|
Excellent Graphic Demonstrating Climate Change Timeline
|
|
Topic Started: Dec 18 2016, 02:39 AM (850 Views)
|
|
donsm60
|
Dec 20 2016, 12:17 PM
Post #51
|
- Posts:
- 2,508
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #201
- Joined:
- Apr 19, 2011
|
Ima,
I appreciate the honesty, seriously, zero disrespect on my end. But what is the point you are trying to make when you won’t spend your own money to make a difference on global warming?
|
|
|
| |
|
ImaHeadaU
|
Dec 20 2016, 12:23 PM
Post #52
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 8,580
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #12
- Joined:
- Feb 21, 2008
|
- donsm60
- Dec 20 2016, 12:17 PM
Ima,
I appreciate the honesty, seriously, zero disrespect on my end. But what is the point you are trying to make when you won’t spend your own money to make a difference on global warming?
My condo comes with a monthly charge, public transit isn't free where I live and shoes and bikes require fresh rubber from time to time.
However, spending is often the best way to improve the environment. Reducing and reusing are much better ways than producing more unnecessary stuff.
|
|
|
| |
|
donsm60
|
Dec 20 2016, 12:56 PM
Post #53
|
- Posts:
- 2,508
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #201
- Joined:
- Apr 19, 2011
|
- ImaHeadaU
- Dec 20 2016, 12:23 PM
- donsm60
- Dec 20 2016, 12:17 PM
Ima,
I appreciate the honesty, seriously, zero disrespect on my end. But what is the point you are trying to make when you won’t spend your own money to make a difference on global warming?
My condo comes with a monthly charge, public transit isn't free where I live and shoes and bikes require fresh rubber from time to time. However, spending is often the best way to improve the environment. Reducing and reusing are much better ways than producing more unnecessary stuff. I respect that, moving around with your own power is a lot healthier for longevity too. Totally different worlds from what we live in though, Orlando isn’t a pedestrian friendly place.
|
|
|
| |
|
ImaHeadaU
|
Dec 20 2016, 02:38 PM
Post #54
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 8,580
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #12
- Joined:
- Feb 21, 2008
|
- Berton
- Dec 20 2016, 12:08 PM
- ImaHeadaU
- Dec 20 2016, 11:16 AM
- Berton
- Dec 20 2016, 07:31 AM
- ImaHeadaU
- Dec 20 2016, 05:20 AM
Berton, Satellite measurement of temperature in the troposphere has been highly unreliable since it began in 1978. These satellites rarely pass over the same spot at the same time of day or at the same elevation repeatedly. Scientists have been working at systems to adjust this data to find ways that might better replicate the reliable land and ocean temperature measurements conducted over the globe. Scientists have developed these systems to a point that they now show measurements in the troposphere that match those on the surface globally but don't yet do so in the tropics due to data error. Temperature Trends in the Lower Atmosphere - Understanding and Reconciling DifferencesClimate Change & Tropospheric Temperature Trends - Scott ChurchSo your author, who so far as I can tell isn't a Climate Scientist, chooses not to use available, reliable land and ocean temperature measurements but unreliable satellite measurements. In addition, she doesn't doesn't look at global records but instead she focuses on the one part of the globe where the satellite troposphere temperature measurement is still presenting unresolved data error.
You have no idea what you are talking about. You can not even understand the mathematics involved in the calculations. You do not have the expertise to make such a judgement.
I have never claimed to be a mathematician or a scientist. - Quote:
-
I used that article to prove a couple of points.
One was you are not an expert to tell others what to think about a mathematical equation which is all you have to use to predict the future climate. Quite simply you are not a statistician.
You have only proven that you have little understanding of basic scientific research. I haven't addressed any mathematical equation in your story. I have never claimed to be a statistician. - Quote:
-
The other is your reliance on only "climate scientists" can do work in climate research is bogus.
While someone who isn't a Climate Scientist might be able to conduct research to produce a paper that might be published in a peer reviewed Climate Science journal, I'm not aware of that having happened yet. If someone could produce such a paper criticizing accepted Climate Science practice, I'm confident that all Climate Scientists would would give it due consideration. - Quote:
-
As I said, the only thing you have is a mathematical equation made by people (climate scientists) who are not qualified to make or interpret the equation. That would take a specialized mathematician usually called a statistician.
What "mathematical equation" are you referring to and which Climate Scientists do you believe are "not qualified to make or interpret the equation"? Most Climate Scientists are highly trained mathematicians and some are also statisticians. Most are certainly qualified to employ statisticians to examine and find patterns in the raw data they deal with. - Quote:
-
So if you are going to say that only "climate scientists" can do work in the area of climate then the corollary is that only a statistician can do work in the statistical area.
There are statistics involved in most areas of science. Generally, I believe, statisticians check the work of statisticians but they need to have a good grasp of the science just as the scientists will also need to have a good grasp of the statistical analyses used in that field. - Quote:
-
You have no idea what you are talking about. You can not even understand the mathematics involved in the calculations. You do not have the expertise to make such a judgement.
I haven't discussed the mathematics or the calculations. Have you? - Quote:
-
So don't expect me or any sane person to believe a "climate scientist" when he talks statistics as long as you keep insisting that only a "climate scientist" can do work in climate research.
I don't see why a Climate Scientist's discussion of "statistics" should be any less believed than when a medical scientist, rocket scientist, astronomy scientist, biology scientist, chemistry scientist, or physics scientist discusses statistics. - Quote:
-
Or you can clime off your high horse about "climate scientists" are the only ones which can do climate research.
I have only expressed my opinion. I have seen many attempts to criticize the work of Climate Scientists that fell short much as the one in your story in which the author cherry picked data that she believed supported her position. Science whether it be of the Climate variety or not is not political nor is it religious. It can stand challenges. If someone comes up with a better hypothesis or theory than the current accepted ones, science will embrace it. You have not come up with any such valid challenge.
- Quote:
-
Most Climate Scientists are highly trained mathematicians and some are also statisticians. Most are certainly qualified to employ statisticians to examine and find patterns in the raw data they deal with.
You can start by proving that. You could easily search the qualifications required to enter a good Climatology PHD program yourself but I'll help you out.
- Quote:
-
If you want to study -- study icebergs or climate or sea ice, it’s bad news if you don’t like maths or physics. The reality is that climate is part of physics, and you need a high level of maths in it. And that’s the background you need if you want to move in that direction. Science Learning Hub
- Quote:
-
Applicants to graduate school may have a bachelor's degree in climatology or, in some cases, a bachelor's degree in physics or engineering. Master's degree programs can include graduate courses in microclimatology, atmospheric thermodynamics, and dynamic meteorology. How to Become a Climatologist
- Quote:
-
Their equations have been flawed from the start.
Can you support this claim in a source that shows familiarity with Climate Science?
- Quote:
-
Otherwise they would not have to keep adjusting their measured data to fit their equation.
Can you support this claim in a source that shows familiarity with Climate Science?
- Quote:
-
If you want to take the word of people who are paid off to print the results the government wants then that is your privilege.
Can you support this claim in a source that shows familiarity with Climate Science?
|
|
|
| |
|
Neutral
|
Dec 20 2016, 04:37 PM
Post #55
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 61,888
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #239
- Joined:
- May 26, 2012
|
Games
|
|
|
| |
|
Jim Miller
|
Dec 20 2016, 07:27 PM
Post #56
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 45,552
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #7
- Joined:
- Feb 19, 2008
|
All phony nonsense. The alarmists eat it up like candy.
|
|
|
| |
|
ImaHeadaU
|
Dec 21 2016, 01:16 AM
Post #57
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 8,580
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #12
- Joined:
- Feb 21, 2008
|
Have any of you actually looked at the graphic linked in the opening post? Have you scrolled all the way down?
It is essentially a graph built from temperature measurements over the past 2,200 years.
|
|
|
| |
|
Berton
|
Dec 21 2016, 01:21 AM
Post #58
|
- Posts:
- 55,589
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #238
- Joined:
- May 26, 2012
|
- ImaHeadaU
- Dec 21 2016, 01:16 AM
Have any of you actually looked at the graphic linked in the opening post? Have you scrolled all the way down?
It is essentially a graph built from temperature measurements over the past 2,200 years.
If you were an honest person you would explain that the data shown has been manipulated to fit the assumptions which were made about climate change. But then you are not.........
|
|
|
| |
|
Neutral
|
Dec 21 2016, 01:43 AM
Post #59
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 61,888
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #239
- Joined:
- May 26, 2012
|
Yes garbage in garbage out graphs prove nothing Ima.
|
|
|
| |
|
ImaHeadaU
|
Dec 21 2016, 02:35 AM
Post #60
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 8,580
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #12
- Joined:
- Feb 21, 2008
|
- Berton
- Dec 21 2016, 01:21 AM
- ImaHeadaU
- Dec 21 2016, 01:16 AM
Have any of you actually looked at the graphic linked in the opening post? Have you scrolled all the way down?
It is essentially a graph built from temperature measurements over the past 2,200 years.
If you were an honest person you would explain that the data shown has been manipulated to fit the assumptions which were made about climate change. If you were correct, you would be able to show that the data "has been manipulated to fit the assumptions."
If you cared about the welfare of the next couple of generations of humankind including your children and/or grandchildren, if you have any, as well as the welfare of most species on the planet, you would pay better attention to actual science than you do to the political agenda of the fact free of arguments put forward by science deniers.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|