Page 36 of 212 FirstFirst ... 263233343536373839404686136 ... LastLast
Results 876 to 900 of 5280
  1. #876
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Did you not read the link drug addict?

    Are Skeptical Scientists funded by ExxonMobil?

    Sherwood B. Idso, B.S. Physics Laude, University of Minnesota (1964); M.S. Soil Science, University of Minnesota (1966); Ph.D. Soil Science, University of Minnesota (1967); Research Assistant in Physics, University of Minnesota (1962); National Defense Education Act Fellowship (1964-1967); Research Soil Scientist, U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (1967-1974); Editorial Board Member, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology Journal (1972-1993); Secretary, American Meteorological Society, Central Arizona Chapter (1973-1974); Vice-Chair, American Meteorological Society, Central Arizona Chapter (1974-1975); Research Physicist, U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (1974-2001); Chair, American Meteorological Society, Central Arizona Chapter (1975-1976); Arthur S. Flemming Award (1977); Secretary, Sigma Xi - The Research Society, Arizona State University Chapter (1979-1980); President, Sigma Xi - The Research Society, Arizona State University Chapter (1980-1982); Member, Task Force on "Alternative Crops", Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (1983); Adjunct Professor of Geography and Plant Biology, Arizona State University (1984-2007); Editorial Board Member, Environmental and Experimental Botany Journal (1993-Present); Member, Botanical Society of America; Member, American Geophysical Union; Member, American Society of Agronomy; ISI Highly Cited Researcher; President, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (2001-Present)


    I take it you are also mathematically illiterate if you think Dr. Idso's papers are 40% of the list.
    Thanks for fetching the can, monkey.

    I will never click on your links, aspie. Your behavior has been troubling and I do not even want you to have an inkling of my IP or anything else for that matter.

    Why bother anyway? You are like a vending machine. It's hilarious.

    Sherwood Idso, you ask: here's your canned answer.
    My list is questioned: here's my canned refutations.

  2. #877
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Yoni doesn't even want to touch the stuff that I am saying. It's quite funny.

    I explained the difference between the aerospace engineering problems circa 1960 and their relative solutions versus climate modeling and the problems it brings to the table. It the difference between engineering and reverse engineering but with the caveat that the original design was not based on periodic LTI systems and with an extra special heaping of unbounded feedback loops.

    Yoni, how on Earth do you think that you, a law enforcement type, are in any position to judge what is or is not credible regarding anything scientific?

    And the 5 year old analogy is just gratuitous dismissal. the 5 year old analogy enters in the notion of relative age and implies that there is someone elder and thus more qualified to make the attempt.

    That is clearly not the case. These are the best scientists in the world from places like Cambridge, Standford, MIT, Minnesota, etc as well as the the pinnacle of the US scientific community exemplified by the NAS. Not some stupid kid but instead thousands of the brightest most educated, most trained and experienced minds on this planet.

    If you want to characterize someone's relative understanding then reflect on yourself. Whats the highest level of math and/or statistics that you are fluent in? Whats the highest level of chemistry, physics, biology, mechanics, systems analysis, thermodynamics, fluid dynamics, aerodynamics, celestial mechanics, astrophysics etc that are all central to climate science that you are fluent in?

  3. #878
    I don't really care... Yonivore's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Post Count
    26,781
    You don't think that climate science has a better handle on things with computing power that is far more advanced than 1988 NOW?




    Please keep going. PLEASE.
    Don't talk to me, talk to the guy that agrees with you that the planet is warming.

    Except that the link acknowledges warming that you do not. Why try to take up a stance that is not yours?
    See how that works?

  4. #879
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    being a cartoonist with a website...
    Computer analyst beats cartoonist.
    Last edited by Poptech; 06-19-2012 at 08:10 PM.

  5. #880
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    Thanks for fetching the can,

    I will never click on your links... Your behavior has been troubling and I do not even want you to have an inkling of my IP or anything else for that matter.

    Why bother anyway? You are like a vending machine. It's hilarious.

    Sherwood Idso, you ask: here's your canned answer.
    My list is questioned: here's my canned refutations.
    Drug addict, I provide the information for others reading this not for your damaged brain. You should stop smoking so much pot.

  6. #881
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    You don't think that climate science has a better handle on things with computing power that is far more advanced than 1988 NOW?
    why do computer illiterates always discuss the topic they are illiterate on? Faster computing power does not make something that is not fully understood anymore accurate. Where did you learn this? Skeptical Science?
    Last edited by Poptech; 06-19-2012 at 08:36 PM.

  7. #882
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    These are the best scientists in the world from places like Cambridge, Standford, MIT, Minnesota, etc as well as the the pinnacle of the US scientific community exemplified by the NAS. Not some stupid kid but instead thousands of the brightest most educated, most trained and experienced minds on this planet.
    Oh really? I can find credentialed skeptics from all of these Universities and the NAS,

    Richard S. Lindzen, A.B. Physics Magna Laude, Harvard University (1960); S.M. Applied Mathematics, Harvard University (1961); Ph.D. Applied Mathematics, Harvard University (1964); Research Associate in Meteorology, University of Washington (1964-1965); NATO Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Ins ute for Theoretical Meteorology, University of Oslo (1965-1966); Research Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research (1966-1967); Visiting Lecturer in Meteorology, UCLA (1967); NCAR Outstanding Publication Award (1967); AMS Meisinger Award (1968); Associate Professor and Professor of Meteorology, University of Chicago (1968-1972); Summer Lecturer, NCAR Colloquium (1968, 1972, 1978); AGU Macelwane Award (1969); Visiting Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences, Tel Aviv University (1969); Alfred P. Sloan Fellowship (1970-1976); Gordon McKay Professor of Dynamic Meteorology, Harvard University (1972-1983); Visiting Professor of Dynamic Meteorology, Massachusetts Ins ute of Technology (1975); Lady Davis Visiting Professor, Department of Meteorology, The Hebrew University (1979); Director, Center for Earth and Planetary Physics, Harvard University (1980-1983); Robert P. Burden Professor of Dynamical Meteorology, Harvard University (1982-1983); AMS Charney Award (1985); Vikram Amblal Sarabhai Professor, Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad, India (1985); Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science Fellowship (1986-1987); Distinguished Visiting Scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA (1988-Present); Sackler Visiting Professor, Tel Aviv University (1992); Landsdowne Lecturer, University of Victoria (1993); Bernhard Haurwitz Memorial Lecturer, American Meteorological Society (1997); Fellow, American Academy of Arts & Sciences; Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science; Fellow, American Geophysical Union; Fellow, American Meteorological Society; Member, Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters; Member, Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society; Member, National Academy of Sciences; ISI Highly Cited Researcher; Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Ins ute of Technology (1983-Present); Lead Author, IPCC (2001)

    Freeman J. Dyson, Scholar, Winchester College, UK (1936-1941); B.A. Mathematics, University of Cambridge, UK (1945); Operations Research, R.A.F. Bomber Command, UK (1943-1945); Research Fellow, Trinity College, Cambridge University, UK (1946–1947); Commonwealth Fellow, Cornell University (1947–1948); Commonwealth Fellow, Ins ute for Advanced Study, Princeton University (1948–1949); Research Fellow, University of Birmingham (1949–1951); Professor of Physics, Cornell University (1951-1953); Fellow, Royal Society (1952); Professor of Physics, Ins ute for Advanced Study, Princeton University (1953-1994); Chairman, Federation of American Scientists (1962-1963); Member, National Academy of Sciences (1964); Danny Heineman Prize, American Physical Society (1965); Lorentz Medal, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (1966); Visiting Professor, Yeshiva University (1967-1968); Hughes Medal, The Royal Society (1968); Max Planck Medal, German Physical Society (1969); J. Robert Oppenheimer Memorial Prize, Center for Theoretical Studies (1970); Visiting Professor, Max Planck Ins ute for Physics and Astrophysics (1974-1975); Corresponding Member, Bavarian Academy of Sciences (1975); Harvey Prize, Technion - Israel Ins ute of Technology (1977); Wolf Prize in Physics, Wolf Foundation of Herzlia, Israel (1981); National Books Critics Circle Award - Non-Fiction (1984); Andrew Gemant Award, American Ins ute of Physics (1988); Phi Beta Kappa Award in Science, Phi Beta Kappa Society (1988); Honorary Fellow, Trinity College, Cambridge University, UK (1989); Foreign Associate of the Academy of Sciences, Paris, France (1989); Member, National Research Council Commission on Life Sciences (1989-1991); Britannica Award (1990); Matteucci Medal, National Academy of Sciences dei Quaranta, Italy (1990); Oersted Medal, American Association of Physics Teachers (1991); Enrico Fermi Award, United States Department of Energy (1993); Montgomery Fellow, Dartmouth College (1994); Wright Prize, Harvey Mudd College (1994); Antonio Feltrinelli International Prize, Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy (1996); Lewis Thomas Prize, Rockefeller University (1996); Joseph A. Burton Forum Award, American Physical Society (1999); Rydell Professor, Gustavus Adolphus College (1999); Honorary Member, London Mathematical Society (2000); Templeton Prize (2000); Member, NASA Advisory Council (2001-2003); Page-Barbour lecturer, University of Virginia (2004); Member, committee on Next Generation Biowarfare (2004-2005); Professor Emeritus of Physics, Ins ute for Advanced Study, Princeton University (1994-Present); 21 Honorary Degrees

    Sherwood B. Idso, B.S. Physics Laude, University of Minnesota (1964); M.S. Soil Science, University of Minnesota (1966); Ph.D. Soil Science, University of Minnesota (1967); Research Assistant in Physics, University of Minnesota (1962); National Defense Education Act Fellowship (1964-1967); Research Soil Scientist, U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (1967-1974); Editorial Board Member, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology Journal (1972-1993); Secretary, American Meteorological Society, Central Arizona Chapter (1973-1974); Vice-Chair, American Meteorological Society, Central Arizona Chapter (1974-1975); Research Physicist, U.S. Water Conservation Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture (1974-2001); Chair, American Meteorological Society, Central Arizona Chapter (1975-1976); Arthur S. Flemming Award (1977); Secretary, Sigma Xi - The Research Society, Arizona State University Chapter (1979-1980); President, Sigma Xi - The Research Society, Arizona State University Chapter (1980-1982); Member, Task Force on "Alternative Crops", Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (1983); Adjunct Professor of Geography and Plant Biology, Arizona State University (1984-2007); Editorial Board Member, Environmental and Experimental Botany Journal (1993-Present); Member, Botanical Society of America; Member, American Geophysical Union; Member, American Society of Agronomy; ISI Highly Cited Researcher; President, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (2001-Present)

    Robert M. Carter, B.Sc. (Hons) Geology, University of Otago (1963), Ph.D. Palaeontology, University of Cambridge (1968), Assistant Lecturer, Department of Geology, University of Otago (1963), Senior Lecturer, Department of Geology, University of Otago (1968-1980), Hochstetter Lecturer, Geological Society of New Zealand (1975), Professor and Head, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University (1981-1999), Visiting Experts Program, Carrington Polytechnic Ins ute (1994), Honorary Fellow, Royal Society of New Zealand (1997), Special Investigator Research Award, Australian Research Council (1998-2002), Outstanding Research Career Award, Geological Society of New Zealand (2005), Adjunct Research Professor, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University (1998-Present), Visiting Research Professor, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide (2001-Present)

    David Evans, B.Sc. Applied Mathematics and Physics, University Of Sydney, Australia (1979); M.A. Applied Mathematics, University Of Sydney, Australia (1980); B.E. Electrical Engineering (First-Class Honors), University Of Sydney, Australia (1983); University Medal, University Of Sydney, Australia (1983); M.S. Statistics, Stanford University (1984); M.S. Electrical Engineering, Stanford University (1985); Ph.D. Electrical Engineering, Stanford University (1989); Engineer, Department of Main Roads, New South Wales, Australia (1981-1982); Engineer, Telecom Australia (1983); Research Assistant, Electrical Engineering Department, Stanford University (1984-1988); Electronics Technician, Chemistry Department, Stanford University (1988); Staff Scientist & Software Engineer, KLA Instruments Corporation (1989-1990); Information Engineer, Aquatech Pty Ltd (1994-1996); Applications Programmer and Modeler, Canberra (1996–2005); Carbon Accounting Modeler, Australian Greenhouse Office and Department of Climate Change, Australian Government (1999-2005); Consultant, Australian Greenhouse Office and Department of Climate Change, Australian Government (2008-2010)
    Last edited by Poptech; 06-19-2012 at 08:27 PM.

  8. #883
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Are summing and addition the same thing? No, dumbass. This is why you don't understand half this .
    Maybe because sometimes you AGW alarmists remind us skeptics of people like Mouse and Cosmored, so solidly believing in something you can't show proof of. I rank the alarmist at ude to the same degree of dogma as those who believe we didn't go to the moon.

  9. #884
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    why do computer illiterates always discuss the topic they are illiterate on? Faster computing power does not make something that is not fully understood anymore accurate. Where did you learn this? Skeptical Science?
    The faster computers go allow them to manipulate the model at faster paces to design the perfect alarmist model. Instead of waiting days for a power computer of the past to spit the data out, they only have to wait hours, before they can tweak the model again.

  10. #885
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Poptech is still unable to deviate from his canned answers. I said that they were the ones that were working on the climate models not that they were biased one way or another.

    As for your claim to be a computer analyst that does not trump the personality disorder that you claim to have. Aspergers is noted for the inability to discern nuance or degree ie with you its all or nothing which severely linits your cognitive abilities.

