Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic [W:1239:1469]

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

I don't know. Look in the mirror and see what comes to mind.

Talk about aping PeeWee Herman....sheesh but you're a piece of work.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

How much of Miami Beach has been submerged by the encroaching rise of the oceans?

There has been very good photographic technology in use for about 150 years.

Detail of Soldiers from 6th Maine Infantry on Parade after Fredricksburg by Mathew Brady

There should be plenty of photographic evidence to SHOW the before & after the effect you say is occurring. Go ahead and post them.

You're just flailing like a drowning man who doesn't know how to swim. I'd throw you a life preserver but you wouldn't know how to use it. And you've made a quote of yours look like it came from me up there (that last one). I'll chalk that up to your clumsiness and incompetence rather than a deliberate attempt to make a false case....this time. Don't let it happen again.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

So, to confirm what you are saying, there is absolutely no change in the rate of increase of climate comparing the rate of 1980 to 2000 with the rate 2000 to 2015.

Alrighty then.

I'll have what he's having.

This from someone who accused me of resorting to silliness. I'm embarrassed for you since you obviously are incapable of that yourself.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

If the projection is made and it is not reflected by the real world performance of climate, to what do attribute the departure?

Most of the projections are for several decades from now to the year 2100 so that question is absurd as all the other things you've posted. But all the data accumulating now show that the IPCC projections for warming in the 4th report (2008) were far too conservative and were updated in the 5th report of Jan 2014. You really have no idea what you're talking about, do you.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

Disclaimer: The current situation off the US East Coast is weather. But these weather events are becoming more frequent and more severe. This rainfall comes off of a hurricane (Jaoquin) that never got within 200 miles of the coast and is actually heading away from it. Repeat: I'm not claiming that this one storm serves as proof of the projected effects of CAGW. But as we keep piling these single events into a steady trend that will be the evidence. And that is happening.

http://www.weather.com/safety/floods/news/south-carolina-flooding-impacts-0

http://www.weather.com/safety/hurricane/news/hurricane-joaquin-bahamas-impacts

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

How much of Miami Beach has been submerged by the encroaching rise of the oceans?

There has been very good photographic technology in use for about 150 years.

Detail of Soldiers from 6th Maine Infantry on Parade after Fredricksburg by Mathew Brady

There should be plenty of photographic evidence to SHOW the before & after the effect you say is occurring. Go ahead and post them.

And not that facts will make a bit of difference to you but here's a bunch of 'em just the same:

Sea-Level Rise and Its Impact on Miami-Dade County | World Resources Institute

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

If I seem to argue, even when it is clear, that they cannot, or will not understand, it is because of my
profound respect for Science and the Scientific method.
I fear the stink of corruption AGW could leave on Science could harm research for decades.

I wonder why your profound respect doesn't extend to the most respected scientific organizations and publications in the world...the NAS, AAAS, Royal society, Nature, PNAS, etc.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

And now you've added ignorance (or is it just contempt) of the English language to your colossal ignorance of the process of collecting and interpreting scientific data. The only question I have now is what other area of vast ignorance are you going to reveal next?

Explain in the context of climate science the difference between a prediction and a projection.

Or you show yourself to be dishonest.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

I've not only read that statement or variations of it dozens of times but I've also reported nearly as many times that it is not true for the two most accurate measurements of surface temperature, GISS and HadCRUT, two data sets that you often used in the past until now that you'ver recognized they no longer (and never did) support that false claim of cooling (which you have now wisely abandoned and taken refuge in the equally false claim of the "pause"). In fact, the satellite measurements have had to be revised several times for discrepancies but apart from that, it's pretty clear that temperatures being lower in TLT have little or no palliative effect on the steady heating of the surface of the planet which happens to be where we live. But continue to cherry-pick the year and the data set to your heart's content. It really solidifies your reputation as a dedicated science denier. I couldn't have done a better job of illustrating that fact myself.

You lie in the description of a man committed to honesty. Not everybody is a liar like you.

Note to moderators; If you don't hold both sides to not call each other liars then this what you get. Yes I know you will give me an infraction but I also would like to know why this liar is allowed to continue to insult and call people who have plainly not lied liars. Please explain!

 

[Jack Hays]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

You lie in the description of a man committed to honesty. Not everybody is a liar like you.

Note to moderators; If you don't hold both sides to not call each other liars then this what you get. Yes I know you will give me an infraction but I also would like to know why this liar is allowed to continue to insult and call people who have plainly not lied liars. Please explain!

DP offers an Ignore List feature. Just sayin' . . .

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

DP offers an Ignore List feature. Just sayin' . . .

Sure but the point of a forum such as this is that it does actually matter. These days these forums are where political ideas develope. It is a significant part of the world's democratic process. Letting those who would pump out wrong headed religious propaganda do so without reply allows them to win. They must be opposed or we will have much more damage to humanity than the hundreds of millions of deaths done so far by this AGW drivel.

The anti-CO2 drive has killed more the the second world war did. This is important to me.

 

[Jack Hays]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

Sure but the point of a forum such as this is that it does actually matter. These days these forums are where political ideas develope. It is a significant part of the world's democratic process. Letting those who would pump out wrong headed religious propaganda do so without reply allows them to win. They must be opposed or we will have much more damage to humanity than the hundreds of millions of deaths done so far by this AGW drivel.

The anti-CO2 drive has killed more the the second world war did. This is important to me.

As you wish. Debate requires a good faith partner.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

As you wish. Debate requires a good faith partner.

I think 3goofs is the ideal opponent to get across the message that AGW is drivel. It is utterly obvious that he is wrong on almost every occaision.

He does not go as far as the latest drivel producer though as the mud slinging of you lie! er..no show how I have done so. YOU LIE!!! actually looks like he migh have a point to anybody who does not understand what he is talking about. Like a politician for example. That's the trouble. That's why moderation is needed here. I would like it if that moderation was applied equally.

 

[Jack Hays]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

I think 3goofs is the ideal opponent to get across the message that AGW is drivel. It is utterly obvious that he is wrong on almost every occaision.

He does not go as far as the latest drivel producer though as the mud slinging of you lie! er..no show how I have done so. YOU LIE!!! actually looks like he migh have a point to anybody who does not understand what he is talking about. Like a politician for example. That's the trouble. That's why moderation is needed here. I would like it if that moderation was applied equally.

3G is harmless. My focus was elsewhere.

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

Sure but the point of a forum such as this is that it does actually matter. These days these forums are where political ideas develope. It is a significant part of the world's democratic process. Letting those who would pump out wrong headed religious propaganda do so without reply allows them to win. They must be opposed or we will have much more damage to humanity than the hundreds of millions of deaths done so far by this AGW drivel.

The anti-CO2 drive has killed more the the second world war did. This is important to me.

Political ideas might develop here, but SCIENTIFIC ideas develop in the scientific literature.

And your denial of the basics of the science ( as evidenced by your opposition to the statements of every single major scientific organization on the planet, which all have developed statements for deniers JUST LIKE YOU) are rightly called out on this forum.

You're not a scientist. The fringe people you listen to are generally also not scientists. Why not try to listen to them and not pretend they hold their scientific position because your politics don't like it?

 

[Absentglare]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

So you agree that a commitment to a single, particular course of action for the society or the world to address this is not justified by the current state of the science. (?)

Of COURSE not!!!!!!!!

Wow you just blew my whole god damned mind- how could you possibly think any "alarmist" is advocating as such?!?

We need to continually observe, predict, and react. If humanity doesn't roll with the punches, it will go extinct. What you seem to support is doing nothing, ignoring the mounting evidence several decades in, and blindly contaminating the atmosphere until it's too late to recover.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

Explain in the context of climate science the difference between a prediction and a projection.

Or you show yourself to be dishonest.

How do you not know what the difference between a prediction and a projection is ? You talk down to us and you still don't have this sorted out yet?

 

[Absentglare]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

Sure but the point of a forum such as this is that it does actually matter. These days these forums are where political ideas develope. It is a significant part of the world's democratic process. Letting those who would pump out wrong headed religious propaganda do so without reply allows them to win. They must be opposed or we will have much more damage to humanity than the hundreds of millions of deaths done so far by this AGW drivel.

The anti-CO2 drive has killed more the the second world war did. This is important to me.

Cite this claim if you can.

(Note: i already know you can't. Thanks)

 

[Absentglare]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

You lie in the description of a man committed to honesty. Not everybody is a liar like you.

Note to moderators; If you don't hold both sides to not call each other liars then this what you get. Yes I know you will give me an infraction but I also would like to know why this liar is allowed to continue to insult and call people who have plainly not lied liars. Please explain!

You have the exact same tools available that the rest of us do.

It makes me wonder what your motivations are when you insult people, talk down to them, refuse to cite any sources for your ridiculous claims, and then criticize others for reasons that plainly describe your own behavior.

I have no horse in this race. I want the truth. If i'm wrong, so be it. You haven't given me a single reason to seriously consider as such. Try to find one, if it exists.

 

[longview]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

I wonder why your profound respect doesn't extend to the most respected scientific organizations and publications in the world...the NAS, AAAS, Royal society, Nature, PNAS, etc.

It is part of their "respected" status I am concerned with.
In a few decades AGW will be another obsolete theory, with the same value as eugenics.
Those respected scientific organizations and publications, who have made bold statements in support
of AGW being settled science, will have to do some backtracking.

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

It is part of their "respected" status I am concerned with.
In a few decades AGW will be another obsolete theory, with the same value as eugenics.
Those respected scientific organizations and publications, who have made bold statements in support
of AGW being settled science, will have to do some backtracking.

That's quite the fantasy.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

If I seem to argue, even when it is clear, that they cannot, or will not understand, it is because of my
profound respect for Science and the Scientific method.
I fear the stink of corruption AGW could leave on Science could harm research for decades.

Is the way you maul statistics how you show that "profound respect.?" Thanks for yet another laugh at your expense, long.

 

[longview]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

Is the way you maul statistics how you show that "profound respect.?" Thanks for yet another laugh at your expense, long.

I had not realized you had demonstrated any understanding of statistics.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

It is part of their "respected" status I am concerned with.
In a few decades AGW will be another obsolete theory, with the same value as eugenics.
Those respected scientific organizations and publications, who have made bold statements in support
of AGW being settled science, will have to do some backtracking.

C'mon, long. We know you'll continue to deny the science as long as you're able to regardless of how overwhelming the evidence for CAGW becomes. You could be under water and still denying it so fiercely is your ideology.

 

[digitusmedius]

Re: Capturing Global Warming in One Simple Statistic

Explain in the context of climate science the difference between a prediction and a projection.

Or you show yourself to be dishonest.

Been there, done that. You refuse to get it (because it violates your first rule of denial: Do Not Even Try To Understand Anything). The second rule is: Keep Demanding Definitions of Terms No Matter How Many Times They've Been Defined. And, of course, the third and most important rule: When All Else Fails (and it always does) Just Make Shyt Up (forging graphs is one good way).