Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Koch Brothers pay to show global warming is real
Topic Started: Oct 31 2011, 08:01 PM (4,896 Views)
Chris
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
telcoman
Nov 13 2011, 05:42 AM
When then lets address that. Here is your graph:

Posted Image

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. Possibly you could reveal the source, a graph means nothing if you can't back up where the data to produce it came from. my granddaughter can draw up a graph like that.

Here is the one from the US environment agency (Link)

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


Posted Image

Source


Now the one big factor on temperature change vs CO2 since the industrial revolution is the role of SO2 pollution which has had an offsetting effect. One reason for the rapid change as of late is the fact that SO2 pollution has been bought far more under control than carbon emissions.
"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.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
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?

Posted Image

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?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
telcoman
Nov 13 2011, 06:04 AM
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?

Posted Image

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?
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?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
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
Quote:
 
It was hailed as the scientific study that ended the global warming debate once and for all – the research that, in the words of its director, ‘proved you should not be a sceptic, at least not any longer’.
Professor Richard Muller, of Berkeley University in California, and his colleagues from the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperatures project team (BEST) claimed to have shown that the planet has warmed by almost a degree centigrade since 1950 and is warming continually.

...It was cited uncritically by, among others, reporters and commentators from the BBC, The Independent, The Guardian, The Economist and numerous media outlets in America.
The Washington Post said the BEST study had ‘settled the climate change debate’ and showed that anyone who remained a sceptic was committing a ‘cynical fraud’.

...But today The Mail on Sunday can reveal that a leading member of Prof Muller’s team has accused him of trying to mislead the public by hiding the fact that BEST’s research shows global warming has stopped.
Prof Judith Curry, who chairs the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at America’s prestigious Georgia Institute of Technology, said that Prof Muller’s claim that he has proven global warming sceptics wrong was also a ‘huge mistake’, with no scientific basis.
Prof Curry is a distinguished climate researcher with more than 30 years experience and the second named co-author of the BEST project’s four research papers.

...In fact, Prof Curry said, the project’s research data show there has been no increase in world temperatures since the end of the Nineties – a fact confirmed by a new analysis that The Mail on Sunday has obtained.
‘There is no scientific basis for saying that warming hasn’t stopped,’ she said. ‘To say that there is detracts from the credibility of the data, which is very unfortunate.’
However, Prof Muller denied warming was at a standstill.
‘We see no evidence of it [global warming] having slowed down,’ he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. There was, he added, ‘no levelling off’.
A graph issued by the BEST project also suggests a continuing steep increase.

Posted Image

But a report to be published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation includes a graph of world average temperatures over the past ten years, drawn from the BEST project’s data and revealed on its website.
This graph shows that the trend of the last decade is absolutely flat, with no increase at all – though the levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have carried on rising relentlessly.
‘This is nowhere near what the climate models were predicting,’ Prof Curry said. ‘Whatever it is that’s going on here, it doesn’t look like it’s being dominated by CO2.’

...she [Curry] added, in the wake of the unexpected global warming standstill, many climate scientists who had previously rejected sceptics’ arguments were now taking them much more seriously.
They were finally addressing questions such as the influence of clouds, natural temperature cycles and solar radiation – as they should have done, she said, a long time ago.

...he [Muller] admitted it was true that the BEST data suggested that world temperatures have not risen for about 13 years. But in his view, this might not be ‘statistically significant’, although, he added, it was equally possible that it was – a statement which left other scientists mystified.

...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
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.

Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
telcoman
Nov 13 2011, 07:25 AM
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.

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.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
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.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
telcoman
Nov 13 2011, 07:48 AM
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.
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:

Posted Image

Why does it not include the BEST data showing temperatures flat over the last decade or so?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
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.

Posted Image

Posted Image
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Chris
Member Avatar
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.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis