Visit our Popular Forums

conachair · 06-04-2015, 00:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by sobraon

The irrefutable fact is that there has not been any significant statistical warming of the earths surface atmosphere in approximately 19 years.

The oceans are still warming.

An apparent hiatus in global warming? - Trenberth - 2013 - Earth's Future - Wiley Online Library

sobraon · 06-04-2015, 00:47

Tensen

Quote:

No it doesn't. It comes from peer reviewed scientific papers on the subject. Links to them have been provided on approximately pages 58 to 60 of this thread

You obviously never read anything of what Tol wrote. I quoted him because he was one of the believers. There are plenty of other well respected scientists who have also concurred.

Just because you continually repeat a myth doesn't make it true. That is Goebbels logic.

The only people denying anything are those who continually repeat the myth. John Cook has less credibility than Tim Flannery. Even his blog site is deceptively titled Skeptical Science.

Garry
Home Page - www.sobraon.com

StuM · 06-04-2015, 00:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tensen

Those emails have long since been explained, and they have no impact on the current data that keeps coming out.

Can to share the explanation?

Of course they have an impact on the "current data that keeps coming out". The current data sets included exactly the adjustments discussed in that email.

Quote:

The climate change we're seeing now is unprecedented FYI.

https://www.climate.gov/news-feature...ately%E2%80%9D

A classic example of grafting fine resolution instrumental data onto proxy data which has resolutions on decadal to centennial scales.

Anyone who has taken Basic Statistics is aware in the major flaw in that approach. You just don't combine data with such diverse resolutions - other than in "climate science".

Quote:

The images you posted are from nut-job conspiracy theorist sites, not peer reviewed scientific papers.

Are you claiming that the data shown is incorrect, or are you just resorting to the usual ad hominem arguments.

If the former, I can provide you with the links to the original data on "official" sites. If the latter, I won't waste my time.

sobraon · 06-04-2015, 00:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by conachair

The oceans are still warming.

As I stated, if you repeat a myth it doesn't make it true. NASA, who are under huge pressure to make the data agree with the hypothesis have even had to admit that this myth isn't true.
Notice the date.

Oct. 6, 2014: The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years. Study Finds Earthâ€™s Ocean Abyss Has Not Warmed - NASA Science

Mind you they are saying: "We're just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details." That's like saying we are running out of excuses.

Ocean warming is another of the de-bunked therories.

Realists deal in data, Idealists deal in theories.

Garry
Home Page - www.sobraon.com

Tensen · 06-04-2015, 01:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by sobraon

Tensen You obviously never read anything of what Tol wrote. I quoted him because he was one of the believers. There are plenty of other well respected scientists who have also concurred.

Just because you continually repeat a myth doesn't make it true. That is Goebbels logic.

The only people denying anything are those who continually repeat the myth. John Cook has less credibility than Tim Flannery. Even his blog site is deceptively titled Skeptical Science.

Garry
Home Page - www.sobraon.com

Here are the links. Peer reviewed studies that show 97% of climate scientists agree on climate change:

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature - IOPscience
The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change

conachair · 06-04-2015, 01:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by sobraon

As I stated, if you repeat a myth it doesn't make it true. NASA, who are under huge pressure to make the data agree with the hypothesis have even had to admit that this myth isn't true.
Notice the date.

Oct. 6, 2014: The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years. Study Finds Earthâ€™s Ocean Abyss Has Not Warmed - NASA Science

Mind you they are saying: "We're just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details." That's like saying we are running out of excuses.

Ocean warming is another of the de-bunked therories.

Realists deal in data, Idealists deal in theories.

Garry
Home Page - www.sobraon.com

Have a look at the depths being talked about on the two papers.

Tensen · 06-04-2015, 01:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by StuM

Can to share the explanation?

Quotes had been cherry-picked and taken way out of context.
Inquiries by the following all found there was nothing to answer for.

Pennsylvania State University
UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee
University of East Anglia International Scientific Assessment Panel
US EPA
US Department of Commerce
US National Science Foundation

Quote:

Of course they have an impact on the "current data that keeps coming out". The current data sets included exactly the adjustments discussed in that email.

I'll rephrase: they have no impact on the validity of data coming out.

