Ignoring inconvenient climate model failures

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Sunsettommy, Jun 13, 2018.

  1. mamooth
    Offline

    mamooth Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2012
    Messages:
    18,758
    Thanks Received:
    3,295
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Ratings:
    +11,674
    Hey guys! How's it going!

    So, why did I bring up this old thread? Because Sunsettommy arrived after I started my long break. I'm used to the other deniers. They haven't changed at all, same old sulky failed arguments and helplessly flapping wrists. Boring. I crave fresh meat. I'll get it by calling Sunsettommy out on his own thread, and ripping apart his fraudulent claims about models.

    The models have been stellar. Anyone saying otherwise is lying. The models have basically predicted 0.20C/decade (anyone saying they predicted 0.30C/decade is peddling a falsehood), and the climate has responded with 0.19C/decade (anyone saying the warming has been 0.13C/decade is peddling a falsehood.) So, the models were spot-on.

    Analysis: How well have climate models projected global warming? | Carbon Brief

    Climate model projections compared to observations

    [​IMG]


    So, Sunsettommy, why were your claims about models so wildly incorrect? You got some 'splainin to do.

    And please, don't start out by saying how all the hard data is a socialist plot. Save that ace-in-the-hole cult conspiracy theory for after you've been reduced to helplessly weeping out of hysterical desperation, then trot it out as your final admission of humiliating defeat. Leading with it, that would be way too soon.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    13,631
    Thanks Received:
    2,698
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +12,161
    Right out of the gate and a bald face lie.... At least your consistent...

    Seems to me you left when you were called on this same lie. Tell me again why you post up a graph that has model training only and no forward prediction?

    Just more bull shit from a stupid cat...

    FYI... When your models are left to any short 15-25 year prediction phase they fail miserably... Which is why you liars omit it now...
    cmip5-73-models-vs-obs-20n-20s-mt-5-yr-means11 Dr Roy Spencer.png
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2018
  3. skookerasbil
    Offline

    skookerasbil Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    30,745
    Thanks Received:
    3,524
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +11,413
    Hoof'ingray....look who's back!:113:
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  4. mamooth
    Offline

    mamooth Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2012
    Messages:
    18,758
    Thanks Received:
    3,295
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Ratings:
    +11,674
    At least you're consistent. You're too dim to fathom the "your/you're" difference. And you know Spencer's graph there is openly fraudulent, but you still posted it and pretended it was legit. You've seen this many times before.

    Roy Spencer's latest deceit and deception | HotWhopper

    Yes, I know the woman who writes that blog humiliated you in front of the world and banned you from the blog, after you were busted for lying over and over. That makes the fact that she's the one debunking Spencer's fraud so much sweeter, being how it sends you insane with butthurt. Sucks to be you, that in the real world, there are consequences for lying. You can get away with lying here, due to your political affiliations, but honest people won't put up with it.

    And you're lying again. The graph and the links show how past model predictions stacked up to reality. It has nothing to do with "model training." The models have been excellent. Anyone saying otherwise is peddling a falsehood. Some have been brainwashed into believing their falsehood. Some, like you, know very well that they're pushing a fraud.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Billy_Bob
    Offline

    Billy_Bob Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    13,631
    Thanks Received:
    2,698
    Trophy Points:
    1,010
    Location:
    Top Of The Great Divide
    Ratings:
    +12,161
    And you still use Hotwhooper lies as proof.... Nothing changes with you morons..
     
  6. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    58,540
    Thanks Received:
    7,102
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +18,491
    Let us say that you are correct. And the warming is far less than predicted. Yet the effects of the warming that we have are clearly evident. From the fires around the world, in both hemispheres, to the precipitation events and the heat waves. So, what that tells us, is that we are in for a lot more trouble from AGW that predicted. So go ahead and deny that the present fires are not influenced by the warming.
     
  7. skookerasbil
    Offline

    skookerasbil Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    30,745
    Thanks Received:
    3,524
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +11,413
    But the only thing that matters is if the public thinks the fires are being caused by "warming". They dont. They've seen it their whole lives during times of drought....less in non-drought years. Folks get conditioned to things in life....a dynamic just not at all understood by most climate crusaders.:113:
     
  8. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    58,540
    Thanks Received:
    7,102
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +18,491
    A new study says that human-induced climate change has doubled the area affected by forest fires in the U.S. West over the last 30 years. According to the study, since 1984 heightened temperatures and resulting aridity have caused fires to spread across an additional 16,000 square miles than they otherwise would have—an area larger than the states of Massachusetts and Connecticut combined. The authors warn that further warming will increase fire exponentially in coming decades. The study appears today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

    Read more at: Climate change has doubled western US forest fires
     
  9. skookerasbil
    Offline

    skookerasbil Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    30,745
    Thanks Received:
    3,524
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Not the middle of nowhere
    Ratings:
    +11,413
    Their conclusions mean that maybe California burns to the ground in the next two decades. And that's a bad thing?:21::21:
     
    • Funny and Agree!! Funny and Agree!! x 1
  10. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    58,540
    Thanks Received:
    7,102
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +18,491
    So you are as stupid as the people in Texas that wish the same fate for New York.
     

Share This Page