| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Koch Brothers pay to show global warming is real | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 31 2011, 08:01 PM (4,896 Views) | |
| Chris | Nov 13 2011, 06:01 AM Post #121 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"First of all look at the scale used its a pretty wide one in both time & temperature and I see no reference as where it originated and how the data was obtained. " Scale has nothing to do with whether rises in CO2 levels correspond to rises in temperatures. The graph shows some correlation up to about 2000 BC. You just can't distort the lack of correlation. What scale can do is hide details or expose them. " then look at this graph of the last 10 years" Your graph doesn't show the last 10 years or so of data. Just like Bruce's graph omits it. Take the top/bottom graphs of BEST data that I've presented several times. The top covers 1800 to 2000 or so and the bottom 2000 to 2010 or so. Move the bottom one up and to the right of the top one, and, y7eas, scale it to the top one, then you have a complete graph of the data. It will still show no rise in temperatures for over the last decade. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Nov 13 2011, 06:04 AM Post #122 |
|
Deleted User
|
OK let me get this straight then, You are presenting a graph supposedly based on the Berkley groups findings, refusing to state the source of those graphs (now just why would that be?), which appear in contradiction to the actual graph produced by the Berkeley group itself, as pictured below?![]() For someone who harps on about straw men, you have just constructed the biggest one I have ever seen. Once again, I ask, what is the source of your graphs & who produced them? |
|
|
| Chris | Nov 13 2011, 06:20 AM Post #123 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I gave you the source of the data in post #130, and gave it each time I posted the graphs, the source of the data is part of the image, telco. Put your false innuendo in check and read what's posted first. Again, you post a graph that omits the last decade or so of data, why? |
![]() |
|
| Chris | Nov 13 2011, 07:24 AM Post #124 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
OK, I see you're not asking about the source of the data, which is BEST, but the source of the graphs. Graphs are not dat of course, mere representations of representations (averages, means, tend lines etc). This was posted back around page 3 or 4, forget, but the source is given in Scientist who said climate change sceptics had been proved wrong accused of hiding truth by colleague
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Nov 13 2011, 07:25 AM Post #125 |
|
Deleted User
|
Why are you so afraid to reveal the source of your graphs? What are you hiding? Would you like me to have my granddaughter scribble one & I can label it as BEST data? Because unless you can tell me who produced those graphs and where on BESTS web site they obtained them, you have no argument whatsoever. Anyone can draw pretty pictures. |
|
|
| Chris | Nov 13 2011, 07:38 AM Post #126 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Uh, telco, I did when I realized you weren't asking for the source of the data. It was all posted early in this thread. Again graphs are not data. They can distort what people see--as we already discussed--but they don't change the data. The data for all these graphs you and I have presented, and many more were presented earlier in this thread, is the same source, BEST. All your graphs stop at 2000--why? Edited by Chris, Nov 13 2011, 07:40 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Nov 13 2011, 07:48 AM Post #127 |
|
Deleted User
|
OK chris, so now it comes out the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a nice name for a political organization. It's 2 directors and only are: Nigel Lawson, Baron Lawson of Blaby, PC (born 11 March 1932), is a British Conservative politician and journalist. He was a Member of Parliament (MP) representing the constituency of Blaby from 1974–92, and served as the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the government of Margaret Thatcher from June 1983 to October 1989. and Benny Josef Peiser, born 1957, is a social anthropologist specializing in the environmental and socio-economic impact of physical activity on health. Two recognized Climate scientists. LOL. No, a Conservative politician and an anthropologist. Maybe you would like to ask them to do a knee replacement on you if ever need it, since they seem to be experts on fields they are nto trained in. On top of that they use space provided by a mining & petroleum organization for their offices. Another very loud LOL. It's no wonder you were so reluctant to reveal your sources. They have absolutely no credibility. Your attempts at arguing this subject are to put it bluntly, pathetic. A constructed straw man indeed. The graphs I posted went past 2000, BTW if you look closely. |
|
|
| Chris | Nov 13 2011, 07:53 AM Post #128 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Again, just ad hom. I can understand that as a liberal you mistrust conservatives, but attacking the messenger is not attacking the message, and that's the data, data from BEST that shows temps have not risen since about 2000. "It's no wonder you were so reluctant to reveal your sources." The source of the data is BEST. "The graphs I posted went past 2000, BTW if you look closely." Nice dodge of the question. Here's one of your graphs: ![]() Why does it not include the BEST data showing temperatures flat over the last decade or so? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Nov 13 2011, 08:01 AM Post #129 |
|
Deleted User
|
The graphs came from BEST itself. They are on its website. That organization is an organization of skeptics, and now you are trying to imply they are cooking data to disprove their own beliefs? That makes a lot of sense. Here they are straight from their own website. ![]()
|
|
|
| Chris | Nov 13 2011, 08:10 AM Post #130 |
![]()
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not questioning BEST, that would be to engage in ad hom like you and bruce. I'm questioning why you keep posting graphs that omit data from over the last decade? Why does no one here want to address that data. The scientific community is. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic » |






![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)

, then look at this graph of the last 10 years.






10:41 PM Jul 11
