| 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: |
| IPCC Scientists Knew Data and Science Inadequacies Contradicted Certainties | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 23 2014, 12:58 AM (500 Views) | |
| Berton | Mar 23 2014, 12:58 AM Post #1 |
![]()
Thunder Fan
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
IPCC Scientists Knew Data and Science Inadequacies Contradicted Certainties Presented to Media, Public and Politicians, But Remained Silent By Dr. Tim Ball I have no data yet. It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. Arthur Conan Doyle. (Sherlock Holmes) There is no more common error than to assume that, because prolonged and accurate mathematical calculations have been made, the application of the result to some fact of nature is absolutely certain. A.N.Whitehead The recent article by Nancy Green at WUWT is an interesting esoteric discussion about models. Realities about climate models are much more prosaic. They don’t and can’t work because data, knowledge of atmospheric, oceanographic, and extraterrestrial mechanisms, and computer capacity are all totally inadequate. Computer climate models are a waste of time and money. Inadequacies are confirmed by the complete failure of all forecasts, predictions, projections, prognostications, or whatever they call them. It is one thing to waste time and money playing with climate models in a laboratory, where they don’t meet minimum scientific standards, it is another to use their results as the basis for public policies where the economic and social ramifications are devastating. Equally disturbing and unconscionable is the silence of scientists involved in the IPCC who know the vast difference between the scientific limitations and uncertainties and the certainties produced in the Summary for Policymakers (SPM). IPCC scientists knew of the inadequacies from the start. Kevin Trenberth’s response to a report on inadequacies of weather data by the US National Research Council said “It’s very clear we do not have a climate observing system…” “This may come as a shock to many people who assume that we do know adequately what’s going on with the climate, but we don’t.” This was in response to the February 3, 1999 Report that said, “Deficiencies in the accuracy, quality and continuity of the records place serious limitations on the confidence that can be placed in the research results. Remember this is 11 years after Hansen’s comments of certainty to the Senate and five years after the 1995 IPCC Report. It is worse now with fewer weather stations and less data than in 1990......... LINK We are witnessing the greatest scandal in the history of science. Someday before long, the discreditable role played by Benjamin Santer, Michael Mann and others will be universally recognized. Until then, governments will continue to funnel billions of dollars to alarmist scientists to reward them for leading the charge for expanded government power. Edited by Berton, Mar 23 2014, 12:58 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Mar 23 2014, 01:21 AM Post #2 |
|
Deleted User
|
Apart from the usual garbage from tne unqualified weatherman, anyone who knows how science works realizes that theories are always a work in progress. You simply make theories based upon the best data available at the time. If Watts was an actual scientist rather thana layman and polical dogmatist, he would know that. Also it appears that Tim Ball is hardly credible either ball Watts loves to dredge the bottom of the barrel, as do you. |
|
|
| Berton | Mar 23 2014, 01:34 AM Post #3 |
![]()
Thunder Fan
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I see that as usual you have are unable to discredit the information so you attempt to discredit the author. Apparently you are thereby also discrediting all the Climate Scientists who were quoted. Good for you. It is about time you woke up from your dream world. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Mar 23 2014, 02:18 AM Post #4 |
|
Deleted User
|
If the author is an unqualified quack, then by definition so are his opinions.Why do ypu keep insist on getting your info from the unqualified and politically motivated blogs? I can only conclude you dislike the truth. |
|
|
| Neutral | Mar 23 2014, 02:22 AM Post #5 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You are the unqualified quack Telco and you believe everything the scammers tell you. UI |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Mar 23 2014, 02:26 AM Post #6 |
|
Deleted User
|
As usual, you have nothing intelligent to say. Go to your room, until you do. |
|
|
| Neutral | Mar 23 2014, 02:28 AM Post #7 |
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You are incapable of recognizing intelligence Telco, now keep living in that third world pisspot until you do. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Mar 23 2014, 02:31 AM Post #8 |
|
Deleted User
|
Like I just pointed out, you have nothing of value to add to subject. Go away, you are like pesky gnat. |
|
|
| Berton | Mar 23 2014, 04:11 AM Post #9 |
![]()
Thunder Fan
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You are a unqualified quack, then by definition so are your opinions. Why do you keep insisting on attacking the source rather than the content? I can only conclude you have no ammunition and you have nothing of value to add to the subject. Go away, you are like pesky gnat.. |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Mar 23 2014, 06:09 AM Post #10 |
|
Deleted User
|
Nobody is quoting me. I only quote recognized sources. You are the one pushing political opinion as science. That is quackery. |
|
|
| 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)



10:19 PM Jul 11
