We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » New Report on Global Warming » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (153 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..38..73..108..143..177~178~179~180~181..190..198..206..214..222..224~225~226 [Next]
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
I wonder. Are there any peer reviewed studies that actually prove that peer reviewed studies produce better results?
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Jul 24, 2017, rockwall wrote:
You'll have to read the report to figure that out. ... and to answer my 2nd questions. Do you find fault with something in the report?


I read it when you first posted it. I'm waiting for you to confirm that you've read it yourself.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Jul 24, 2017, rockwall wrote:
You'll have to read the report to figure that out. ... and to answer my 2nd questions. Do you find fault with something in the report?


It contains essentially no analysis. I repeats the claims that

1. without data adjustments, US temperature data would by "cyclic"--without explaining exactly how or why.
2. they claim that they have shown the data adjustments to be "inappropriate" but do not show any reasons why they think they are.

Apparently the biggest problem they have with the datasets is that they don't show the results that these guys want to see. And that is enough for them to accuse others of impropriety.

Since you don't trust peer-reviewed science, here's a response from the Union of Concerned Scientists. Dr. Rachel Licker of Princeton was asked to comment on Wallace, D'Aleo and Idso's White Paper Blog.

Quote:
Embarrassing Error # 1:

The authors erroneously claim that the NASA, NOAA, and Hadley CRU global average surface temperature records all produce the same results simply because they use many of the same land-based weather stations as sources.

These datasets incorporate information from thousands of individual weather stations, ocean measurements and satellite data. Each of these datasets incorporate as many high-quality temperature data sources as possible, including many in common. Then, each dataset is constructed and analyzed using different methods. Why? Because this is what scientists do to be confident about their results. Scientists test and re-test datasets to see if – using different methods and approaches – they get the same results as their colleagues working independently. I would not want to fly in a plane that had only been inspected once – would you?

Embarrassing Error # 2:

The authors falsely claim that the NASA, NOAA and Hadley CRU GAST records do not properly take into account factors such as urban heat islands and changes in the technologies used to measure land and ocean temperatures over time. They also falsely claim that each of the datasets has selectively biased results in order to exaggerate an upward trend in temperature.

In fact, it is well-established that these datasets do account for these and other factors needed to ensure consistent, comparable and accurate results. Researchers have repeatedly found that the methods used to account for these issues do not affect GAST records to any substantial extent. The size of global surface temperature increases swamps the noise associated with these known and well-studied factors.

Embarrassing Error #3:

The authors cherry-pick some examples in the US as “evidence” that they use to try and refute the well-documented increase in the global average temperature.

Of course, the NOAA, NASA, and CRU datasets include these regional variations. Bottom line: there is a pronounced increase in the global average surface temperature since pre-industrial times and such regional variations are to be expected.

Image


The near-complete lack of references to other scientific studies that examine their spurious claims and the extent to which the authors of this document take information out of context is, quite frankly, embarrassing.


I can post-truth too.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27164 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On Jul 24, 2017, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Quote:
On Jul 24, 2017, rockwall wrote:
...the extent to which the authors of this document take information out of context is, quite frankly, embarrassing.


I can post-truth too.


:) Thanks. Wondering what a "trans-truth" might be.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16276 Posts

Profile of tommy
Since the believers think the climate isn't cyclical, do they think it could be summertime this winter?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Jul 25, 2017, tommy wrote:
Since the believers think the climate isn't cyclical do they think it could be summertime this winter?


Do you really think you've raised a serious question?

Nobody thinks that the seasons are not cyclical, nor that day and night will continue to cycle, and that the earth will continue to travel around the sun once per year.

Some change deniers claim that the warming that is currently being observed is part of some larger cycle. Scientists who look at the evidence are not convinced. But if you want to make yourself feel better in a post-truth world, you can find hundreds of websites that'll support the cycle claim.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Speaking of "Embarrassing Errors", I can point out at least one from each point of "analysis" done by Dr. Rachel Licker. It appears Dr Licker is more interested in misrepresenting the report she is supposedly "fact checking".

1 Embarrassing Error #1.
Dr Licker claims that, "The authors erroneously claim that the NASA, NOAA, and Hadley CRU global average surface temperature records all produce the same results simply because they use many of the same land-based weather stations as sources.".

This is a mis-representation of what they state in their report. What they say is, "It is not surprising that there is good agreement between NOAA, NASA and Hadley on past temperatures given that they all largely use the same raw data. The “best estimate” that has been reported is that 90 – 95% of the raw data is the same in each of the data sets." Then they quote Dr. Pilke that, "The differences between the three global surface temperatures that occur are a result of the analysis methodology as used by each of the three groups."

You'll notice that Dr. Licker doesn't dispute the fact that 95% of the raw data is the same. She makes her big argument that the three agencies use different analysis methods while overlooking that the report acknowledges that the three groups use different analysis methodology. I'll rate this 2 Pinocchio's.

2. Embarrassing Error #2
Dr. Licker claims that, "The authors falsely claim that the NASA, NOAA and Hadley CRU GAST records do not properly take into account factors such as urban heat islands and changes in the technologies used to measure land and ocean temperatures over time."

They do no such thing. In accuality, they explain that the reasons the agencies need to make adjustments to the raw data is 'because' of heat islands, etc. They never claim that the agencies ignore these. I rate this claim "Pants on Fire".

3. Embarrassing Error #3
Dr. Licker claims that, "The authors cherry-pick some examples in the US as “evidence” that they use to try and refute the well-documented increase in the global average temperature. "

Here Dr. Licker completely misrepresents most of the report. First off, the authors are not even trying to refute an increase in global average temperature. What they are doing, is showing how the flattening of the data by removing cyclical patterns and the lowering of temperatures in the first have of the last century while raising the temperatures in the 2nd have of the century creates the illusion of a much sharper increase in temperature than the data actually shows. The authors also don't simply "cherry-pick some examples in the US". They use data from around the world to show that in the northern hemisphere the cycles that show up on the original data and have been eliminated in the manipulated data did in fact exist. Again, I'll have to rate this claim as "Pants on Fire".

Now, of course, Magnus would have spotted these errors also if he really had read the report. So, I'll also have to rate his claim as, "Pants on Fire" also.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16276 Posts

Profile of tommy
Since the believers think the climate isn't cyclical and they claimed for many the winters we remember from childhood are becoming just that: memories - then one wonders what is and what is not, a serious question for these magical characters living in their extreme climate regime post truth world.

Since the believers think the climate isn't cyclical do they deny theories relating to Earth motions and long-term climate change?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27164 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
When does dinosaur season start again?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16276 Posts

Profile of tommy
Let’s now turn our attention away from the Lion King to the lying quisling we call the IPCC.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Jul 25, 2017, rockwall wrote:
Speaking of "Embarrassing Errors", I can point out at least one from each point of "analysis" done by Dr. Rachel Licker. It appears Dr Licker is more interested in misrepresenting the report she is supposedly "fact checking".

1 Embarrassing Error #1.
Dr Licker claims that, "The authors erroneously claim that the NASA, NOAA, and Hadley CRU global average surface temperature records all produce the same results simply because they use many of the same land-based weather stations as sources.".

This is a mis-representation of what they state in their report. What they say is, "It is not surprising that there is good agreement between NOAA, NASA and Hadley on past temperatures given that they all largely use the same raw data. The “best estimate” that has been reported is that 90 – 95% of the raw data is the same in each of the data sets." Then they quote Dr. Pilke that, "The differences between the three global surface temperatures that occur are a result of the analysis methodology as used by each of the three groups."

You'll notice that Dr. Licker doesn't dispute the fact that 95% of the raw data is the same. She makes her big argument that the three agencies use different analysis methods while overlooking that the report acknowledges that the three groups use different analysis methodology. I'll rate this 2 Pinocchio's.


You seem not to understand Licker's point. What you edited out was the reason for using the same data 3 different ways.

Quote:
Licker: These datasets incorporate information from thousands of individual weather stations, ocean measurements and satellite data. Each of these datasets incorporate as many high-quality temperature data sources as possible, including many in common. Then, each dataset is constructed and analyzed using different methods. Why? Because this is what scientists do to be confident about their results. Scientists test and re-test datasets to see if – using different methods and approaches – they get the same results as their colleagues working independently.


Her point is that by using the same data with different methods is how one checks methods not how one checks data. No pinocchios for Licker. Once lack of reading comprehension point against rockwall.

Quote:
2. Embarrassing Error #2
Dr. Licker claims that, "The authors falsely claim that the NASA, NOAA and Hadley CRU GAST records do not properly take into account factors such as urban heat islands and changes in the technologies used to measure land and ocean temperatures over time."

They do no such thing. In accuality, they explain that the reasons the agencies need to make adjustments to the raw data is 'because' of heat islands, etc. They never claim that the agencies ignore these. I rate this claim "Pants on Fire".


You have conveniently overlooked Licker's word "properly". She responds to the claim that the adjustments are not correctly or appropriately done.

Quote:
Wallace et al: All of these challenges notwithstanding, calculation of GAST requires that, after the raw data are collected, some adjustments clearly must be made. For example, both Time of Observations and Urban Heat Island adjustments have been shown clearly to be necessary. It has been argued elsewhere that the “adequacy” of adjustments to historical GAST data has not been sufficient “to remove warming biases.


rockwell either loses another point for failure to read, or he gains a Pinocchio for misrepresenting the text that he is trying to champion.

Quote:
3. Embarrassing Error #3
Dr. Licker claims that, "The authors cherry-pick some examples in the US as “evidence” that they use to try and refute the well-documented increase in the global average temperature. "

Here Dr. Licker completely misrepresents most of the report. First off, the authors are not even trying to refute an increase in global average temperature. What they are doing, is showing how the flattening of the data by removing cyclical patterns and the lowering of temperatures in the first have of the last century while raising the temperatures in the 2nd have of the century creates the illusion of a much sharper increase in temperature than the data actually shows. The authors also don't simply "cherry-pick some examples in the US". They use data from around the world to show that in the northern hemisphere the cycles that show up on the original data and have been eliminated in the manipulated data did in fact exist. Again, I'll have to rate this claim as "Pants on Fire".


Again, it's not clear if you didn't read, didn't understand what you were reading, or are simply lying. Pages 18-26 of the report are all single case reports from the USA. Why these cities were chosen and not others is never indicated. Licker's point, I believe, is that these cities are NOT representative of the US (nor of the entire world) and are merely cherry-picked to convince the careless reader. (Two non-USA sites are also mentioned, one in Greenland and one in Auckland, NZ. No justification is given for why these stations were chosen and others were not.

Quote:
Now, of course, Magnus would have spotted these errors also if he really had read the report. So, I'll also have to rate his claim as, "Pants on Fire" also.


rockwell gets a prize, but I'm not sure for what. Is it that he reads but doesn't understand? Is it that he doesn't read thoroughly? Or is he lying?
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Alarmists call plant food ‘pollution’,
Which now needs their Marxist solution,
Which would force the reduction,
Of fossil fuel production,
In the West for the Green Revolution.

– Ruairi
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5041 Posts

Profile of landmark
The devastating Limerick Defense.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16276 Posts

Profile of tommy
UK to ban new petrol and diesel cars from 2040
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBRV3VBizXk

A pal of mine has just bought a fleet of Tesla cars and they are good - far better than I expected.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16276 Posts

Profile of tommy


The International Panel of utter liars exposed yet again.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16276 Posts

Profile of tommy
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
The Hermit
View Profile
Loyal user
300 Posts

Profile of The Hermit
Well it seems that the warming didn't happen as predicted. The models were faulty and didn't track. The scientists are now admitting they were wrong. But don't worry, they have new models that are better. We have 20 more years before catastrophe. Guys that can't predict weather two weeks from now, want to spend trillions on models that are unproven. When will people understand this is politics and not science.

“We haven’t seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models. We haven’t seen that in the observations,” Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford and one of the study’s authors, told the Times of London, as reported in The Independent.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2017/09/2......ght.html

200 pages are coming
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On Sep 23, 2017, The Hermit wrote:
Well it seems that the warming didn't happen as predicted. The models were faulty and didn't track. The scientists are now admitting they were wrong. But don't worry, they have new models that are better. We have 20 more years before catastrophe. Guys that can't predict weather two weeks from now, want to spend trillions on models that are unproven. When will people understand this is politics and not science.

“We haven’t seen that rapid acceleration in warming after 2000 that we see in the models. We haven’t seen that in the observations,” Myles Allen, professor of geosystem science at the University of Oxford and one of the study’s authors, told the Times of London, as reported in The Independent.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2017/09/2......ght.html

200 pages are coming


I haven't read the study, but the fox news link contains the following:

Quote:
The study, published in the journal Nature Geoscience, does not contradict the scientists’ concerns that global warming is dramatically damaging the environment, but it does suggest that it’s not too late to do something about it.


So what do you mean by claiming that "the scientists are now admitting they were wrong." Looks to me that this study confirms that they were right about almost every thing, but that a single detail is being modified.

Global warming is real. Human emissions are one of the major causal factors. Now there is some suggestion that the time frame for action may be larger than previously believed.

What're you gloating over?
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Dynamike
View Profile
Eternal Order
FullTimer
24120 Posts

Profile of Dynamike
Is anyone else scared like me? Smile
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20661 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Well since we should all be on the same side there should be nothing to gloat over. After all it is our planet.

The point that it is politics not science makes some sense. I have never doubted much except the idea of having 5 minutes to avert catastrophe. That is indeed a moving goal post.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » New Report on Global Warming » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (153 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..38..73..108..143..177~178~179~180~181..190..198..206..214..222..224~225~226 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.33 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL