If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Global warming stopped 16 years ago, so fire up the Corvette and go out and have some fun laughing at the drivers of Smart Cars   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 214
    More: Interesting, Met Office, smart cars, corvettes, global warming, Phil Jones, climate variability, energy minister, temperatures  
•       •       •

5071 clicks; posted to Geek » on 14 Oct 2012 at 1:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



214 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-16 08:36:42 PM

chuckufarlie: GeneralJim: Of all the people I've seen post in climate threads, Snowjob is the single most likely to be a shill.

He is one of three, although I suspect that all three are one person. He has a political agenda to push, but all warmers do. He does a good job of following the orders sent down from the politicos pushing this crap.


More than one person posting accurate information on AGW and exposing the deniers' perversion of science for political gain? Inconceivable!
 
2012-10-16 08:51:22 PM

SVenus: I read enough to know the talking points.


Apparently not.

SVenus:That given a steady state Earth, carbon dioxide is the main driver, and that ENSO is the main hider of heat. I have a hard time buying any other method for explaining why there's such the "Time Lag" that very few want to talk about with the link between CO2 and earth's temp.

The time lag, as climate science uses the term, has nothing to do with ENSO. It has to do with the thermal capacity of the ocean.

People are talking about ENSO in the context of the surface temperature because the variability of ENSO can obscure the underlying forced trend.

There is a separate issue of why models predict decade-long pauses in warming even in the presence of an unchanging forced trend. This relates to transporting heat from the upper to the deeper ocean.layers. The ocean behavior in the models during such events resembles La Niña somewhat, but it's not an ENSO-driven process per se. 

You appear to be conflating three separate issues.
 
2012-10-16 09:26:03 PM

SVenus: chuckufarlie: DO NOT FEED THE TROLL, He has no knowledge on this subject. He only repeats what he has been told and he is wrong a lot more often than he gets it right.

I read enough to know the talking points. I understand some of the warmist's logic. That given a steady state Earth, carbon dioxide is the main driver, and that ENSO is the main hider of heat. I have a hard time buying any other method for explaining why there's such the "Time Lag" that very few want to talk about with the link between CO2 and earth's temp. Is it ten years, is it 50, or 200? Have the oceans hidden the heat trapped from the carbon dioxide from Napoleon's camp fires and we're just now seeing it? If not, what truly IS the heat cycle of the ocean, if it's truly hiding all that heat in the mddle depths? It probably isn't. But it could be.

I'm not convinced the ENSO is known to the extent, with respect to volumetrics and temperature exchange so as to be predictable.

So, air temps are pretty much useless when discussing the latent heat of the ocean.
But I am interested if someone can predict the future heat flow of the ocean.
Hindcasting it is a great parlour trick. Works 100% of the time.
Predicting future ocean heat... Well, that's the wild card.


JonSnoJob, in his various forms, can be entertaining in a retarded monkey sort of way. I have yet to figure out where the BS ends and the stupidity takes over. He can be extremely dense at times and he is always less than honest. On one day he will pretend to know nothing of a post and a statement that he made the day before. It is this lack of honesty and integrity that gives him away. If he was really interested in getting the truth out there, he would deal with people in an honest manner. He is not capable of that.

Enjoy the conversation with him but do not get your fingers to close to the cage,
 
2012-10-16 11:46:16 PM

chuckufarlie: SVenus: chuckufarlie: DO NOT FEED THE TROLL, He has no knowledge on this subject. He only repeats what he has been told and he is wrong a lot more often than he gets it right.

I read enough to know the talking points. I understand some of the warmist's logic. That given a steady state Earth, carbon dioxide is the main driver, and that ENSO is the main hider of heat. I have a hard time buying any other method for explaining why there's such the "Time Lag" that very few want to talk about with the link between CO2 and earth's temp. Is it ten years, is it 50, or 200? Have the oceans hidden the heat trapped from the carbon dioxide from Napoleon's camp fires and we're just now seeing it? If not, what truly IS the heat cycle of the ocean, if it's truly hiding all that heat in the mddle depths? It probably isn't. But it could be.

I'm not convinced the ENSO is known to the extent, with respect to volumetrics and temperature exchange so as to be predictable.

So, air temps are pretty much useless when discussing the latent heat of the ocean.
But I am interested if someone can predict the future heat flow of the ocean.
Hindcasting it is a great parlour trick. Works 100% of the time.
Predicting future ocean heat... Well, that's the wild card.