Quote:

A classic example of grafting fine resolution instrumental data onto proxy data which has resolutions on decadal to centennial scales.

Anyone who has taken Basic Statistics is aware in the major flaw in that approach. You just don't combine data with such diverse resolutions - other than in "climate science".

A good example of a statement that doesn't actually mean anything. Make a point.
And I have taken "Basic Statistics" and more.

Quote:

Are you claiming that the data shown is incorrect, or are you just resorting to the usual ad hominem arguments.

If the former, I can provide you with the links to the original data on "official" sites. If the latter, I won't waste my time.

Post links directly to the original data.

sobraon · 06-04-2015, 01:29

Tenson.

Your links quotes the discredited papers. As I said. Read what Tol has to say about the methodology for the paper. Cook had an agenda. I don't need to chase my tail. If you won't listen to the scientists who are telling you that they don't agree with the myth then you certainly won't accept the facts that the myth is not true.

Realist and Idealist. I assume you are in favour of a carbon tax.

Garry
Home Page - www.sobraon.com

Tensen · 06-04-2015, 01:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by sobraon

As I stated, if you repeat a myth it doesn't make it true. NASA, who are under huge pressure to make the data agree with the hypothesis have even had to admit that this myth isn't true.
Notice the date.

Oct. 6, 2014: The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years. Study Finds Earthâ€™s Ocean Abyss Has Not Warmed - NASA Science

Mind you they are saying: "We're just trying to understand the nitty-gritty details." That's like saying we are running out of excuses.

Ocean warming is another of the de-bunked therories.

Realists deal in data, Idealists deal in theories.

Garry
Home Page - www.sobraon.com

You said there's no evidence that surface temperatures have risen.
Here's graphical evidence of measurements taken, from IPCC's AR5.
I'm only embedding one image, and linking the rest, because the post would be far too large otherwise.

Reefmagnet · 06-04-2015, 01:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tensen

You said there's no evidence that surface temperatures have risen.
Here's graphical evidence of measurements taken, from IPCC's AR5.
I'm only embedding one image, and linking the rest, because the post would be far too large otherwise.

You seem to have your finger on the pulse. Can you post graphs with natural variability nulled?

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

sobraon · 06-04-2015, 01:40

Conachair.
I have read the NASA paper at depth. They can't explain the lack of temperature gain. They theorise but admit to not knowing.

Look back even further and you will find that the myth is even further debunked. NOAA noted that unprecedented warming of ocean waters occurred during a 30-year period which ended in 1945 when human CO2 emissions were some 85% less than the modern era (166 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions versus 784 billion tonnes for the most recent 30-year span).

The world's climate has experienced a declining ocean warming rate since the 1940s, which contradicts the "consensus" anthropogenic global warming hypothesis, per NOAA. Just another case of those-stubborn-facts ... modern ocean warming is not unprecedented.

Now let's get onto acidification. What a joke.

Garry
Home Page - www.sobraon.com

Reefmagnet · 06-04-2015, 01:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackdale

An alarmist would make statements with 100% certainty. The IPCC has a set of guidelines for discussing certainty.

So just to confirm, the IPCC aren't certain?

Didn't I say that like 500 posts back?

Tensen · 06-04-2015, 01:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by sobraon

Tenson.

Your links quotes the discredited papers. As I said. Read what Tol has to say about the methodology for the paper. Cook had an agenda. I don't need to chase my tail. If you won't listen to the scientists who are telling you that they don't agree with the myth then you certainly won't accept the facts that the myth is not true.

And Nuccitelli, Green, Richardson, Winkler, Painting, Way, Jacobs, and Skuce all happened to share precisely the same "agenda" did they? How convenient. And the authors of the other two papers that reached the same conclusion were part of the conspiracy too?

Richard Tol is an economist. About a million miles removed from a climate scientist.
Here's a quote from him, for your reading pleasure:

Quote:

There is no doubt in my mind that the literature on climate change overwhelmingly supports the hypothesis that climate change is caused by humans. I have very little reason to doubt that the consensus is indeed correct

From this paper of his: Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis

Quote:

Realist and Idealist. I assume you are in favour of a carbon tax.

Of course. Right now there are huge profits that act as an incredibly powerful disincentive to incumbent energy producers etc to change their methods.