Global Warming Thread X

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: Jon Estes

Re: Global Warming Thread X

Postby David Flick » Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:18 pm

Haruo wrote:A miracle: five days without a GW post! Oh, rats, I ruined it. I was two hours early. ;-(

Naaa, you didn't ruin anything. Keith was needing a 5-day rest. :wink:

How about 5 cartoons for the 5 days where there were no posts?
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Thread X

Postby KeithE » Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:09 am

Keith is on the road Salt Lake City and besides I'm tired on cornering David on the facts and DATA and David runs to cartoons and political tacticians like the VA attorney general.

Question- is anyone besides me on BL studying the data ( not the pundits ) in a serious manner?
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Thread X

Postby Ed Edwards » Thu Oct 21, 2010 9:33 pm

Me. Pointers would be just as good.
Remember: Mathamations,Scientists and Engineers have to learn Graphs;
Public School Teachers (except teachers of Math & Engineering) and Preacher boys do not have to learn Graphs.

.
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Re: Global Warming Thread X

Postby David Flick » Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:03 pm

KeithE wrote:Keith is on the road Salt Lake City and besides I'm tired on cornering David on the facts and DATA and David runs to cartoons and political tacticians like the VA attorney general.

:lol: :lol: What a hoot, Keith! You haven't cornered me on anything in this debate. The "facts and DATA" you present are mostly bogus. I'll document that in my response to your question.

KeithE wrote:Question- is anyone besides me on BL studying the data ( not the pundits ) in a serious manner?

Answer: You have a small problem, Keith. Most of the DATA & facts you're studying are bogus. For example:
  1. Climategate scandal occurred as the result bogus DATA (i.e. "hiding the decline") emanating from CRU, Phil Jones, Michael Mann, et. al.
  2. Mann's hockey stick graphs --both the original and the reconstructed versions-- were based on bogus DATA (i.e. completely omitting data from the Medieval Warming Period & the Little Ice Age. ).
  3. The Doran/Zimmerman "survey" (which declares that 97% of scientists do believe AGW is reality) is bogus.
  4. The Anderegg, Schneider, et. al. "survey" (which attempts to prop up Doran/Zimmerman) is bogus.
There are many more, but when you're seriously studying bogus DATA, you will end up seriously wrong on every count...

Here's color cartoon for you... :wink:
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Re: Global Warming Thread X

Postby KeithE » Fri Oct 22, 2010 7:25 am

David Flick wrote:
KeithE wrote:Keith is on the road Salt Lake City and besides I'm tired on cornering David on the facts and DATA and David runs to cartoons and political tacticians like the VA attorney general.

:lol: :lol: What a hoot, Keith! You haven't cornered me on anything in this debate. The "facts and DATA" you present are mostly bogus. I'll document that in my response to your question.

KeithE wrote:Question- is anyone besides me on BL studying the data ( not the pundits ) in a serious manner?

Answer: You have a small problem, Keith. Most of the DATA & facts you're studying are bogus. For example:
  1. Climategate scandal occurred as the result bogus DATA (i.e. "hiding the decline") emanating from CRU, Phil Jones, Michael Mann, et. al.
  2. Mann's hockey stick graphs --both the original and the reconstructed versions-- were based on bogus DATA (i.e. completely omitting data from the Medieval Warming Period & the Little Ice Age. ).
  3. The Doran/Zimmerman "survey" (which declares that 97% of scientists do believe AGW is reality) is bogus.
  4. The Anderegg, Schneider, et. al. "survey" (which attempts to prop up Doran/Zimmerman) is bogus.
There are many more, but when you're seriously studying bogus DATA, you will end up seriously wrong on every count...

Here's color cartoon for you... :wink:


Well hoot away the habitat of your grandkids then David. "Hide the decline" has been explained as loose insider talk describing a methodology that ignores what is known to be bad data (after 1960) and replaces it with more reliable measured temp data since 1850 (with good match paleo to measured in the 1850-1960 timeframe- got it!).

The reconstructed plot you show is not the complete latest. Here that is with all the DATA:
Image
Besides even your plot does have the MWP explicitly mentioned -it was not omitted in the reconstructed version, as you claim - your plot just does not show the whole dataset back to 0 AD. Both reconstructed plots show the MWP to be the whimpy slow rolling blip that it is (quite possibly only in Europe). Look to the right on those plots to see the BLADE - not so whimpy (if you have the ability to see the important points of a graph! Ed was right). And if we were to update those plots to show 2010 data (it ends at 2004 right now), it would be 0.66C (off the plot) for the period of Jan 10-Sept 10 ( or 0.635C, if you took the whole year Oct 09- Sept10). See the data here. How you can ballyhoo the MWP (about 0.2C rise in smoothed average over a period of ~300 years, less than that if you remove the outliers - aqua and light green colored lines) so much without acknowledging what has happened since 1910 (a >0.8C rise in 100 years) just shows how one-sided and biased you mind is on this subject.

Trying to claim the GW we have seen and measured since the industrial age is just some "natural event" is what is truly "bogus". You are sick and graph-challenged.

Read those surveys David and BLfers - David posted no rejoinders. David continues to mis-state the conclusions of Doran in classic strawman fashion. It is 97% of those scientists that are most involved in GW research and publishing that are AGW. As for "earth scientists" in the Doran survey, that number is 77% believe in AGW, 8% disbelieve AGW, and 15% not sure. Doran's main conclusion is the more one studies GW the more ones sees the truth of AGW. Anderegg confirmed the 97+% and even strenghtened with more samples wrt to the most GW involved scientists.

Speaking of being sick, I think I have shingles. Have Dr. appointment to confirm that I need to get ready for.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Thread X

Postby Ed Edwards » Fri Oct 22, 2010 9:30 pm

Keith -- // Speaking of being sick, I think I have shingles. Have Dr. appointment to confirm that I need to get ready for. \\

Been there, done that, cannot wear the 'T' shirt :-(

Two rounds of steriods each of the two times. 5-pounds permemant weight gain each time -- 20 pounds
One round of steriods each of two times with pnemonia -- 10 pounds
One rounds of steriods each of 5 times with broncia-yuck -- 25 pounds

Still got those 55 pounds on top of 165 - where I chould be.

Praying for you LOTZ!
Keep the Planet Cool :angel:
( for the physical Millennial Messianic Reign of Jesus )


Image

-- Ed Edwards, AGW Dude
(AGW = Anthropogenic Global Warming)
Ed Edwards
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:21 pm
Location: Exciting Central Oklahoma

Re: Global Warming Thread X

Postby KeithE » Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:22 pm

Ed Edwards wrote:Keith -- // Speaking of being sick, I think I have shingles. Have Dr. appointment to confirm that I need to get ready for. \\

Been there, done that, cannot wear the 'T' shirt :-(

Two rounds of steriods each of the two times. 5-pounds permemant weight gain each time -- 20 pounds
One round of steriods each of two times with pnemonia -- 10 pounds
One rounds of steriods each of 5 times with broncia-yuck -- 25 pounds

Still got those 55 pounds on top of 165 - where I chould be.

Praying for you LOTZ!

Doctor did not perscribe Prednisone, although I've seen it listed as a common treatment. My experience with Prednisone in 1969-71 was bad while I was at colllege - my dosage was 120 mg/day for over a year, gained from 175 to 310, took over a year to slowly get off it and my weight got back to about 240 by the time I graduated UW (Mar 1972). I still have all of those lbs and some more. And it was all a mistaken diagnosis.

Thanks for the prayers and tell me how long you had shingles over on the Prayer Request forum.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 9316
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Global Warming Thread X

Postby David Flick » Sat Oct 23, 2010 6:19 am

KeithE wrote:Speaking of being sick, I think I have shingles. Have Dr. appointment to confirm that I need to get ready for.

Sorry to hear about health problem. I join Ed in praying for you.

I'll wait until next week to respond to the points in this post.
User avatar
David Flick
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8490
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma City, OK

Previous

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron