NOAA - Arctic Report Card -warming temperatures and melting ice

[Jack Hays]

Except the trend since 2006 is up, but your graph (ending at 2015) cuts that off.

 

[Threegoofs]

Except the trend since 2006 is up, but your graph (ending at 2015) cuts that off.

Yes.

Recovery!

 

[Jack Hays]

Yes.

Recovery!

Twelve years of upward trend.

 

[Threegoofs]

Twelve years of upward trend.

Recovery!

I’m beginning to see how all these denier blogs are able to confuse you so easily, especially when you combine it with the confidence/arrogance of not wanting to be wrong.

Here’s the updated graph. Would have looked for September, but since you’ll dismiss whatever I post anyway, I wont expend the effort.

 

[Jack Hays]

Recovery!

I’m beginning to see how all these denier blogs are able to confuse you so easily, especially when you combine it with the confidence/arrogance of not wanting to be wrong.

Here’s the updated graph. Would have looked for September, but since you’ll dismiss whatever I post anyway, I wont expend the effort.

As I said, upward trend from 2006 to the present, despite constant doomsaying during those years.

 

[longview]

As I said, upward trend from 2006 to the present, despite constant doomsaying during those years.

It should be pointed out that the two graphs represent two different numbers,
One is sea ice volume, the other is sea ice extent.
These are very different measurements, and both could in theory be correct.

 

[Jack Hays]

It should be pointed out that the two graphs represent two different numbers,
One is sea ice volume, the other is sea ice extent.
These are very different measurements, and both could in theory be correct.

A fair point, although to my eye it looks like extent too is up over 2006.

 

[Threegoofs]

A fair point, although to my eye it looks like extent too is up over 2006.

Recovery! LOL

 

[longview]

A fair point, although to my eye it looks like extent too is up over 2006.

I am not seeing the graph, you found, but it is also possible that the OSI SAF calculates sea ice extent differently than
say NSIDC, who I think uses a 30% coverage number.

 

[Jack Hays]

I am not seeing the graph, you found, but it is also possible that the OSI SAF calculates sea ice extent differently than
say NSIDC, who I think uses a 30% coverage number.

The graph in #118?

 

[longview]

The graph in #118?

I was trying to find the data from the source the DMI. But do not have a login.
Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

 

[Jack Hays]

I was trying to find the data from the source the DMI. But do not have a login.
Ocean and Ice Services | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

There is a click "here" at the bottom of the page.

 

[longview]

There is a click "here" at the bottom of the page.

I tried to search for volume, and came up with no hits, but suspect the data is there somewhere.

 

[Into the Night]

Wrong. No there isn't. You made it up. "Projection" has nothing to do with contextomy (taking someone's words out of context to change the meaning). Absolutely zero.

It has everything to do with it. That's essentially what 'projection' is.

And if you want to use that the term "projection" that's fine.

I use the term from logic.

People will at least understand what you are accusing them of instead of a made up 'Inversion' fallacy that can't be found in any reference source.

False authority fallacy. Argument of ignorance fallacy.

So it's completely illogical to use it.

Argument of ignorance fallacy. Inversion fallacy.

You might as well tell them they are using the Third Flush of the Porcelain Throne fallacy as it makes no sense either and can't be found in any standard reference text.

Buzzword fallacy. False authority fallacy.

No it's not, as I can give complete quotes from him showing that's what he thought it was.

Void argument fallacy.

That isn't a logical form that makes any sense

Yes it is. You obviously don't know logic notation.

and it certainly can't be applied to the concept of 'projection'.

Yes it does. The form I gave shows formally what an inversion fallacy is (as well as 'projection').

You were also unable to give an example or a standard reference.

False authority fallacy. Argument of ignorance fallacy.

If you want to learn how to construct logical arguments,

I did still do construct logical arguments.

take a couple of classes in logic

Already have.

instead of using a list of logical fallacies

There is no fixed list of logical fallacies. False authority fallacy.

and using them incorrectly.

I am using them correctly Redefinition fallacy (logic->void)

Especially your overuse of them as a blunt instrument to bash everyone on the head all the time,

Stop making fallacies, and I won't keep calling you on them.

instead of actually presenting a valid argument

I am presenting valid arguments. You want to quibble over irrelevant details, try to deny and redefine logic, play word games, etc. It is YOU making fallacies. YOU need to start presenting arguments free of fallacy.

or having a discussion.

I would like nothing better. Takes two to tango, you know.

It's pretty clear you've never studied logic at an academic level.

Redefinition fallacy (logic->void). Logic is not any 'level' (much less an 'academic' one!). It simply is. It is YOUR problem you don't understand combinatorial notation or set notation.

 

[Threegoofs]

I tried to search for volume, and came up with no hits, but suspect the data is there somewhere.

Can’t find other people’s data on a website, but knows the National Academy of Science doesn’t know what they’re talking about on climate...

 

[flogger]

I tried to search for volume, and came up with no hits, but suspect the data is there somewhere.

Given the extremely short duration of such datasets they are essentially a worthless curiosity to be used as a political football by the greedy for the gullible. There really is nothing unprecedented going on at either pole if one looks at ice core data from recent millenia as I've illustrated many times here

 

[Quaestio]

It has everything to do with it. That's essentially what 'projection' is.

I use the term from logic.

False authority fallacy. Argument of ignorance fallacy.

Argument of ignorance fallacy. Inversion fallacy.

Buzzword fallacy. False authority fallacy.

Void argument fallacy.

Yes it is. You obviously don't know logic notation.

Yes it does. The form I gave shows formally what an inversion fallacy is (as well as 'projection').

False authority fallacy. Argument of ignorance fallacy.

I did still do construct logical arguments.

Already have.

There is no fixed list of logical fallacies. False authority fallacy.

I am using them correctly Redefinition fallacy (logic->void)

Stop making fallacies, and I won't keep calling you on them.

I am presenting valid arguments. You want to quibble over irrelevant details, try to deny and redefine logic, play word games, etc. It is YOU making fallacies. YOU need to start presenting arguments free of fallacy.

I would like nothing better. Takes two to tango, you know.

Redefinition fallacy (logic->void). Logic is not any 'level' (much less an 'academic' one!). It simply is. It is YOUR problem you don't understand combinatorial notation or set notation.

Complete and utter bollocks. It's completely irrational to just make up pretend logical fallacies that can't be found in any reference source. You might as well just repeat over and over again MyMadeUpThingaMajig fallacy! Or just make up your own words that can't be found in any dictionary. You're just playing word games that mean nothing.

Whats the point?

There can be no rational discussion when you engage in that sort of nonsense. Or perhaps you just don't want to engage in a rational discussion? Especially where you have to support your made up assertions with evidence.

 

[longview]

You are correct, it is likely that all of the observations are well within "normal".
The reality is that we have not really established a normal, with which to judge abnormality.

 

[gfm7175]

Complete and utter bollocks. It's completely irrational to just make up pretend logical fallacies that can't be found in any reference source.

Fallacies aren't "made up"; they simply are. One need only understand the axioms of logic and correctly apply them to avoid making fallacies... You seem to have issues doing that...

False Authority Fallacy. No book/website/etc. defines fallacies... Logic does.

You might as well just repeat over and over again MyMadeUpThingaMajig fallacy!

Redefinition Fallacy. You are redefining the word logic to the word void.

Or just make up your own words that can't be found in any dictionary.

Dictionaries don't coin words; people do. False Authority Fallacy. This seems to be a "go to fallacy" for you...

You're just playing word games that mean nothing.

Inversion Fallacy. YOU are the one doing this...

Whats the point?

To help people properly understand Logic...

There can be no rational discussion when you engage in that sort of nonsense.

Redefinition Fallacy... Logic is not nonsense...

Or perhaps you just don't want to engage in a rational discussion?

Inversion Fallacy. YOU are the one who doesn't want to... I have been ever ready to engage in one.

Especially where you have to support your made up assertions with evidence.

Logic is not "made up"... It simply is.

Define "evidence"...

 

[Quaestio]

Fallacies aren't "made up"; they simply are. One need only understand the axioms of logic and correctly apply them to avoid making fallacies... You seem to have issues doing that...

False Authority Fallacy. No book/website/etc. defines fallacies... Logic does.


Redefinition Fallacy. You are redefining the word logic to the word void.


Dictionaries don't coin words; people do. False Authority Fallacy. This seems to be a "go to fallacy" for you...


Inversion Fallacy. YOU are the one doing this...


To help people properly understand Logic...


Redefinition Fallacy... Logic is not nonsense...


Inversion Fallacy. YOU are the one who doesn't want to... I have been ever ready to engage in one.


Logic is not "made up"... It simply is.

Define "evidence"...

More parroted nonsense from Into the Night's little sock-like buddy.

 

[Into the Night]

Complete and utter bollocks. It's completely irrational to just make up pretend logical fallacies that can't be found in any reference source. You might as well just repeat over and over again MyMadeUpThingaMajig fallacy! Or just make up your own words that can't be found in any dictionary. You're just playing word games that mean nothing.

Whats the point?

There can be no rational discussion when you engage in that sort of nonsense. Or perhaps you just don't want to engage in a rational discussion? Especially where you have to support your made up assertions with evidence.

False authority fallacy. There are as many fallacies as there are ways to make errors in logic. There is no 'official list'.

 

[Into the Night]

More parroted nonsense from Into the Night's little sock-like buddy.

Argument of the Stone fallacy. Bulverism fallacy. Redefinition fallacy (logic->void).

 

[Quaestio]

False authority fallacy. There are as many fallacies as there are ways to make errors in logic. There is no 'official list'.

Put your 'fallacy' away, we don't need to see you exposing yourself all the time.

 

[Quaestio]

Argument of the Stone fallacy. Bulverism fallacy. Redefinition fallacy (logic->void).

[Squawk!] fallacy! fallacy! fallacy! fallacy! fallacy! fallacy! fallacy! [/Squawk!]

 

[Into the Night]

Put your 'fallacy' away, we don't need to see you exposing yourself all the time.

Nonsense. Insult fallacy.