    Computers are dependent on binary logic and the ALU's, busses etc are engineered to perform an exact manner. As such, your aspergers is not a limitation. OTOH, whenever uncertainty evers the equation you are uable to take any sort of middle ground. Its either irrefutable or completely wrong and after observing your behavior, its obvious that you exhibit exactly that.

    As such you can never be considered objective. Your preconceived notion are absolute and intractable. You are a cliche to your disorder.

    You throw out my admission to smoking pot as a constant ad hominem however you completely fail to quantify how it impacts or even point to specific examples. In contrast, I just showed specific examples of your behavior that demonstrate a complete lack of objectivity.

    You also are deceptive as demonstrated by your editing of posts weeks after original postings and claiming that they were not your admissions of your disorder but instead that I am a drug addict. That exhibits a deep shame and cognizance of your own behavior and as I have told you before that points to axis 2 such as NPD/OCD.

    A political cartoonist is an artist and can draw whatever they like. Antisocial behavior is quite another thing.

  11. #886
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    why do computer illiterates always discuss the topic they are illiterate on? Faster computing power does not make something that is not fully understood anymore accurate. Where did you learn this? Skeptical Science?
    It allows them to use more complex models and more quickly get their results so they can refine the formulas. Quicker processing means quicker evolution of the science. You familiar with sampling rate and reconstruction of signals?

    That is intuitive on the simple notion of cycles per second and has nothing to do with the ability to operate windows, write code or the like.

  12. #887
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Oh and to quote from greenfyre, "meet the denominator."

    http://www.pacinst.org/climate/climate_statement.pdf

    From 255 members of the National Academy of Sciences:
    We are deeply disturbed by the recent escalation of political assaults on scientists in general and on climate scientists in particular. All citizens should understand some basic scientific facts. There is always some uncertainty associated with scientific conclusions; science never absolutely proves anything. When someone says that society should wait until scientists are absolutely certain before taking any action, it is the same as saying society should never take action. For a problem as potentially catastrophic as climate change, taking no action poses a dangerous risk for our planet.
    Scientific conclusions derive from an understanding of basic laws supported by laboratory experiments, observations of nature, and mathematical and computer modeling. Like all human beings, scientists make mistakes, but the scientific process is designed to find and correct them. This process is inherently adversarial— scientists build reputations and gain recognition not only for supporting conventional wisdom, but even more so for demonstrating that the scientific consensus is wrong and that there is a better explanation. That's what Galileo, Pasteur, Darwin, and Einstein did. But when some conclusions have been thoroughly and deeply tested, questioned, and examined, they gain the status of "well-established theories" and are often spoken of as "facts."
    For instance, there is compelling scientific evidence that our planet is about 4.5bn years old (the theory of the origin of Earth), that our universe was born from a single event about 14bn years ago (the Big Bang theory), and that today's organisms evolved from ones living in the past (the theory of evolution). Even as these are overwhelmingly accepted by the scientific community, fame still awaits anyone who could show these theories to be wrong. Climate change now falls into this category: there is compelling, comprehensive, and consistent objective evidence that humans are changing the climate in ways that threaten our societies and the ecosystems on which we depend.
    Many recent assaults on climate science and, more disturbingly, on climate scientists by climate change deniers, are typically driven by special interests or dogma, not by an honest effort to provide an alternative theory that credibly satisfies the evidence. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other scientific assessments of climate change, which involve thousands of scientists producing massive and comprehensive reports, have, quite expectedly and normally, made some mistakes. When errors are pointed out, they are corrected.
    But there is nothing remotely identified in the recent events that changes the fundamental conclusions about climate change:
    (i) The planet is warming due to increased concentrations of heat-trapping gases in our atmosphere. A snowy winter in Washington does not alter this fact.
    (ii) Most of the increase in the concentration of these gases over the last century is due to human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.
    (iii) Natural causes always play a role in changing Earth's climate, but are now being overwhelmed by human-induced changes.
    (iv) Warming the planet will cause many other climatic patterns to change at speeds unprecedented in modern times, including increasing rates of sea-level rise and alterations in the hydrologic cycle. Rising concentrations of carbon dioxide are making the oceans more acidic.
    (v) The combination of these complex climate changes threatens coastal communities and cities, our food and water supplies, marine and freshwater ecosystems, forests, high mountain environments, and far more.
    Much more can be, and has been, said by the world's scientific societies, national academies, and individuals, but these conclusions should be enough to indicate why scientists are concerned about what future generations will face from business- as-usual practices. We urge our policymakers and the public to move forward immediately to address the causes of climate change, including the unrestrained burning of fossil fuels.
    We also call for an end to McCarthy- like threats of criminal prosecution against our colleagues based on innuendo and guilt by association, the harassment of scientists by politicians seeking distractions to avoid taking action, and the outright lies being spread about them. Society has two choices: we can ignore the science and hide our heads in the sand and hope we are lucky, or we can act in the public interest to reduce the threat of global climate change quickly and substantively. The good news is that smart and effective actions are possible. But delay must not be an option.
    The signatories are all members of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences but are not speaking on its behalf or on behalf of their ins utions:
    255 scientists including 11 nobel prize winners all of whom are members of the NAS that specifically support AGW concerns. Lets not forget what the NAS official position is.

    Compare that to 2 scientists that you claim to be skeptics. It should be noted your claims of skepticism have to be taken with a grain of salt. You include papers that are about positive feedback mechanisms in your skeptic papers.

  13. #888
    I don't really care... Yonivore's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Post Count
    26,781
    why do computer illiterates always discuss the topic they are illiterate on? Faster computing power does not make something that is not fully understood anymore accurate. Where did you learn this? Skeptical Science?
    Last I checked, GIGO still applies - no matter how much faster you're able to shovel it in. You just get bigger, faster, more complicated mistakes.

  14. #889
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Maybe one day Yoni will be able to point to specifics and not generalities. Sucjh as specific normalization factors or formula coefficients that are incorrect.

    I guess in the meantime we will just have to settle for claims of incredulity based on said generalities.

    They were wrong on one projection among many possible trajectories based on emissions on the high end from 24 years ago so they must be wrong now.

    Climate is too complex but you cannot point to any specifics.

    Quantification of measurements is not summed correctly but not a single normalization factor can be pointed to.

    The list goes one and I am still wondering what if any scientific background yoni has.

  15. #890
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    Note to Fuzzy -- Moore's Law doesn't make ty computer models better -- just gives the ty results faster.

    The Apollo Guidance Computer had 36k of ROM and 2k RAM.

  16. #891
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Note to Fuzzy -- Moore's Law doesn't make ty computer models better -- just gives the ty results faster.

    The Apollo Guidance Computer had 36k of ROM and 2k RAM.
    Again, point to specific errors within the modelling. We have posted and discussed the ocean models extensively. WC claimed they did not consider solubility states which was wrong.

    We have looked at the MIT paper from the 1970s which used partial derivates that you should be familiar with in describing flux.

    We have looked at BEST and their normalization factors in their summations of surface temperature measurements.

    Where are the errors, where are they going in the wrong direction? Be specific instead of throwing out the typical generalities.

  17. #892
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    Just as high definition doesn't necessarily improve ty movies and length of Fuzzy's posts doesn't improve his ideas.

  18. #893
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Just as high definition doesn't necessarily improve ty movies and length of Fuzzy's posts doesn't improve his ideas.
    Just as baseless analogies are baseless so are baseless claims of bad ideas baseless.

  19. #894
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    Again, point to specific errors within the modelling. We have posted and discussed the ocean models extensively. WC claimed they did not consider solubility states which was wrong.

    We have looked at the MIT paper from the 1970s which used partial derivates that you should be familiar with in describing flux.

    We have looked at BEST and their normalization factors in their summations of surface temperature measurements.

    Where are the errors, where are they going in the wrong direction? Be specific instead of throwing out the typical generalities.

    When I see programmers comment like "fudge factor" and "very artificial correction", it raises red flags -- but maybe that's just me.

  20. #895
    I don't really care... Yonivore's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Post Count
    26,781

  21. #896
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    Forbes a chairman for the heritage foundation. they were present amongst other things financial industry agricultre, manufacturing industry, mining interests

    trade from southeast asia northern asian hubs, media moguls and things of that nature they are parts from early american industrialists .

    Their means of business rely on the status quo remaining the sa. Farmer rely on fossil fuels to provide fertiliz, pesticid, storage harvesting. They're are bot objective.

  22. #897
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Post Count
    22,886
    When I see programmers comment like "fudge factor" and "very artificial correction", it raises red flags -- but maybe that's just me.
    who stated these things and in what context?

  23. #898
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    Poptech is still unable to deviate from his canned answers.
    Your mind is so damaged you delusionally believe every answer I give is canned.

    As for your claim to be a computer analyst that does not trump the personality disorder that you claim to have. Aspergers is noted for the inability to discern nuance or degree ie with you its all or nothing which severely linits your cognitive abilities.
    I do not have aspergers you dumb drug addict and I can discern nuance and degree but computers do not work based on nuance, outside of a hardware issue or cosmic rays flipping memory states they always give the answer they were programmed for.

    Computers are dependent on binary logic and the ALU's, busses etc are engineered to perform an exact manner. ..OTOH, whenever uncertainty evers the equation you are uable to take any sort of middle ground. Its either irrefutable or completely wrong and after observing your behavior, its obvious that you exhibit exactly that.
    That is how computers work, uncertainty (random variables) makes the results wrong not "close". There is no middle ground to take, your mental limitations makes it impossible for you to comprehend such logic.

    As such you can never be considered objective.
    I am completely objective and have forgotten more about computer systems than you know. Climate models are simply a form of confirmation bias, programmed to the get the results that the scientists creating them want, they prove nothing but the computer illiteracy of those scientists and anyone who believes the accuracy of their results. They are the code based on the subjective opinions of the scientists creating them.

    You throw out my admission to smoking pot as a constant ad hominem however you completely fail to quantify how it impacts or even point to specific examples. In contrast, I just showed specific examples of your behavior that demonstrate a complete lack of objectivity.
    Pot causes brain damage as it has with your drug addicted mind,

    Brain Damage:
    Cannabis and adolescence: A dangerous tail (McGill University Health Centre)
    Cannabis 'can cause psychosis in healthy people' (Ins ute of Psychiatry, King's College London)
    Cannabis Could Increase Risks Of Psychotic Illness By 40 Percent (Cardiff University, UK)
    Cannabis Increases Risk Of Psychosis (British Medical Journal)
    Cannabis increases risk of depression and schizophrenia (British Medical Journal)
    Cannabis ingredient causes toxic psychosis (University of Lausanne, Switzerland)
    Cannabis link to psychosis (University of New South Wales, Australia)
    Cannabis smokers 'are taking huge risk of psychotic illness' (Ins ute of Psychiatry, King's College London)
    Cannabis Triggers Transient Schizophrenia-like Symptoms (Yale School of Medicine)
    Cannabis use 'dulls the brain' (Journal of the American Medical Association)
    Cannabis use precedes the onset of psychotic symptoms in young people (British Medical Journal)
    Concerns over mental health risk of smoking cannabis (British Journal of Psychiatry)
    Daily Consumption Of Cannabis Predisposes To Appearance Of Psychosis And Schizophrenia (University of Granada)
    Daily Pot Smoking May Hasten Onset of Psychosis (Emory University)
    Early Cannabis Use Increases Risk of Schizophrenia (University of Otago, New Zealand)
    Early cannabis users three times more likely to have psychotic symptoms (University of Queensland, Australia)
    Frequent Marijuana Use May Affect Brain Function (NeuroReport Journal)
    Heavy Cannabis Use May Lead to Psychotic Symptoms (University of Otago, New Zealand)
    Heavy Marijuana use has a detrimental impact on intelligence (Canadian Medical Association Journal)
    Heavy Marijuana Use May Damage Developing Brain In Teens, Young Adults (Children's Hospital of Philadelphia)
    How cannabis causes 'cognitive chaos' in the brain (University of Bristol, UK)
    How Marijuana Causes Memory Deficits (Nature Neuroscience)
    How marijuana impairs memory (Cell Journal)
    How Smoking Marijuana Damages The Fetal Brain (Science)
    Human Study Shows Greater Cognitive Deficits in Marijuana Users Who Start Young (Society for Neuroscience)
    Lab study shows THC exposure as adolescents linked to negative effects of THC as adults (Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology)
    Long-term cannabis use causes brain injury (Archives of General Psychiatry Journal)
    Marijuana And Alcohol Taken Together Induced Widespread Nerve Cell Death In Brains Of Young Rats (Annals of Neurology Journal)
    Marijuana Damages Brain (King's College London)
    Marijuana Is Linked to Brain Damage (The Lancet Medical Journal)
    Marijuana Use Affects Blood Flow In Brain Even After Abstinence (Neurology Journal)
    Marijuana use in pregnancy damages kids' learning (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)
    Marijuana Use Takes Toll On Adolescent Brain Function (University of Cincinnati)
    Memory, speed of thinking get worse over time with marijuana use (American Academy of Neurology)
    Molecular Imaging Shows Chronic Marijuana Smoking Affects Brain Chemistry (Society of Nuclear Medicine)
    More Evidence Of Cannabis-induced Psychosis (BMC Psychiatry Journal)
    New RCSI research demonstrates how cannabis use during adolescence affects brain regions associated with schizophrenia (Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland)
    New research reveals how cannabis alters brain function (Ins ute of Psychiatry, King's College London)
    Scans reveal brain damage from cannabis is like schizophrenia (Albert Einstein College of Medicine)
    Schizophrenia Linked To Dysfunction In Molecular Brain Pathway Activated By Marijuana (Archives of General Psychiatry Journal)
    Skunk 'poses greatest risk of psychosis' (Ins ute of Psychiatry, King's College London)
    Skunk smokers 18 times more likely to be psychotic (Royal College of Psychiatrists)
    Smoking cannabis increases the risk of depression in the case of genetic vulnerability (Radboud University, The Netherlands)
    Starting marijuana use during teens may result in cognitive impairment later in life (NIH National Ins ute on Drug Abuse)
    Teen Drug Use Associated With Psychiatric Disorders Later In Life (NIH National Ins ute On Drug Abuse)
    Teen Marijuana Use Worsens Depression, Leads To More Serious Mental Illness (Office of National Drug Control Policy)

    You also are deceptive as demonstrated by your editing of posts weeks after original postings and claiming that they were not your admissions of your disorder but instead that I am a drug addict. That exhibits a deep shame and cognizance of your own behavior and as I have told you before that points to axis 2 such as NPD/OCD.
    I played you like a fiddle you drug addict and exposed you for what I expected from day one, that you a brain damaged pot head. I have no shame playing with drug addicts like you as people like you are not even worthy of compassion, you are waste of society. You are below the gutter trash on the street an evolutionary failure.

  24. #899
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    It allows them to use more complex models and more quickly get their results so they can refine the formulas. Quicker processing means quicker evolution of the science.
    It simply allows them to get the wrong results faster and to compound these errors over longer time frames.

    Computational science: ...Error …why scientific programming does not compute. (Nature, Volume 467, pp. 775-777, October 2010)
    Researchers are spending more and more time writing computer software to model biological structures, simulate the early evolution of the Universe and analyse past climate data, among other topics. But programming experts have little faith that most scientists are up to the task. [...]

    ...as computers and programming tools have grown more complex, scientists have hit a "steep learning curve", says James Hack, director of the US National Center for Computational Sciences at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. "The level of effort and skills needed to keep up aren't in the wheelhouse of the average scientist."

    As a general rule, researchers do not test or do ent their programs rigorously, and they rarely release their codes, making it almost impossible to reproduce and verify published results generated by scientific software, say computer scientists. [...]

    Greg Wilson, a computer scientist in Toronto, Canada, who heads Software Carpentry — an online course aimed at improving the computing skills of scientists — says that he woke up to the problem in the 1980s, when he was working at a physics supercomputing facility at the University of Edinburgh, UK. After a series of small mishaps, he realized that, without formal training in programming, it was easy for scientists trying to address some of the Universe's biggest questions to inadvertently introduce errors into their codes, potentially "doing more harm than good". [...]

    "There are terrifying statistics showing that almost all of what scientists know about coding is self-taught," says Wilson. "They just don't know how bad they are."

    As a result, codes may be riddled with tiny errors that do not cause the program to break down, but may drastically change the scientific results that it spits out.

  25. #900
    Irrefutable Poptech's Avatar
    My Team
    New Jersey Nets
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    694
    ...11 nobel prize winners all of whom are members of the NAS that specifically support AGW concerns.
    I only have 3 nobel prize winners,

    Kary Mullis, B.S. Chemistry, Georgia Ins ute of Technology (1966); Ph.D. Biochemistry, University of California, Berkeley (1972); Lecturer, Department of Biochemistry, University of California, Berkeley (1972); Post-doctoral Fellow, Pediatric Cardiology, University of Kansas Medical School (1973-1977); Post-doctoral Fellow, Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California, San Francisco (1977-1979); Scientist, Department of Chemistry, Cetus Corporation (1979-1984); Scientist, Department of Human Genetics, Cetus Corporation (1984-1986); Director of Molecular Biology, Xytronyx Inc. (1986-1988); William Allan Memorial Award, American Society of Human Genetics (1990); Viral Hepa is Research Foundation of Japan Award (1991); California Scientist of the Year Award (1992); Cetus Corporation Biotechnology Research Award, American Society for Microbiology (1992); Robert Koch Prize (1992); Vice President of Research, Atomic Tags Inc. (1992-1993); Japan Prize, Science and Technology Foundation of Japan (1993); Outstanding Contributions To Clinical Chemistry Award, American Association for Clinical Chemistry (1993); Nobel Prize in Chemistry (1993); Gustavus J. Esselen Award for Chemistry in the Public Interest, American Chemical Society (1994); Hon. D.Sc. (Honorary Doctorate of Science), University of South Carolina (1994); Distinguished Visiting Professor, The University of South Carolina, College of Science and Mathematics (1994-Present); Vice President of Molecular Biology, VYREX Corporation (1997-1998); Induction, National Inventors Hall of Fame (1998); Vice President of Molecular Biology, Burstein Technologies (1999-2003); Distinguished Researcher, Children’s Hospital at Oakland Research Ins ute at Oakland (2003-Present); Founder and Chief Scientific Officer, Altermune, LLC (2003-Present)

    "To make predictions about what follows from here and when, and to audaciously begin the discussion by implicating our humble species in the whole thing [Global Warming] is worse than audacious, it’s pathetic" - Kary Mullis


    Ivar Giaever, M.E., Norwegian Ins ute of Technology (1952); Ph.D. Theoretical Physics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Ins ute (1964); Engineer, Advanced Engineering Program, General Electric Company (1954–1956); Applied Mathematician, Research and Development Center, General Electric Company (1956–1958); Researcher, Research and Development Center, General Electric Company (1958–1988); Guggenheim Fellowship, Biophysics, Cambridge University (1969-1970); Oliver E. Buckley Condensed Matter Prize (1965); Nobel Prize in Physics (1973); Member, American Academy of Arts & Sciences (1974); Member, National Academy of Science (1974); Member, National Academy of Engineering (1975); Adjunct Professor of Physics, University of California, San Diego (1975); Visiting Professor, Salk Ins ute for Biological Studies (1975); Professor of Physics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Ins ute (1988-2005); Founder and Chief Technology Officer, Applied BioPhysics (1991-Present); Professor Emeritus of Physics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Ins ute (2005-Present)

    "I'm a skeptic. ...Global Warming it's become a new religion. You're not supposed to be against Global Warming. You have basically no choice. And I tell you how many scientists support that. But the number of scientists is not important. The only thing that's important is if the scientists are correct; that's the important part." - Ivar Giaever


    Robert Laughlin, A.B. Mathematics, University of California, Berkeley (1972); Ph.D. Physics, Massachusetts Ins ute of Technology (1979); Fellow, IBM (1976-1978); Postdoctoral Member, Technical Staff, Bell Laboratories (1979–1981); Research Physicist, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (1982–2004); Associate Professor of Physics, Stanford University (1985–1989); E.O. Lawrence Award for Physics (1985); Oliver E. Buckley Condensed Matter Prize (1986); Eastman Kodak Lecturer, University of Rochester (1989); Professor of Physics, Stanford University (1989–1993); Fellow, American Academy of Arts & Sciences (1990); Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of Physics, Stanford University (1992–Present); Professor of Applied Physics, Stanford University (1993-2007); Member, National Academy of Sciences (1994), Nobel Prize in Physics (1998); Board Member, Science Foundation Ireland (2002-2003); President, Asia-Pacific Center for Theoretical Physics (2004-2006); President, Korean Advanced Ins ute for Science and Technology (2004–2006)

    "The geologic record suggests that climate ought not to concern us too much when we’re gazing into the energy future, not because it’s unimportant, but because it’s beyond our power to control." - Robert Laughlin

    Compare that to 2 scientists that you claim to be skeptics. It should be noted your claims of skepticism have to be taken with a grain of salt.
    Dr. Lindzen and Dyson are not skeptics?

    "Given that the evidence strongly implies that anthropogenic warming has been greatly exaggerated, the basis for alarm due to such warming is similarly diminished." - Richard S. Lindzen

    "My first heresy says that all the fuss about global warming is grossly exaggerated. Here I am opposing the holy brotherhood of climate model experts and the crowd of deluded citizens who believe the numbers predicted by the computer models. Of course, they say, I have no degree in meteorology and I am therefore not qualified to speak. But I have studied the climate models and I know what they can do. The models solve the equations of fluid dynamics, and they do a very good job of describing the fluid motions of the atmosphere and the oceans. They do a very poor job of describing the clouds, the dust, the chemistry and the biology of fields and farms and forests. They do not begin to describe the real world that we live in. The real world is muddy and messy and full of things that we do not yet understand. It is much easier for a scientist to sit in an air-conditioned building and run computer models, than to put on winter clothes and measure what is really happening outside in the swamps and the clouds. That is why the climate model experts end up believing their own models." - Freeman Dyson

    You include papers that are about positive feedback mechanisms in your skeptic papers.
    What paper is about positive feedback mechanisms that is not quoted to address a specific argument?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •