+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 132

Thread: Twenty years of overestimating global warming?

  1. #41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mamooth View Post
    So your official line is that Spencer repeated it verbatim and didn't add his own lines to the graph, he own weird interpretation? That kind of misrepresentation and blatant partisan hackery is why no one pays attention to y'all.

    All your amazing number crunching is based on a very flawed premise, which is why no serious person is paying any attention to it. Granted, the FOX/WUWT crowd eats it up, so congratulations on more successful preaching to that ever-shrinking choir.
    Hi Mam...remember me??

    no one pays attention to y'all.

    why no serious person is paying any attention to it.


    to that ever-shrinking choir.

    LOL....After all this time you still are living your dream world.......

    carbon taxes are so unpopular they won't even bring them up in congress any more
    every poll finds MAJORITIES of scientists say AGW is way over stated
    Even Obama is pushing for more natural gas production (BTW it makes 2/3's the CO2 of coal per BTU)
    Al Gore has been so discredited he is a laughing stock even among liberals
    It is now 2013 and none of the doomsdays have happened
    Most of the alternative energy firms that Obama gave billions (of my tax $$) to have gone bankrupt with the exec's taking the money and running (and laughing)
    Now, even the IPCC admits they were wrong and the sun (OMG the SUN!!....who'd a thunk it!!) warms the planet

    And you STILL say the extremists are WINNING???.......your a piece of work ol' Buddy
    Last edited by Elmer Fudd; Feb 11 2013 at 04:14 PM.
    "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

    H. L. Mencken

  2. Stand Taller and Look Better with the LUMOback Posture and Activity Coach. <LINK> Learn More Here! </LINK>

  3. Default

    RC has their recent annual model/data comparison out...

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...on-comparions/

    Global surface temperature fits closely with most models. Hansen's 1988 model, forced with 4.2C climate sensitivity, is somewhat of an overestimate, but 3C is where most of the science points to today. Arctic sea ice depletion has been significantly underestimated.

    If you want to see woefully wrong predictions, it's easy to find them among global warming deniers.

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2013...ng-prediction/
    "To the average American who’s struggling, we’re in some other stratosphere. We’re the party of Big Business and Big Oil and the rich." - Sen. Olympia Snowe (R)

    Budget surplus inherited by Bush: $236 billion (CBO, 2000)
    Budget deficit inherited by Obama: $1,667 billion (CBO projection, 3/2009)

  4. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gmb92 View Post
    RC has their recent annual model/data comparison out...

    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...on-comparions/

    Global surface temperature fits closely with most models. Hansen's 1988 model, forced with 4.2C climate sensitivity, is somewhat of an overestimate, but 3C is where most of the science points to today. Arctic sea ice depletion has been significantly underestimated.

    If you want to see woefully wrong predictions, it's easy to find them among global warming deniers.

    http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2013...ng-prediction/
    LOL......SOMEWHAT??? Hansen claimed most of the near shore highways on Manhattan would be under water by now. ROLF.....
    "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary."

    H. L. Mencken

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elmer Fudd View Post
    LOL......SOMEWHAT??? Hansen claimed most of the near shore highways on Manhattan would be under water by now. ROLF.....
    Incorrect.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/Hans...de-Highway.htm

    Deniers seem to like the telephone game.

    Hansen is usually on the money.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/Hans...-home-run.html
    Last edited by gmb92; Feb 11 2013 at 04:19 PM.
    "To the average American who’s struggling, we’re in some other stratosphere. We’re the party of Big Business and Big Oil and the rich." - Sen. Olympia Snowe (R)

    Budget surplus inherited by Bush: $236 billion (CBO, 2000)
    Budget deficit inherited by Obama: $1,667 billion (CBO projection, 3/2009)

  6. #45

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gmb92 View Post
    Incorrect.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/Hans...de-Highway.htm

    Deniers seem to like the telephone game.

    Hansen is usually on the money.

    http://www.skepticalscience.com/Hans...-home-run.html
    Jesus, his model wasn't anywhere near accurate. We are currently below scenario CO which is net 0 emissions after 2000.

    Your entire movement has been torpedoed by your own desire to protect the ego of your priests. If you had just thrown Hansne and Mann under the bus when you should have you wouldnt' be losing so badly right now.

    I know you will never get that.
    Mens Sana in Corpore Sano

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Windigo View Post
    Jesus, his model wasn't anywhere near accurate. We are currently below scenario CO which is net 0 emissions after 2000.

    Your entire movement has been torpedoed by your own desire to protect the ego of your priests. If you had just thrown Hansne and Mann under the bus when you should have you wouldnt' be losing so badly right now.

    I know you will never get that.
    In the post you responded to, I wasn't even refer to his 1988 study. Try to keep up. You look foolish.
    "To the average American who’s struggling, we’re in some other stratosphere. We’re the party of Big Business and Big Oil and the rich." - Sen. Olympia Snowe (R)

    Budget surplus inherited by Bush: $236 billion (CBO, 2000)
    Budget deficit inherited by Obama: $1,667 billion (CBO projection, 3/2009)

  8. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gmb92 View Post

    In the post you responded to, I wasn't even refer to his 1988 study. Try to keep up. You look foolish.
    I didn't read them you said he usually on the money. His most famous prediction was wrong. Prove otherwise.
    Mens Sana in Corpore Sano

  9. Default

    Climatology deals with trends.So why does Glickstein (not Watts as I stated earlier) use the 2012 temperatures (0.12C to .016C) instead of the trend from 1990 to 2012? By using a single year as the standard, that one year becomes important in assessing IPCC projections and the "accuracy" will fluctuate depending on the year's anomalies.
    And Tamino has a point. The IPCC makes the same mistake by starting the plots on a single year instead of the trend in 1990.

    "The flaw is this: all the series (both projections and observations) are aligned at 1990. But observations include random year-to-year fluctuations, whereas the projections do not because the average of multiple models averages those out. Using a single-year baseline (1990) offsets all subsequent years by the fluctuation of that baseline year. Instead, the projections should be aligned to the value due to the existing trend in observations at 1990."
    1. The Scientific debate remains open. Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field.--Luntz Research

  10. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MannieD View Post
    Climatology deals with trends.So why does Glickstein (not Watts as I stated earlier) use the 2012 temperatures (0.12C to .016C) instead of the trend from 1990 to 2012? By using a single year as the standard, that one year becomes important in assessing IPCC projections and the "accuracy" will fluctuate depending on the year's anomalies.
    And Tamino has a point. The IPCC makes the same mistake by starting the plots on a single year instead of the trend in 1990.
    That makes absolutely no sense what so ever. The trend in 1990 from what. The linear trend is dependent on from when to when.
    Mens Sana in Corpore Sano

  11. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Windigo View Post
    That makes absolutely no sense what so ever. The trend in 1990 from what. The linear trend is dependent on from when to when.
    If Glickstein had used the trend, because climatology uses trends and not data from year to year, the increase in temps from 1990 to 2012 would not have been .012 - 0.16C increase.
    1. The Scientific debate remains open. Voters believe that there is no consensus about global warming within the scientific community. Should the public come to believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate, and defer to scientists and other experts in the field.--Luntz Research

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 22
    Last Post: Jul 12 2012, 10:59 AM
  2. Replies: 63
    Last Post: Jul 10 2012, 12:01 PM
  3. Replies: 140
    Last Post: Mar 24 2012, 05:57 AM
  4. Replies: 497
    Last Post: Feb 26 2012, 05:51 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks