• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

National Climatic Data Center: 2014 Was the Warmest Year on Record

Threegoofs said:
HIS TWEET WASNT QUOTED. Nothing was. He was just incredibly misrepresented by the article.

They didn't use a quote at all- probably because it would have made the reporter look bad, and not fool the suckers taken in by this 'journalism'.
Click to expand...

The tweet was not only quoted, it was displayed in full.
 
Ceist said:
LOP had posted several times that 2014 was likely NOT the warmest year using some bizarre confused 'logic'. Now perhaps he had an epiphany and realised his silly error and he is now saying that 2014 IS most likely to be the warmest year. Oh, and claiming that's what he had been saying all along. :shock:
Click to expand...

LoL nice catch. One can only speculate what kind of maniacal thought process is going on to create such confounding statements.
 
Jack Hays said:
Sorry, but the graph is accurate and illustrate's Steffen's error, a minor oversight notwithstanding. Keep up the denial.
Click to expand...

A fake graph based on data that only goes to 1855 yet claims it goes to 2000 is 'accurate"? Missing out the last 165 years when their "argument" was based on current temperature is a 'minor oversight'? Only on the deluded minds of pseudo-skeptics (aka deniers)
 
Jack Hays said:
Gavin's tweet is the heart of the matter and stands as irrefutable evidence.
Click to expand...

Evidence of what? That 2014 was the most likeliest hottest year on record by a margin of about 1.5 to 3 times greater than 2010? Or of David Rose not having a clue and not even listening to the press conference to hear the chart explained quite clearly?

I guess David forgot to include this tweet:

Gavin Schmidt‏@ClimateOfGavin


Jan 16 How certain are we that 2014 was a record warm year? @NASAGISS pic.twitter.com/CGyZMBopSQ



 
Last edited:
Ceist said:
The whole article was a pack of lies, false claims and misrepresentation. David Rose's trash tabloid articles certainly don't smell sweet. They always reek of BS.
Click to expand...

The people who are skeptical of scientists but accepting of tabloids... :confused:
 
Verax said:
The people who are skeptical of scientists but accepting of tabloids... :confused:
Click to expand...

How do they even take themselves seriously?
 
Ceist said:
Evidence of what? That 2014 was the most likeliest hottest year on record by a margin of about 1.5 to 3 times greater than 2010? Or of David Rose not having a clue and not even listening to the press conference to hear the chart explained quite clearly?

I guess David forgot to include this tweet:

Gavin Schmidt‏@ClimateOfGavin


Jan 16 How certain are we that 2014 was a record warm year? @NASAGISS pic.twitter.com/CGyZMBopSQ
Click to expand...

You can run, but you can't hide.
 
Jack Hays said:
Please see #124 in this thread.
Click to expand...

His tweet and probability table were never quoted, displayed, or explained in any denier article. They took it and mashed it into...

Gavin Schmidt now admits NASA are only 38% sure 2014 was the hottest year
Click to expand...

Nasa climate scientists: We said 2014 was the warmest year on record… but we’re only 38% sure we were right
Click to expand...

You guys complain about the "2014 hottest year" headline wasn't perfect but then trumpet a hatchet job that won't even show the actual table and explain it? :no:
 
Verax said:
His tweet and probability table were never quoted, displayed, or explained in any denier article. They took it and mashed it into...





You guys complain about the "2014 hottest year" headline wasn't perfect but then trumpet a hatchet job that won't even show the actual table and explain it? :no:
Click to expand...

Please see my #140.
 
Verax said:
You guys complain about the "2014 hottest year" headline wasn't perfect but then trumpet a hatchet job that won't even show the actual table and explain it? :no:
Click to expand...

Regardless, do you agree or disagree with that 38% probability? If so, it is 38% likely the hottest year, and 62% likely not the hottest year.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Regardless, do you agree or disagree with that 38% probability? If so, it is 38% likely the hottest year, and 62% likely not the hottest year.
Click to expand...

Well sure if you want to look at it that way you guys have a point with that, that it may not be the warmest year, that the probabilities tends to it not being the warmest year as compared to all other years combined. However what about the other points...

The data points to it being the warmest.

The probability of 2014 being the warmest is much greater than any other single year.

Why shouldn't 2014 be crowned the warmest year? There is no other year that would be better suited for the job, it has the data and a strong probability, damn near 50% by NOAA's estimation.
 
Verax said:
Well sure if you want to look at it that way you guys have a point with that, that it may not be the warmest year, that the probabilities tends to it not being the warmest year as compared to all other years combined. However what about the other points...

The data points to it being the warmest.

The probability of 2014 being the warmest is much greater than any other single year.

Why shouldn't 2014 be crowned the warmest year? There is no other year that would be better suited for the job, it has the data and a strong probability, damn near 50% by NOAA's estimation.
Click to expand...
I guess he didn't have an epiphany about his error in logic after all. Oh well. I hope he doesn't play Russian Roulette with that type of 'logic'. All his chambers would be loaded with bullets. Or use that type of 'logic' when choosing the most effective drug if he had cancer. He'd take any drug BUT the most effective because he added up the test scores of all the other much less effective drugs together.
 
Last edited:
Jack Hays said:
You can run, but you can't hide.
Click to expand...

Putting your hands over your eyes doesn't make you invisible Jack. It just makes you blind to what's right in front of you.
 
Verax said:
That's WUWT, not the DailyMail or JoNova where those mangled quotes came from.
Click to expand...

You wrote: "His tweet and probability table were never quoted, displayed, or explained . . . " I merely showed you to be in error.
 
Ceist said:
Putting your hands over your eyes doesn't make you invisible Jack. It just makes you blind to what's right in front of you.
Click to expand...

I've already marked this in the "win" column and moved on. You should cut your losses.
 
Jack Hays said:
You wrote: "His tweet and probability table were never quoted, displayed, or explained . . . " I merely showed you to be in error.
Click to expand...

In context of those horrible interpretations that have been the subject of dozens of pages in this thread. It seems you're unable to follow more than a single post logically.
 
Verax said:
In context of those horrible interpretations that have been the subject of dozens of pages in this thread. It seems you're unable to follow more than a single post logically.
Click to expand...

Your puny ad hominem cannot recover your lost point.
 
Ceist said:
I guess he didn't have an epiphany about his error in logic after all. Oh well. I hope he doesn't play Russian Roulette with that type of 'logic'. All his chambers would be loaded with bullets. Or use that type of 'logic' when choosing the most effective drug if he had cancer. He'd take any drug BUT the most effective because he added up the test scores of all the other much less effective drugs together.
Click to expand...

LoL, yeah he tends to change his positions often. One day he'll be saying the sun is to blame for warming, the next day there is no warming, the next day its black soot, the next day its cosmic rays, the next day its cooling...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom