Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Advances in the investigation of the physical universe we live in.

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Mon Dec 21, 2015 3:50 pm

Torchwood wrote:Cherry picking data. The "no global warming for 18 years" starts from the last big El Nino, in 1997-98, when the world was abnormally warm. There is another big one starting now


I recall the last el Nino vividly as I was back in Chicago for a visit and was surprised to find myself being able to wear nothing more than a light sweater in early December.

I would say that cherry-picking is the claims in media that this el Nino is due to man-made global warming rather than a quasi-periodic natural event.

Anyways, the pause argument excludes the past el Nino time points.

Aside from the group at US NOAA that took ancient ship bucket and intake measurements, with their unknown systematic uncertainties, as the gold standard and fit the far more accurate recent buoy data to them to get rid of the "pause", instead of the obvious standard vice versa, even most climate scientists admit to the existence of the pause. At last count, there are over 50 purported explanations for it.

This also raises the issue of how does one separate out the possible small contribution of AGW to the change in global temperature in the "global temperature" time series which exhibits the large natural variations in temperature of a driven dynamic non-linear system far from thermodynamic equilibrium.

The sad reality is that the entire field of "AGW climate science" is mostly based on grossly underestimating statistical and systematic errors.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Fri Jan 01, 2016 11:35 pm

The Fishy ‘Science’ of Ocean Acidification

The trove of FOI emails include some beauties. Here’s what NOAA’s Dr Shallin Busch had to say, privately, to her NOAA colleague Madelyn Applebaum on September 30 about the draft. They had been asked by the New York Times to sex it up with some specific hurts allegedly being caused by all this acidification. The editor asked,

It’s very interesting, but in order to work for us it needs to be geared more toward the general reader. Can the authors give us more specific, descriptive images about how acidification has already affected the oceans? Is the situation akin to the acid rain phenomenon that hit North America? What can be done to counteract the problem?


Dr Busch, who works for NOAA’s Ocean Acidification Program and Northwest Fisheries Science Center at Seattle, responded to Ms Applebaum:

Unfortunately, I can’t provide this information to you because it doesn’t exist. As I said in my last email, currently there are NO areas of the world that are severely degraded because of OA or even areas that we know are definitely affected by OA right now. If you want to use this type of language, you could write about the CO2 vent sites in Italy or Polynesia as examples of things to come. Sorry that I can’t be more helpful on this!


Dr Busch had the integrity to admit that science can cite “NO” significant ocean “acidification” impacts. But she was nonetheless happy for the article to include, as agitprop, the effects of natural CO2 venting through the ocean floor, as though this somehow corroborated the “acidification” story.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Simple Minded » Tue Jan 05, 2016 1:03 pm

Torchwood wrote:Cherry picking data. The "no global warming for 18 years" starts from the last big El Nino, in 1997-98, when the world was abnormally warm. There is another big one starting now


"When the world was abnormally warm" implies we have identified the "normal" world temperature. Has anyone ever determined the normal temperature of the Earth? Has anyone seen a number published?
Enquiring minds want to know. And if we don’t know, or can't know, then we’ll just imagine or project.
Simple Minded
 
Posts: 6310
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:24 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Nonc Hilaire » Tue Jan 05, 2016 2:30 pm

Simple Minded wrote:
Torchwood wrote:Cherry picking data. The "no global warming for 18 years" starts from the last big El Nino, in 1997-98, when the world was abnormally warm. There is another big one starting now


"When the world was abnormally warm" implies we have identified the "normal" world temperature. Has anyone ever determined the normal temperature of the Earth? Has anyone seen a number published?

Taking normal temperature should be a cinch, assuming one uses a rectal thermometer.

Buttholes on earth appear to be in unlimited supply.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
 
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:06 am

Record Missouri flooding was manmade calamity

"Climate change" is a convenient catch-all excuse to hide human incompetence, be it Louisiana, New York, or parts of the Mississippi.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Sun Feb 07, 2016 4:50 pm

On CO2.

All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Mon Feb 22, 2016 3:49 pm

All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Mon Feb 22, 2016 3:54 pm

UN "Green Climate" Program Is a Slush Fund for Dictators

The fund is planned to be $450 billion by 2020
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Ammianus » Tue Feb 23, 2016 5:26 am

For the dear Colonel himself,

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... udies-show

Did you not say some years ago that these findings should not actually be happening?
User avatar
Ammianus
 
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:38 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:33 pm

Ammianus wrote:For the dear Colonel himself,

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... udies-show

Did you not say some years ago that these findings should not actually be happening?


Geological history context:

Image

The the conclusions of the paper are model based which is often a case of GIGO: Garbage In, Garbage Out.

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2016/02/17/1517056113

The sea level pre 19th century is guesstimated via indirect proxy measurements and then modeled.
Indirect proxy measurements for anything are notoriously fraught with known and especially unknown systematic biases.

Actual measured sea level rise at New York City:

Image

Less than 3mm per year with no evidence of a change in the rate for 160 years. No acceleration.

As for predictions of the future, one point to keep in mind is that the track record of experts in predicting the future is worse that than of psychics.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Wed Feb 24, 2016 7:25 pm

Ammianus wrote:For the dear Colonel himself,

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/ ... udies-show

Did you not say some years ago that these findings should not actually be happening?


Actually, scientists in the field are starting to point out why the paper in question is not even wrong:

http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/02/23/ ... nal-facts/

There are two key issues that almost all devoted followers of The Grauniad do not understand with regards to this type of science:

1/ One can always generate artifacts through aggressive data processing that gives on the desired, foregone concluded, results.

2/ Any model-based computer simulation is only as good as the underlying assumptions.
If the assumptions are incorrect, then it is just GIGO [Garbage In, Garbage Out].

The entire industry of "climate science" consists mainly of data processing-analysis artifacts and speculative extrapolations based on models with zero predictive ability [a.k.a. skill].

Just because a lot of people believe the results without question does not make them right.

And if The Grauniad believes them to be correct, then there is a rather high probability that they are not even wrong ;)
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Wed Feb 24, 2016 8:58 pm

Typhoon wrote:
Torchwood wrote:Cherry picking data. The "no global warming for 18 years" starts from the last big El Nino, in 1997-98, when the world was abnormally warm. There is another big one starting now


I recall the last el Nino vividly as I was back in Chicago for a visit and was surprised to find myself being able to wear nothing more than a light sweater in early December.

I would say that cherry-picking is the claims in media that this el Nino is due to man-made global warming rather than a quasi-periodic natural event.

Anyways, the pause argument excludes the past el Nino time points.

Aside from the group at US NOAA that took ancient ship bucket and intake measurements, with their unknown systematic uncertainties, as the gold standard and fit the far more accurate recent buoy data to them to get rid of the "pause", instead of the obvious standard vice versa, even most climate scientists admit to the existence of the pause. At last count, there are over 50 purported explanations for it.

This also raises the issue of how does one separate out the possible small contribution of AGW to the change in global temperature in the "global temperature" time series which exhibits the large natural variations in temperature of a driven dynamic non-linear system far from thermodynamic equilibrium.

The sad reality is that the entire field of "AGW climate science" is mostly based on grossly underestimating statistical and systematic errors.


Those silly climate scientists. Still arguing about the existence of the warming pause, when Lewandowsky and The Grauniad have proclaimed it to be non-existent.

Nature | Global warming ‘hiatus’ debate flares up again
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Fri Feb 26, 2016 3:58 pm

The lunatics have taken over the asylum:

All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Parodite » Fri Feb 26, 2016 4:43 pm

Can't imagine that at one point this MMGW Church does not face a serious melt down. Maybe the next El Nino and its aftermath pull the trigger.
Outside, away from the noise, grows a flower.
User avatar
Parodite
 
Posts: 4174
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Fri Feb 26, 2016 10:24 pm

Parodite wrote:Can't imagine that at one point this MMGW Church does not face a serious melt down. Maybe the next El Nino and its aftermath pull the trigger.


Post COP21, the smarter ones have already left or are in the process of leaving as they can sense which way the wind is blowing.

Note that two of the authors of that recent global warming pause/hiatus paper are
Michael "Hide the Decline" Mann and Ben "GIGO Models" Santer.
Notably the paper has been completely ignored by the mainstream media.

They may be no-rate scientists, but they excel at political positioning.

Church of MMGW indeed.

Q: What is the clearest way to identify a cult?
A: All the predictions are one sided.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Mon Feb 29, 2016 2:52 pm

The 'religion' of climate modelling

Our global system of air currents, ocean currents, cloud patterns, resonant temperature cycles, energy storage and release mechanisms, and further processes is mind-bogglingly complex.

Presently, the best climate models fall many orders of magnitude short of the power and intricacy needed to effectively predict the long-term climate patterns that emerge from the interactions of all these planetary systems. And that's not a failure of science; it's just the reality of how tough the problem is.

Predictions are made by building models using the smartest simplifications we have thought of and running them on the most powerful computers ever built. Basically, it's the best we can do right now.

But there is a major failure of science going on.

The failure is the lack of transparency and honesty about how feeble these models are and how much we should stake on their all-too-fallible forecasts. Thus the same problem continues: climate science has once again botched a prediction that its models were under equipped to make.


It seems that there can be no moderate and honest discussion of this issue. Skeptics are singled out in creepy enemies lists. Actually, we're now supposed to call them deniers, as though they were disputing the existence of HIV or the holocaust. Numerous scientists, as well as senators, anti-vaccination Kennedys, and clickbait purveyors have even called for the imprisonment and legal prosecution of those who disagree with them.

Climate science acts like it is fighting a holy war. There are only those who are just and those who must be silenced and stopped at all costs. Anyone who mounts reasonable logical, empirical, or skeptical challenges to the orthodoxy must be ruined, not by counterfactual evidence, but by vicious attack.

Weekly, we're bombarded with doom-and-gloom future scenarios spit out of these models. The public is supposed to quiver in fear and to disregard and forget the many times that these predictions have failed.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Climate modeling done correctly.

Postby Nonc Hilaire » Mon Feb 29, 2016 3:26 pm

Image
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
 
Posts: 3982
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Climate modeling done correctly.

Postby Typhoon » Mon Feb 29, 2016 3:33 pm

Nonc Hilaire wrote:Image


The only way.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Ammianus » Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:06 am

Yo Colonel, how does this February compare to the Medieval Warming Period?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense ... _dt_tw_top
User avatar
Ammianus
 
Posts: 286
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 1:38 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Thu Mar 03, 2016 5:21 pm

Ammianus wrote:Yo Colonel, how does this February compare to the Medieval Warming Period?

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense ... _dt_tw_top


Don't know for sure as we did not have satellite data back then.
Most indirect time series proxy measurements are an exercise in fooling oneself.

The one key point that that that author of that silly histrionic article and Bill "Weepy" McKibben studiously ignore is that el Nino is a natural quasiperiodic global event and has nothing to do with AGW/MMGW. An event that has been occurring since the Pacific became an ocean.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Heracleum Persicum » Sun Mar 06, 2016 3:40 pm

User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
 
Posts: 8692
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Typhoon » Wed Mar 09, 2016 5:14 pm

What US$ 709,000 of govt climate change funding buys:

Glaciers, gender, and science | A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research

I thought it was another Sokal type spoof, but apparently not.
All the world's a stage.
User avatar
Typhoon
 
Posts: 14574
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Parodite » Wed Mar 09, 2016 5:24 pm

Typhoon wrote:What US$ 709,000 of govt climate change funding buys:

Glaciers, gender, and science | A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research

I thought it was another Sokal type spoof, but apparently not.


Hilarious. I guess it has something to do with squirting, white floods, mountain boobs. We guys likle to hunt and sniff around dose female ahreas. How daughters relate to Mother nature while envying the penis possessents.
Outside, away from the noise, grows a flower.
User avatar
Parodite
 
Posts: 4174
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby YMix » Wed Mar 09, 2016 5:50 pm

more just and equitable science and human-ice interactions.


:shock:

... what?
“There are a lot of killers. We’ve got a lot of killers. What, do you think our country’s so innocent? Take a look at what we’ve done, too.” - Donald J. Trump, President of the USA
User avatar
YMix
 
Posts: 4330
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:53 am
Location: Department of Congruity - Report any outliers here

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Postby Simple Minded » Thu Mar 10, 2016 2:24 am

Parodite wrote:
Typhoon wrote:What US$ 709,000 of govt climate change funding buys:

Glaciers, gender, and science | A feminist glaciology framework for global environmental change research

I thought it was another Sokal type spoof, but apparently not.


Hilarious. I guess it has something to do with squirting, white floods, mountain boobs. We guys likle to hunt and sniff around dose female ahreas. How daughters relate to Mother nature while envying the penis possessents.


Any single thesis that can combine racism, sexism, and intellectualism is a bargain at any price. Only Flat Earthers would lack the intellectual horsepower to truly understand and appreciate it.

String theory scientists are (penis) envious.
Enquiring minds want to know. And if we don’t know, or can't know, then we’ll just imagine or project.
Simple Minded
 
Posts: 6310
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:24 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Science + Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest