Prev: THE JIC SECTS - WHAT THE WEST NEEDS TO KNOW with recent episodes at hand related to the unending religious wars between the JIC sects & their different infantile beliefs
Next: Quantum Field Theory's Howler
From: Desertphile on 10 Jun 2010 12:44
On 10 Jun 2010 13:23:04 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above(a)aol.com> wrote:

> Desertphile wrote:
> > On 9 Jun 2010 13:53:18 GMT, jmfbahciv <See.above(a)aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Desertphile wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:23:41 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> >> > <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On 6/8/2010 11:37 AM, Desertphile wrote:
> >> >> > On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 10:10:33 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> >> >> > <jclarke.usenet(a)cox.net> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On 6/8/2010 9:01 AM, Desertphile wrote:
> >> >> >>> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:59:40 +0100, "Cwatters"
> >> >> >>> <colin.wattersNOSPAM(a)TurnersOakNOSPAM.plus.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>> I love the way the deniers pick up on the comment about the
> >> "sum-of-squares
> >> >> >>>> parameter" going negative here..
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>>
> >>
> http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/climategate-hide-the-decline-codified/
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Obviously any mention of fixing something going negative is vital
> >> evidence
> >> >> >>>> of fraud. Even if it's a sum-of-squares :-)
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> The fraud is the assertion that there was a "climategate:" it
> >> >> >>> never happened. There was no fraud, "climategate" never existed,
> >> >> >>> and the scientists did nothing wrong.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> As has been pointed out to the alarmist nutcases who deny AGW, CRU
> >> >> >>> scientists routinely used and use _Nature_ magazine's technique in
> >> >> >>> dendroclimatology to "hide the decline." The "decline" being the
> >> >> >>> loss of correlation between tree ring proxy data and regional
> >> >> >>> temperature. The CRU scientists use and used actual temperature
> >> >> >>> readings via thermometors instead of the proxy data for the data
> >> >> >>> after 1960. The hysterical alarmist nutcases are complaining about
> >> >> >>> scientists using more accurate data, calling it a "fraud!" That
> >> >> >>> just cracks me up!
> >> >
> >> >> >> Is it "more accurate" or is it just easier to rig?
> >> >
> >> >> > Huh? "Rig?" You are not making any sense.
> >> >
> >> >> Only because you don't understand how experiments can be tinkered with
> >> >> to give a desired result.
> >
> >> > N/A
> >
> >> With your attitude, you will be fooled all the time.
> >
> > Nope! I accept the fact of AGW.
>
> Q.E.D.
>
> >
> >> >> > Temperature readings are more accurate than proxy data for
> >> >> > historical temperatures. Surely that is obvious.
> >> >
> >> >> Only seems obvious. The thermometer accurately reports the temperature
> >> >> of the thermometer. If the thermometer temperature diverges from
> >> >> temperature measurements determined by other means then one doesn't
> >> >> reject the other measurements
> >
> >> > One *DOES* reject proxies, idiot. That's what the CRU scientists
> >> > did when they applied _Nature_ magazine's technique to hide the
> >> > statistical discorrelation. Sheeeish you clowns are funny!
> >
> >> If the recorded temperatures pre-1970s were recorded using
> >> a thermometer on a farm and, if the same thermometer is used
> >> post-1970s after urban crawl surrounded and ate up all the farm
> >> land, the average temps would appear to have risen. But this
> >> happens because cities are hot and retain heat.
> >
> > You're being silly. Global temperature has been and is being
> > measured by several thousand measuring devices as well as via
> > satellite; in the oceans, on the plains, in the mountains, on the
> > ice caps, in the canyons, in the deserts, in the meadows. What
> > they have recorded (increased temperature anomaly) is exactly what
> > scientists predicted over 50 years ago they would record as CO2 is
> > added to the atmosphere.
> >
> > You'll just have to adjust.

> If I have to adjust to an increase of temperature, then you, also,
> will have to adjust.

Of course. That means higher sea walls, moving infrastructure away
from the coasts, and moving food production northward and to
higher elevation. We have no choice in the matter.

> So why are you spending time insisting that
> the increase be fixed?

No.


--
http://desertphile.org
Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water
"Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: THE JIC SECTS - WHAT THE WEST NEEDS TO KNOW with recent episodes at hand related to the unending religious wars between the JIC sects & their different infantile beliefs
Next: Quantum Field Theory's Howler