Sunsettommy
Diamond Member
- Mar 19, 2018
- 15,178
- 12,747
- 2,400
Crick then asked me with a straight face to provide him with the list of unknown natural factors! Hahahahaha. And gave me a graph of known anthropogenic factors.
No, he didn't ask you for a "list of unknown natural factors". He asked:
"What unknown influences and factors Ian?"
That may sound puzzling at first blush, but it is a plausible response, since you so confidently asserted, "The chaotic nature of climate change means that unknown influences and combinations of factors cause unknowable changes of variable magnitude."
And with that babbling of yours it's perfectly reasonable to ask what influences and factors you may have in mind. Because, taking reasonable what you typed, elves might have some influence on our climate, too. We just haven't seen elves lately. So, you seem to be throwing in comments that would destroy science itself. Because with every phenomenon physics describes, there could be a counter vaguely referring to "unknown influences", which might alter future developments. That, however, would be benighted.
And, he didn't give you a "graph of known anthropogenic factors". You can look up your misrepresentation yourself.
And that is (among many other instances of you misrepresenting, seemingly not understanding and distorting science) why ...
And now you are calling me ignorant and misleading?
... I do in fact call you ignorant and misleading. Because that's what describes you best.
Look, Ian, I'd really like to give you the benefit of the doubt, assuming you aren't just another merchant of doubt, harder thought that gets posting by posting. If you had gotten to work and engaged in debate, you'd have thought about Crick's question, and had come up with possible factors (or combinations thereof) the world's leading climate scientists may have overlooked, which might decisively alter the earth's energy balance. The old puzzle - cloud formation is difficult to model - patently doesn't fit the bill. The factor is at least an order of magnitude too small.
I am admittedly done with, and disinterested in, any back and forth with denialingdongs and ignoramuses trying to besmirch climate science. Their time is over (has been for a while). Inventing "unknown influences and combinations of factors" out of thin air may be somewhat creative, but it adds nothing to debate. There plainly is no there there. "Hahahahaha." For all I care, you can stuff that.
Hahahahaha. I see you are doubling down on stupid.
Just out of curiosity, what would you call the graph that Crick posted. I looked for the provenance but it didn't seem to have a caption.
The stupid boy never answered Todd's request at post 27
"Enlighten us"
He ran away after I made a fool of him over his absurd insistence that I have no idea what the IPCC was saying, when I posted the ENTIRE paragraph, he vanished probably realizing I did understand it. The fool never read in the link I had provided that whole segment that make clear the IPCC admitted it was a statistical modeling construct.
"Explore more fully the probabilistic character of future climate states by developing multiple ensembles of model39 calculations. The climate system is a coupled nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore the long-term prediction of 40 future climate states is not possible. Rather the focus must be upon the prediction of the probability distribution of41 the systems future possible states by the generation of ensembles of model solutions. Addressing adequately the42 statistical nature of climate is computationally intensive and requires the application of new methods of model43 diagnosis, but such statistical information is essential"
bolding mine
Basically saying improve their far into the future guesses for better statistical relevance.
Here is the very next paragraph the fool didn't read:
"Improve the integrated hierarchy of global and regional climate models with emphases on improving the46 simulation of regional impacts and extreme weather events. There is the potential for increased understanding of47 extremes events by employing regional climate models; however, there are also challenges to realise this potential.48 It will require improvements in the understanding of the coupling between the major atmospheric, oceanic, and49 terrestrial systems, and extensive diagnostic modeling and observational studies that evaluate and improve50 simulative performance. A particularly important issue is the adequacy of data needed to attack the question of51 changes in extreme events."
bolding mine
A lot of admissions about needing to improve various states of modeling parameters.
You won't get a real discussion with him, as he is an ideologist.