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.

(The Planetary Society)   April 1: Bill Nye convinces Congress that Climate Change and evolution are realities. Not April 1: Bill Nye the Science Guy convinces Congress to restore funding for planetary exploration. Hero trumps cool   (planetary.org) divider line 9
    More: Hero, Timeline of Solar System exploration, evolution, U.S. Congress, climate change, Planetary Society, union dues, Planetary Science, NASA  
•       •       •

3282 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 Apr 2013 at 9:41 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-04-02 12:03:24 PM
5 votes:

SevenizGud: More reality:

[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]
But hey, any set of data can have an "off" 15+ years, amirite?


i25.photobucket.com
2013-04-02 12:56:42 PM
3 votes:

KiltedBastich: SevenizGud: More reality:

[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]
But hey, any set of data can have an "off" 15+ years, amirite?

It's so cute how you always start that graph on the 1998 outlier to deliberately skew the trend.

Oh wait, I did not mean cute, I mean "dishonest and stupid".


What do you mean? His method of selecting and analyzing data is perfectly legitimate. In fact, when we apply Sevenizgud's method to the 2012 election results, we can clearly see that Mitt Romney won every state, and is now our president.

s24.postimg.org
2013-04-04 10:56:30 AM
1 votes:

omeganuepsilon: Point?

A confounding variable. What of it? Did you even read the page? That's an accusation I may toss out there as food for thought.
A perceived relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable that has been misestimated due to the failure to account for a confounding factor is termed a spurious relationship, and the presence of misestimation for this reason is termed omitted-variable bias.

Sounds rather exactly like something I may say.

Yes, outliers are removed, as they are not "data". A sensor that reads 500 degrees is broken. 90 degrees in January in south dakota? Yeah, not happening either.

But some of the organizations go above and beyond that, and is evident when you really read their methodology reports, they're quite blatant about it. Berkeley has attempted to not do it so harshly(read: obviously), but they still do so. They all dampen their references for the floating average, for example, and attempt to extrapolate (read: guess) at missing data. sure, some guesses are more reasonable than others, but none are certain by any means, so that only adds another error to propagate.


Except that they are not any of these things when their methodology is examined by people who actually understand the math, unlike idiot denialist shills like yourself. That's why every serious investigation of the methods has vindicated climate scientists, and why derpsters like yourself keep moving the goalposts.

omeganuepsilon: And that link was relevant how?

You're going to have to explain that one, because, in your very limited context, you may as well have said "math".


Given that your problems seems to be a complete inability to understand math, you are actually correct here. Hey, broken clocks and all that.

Here's an explicit point for you: Climate scientists did not invent the statistical techniques they apply. They are applying standard statistical methodologies developed by mathematicians who have nothing to do with climate science to isolate the effects of particular variables in complex chaotic systems with multiple confounds and occasional large outliers that can heavily skew small subsets of the data. They are using exactly the same techniques that anyone else would use for these research topics.

And yet moron derpsters like yourself fail to grasp the larger mathematical context and narrowly focus down on particular cherry picked data points that fall victim to exactly the problems these statistical techniques were developed to eliminate, and then tell yourselves that you've found some kind of ultimate argument against climate change.

www.lowbird.com

Sheesh, you're so willfully ignorant I'm surprised you don't slip completely into solipsism. Oh wait...

omeganuepsilon: I think you all share some mental condition. I brought up a possibility in that thread:

Is extreme stupidity(and hence a lot of religiosity) possibly some type of anosognosia?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anosognosia


I guess maybe you have. This is just the height of irony driven by lack of self-awareness. You've gone meta. You're so caught up in your echo chamber you're unaware that you're caught up in your echo chamber and believe other people are mentally ill for believing you to be caught up in your echo chamber and you believe they are unaware of it!

Truly, if it wasn't so pathetic it would be hilarious.

s3.amazonaws.com
2013-04-04 03:23:21 AM
1 votes:

omeganuepsilon: I think you all share some mental condition


omeganuepsilon: Go hug a tree  cattle-guard on an already fast moving train.  Just stand in the tracks and embrace it as it gets to you.


Ah, it's always nice to see skeptics engage in a rational debate of the evidence.

omeganuepsilon: Given your fark handle [

Damnhippyfreak], I still have to wonder if you're some kind of role playing troll.  I know it's neither here nor there, but it's still just a tad eerie. Almost like you knew exactly what you joined fark to do, prophetic in a sense, to be a dirty hippy.

Oh, that reminds me of the quote that keeps on giving:

omeganuepsilon:
We're presently following an ice age, there's no where to go but get warmer. A perspective of decades is pointless because we're on that upcurve. The planet, in a majority of the time in that larger picture, has no ice caps. The sky is not falling, we're simply on schedule.

Any other perspective is anti-corporation greenpeace nonsense or a reasonable facsimile thereof.


Gee, I wonder what's really motivating omega to come into climate change threads.
2013-04-03 07:56:42 AM
1 votes:

Damnhippyfreak: omeganuepsilon: Unknown_Poltroon: Oh, look what happens when you don't cherry pick the data from 1998 on??  Lying fark.

That's cute.

Similarly small date.

Various graphs, last 213 years

[BEST]
[BEST upper 95% CI]

As long as we're messing with the woodfortrees graph generator [snipped]


Omega posts a bunch of graphs without actually understanding what they mean or how to apply the information and gets calmly rebuffed.  Beautiful.

But don't call him a denier!  He's just an skeptic trying to keep everyone honest even though every point he attempts to make goes against ACC/AGW.

Damnhippyfreak: Unsurprisingly, they are indeed cyclical (it's right in the name, after all). PDO and AMO indexes are calculated by first removing other factors (such as anthropogenic climate change) - it's essentially a residual. Not sure what you were trying to get at by posting those.


It's pretty obvious that he
A) Had no idea the O stood for oscillation
B) Thought he was making some amazing critique of global warming

It's doubly funny to see him referencing data prior to roughly 1900 as in one of the other recent climate change threads he was complaining that the error bars on non modern records are too large to be trusted.
2013-04-02 06:04:45 PM
1 votes:

SevenizGud: More reality:

[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]
But hey, any set of data can have an "off" 15+ years, amirite?


www.skepticalscience.net
2013-04-02 12:01:04 PM
1 votes:

SevenizGud: More reality:

[www.woodfortrees.org image 640x480]
But hey, any set of data can have an "off" 15+ years, amirite?


Oh sweet, the green line hovers at just over 0.4?  And the red line is all wiggly?!  I AM DRAWING SO MANY CONCLUSIONS RIGHT NOW

/label yo' axes foo!
2013-04-02 09:52:03 AM
1 votes:
Hey now. That money could purchase like 1.5 F-35s. What about those manufacturing jobs he so triumphantly pissed away with his little faux "science" tirade?? Typical elitist liberal intellectual America hating Marxist job destroying tax monger. Where will Bill Nye be when North Korea invades Portland?
2013-04-02 09:15:56 AM
1 votes:
planetary.s3.amazonaws.com

Bowties are cool.
 
Displayed 9 of 9 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report