Massive study concludes: 'Global warming is real

[DarrinS]

Still going with that lie?

Do you want me to start linking all your threads about snow storms with les that go, roughly, "what global warming, look at this snow"?

or would you rather I just link all the posts within the threads where you imply that with studies about short regional cooling trends or similar? I have already given two.

Hey, if I want to throw out anecdotes to counter all the AGW anecdotes, that's my business.

I'm no more think a snow storm "disproves" AGW than a heat wave "proves" AGW.

[RandomGuy]

I doubt very seriously that this is an answerable question, at least not to your satisfaction.

Moving the goalposts

Moving the goalposts is an informal logical fallacy in which previously agreed upon standards for deciding an argument are arbitrarily changed once they have been met. This is usually done by the "losing" side of an argument in a desperate bid to save face. If the goalposts are moved far enough, then the standards can eventually evolve[1] into something that cannot be met no matter what. Usually such a tactic is spotted quickly.

This tactic is extremely common in debates with creationists, who will often say "show me an example of something evolving today," or "show me an example of information increasing through random processes." When either of these are shown to the creationist, they will suddenly change the standards of what they meant by "evolving" or "information" to try and avoid losing an argument they clearly lost. The definition between "micro" and "macro" evolution is often left exceptionally vague by creationists and intelligent design proponents just for this purpose.

A: "I won't believe there is any global warming until there is a peer-reviewed paper done by scientists I trust to be skeptics, with data and methods that they release publicly"

B: "Ok, here is a peer-reviewed paper done by scientists trusted to be skeptics, with data and methods that are being released publicly."

A: "Well then, they need to get the level of preciseness & certainty levels of 1 in a trillion because there is no way they can do that"

[DarrinS]

I guess you don't need to be any good with statistics to post youtubes on a forum all day. Good thing for you!

I'm good enough at stats to know when a climate scientist has fudged a principal component analysis.

[MannyIsGod]

What are the odds of a single data point out of a data set of millions falling on an expected mean?

Now, what are the odds for that entire data set's mean to NOT fall on the expected mean?

[MannyIsGod]

I'm good enough at stats to know when a climate scientist has fudged a principal component analysis.

No, you're not, actually. And the study pretty much proves that. !!!!!

[DarrinS]

What are the odds of a single data point out of a data set of millions falling on an expected mean?

Now, what are the odds for that entire data set's mean to NOT fall on the expected mean?

Just so you know, I don't have any issues with the study, I was just trying to clarify a point WC made. Evidently, I did a poor job.

[RandomGuy]

Hey, if I want to throw out anecdotes to counter all the AGW anecdotes, that's my business.

I'm no more think a snow storm "disproves" AGW than a heat wave "proves" AGW.

Darrin's 2010 thread en led "Earth Enters New Cold Climate Era"

(edit)
Being a liar might be your business, I guess.

Just as it is my business to point out how dishonest you are, you lying sack of .

[MannyIsGod]

From the OP :

Watts argues that poorly performing temperature sensors in the US have skewed climate analysis, but the BEST analysis concludes that although readings from the stations Watts identifies as "poor" may be both higher and less accurate, the overall global warming trend is the same.

Is it hard to be so stupid, Darrin?

[DarrinS]

Darrin's 2010 thread en led "Earth Enters New Cold Climate Era"

Your sarcasm meter doesn't work very well.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm good enough at stats to know when a climate scientist has fudged a principal component analysis.

Just so you know, I don't have any issues with the study, I was just trying to clarify a point WC made. Evidently, I did a poor job.

In other words you don't even know what to believe? I'm not surprised, really. You just need to go find a blog to tell you what you're supposed to think and then come back.

[DarrinS]

In other words you don't even know what to believe? I'm not surprised, really. You just need to go find a blog to tell you what you're supposed to think and then come back.

Why are you and RG so angry?

I have no issues with the study. Yes, it has warmed an entire degree this century. They might as well have concluded that the sun is hot and water is wet.

[RandomGuy]

Your sarcasm meter doesn't work very well.

You weak attempt t walking the stupid you want to take back doesn't work very well.

I have just lost my patience with you ass-clowns.

This makes me have much greater empathy for Fat Freddy's frustration trying to argue about the moon landings with Cosmored.



Cosmored needs the company.

[DarrinS]

From a very popular non-skeptic website.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ke-called-off/

Anybody expecting earthshaking news from Berkeley, now that the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature group being led by Richard Muller has released its results, had to be content with a barely perceptible quiver. As far as the basic science goes, the results could not have been less surprising if the press release had said “Man Finds Sun Rises At Dawn.” This must have been something of a disappointment for anyone hoping for something else.

[MannyIsGod]

What makes you think I'm angry? The fact that I'm calling you an idiot? telling the truth doesn't make me angry no matter how much it bothers you.

You've got no expertise to say whether a degree is significant but you try to downplay it as though you understand the implications of how much of an energy change it takes to make that happen. Furthermore, you have no expertise in understanding what the implications are for increased warming over the next century due to the same mechanism that caused the original increase yet you try to downplay it.

The fact that you think a degree is insignificant means nothing to me. You're not an expert.

[DarrinS]

The fact that you think a degree is insignificant means nothing to me. You're not an expert.

Neither are you.

[RandomGuy]

Why are you and RG so angry?

I have no issues with the study. Yes, it has warmed an entire degree this century. They might as well have concluded that the sun is hot and water is wet.

In fact, it's warming just as much as more-limited studies conducted by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA, and the UK's Met Office Hadley Centre for Climate Change said it was: about 1°C since 1950.

That would be one degree celcius in 60 years, dolt.

[MannyIsGod]

From a very popular non-skeptic website.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ke-called-off/

You JUST claimed exactly the opposite of what the paper claims and just a few posts later you're trying to say it was what was expected? NO it was what was expected but you're the idiot who always brings up climate gate and the weather stations. People in the field KNOW the temperature data is fine and has been confirmed for a long ass time.

The study wasn't done for people doing AGW science, Darrin. It was done for stupid asses like you who can't even get their own throughts on the subject straight.

[RandomGuy]

From a very popular non-skeptic website.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ke-called-off/

[RandomGuy]

What makes you think I'm angry? The fact that I'm calling you an idiot? telling the truth doesn't make me angry no matter how much it bothers you.

You've got no expertise to say whether a degree is significant but you try to downplay it as though you understand the implications of how much of an energy change it takes to make that happen. Furthermore, you have no expertise in understanding what the implications are for increased warming over the next century due to the same mechanism that caused the original increase yet you try to downplay it.

The fact that you think a degree is insignificant means nothing to me. You're not an expert.

I measured the air temp in two different offices in our building. They differed by 1.6 degrees F.


But we are supposed to believe that temperature from surface stations (densely distributed in the northern hemisphere, sparsely distributed elsewhere) and from a handful of satellites are collected, massaged by some FORTRAN code, resulting in a single global temperature that represents the temperature of the entire Earth to within one degree?

He isn't an expert but he can take temperature measurements in an office building with the best of them.

[MannyIsGod]

Neither are you.

No, you're right. But there's only one of us disputing what experts say with nonsense. I'm also going to ahead and wager that the fact that I'm currently working with scientists in the field makes me more of an expert than you.

[MannyIsGod]

He isn't an expert but he can take temperature measurements in an office building with the best of them.

[RandomGuy]

Why are you and RG so angry?

I am angry because the liars and idiots in the "skeptic" movement have started to convince a lot of casually interested people that there is less credibility to the real science than there actually is.

Trying to debate the topic rationally with you, I have backspaced over plenty of insults and snarky remarks, and gone back and taken some of the frustration with your dishonest, stupid , back, because I believe in civil conversations, and that rationality is the way to go.

At some point though, one has to get tired of getting on by people like you, and trying to turn the other cheek to be the better man.

I am getting older and cranky, I guess. Take your dishonest, politically motivated skepticism and shove it up your ass.

At some point I will get a bit less angry, but I have promised myself not to take any of this back.

You deserve every bit of derision and scorn you get, just like Cosmored slightly insane ass does, although he gets a small pass because he can't help being a little sick in the head.

[MannyIsGod]

Its ok. Darrin can't help being stupid either.

[DarrinS]

Trying to debate the topic rationally with you, I have backspaced over plenty of insults and snarky remarks, and gone back and taken some of the frustration with your dishonest, stupid , back, because I believe in civil conversations, and that rationality is the way to go.

Lol

Being a liar might be your business, I guess.

Just as it is my business to point out how dishonest you are, you lying sack of .

[Borat Sagyidev]

You weak attempt t walking the stupid you want to take back doesn't work very well.

I have just lost my patience with you ass-clowns.

This makes me have much greater empathy for Fat Freddy's frustration trying to argue about the moon landings with Cosmored.



Cosmored needs the company.

these morons are not arguing much different than this