JonSnoJob, in his various forms, can be entertaining in a retarded monkey sort of way. I have yet to figure out where the BS ends and the stupidity takes over. He can be extremely dense at times and he is always less than honest. On one day he will pretend to know nothing of a post and a statement that he made the day before. It is this lack of honesty and integrity that gives him away. If he was really interested in getting the truth out there, he would deal with people in an honest manner. He is not capable of that.

Enjoy the conversation with him but do not get your fingers to close to the cage,



nicksteel: WOW!! You missed the point completely and turned it into an attack on people who disagree with you. If you would actually think about these posts instead of your knee jerk reactions, you might learn something. Oh hell, who I am kidding.
 
2012-10-17 12:43:14 AM
Damnhippyfreak

Thanks for bringing back nicksteel vs. nicksteel. It always makes me laugh. Oh, and I like how the self-outed alt still accuses people of posting as several people. Even after the thread where 4 of the people so accused all posted pics of their license plates with the numbers blocked out.
 
2012-10-17 09:57:45 AM

Jon Snow: You appear to be conflating three separate issues.


I look forward to reading AR5
 
2012-10-17 09:58:21 AM

Zafler: Damnhippyfreak

Thanks for bringing back nicksteel vs. nicksteel. It always makes me laugh. Oh, and I like how the self-outed alt still accuses people of posting as several people. Even after the thread where 4 of the people so accused all posted pics of their license plates with the numbers blocked out.


I have never been impressed by your intelligence. In fact, I have always believed you to be very stupid. Anybody can post anything about themselves on the web. They can post all sorts of photos of drivers licenses (you can find lots by googling the image) and pass them off as their own. It would take a real idiot to believe anything like that. It would take a much larger idiot to try to convince anybody that it was real.

The fact that you have been told this before and that you still try to convince me tells me that you are incredibly stupid. Possibly stupider than the hippyfreak. That would be amazingly stupid.
 
2012-10-17 10:07:45 AM

Damnhippyfreak: chuckufarlie: SVenus: chuckufarlie: DO NOT FEED THE TROLL, He has no knowledge on this subject. He only repeats what he has been told and he is wrong a lot more often than he gets it right.

I read enough to know the talking points. I understand some of the warmist's logic. That given a steady state Earth, carbon dioxide is the main driver, and that ENSO is the main hider of heat. I have a hard time buying any other method for explaining why there's such the "Time Lag" that very few want to talk about with the link between CO2 and earth's temp. Is it ten years, is it 50, or 200? Have the oceans hidden the heat trapped from the carbon dioxide from Napoleon's camp fires and we're just now seeing it? If not, what truly IS the heat cycle of the ocean, if it's truly hiding all that heat in the mddle depths? It probably isn't. But it could be.

I'm not convinced the ENSO is known to the extent, with respect to volumetrics and temperature exchange so as to be predictable.

So, air temps are pretty much useless when discussing the latent heat of the ocean.
But I am interested if someone can predict the future heat flow of the ocean.
Hindcasting it is a great parlour trick. Works 100% of the time.
Predicting future ocean heat... Well, that's the wild card.

JonSnoJob, in his various forms, can be entertaining in a retarded monkey sort of way. I have yet to figure out where the BS ends and the stupidity takes over. He can be extremely dense at times and he is always less than honest. On one day he will pretend to know nothing of a post and a statement that he made the day before. It is this lack of honesty and integrity that gives him away. If he was really interested in getting the truth out there, he would deal with people in an honest manner. He is not capable of that.

Enjoy the conversation with him but do not get your fingers to close to the cage,


nicksteel: WOW!! You missed the point completely and turned it into an attack on people who disagree with you ...


once again you have applied a statement that has no bearing on the posts involved. What was the point that I missed completely? This was a post that discussed the intelligence (or lack of it) on one JonSnoJob. My response was to that point. I did not turn it into an attack, it already was one.

Maybe you should find somebody with a bit more intelligence than you (not a difficult task) to help you understand when to use these posts you have saved. They might help you to stop looking like such a moron.
 
2012-10-17 10:12:57 AM

SVenus: I look forward to reading AR5


Why?

I'm curious as to what benefit you think it will give you that starting with something more fundamental would not. Your problems are almost entirely due to misunderstanding basics rather than questions at the leading edges of the topic.

It's nice to see you engaging more than just posting drive by talking points cribbed straight from denialist blogs and then running away, BTW.

I mean that sincerely- it shows that you're willing to learn instead of just parroting nonsense, which is admirable. I hope you continue to do so.
 
2012-10-17 10:25:27 AM

Jon Snow: SVenus: I look forward to reading AR5

Why?

I'm curious as to what benefit you think it will give you that starting with something more fundamental would not. Your problems are almost entirely due to misunderstanding basics rather than questions at the leading edges of the topic.

It's nice to see you engaging more than just posting drive by talking points cribbed straight from denialist blogs and then running away, BTW.

I mean that sincerely- it shows that you're willing to learn instead of just parroting nonsense, which is admirable. I hope you continue to do so.


This coming from the one who does nothing but parrot nonsense. Toss up a few more pointless graphs from your warmer websites.

If you know anything at all about science, you would not refer to people disagree with you "deniers". Science is about debate. Science is about challenging opinions. Science would not advance if people just accepted an idea as fact. Science encourages people to challenge the norm. It embraces people who disagree.

Either you are a complete idiot with no understanding of the weakness of your debating points or you are a shill for the people pushing this agenda. Maybe you are a shill and an idiot.
 
2012-10-17 01:41:22 PM

chuckufarlie: once again you have applied a statement that has no bearing on the posts involved. What was the point that I missed completely? This was a post that discussed the intelligence (or lack of it) on one JonSnoJob. My response was to that point. I did not turn it into an attack, it already was one.

Maybe you should find somebody with a bit more intelligence than you (not a difficult task) to help you understand when to use these posts you have saved. They might help you to stop looking like such a moron.



nicksteel: You made an extremely stupid comment so I responded with a question that was at the same level.
 
2012-10-17 01:43:52 PM

chuckufarlie: Jon Snow: SVenus: I look forward to reading AR5

Why?

I'm curious as to what benefit you think it will give you that starting with something more fundamental would not. Your problems are almost entirely due to misunderstanding basics rather than questions at the leading edges of the topic.

It's nice to see you engaging more than just posting drive by talking points cribbed straight from denialist blogs and then running away, BTW.

I mean that sincerely- it shows that you're willing to learn instead of just parroting nonsense, which is admirable. I hope you continue to do so.

This coming from the one who does nothing but parrot nonsense. Toss up a few more pointless graphs from your warmer websites.

If you know anything at all about science, you would not refer to people disagree with you "deniers". Science is about debate. Science is about challenging opinions. Science would not advance if people just accepted an idea as fact. Science encourages people to challenge the norm. It embraces people who disagree.

Either you are a complete idiot with no understanding of the weakness of your debating points or you are a shill for the people pushing this agenda. Maybe you are a shill and an idiot.



nicksteel: You and your buddies have never once addressed the actual science of anything that I have posted. All you do is attack the person who made the statement. That tells me a lot about what I have posted, it tells me that it is true and you have no "facts" to dispute it.
 
2012-10-17 02:04:26 PM

Jon Snow: It's nice to see you engaging more than just posting drive by talking points cribbed straight from denialist blogs and then running away, BTW.

I mean that sincerely-


You know what side I fall on. But my opinion doesn't matter one iota. When I ask you questions, I am sincere. It will never mean I will agree or disagree. I try to keep informed on both sides.

I work in a business where you would think science would hold sway. However, strong opinions often trumps strong science many times over. I draw parallels.

I'm of the opinion that the AR5 will have scaled back "conclusions", and the call will go out to change how this information is presented to governments. But, that's my opinion, based on reading sites that are on both sides of this.

The only really strong opinion I have on the matter, after following the arguments for some years now is that mitigation of CO2 is a joke, if not an outright costly fraud. I don't think there's a computer on Earth that could model how global politics play into the Global Climate Models.
 
2012-10-17 11:50:45 PM
Damnhippyfreak:
Do you understand now? The reason why your selecting of very short or very long scales in an attempt to disprove anthropogenic climate change is misleading is the same reason why it would be misleading to try to use a "16 (or 32) year time frame [...] to detect a 60-year trend."

The failure to understand is on your side. YOU are the one insisting that the effects of anthropogenic carbon dioxide can only be seen if we start looking once they are there. As in having nothing with which to compare. I AM amused, however, that, according to you, the only way to avoid cherry-picking is to use the single time frame in which it looks like carbon dioxide just might be controlling temperature. You might want to look up the definition of "cherry-picking."

So, how effective is looking at about 150 years at detecting 400 or 1600 year temperature cycles? You know, like the warm-up after the little ice age, which appears to be ending now?
 
Displayed 14 of 214 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report