Scientists study the scientific standing of pro and con global warmists and find:

[sandorski]

I'm not the one using the projections to justify something I believe in. You and others are. I'm saying not a single one of the projections you use to justify what you believe in has predicted the last decade correctly. Not a single one from someone pushing the MMGW agenda. If you can find otherwise prove me wrong, but as far as I've researched there's not a single one.

Incorrect. Fail again.

 

[bfdd]

Incorrect. Fail again.

Then correct me. You haven't put forth anything that tells me I'm wrong besides your say so. For someone who claims to know so much about fail, you sure do fail hard.

 

[sandorski]

Then correct me. You haven't put forth anything that tells me I'm wrong besides your say so. For someone who claims to know so much about fail, you sure do fail hard.

Why should I repeat the work done by Scientists? Your Posts are Debunked before you type them.

 

[bfdd]

Why should I repeat the work done by Scientists? Your Posts are Debunked before you type them.

I haven't seen them. I've looked. Where are the projections and charts from 10 years ago that predicted the last decade from the MMGW/ACC pushers? I can't seem to find them anywhere, so I'm asking for your help since you obviously know where they are. You're not doing a very good job of arguing your point or even trying to convince others with your "facts." So I'm asking you to enlighten me on the subject. If you don't or can't then you fail.

 

[sandorski]

I haven't seen them. I've looked. Where are the projections and charts from 10 years ago that predicted the last decade from the MMGW/ACC pushers? I can't seem to find them anywhere, so I'm asking for your help since you obviously know where they are. You're not doing a very good job of arguing your point or even trying to convince others with your "facts." So I'm asking you to enlighten me on the subject. If you don't or can't then you fail.

Google. Srsly Dude, you continue to Fail. No one cares what Your criteria to Accept the Truth is, it exists nonetheless and is there for you to find. If you want it that is. Continue to Deny for whatever reason you see fit, but know this, it will be Fail.

 

[monovillage]

I remember the good old days when those on the Left said "Question Authority" now it seems to be "Acquiesce to Authority" or "Bend over and spread them for Authority" They seem to get so shrill when who they pick as "Authority" get questioned at all. They support the hiding of data, breaking the law to conceal FOI requests and collusion to stop skeptic authors from publishing papers. What happened to the old "Liberals" that questioned authority?

 

[sandorski]

I remember the good old days when those on the Left said "Question Authority" now it seems to be "Acquiesce to Authority" or "Bend over and spread them for Authority" They seem to get so shrill when who they pick as "Authority" get questioned at all. They support the hiding of data, breaking the law to conceal FOI requests and collusion to stop skeptic authors from publishing papers. What happened to the old "Liberals" that questioned authority?

Most people would jump off the Titanic before it submerged. I see that you would try to get back on the Titanic after it fully submerged.

 

[monovillage]

No, i just think most reasonable people that have questions about the climate data and methods of compiling it, storing it and adjusting it should be able to get answers from the publicly funded Institutions that release it for policy and political reasons. Why has NASA GISS and Hadley CRU refused to release information for over 3 years that has been subject to FOI requests ?

 

[bfdd]

No, i just think most reasonable people that have questions about the climate data and methods of compiling it, storing it and adjusting it should be able to get answers from the publicly funded Institutions that release it for policy and political reasons. Why has NASA GISS and Hadley CRU refused to release information for over 3 years that has been subject to FOI requests ?

The only time you run from a FOI request is when you have something to hide and you aren't sure how to hide it.

edit- btw sandorski I've been looking for these projections all day since you told me they exist and I can't find them anywhere. So again I'm asking you to please prove me wrong. I want to see them.

 

[sandorski]

The only time you run from a FOI request is when you have something to hide and you aren't sure how to hide it.

edit- btw sandorski I've been looking for these projections all day since you told me they exist and I can't find them anywhere. So again I'm asking you to please prove me wrong. I want to see them.

Again, you criteria is the problem. The Models show the Trend, not a Guide to help you plan your Picnic.

 

[piasabird]

If only a scientist that is pro global warming gets a grant to study the environment, then guess what he or she is going to try to prove?

 

[bfdd]

Again, you criteria is the problem. The Models show the Trend, not a Guide to help you plan your Picnic.

Ok an upwards trend doesn't mean shit though. You're basically saying "they're making a really good guess and that's the best they can do" if the best they can do is come up with a good guess then I'm done with you. I'm asking you to prove to me that these projections that have convinced you MMGW/ACC is real years ago projected our current temperature range. Nothing I've seen indicates they're able to project anything of substance. I'm asking YOU to show ME a trend line from 10 years ago that lines up with what the temperatures actually were during those 10 years. If you can't then you've failed. I'm not asking you this to shove it in your face, I'm asking you to educate me and if you won't take the extra 30 seconds to educate someone you think is "ignorant" then shut up and stay out of these threads.

 

[Throckmorton]

Exactly, that is exactly my point in asking for a model that at least correllates closely with the raw data (raw data that's truly raw, and collected properly i.e. not next to an air conditioner vent).

Where the rubber meets the road is going to be cost, and without a model to show how serious the problem we are causing really is, no one is going to take it seriously enough (or, should not take it seriously enough if they're at all responsible) to dedicate money that could be spent elsewhere.

That's Reality.

So, where's that model?

Chuck

You don't need a predictive model to show the amount of warming we are causing. You need to look at the warming over the last century and look at the variables. The only variable that has increased over that time period has been greenhouse gases, because of our fossil fuel burning.

 

[Throckmorton]

Ok an upwards trend doesn't mean shit though. You're basically saying "they're making a really good guess and that's the best they can do" if the best they can do is come up with a good guess then I'm done with you. I'm asking you to prove to me that these projections that have convinced you MMGW/ACC is real years ago projected our current temperature range. Nothing I've seen indicates they're able to project anything of substance. I'm asking YOU to show ME a trend line from 10 years ago that lines up with what the temperatures actually were during those 10 years. If you can't then you've failed. I'm not asking you this to shove it in your face, I'm asking you to educate me and if you won't take the extra 30 seconds to educate someone you think is "ignorant" then shut up and stay out of these threads.

I remember seeing graphs from 10 years ago, and they showed the continuation of the warming trend. That is exactly what happened. If you google enough you might find one of those old graphs, but finding what you really want is really hard.

I'm not sure why predictions from 10 years ago that turned out to be accurate are so important to you. I think you have it completely backwards. What should be important is that we've experienced a warming trend since we started burning fossil fuel, and which only fossil fuel can explain. Do you have some reason to think that trend is going to reverse itself?

 

[bfdd]

I remember seeing graphs from 10 years ago, and they showed the continuation of the warming trend. That is exactly what happened. If you google enough you might find one of those old graphs, but finding what you really want is really hard.

Did the warming trend line up exactly with what happened? That's what I'm asking. I'm asking if someone was 100% right in their projection. If they weren't then they missed something or left something out or did any number of things to fuck it up. If they cannot project a dead on trend line then they shouldn't be trying to push policy with flawed information. I am asking the MMGW/ACC supporters here to show me a projection from 10+ years ago that has been correct in projecting our current temperature trends. I don't think I'm asking to much. You are the guys pushing this and I'm asking you to educate me. I've never seen an accurate projection and I just spent the last hour of my day here at work looking for them. So enlighten me.

 

[Throckmorton]

Did the warming trend line up exactly with what happened? That's what I'm asking. I'm asking if someone was 100% right in their projection. If they weren't then they missed something or left something out or did any number of things to fuck it up. If they cannot project a dead on trend line then they shouldn't be trying to push policy with flawed information. I am asking the MMGW/ACC supporters here to show me a projection from 10+ years ago that has been correct in projecting our current temperature trends. I don't think I'm asking to much. You are the guys pushing this and I'm asking you to educate me. I've never seen an accurate projection and I just spent the last hour of my day here at work looking for them. So enlighten me.

I don't think you understand the statistics behind this type of modelling. It's physically impossible to create a prediction of every year. In 2000 we had a very clear trend of warming. A graph from 2000 would have shown that trend line continuing.

If you look at a graph with data up to 2009, it will have pretty much the same warming trend line.

You know there is a lot of random yearly variation right AND a natural climate change cycle right? You understand that 1 or 2, or even 10 years of cooling doesn't mean there isn't an overall warming trend?

Look at this graph. It's not a constant warming from year to year to year. No one would expect that, because there is a lot of noise as well as predictable changes like the solar cycle. Just forget models even exist, because they don't matter. That's what I'm trying to get across. This is observed warming over time that we expect to continue.

BTW, you notice the flat period starting in 1950? That was because of global dimming from particulate pollution. The Clean Air Act reduced particulates which reduced global dimming. No one really realized that was happening until a couple years ago. Then that was factored into models, and it made perfect sense. Some day we'll have Star Trek computers that can accurately model climate exactly, down to daily weather, but we aren't anywhere close to that. But the human brain can see a general pattern as well as any computer. All it takes is common sense. You can look at this graph and see a warming trend.

 

[bfdd]

I don't think you understand the statistics behind this type of modelling. It's physically impossible to create a prediction of every year. In 2000 we had a very clear trend of warming. A graph from 2000 would have shown that trend line continuing.

If you look at a graph with data up to 2009, it will have pretty much the same warming trend line.

You know there is a lot of random yearly variation right AND a natural climate change cycle right? You understand that 1 or 2, or even 10 years of cooling doesn't mean there isn't an overall warming trend?

I'm not asking for a prediction of the year 2001 or 2005. I'm asking for a projection of the warming trend that was 100% accurate to what really occurred. I'm not saying warming did or didn't happen. I'm asking for you to show me a projection that was correct, specifically something from 2000 or earlier that projected this decade. I have yet to find anything that lines up perfectly with actual temperature trend. Do they exist? If they do can you link me to them. If they don't exist then I'm right and they don't have all the data to correctly model this which makes me believe they're full of shit and don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

 

[Throckmorton]

I'm not asking for a prediction of the year 2001 or 2005. I'm asking for a projection of the warming trend that was 100% accurate to what really occurred. I'm not saying warming did or didn't happen. I'm asking for you to show me a projection that was correct, specifically something from 2000 or earlier that projected this decade. I have yet to find anything that lines up perfectly with actual temperature trend. Do they exist? If they do can you link me to them. If they don't exist then I'm right and they don't have all the data to correctly model this which makes me believe they're full of shit and don't know what the fuck they're talking about.

Read my post again. Models do not matter. 100% prediction is impossible and irrelevant. We expected warming and we got warming.


Doctors often tell chronically ill patients that they have X number of weeks to live. They're almost never exactly right, because it's an estimate. Does that mean "doctors are full of shit and don't know what the fuck they're talking about"?

You really demand 100% accuracy? Fine, stop reading weather reports because there is no such thing as a 100% accurate weather report. You get an estimate with an attached percentage possibility, and you use it to plan accordingly.


Are you seriously interested in understanding or are you just trolling and wasting my time?

 

[sandorski]

Ok an upwards trend doesn't mean shit though. You're basically saying "they're making a really good guess and that's the best they can do" if the best they can do is come up with a good guess then I'm done with you. I'm asking you to prove to me that these projections that have convinced you MMGW/ACC is real years ago projected our current temperature range. Nothing I've seen indicates they're able to project anything of substance. I'm asking YOU to show ME a trend line from 10 years ago that lines up with what the temperatures actually were during those 10 years. If you can't then you've failed. I'm not asking you this to shove it in your face, I'm asking you to educate me and if you won't take the extra 30 seconds to educate someone you think is "ignorant" then shut up and stay out of these threads.

/facepalm

Obviously it's not a "Guess".

 

[monovillage]

There's reasons why skeptics question every press release and/or paper claiming Global warming/Climate change. It's because of papers like this one attributing Global warming to ancient hunters 15,000 years ago. Do you seriously think a study like this shouldn't be questioned ?

http://www.agu.org/news/press/pr_archives/2010/2010-15.shtml

OHHH sorry it's my mistake, this studies lead author (Chris Doughty) is from STANFORD!! GASP! We can't question anyone from STANFORD.

 

[sandorski]

There's reasons why skeptics question every press release and/or paper claiming Global warming/Climate change. It's because of papers like this one attributing Global warming to ancient hunters 15,000 years ago. Do you seriously think a study like this shouldn't be questioned ?

http://www.agu.org/news/press/pr_archives/2010/2010-15.shtml

OHHH sorry it's my mistake, this studies lead author (Chris Doughty) is from STANFORD!! GASP! We can't question anyone from STANFORD.

You Sir, are not a Skeptic. A Skeptic can actually Accept when the Science is Sound. No, you are a Denier which will never Accept Sound Science, no matter how Sound it is.

 

[bfdd]

You Sir, are not a Skeptic. A Skeptic can actually Accept when the Science is Sound. No, you are a Denier which will never Accept Sound Science, no matter how Sound it is.

I've been asking you to show me they have sound science by showing me projections that show they were 100% right about this last decade. I know charts exist that do not show they have an accurate picture of this "warming trend", but I haven't seen any that are dead on accurate. Again I'm not asking them to tell me how hot it will be in California in 2005 back in 1999. I'm asking for charts that show accurate(100%) projections for the last decade, I don't think that is to unreasonable. You say I'm uninformed and/or choosing to be ignorant so enlighten me. Please present the scientific research that 100% correctly projected the "warming trend." You guys keep dodging it and like I said I don't think I'm being unreasonable.

 

[monovillage]

Actually Sandorski I agree with many other Lukewarmers that people have increased the level of GHGs ( CO2 is one) which has raised global temperatures along with a variety of other things such as land use practices. How much is the big question along with what should we or can we do about it and whether adapting to the change is a better option. What i hate is this garbage pile of junk science and people that enable these hack scientists to run roughshod over standard scientific practices.

 

[ShawnD1]

My biggest problem with this graph is that the difference between the lowest temperature and the highest temperature is 1 degree Celsius. We burn coal and oil like there's no tomorrow for the past 150 years and all it did was increase the temperature by 1 degree? Can you understand why I'm not worried about this?

 

[sandorski]

I've been asking you to show me they have sound science by showing me projections that show they were 100% right about this last decade. I know charts exist that do not show they have an accurate picture of this "warming trend", but I haven't seen any that are dead on accurate. Again I'm not asking them to tell me how hot it will be in California in 2005 back in 1999. I'm asking for charts that show accurate(100%) projections for the last decade, I don't think that is to unreasonable. You say I'm uninformed and/or choosing to be ignorant so enlighten me. Please present the scientific research that 100% correctly projected the "warming trend." You guys keep dodging it and like I said I don't think I'm being unreasonable.

It is unreasonable. Whether you think it or not.