What hiatus?

[gnarlylove]

Care to offer a rational scientific reason for adjusting pre 1960 temperatures?
----------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't think so.

In the underlined region is Abraham's supposed response, according to the massively intelligent SSDD. Notice how SSDD offers literally no time and only minimal space (1 line) for a response. I think this sums up SSDD's approach: Ask a [rhetorical] question and then denote how opponents didn't respond. Classic detachment from reality. SSDD believes with certainty there can be no reply to his questions because otherwise, it would undermine his whole aggressive and assertive methods. Usually when people are aggressive its because what they are defending an weak position (no scientist agree with SSDD) so they switch to aggression mode where emotion is in control and it shuts out logical discourse (like the logic of giving your opponent a meaningful chance for rebuttal). Even if Abe responds, you would never accept his reply in a million years because you pre-determined his reply to be false: you believe your position with 100% certainty "Didn't think so" and therefore NO challenge exists. SSDD is always right, according to himself. So my advice to Abraham is to drive SSDD to a lobotomy clinic instead of replying. Dialogging with SSDD is not really a dialogue, its a monologue where SSDD denies what doesn't already fit into his pre-determined worldview (which was largely generated by reading right wing blogs and tuning out any other information--isn't that so SSDD?)

SSDD, when was the last time you actually tried to understand your opponents position instead of dismissing them prior to engaging?

Never. Your only tactic is to remain with you current mental state. Any pin prick would cause it to gush and be utterly useless lies and misinformation. It would imply his time spent on Earth denying the obvious means his existence was a waste of space and time. So instead of trying to understand all the relevant data, SSDD packs 2 dollars worth of cotton in his eyes, ears, nose, and mouth while allowing his totally misinformed brain to tell his fingers to spew forth his message from on high--his irrefutable religious iconoclasm. Try next time God, maybe you'll get a humbler and genuinely rational creature who gives time and space for his opponents.

 

[mamooth]

Don't even bother trying to use reason with the CultOfMcIntyre. DearLeaderMcIntyre has told them fraud is occurring, hence the cultists BELIEVE!

What are better responses? Eye rolls, possibly laughter and mockery, or optionally just ignoring all the conspiracy theories. Most fun of all, of course, is to keep hammering on whatever point they're trying to evade, such as why direct observations, like the heat balance and OLR data, keep contradicting their conspiracy theories. That causes them to keep doubling down on ever more crazy conspiracy theories which declare how pretty much all data is now being faked, except for whatever data they can cherrypick for their own purposes.

 

[Abraham3]

Your constant claim that every adjustment was made to falsify the data lacks one important feature: evidence.

And while you're searching for evidence that those adjustments were unjustified and made to falsify the results, explain how you will convince us that the conspiracy to falsify these data spreads across the UEA's Climate Research Unit, NASA's National Climate Data Center and Goddard's Institute of Space Studies, whose current, independent temperature records agree exceedingly well. Is that just the result of more conspiracy in your world?

Care to offer a rational scientific reason for adjusting pre 1960 temperatures?

Didn't think so.

I'm not the one making extraordinary claims. Your supposition that the world's climate scientists are, en masse, lying to us about temperatures is an extraordinary claim. It is your responsibility to demonstrate the truth of your claim. And that some particular adjustment was upwards is proof of nothing.

If these datasets are the product of someone's imagination, would you care to explain the agreement between HadCRUT, GISS and NCDC? Can you identify a contemporary temperature dataset that shows anything significantly different for global temperatures?

 

[SSDD]

Your constant claim that every adjustment was made to falsify the data lacks one important feature: evidence.

And while you're searching for evidence that those adjustments were unjustified and made to falsify the results, explain how you will convince us that the conspiracy to falsify these data spreads across the UEA's Climate Research Unit, NASA's National Climate Data Center and Goddard's Institute of Space Studies, whose current, independent temperature records agree exceedingly well. Is that just the result of more conspiracy in your world?

Care to offer a rational scientific reason for adjusting pre 1960 temperatures?

Didn't think so.

I'm not the one making extraordinary claims. Your supposition that the world's climate scientists are, en masse, lying to us about temperatures is an extraordinary claim. It is your responsibility to demonstrate the truth of your claim. And that some particular adjustment was upwards is proof of nothing.

If these datasets are the product of someone's imagination, would you care to explain the agreement between HadCRUT, GISS and NCDC? Can you identify a contemporary temperature dataset that shows anything significantly different for global temperatures?

So no rational scientifically sound reason for lowering all of those pre-1960 temperatures.

 

[Abraham3]

If you want the answers, ask the fellows who did the adjusting. I'm just an interested observer.

 

[gnarlylove]

Don't even bother trying to use reason with the CultOfMcIntyre. DearLeaderMcIntyre has told them fraud is occurring, hence the cultists BELIEVE!

What are better responses? Eye rolls, possibly laughter and mockery, or optionally just ignoring all the conspiracy theories. Most fun of all, of course, is to keep hammering on whatever point they're trying to evade, such as why direct observations, like the heat balance and OLR data, keep contradicting their conspiracy theories. That causes them to keep doubling down on ever more crazy conspiracy theories which declare how pretty much all data is now being faked, except for whatever data they can cherrypick for their own purposes.

How interesting. I now have the word for what we are describing: Americans are Fundamentalists. It's right before your eyes and sometimes you forget it, I know I did (and having been a sincere Christian Fundamentalist its funny scary, sometimes you just close your eyes and pretend it isn't so--but it is!).

So in essence we are asking what are the better responses to fundamentalists? Well, it's like this, I have a brother who formerly was diagnosed with clinical paranoia and no matter what we would say during this 2 year episode, no matter the evidence, the respect, the joviality, anything, nothing would convince him to sincerely re-think his obvious faux pas.

In a similar manner we should treat deniers (and the average conservative lackey, even and some democrats for that matter) as clinically paranoid fundamentalist: they are not worth our time. Whether we try to engage them or not our time is being spent on a mental error or disease, a brain lockdown where nothing bad/false enters and only truth/good leaves. Thus they will only perceive information and others as playing either a supportive role or are shut out completely as non-existent. Yeah?

So have a laugh, a cry or even a rhyme but know its not worth our time (throws down the mic)

 

[gnarlylove]

SSDD I want to be clear I do not intend to attack you or your character. I have tried to engage you on a level which we cannot engage. Forgive my hubris, your ideas are interesting and I'm sure you recognize how true they are. Me calling you fundamentalist is nothing more than saying I know you believe your views to be wholly the truth and nothing but the truth. I'm glad you've found perfection on Earth; I too hope to unite with such perfection...maybe I'll meet you there.

 

[ScienceRocks]

A huge fucking nino is coming and the sub-surface anomaly is 1-2c warmer then even 1997 at this time.

 

[westwall]

If all this heat has been going into oceans at a fairly CONSTANT rate since the 60s ---- what does that have to do with the temperature stalling circa 2000? We've seen this movie before MULTIPLE TIMES and none of the questions get answered, BTK still doesnt have a MECHANISM for long wave absorption to suddenly show up at depth, and theres STILL no sign of a grownup full journal article on their "findings".

YAWN.......... Zzzzzz-Zzzzzzzzz

in other words you have zero understanding of what he said or the science behind it.

Actually jillian, it's the other way around. Ole abe has demonstrated beyond doubt that he can't understand even the most basic math, much less physics.

 

[westwall]

Don't even bother trying to use reason with the CultOfMcIntyre. DearLeaderMcIntyre has told them fraud is occurring, hence the cultists BELIEVE!

What are better responses? Eye rolls, possibly laughter and mockery, or optionally just ignoring all the conspiracy theories. Most fun of all, of course, is to keep hammering on whatever point they're trying to evade, such as why direct observations, like the heat balance and OLR data, keep contradicting their conspiracy theories. That causes them to keep doubling down on ever more crazy conspiracy theories which declare how pretty much all data is now being faked, except for whatever data they can cherrypick for their own purposes.

So bleats the cult of Briffa, Trenberth and Mann!

Tell you what admiral, when you clowns can publish something that ole Mac can't demolish in a few hours you can talk. Till then you're just blowin smoke up your skirt!

 

[westwall]

SSDD I want to be clear I do not intend to attack you or your character. I have tried to engage you on a level which we cannot engage. Forgive my hubris, your ideas are interesting and I'm sure you recognize how true they are. Me calling you fundamentalist is nothing more than saying I know you believe your views to be wholly the truth and nothing but the truth. I'm glad you've found perfection on Earth; I too hope to unite with such perfection...maybe I'll meet you there.

What a load of horseshit. You are easily one of the most condescending, ignorant twerps I have ever seen.

 

[gnarlylove]

SSDD I want to be clear I do not intend to attack you or your character. I have tried to engage you on a level which we cannot engage. Forgive my hubris, your ideas are interesting and I'm sure you recognize how true they are. Me calling you fundamentalist is nothing more than saying I know you believe your views to be wholly the truth and nothing but the truth. I'm glad you've found perfection on Earth; I too hope to unite with such perfection...maybe I'll meet you there.

What a load of horseshit. You are easily one of the most condescending, ignorant twerps I have ever seen.

I don't even care to defend against your allegation. If you want to expose your prattle and pacifier by accusing me of insincerity, then go ahead. I don't need you telling me what I think, that was never up to you. Nor is there any reason to think you know what sincere even means when the only relationship you have on this site is gay high-fives to those who agree with you lockstep or pure acrimony towards other human beings. So please stop your indiscriminate hate towards me by NEVER FUCKING RESPOND to a message of mine again. You got it? Good.

 

[flacaltenn]

Care to offer a rational scientific reason for adjusting pre 1960 temperatures?
----------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't think so.

In the underlined region is Abraham's supposed response, according to the massively intelligent SSDD. Notice how SSDD offers literally no time and only minimal space (1 line) for a response. I think this sums up SSDD's approach: Ask a [rhetorical] question and then denote how opponents didn't respond. Classic detachment from reality. SSDD believes with certainty there can be no reply to his questions because otherwise, it would undermine his whole aggressive and assertive methods. Usually when people are aggressive its because what they are defending an weak position (no scientist agree with SSDD) so they switch to aggression mode where emotion is in control and it shuts out logical discourse (like the logic of giving your opponent a meaningful chance for rebuttal). Even if Abe responds, you would never accept his reply in a million years because you pre-determined his reply to be false: you believe your position with 100% certainty "Didn't think so" and therefore NO challenge exists. SSDD is always right, according to himself. So my advice to Abraham is to drive SSDD to a lobotomy clinic instead of replying. Dialogging with SSDD is not really a dialogue, its a monologue where SSDD denies what doesn't already fit into his pre-determined worldview (which was largely generated by reading right wing blogs and tuning out any other information--isn't that so SSDD?)

SSDD, when was the last time you actually tried to understand your opponents position instead of dismissing them prior to engaging?

Never. Your only tactic is to remain with you current mental state. Any pin prick would cause it to gush and be utterly useless lies and misinformation. It would imply his time spent on Earth denying the obvious means his existence was a waste of space and time. So instead of trying to understand all the relevant data, SSDD packs 2 dollars worth of cotton in his eyes, ears, nose, and mouth while allowing his totally misinformed brain to tell his fingers to spew forth his message from on high--his irrefutable religious iconoclasm. Try next time God, maybe you'll get a humbler and genuinely rational creature who gives time and space for his opponents.

Do YOU care to offer a reasonable explanation why ANY 60 yr old US temperature records are CONSTANTLY being revised to this day? Take as much space as you need pardner. Just don't go psychoanalyzing me for ASKING....

 

[Abraham3]

You missed the point. We start with the assumption that mainstream science is being done in an ethical manner. You don't. Yours is the extraordinary claim. Yours is the responsibility to present evidence. Extraordinary evidence.

 

[flacaltenn]

If all this heat has been going into oceans at a fairly CONSTANT rate since the 60s ---- what does that have to do with the temperature stalling circa 2000? We've seen this movie before MULTIPLE TIMES and none of the questions get answered, BTK still doesnt have a MECHANISM for long wave absorption to suddenly show up at depth, and theres STILL no sign of a grownup full journal article on their "findings".

YAWN.......... Zzzzzz-Zzzzzzzzz

in other words you have zero understanding of what he said or the science behind it.

Why Jillian -- that's a silly notion.. I'm gonna assume you hadn't gotten to my posts

#18,#21,#24,#30,#39, or #45 or any others I might have missed.. Otherwise you'd know that I don't weigh in on technical topics where I don't have an adequate knowledge of "the science behind it".. Our problem here is that Abraham keeps asking the same questions and forgetting the outcome.. Usually, if the topic isn't about polling or consensus, he really doesn't retain much. And despite my patience and effort to be civil --- it's boring by now.

What we really need are about 3 or 4 posters who REALLY KNOW AND CARE about GWarming science and believe every ounce of IPCC pronouncements. We don't have ANY of those.. You KNOW ANY we can borrow?????

 

[flacaltenn]

You missed the point. We start with the assumption that mainstream science is being done in an ethical manner. You don't. Yours is the extraordinary claim. Yours is the responsibility to present evidence. Extraordinary evidence.

You really need to find the quote button pardner.. No one knows WHO or WHAT you're referring to without it.. (Do we CARE? --- OF COURSE we do !!!)

 

[Abraham3]

Been here --- done this...

NOAA assessment of Ocean Heat Storage --- with REAL DATA.. Notice no volcanic signatures??
(last time we did this you SWORE you saw them.. But that was before we confirmed you can't read a graph).. Ground Hog Day...

Your move... If you want to play out the same game you lost last time..

Note how, at about 1995, your 700 and 2000 meter data begin to diverge. Note that they continue to diverge for the entire remainder of the dataset.

 

[Abraham3]

Your constant claim that every adjustment was made to falsify the data lacks one important feature: evidence.

And while you're searching for evidence that those adjustments were unjustified and made to falsify the results, explain how you will convince us that the conspiracy to falsify these data spreads across the UEA's Climate Research Unit, NASA's National Climate Data Center and Goddard's Institute of Space Studies, whose current, independent temperature records agree exceedingly well. Is that just the result of more conspiracy in your world?

Care to offer a rational scientific reason for adjusting pre 1960 temperatures?

Didn't think so.

Care to explain your misunderstanding concerning lapse rates?

Didn't think so.

 

[flacaltenn]

Been here --- done this...

NOAA assessment of Ocean Heat Storage --- with REAL DATA.. Notice no volcanic signatures??
(last time we did this you SWORE you saw them.. But that was before we confirmed you can't read a graph).. Ground Hog Day...

Your move... If you want to play out the same game you lost last time..

Note how, at about 1995, your 700 and 2000 meter data begin to diverge. Note that they continue to diverge for the entire remainder of the dataset.

Seriously man -- we're gonna discuss this, but I'm tired of expounding on science and graph reading.. Let's try another tact here.. YOU are gonna come up with rational obvservations about those 2 curves.. Sound like FUN ?????

1) Does the Black curve (0-2000m) contain EVERY JOULE of the red curve (0 - 700m) ??
2) How much more ocean by volume is in the black curve than the red curve?
3) Are these plotted values for BOTH curves ABSOLUTE HEAT content? Or adjusted in some other fashion?

So describe some alternative reasons for that divergence OTHER THAN the warmth is mysteriously teleporting to Davey Jones zipcode...

 

[Abraham3]

Sorry, answer my question first. No dodging allowed.

It's a yes or no question. Simple enough.

Do you see the divergence between 700 and 2000 meter data at 1995?