Musk dismisses predictions from scientist on climate change. Says we have 20 years to fix the world.

[Manonthestreet]

 

[EMH]

That article you cited shows how skeptics of global warming were in fact wrong when they said the atmosphere was actually cooling, but a new study explains the problem and that in reality the atmosphere is indeed warming.

Another CO2 FRAUD "Climate Church" member documents he doesn't understand the difference between DATA, which is from instruments, and FUDGE, which is altering DATA that did not fit the politicized narrative into FUDGE that does.


The article also explains the FUDGE JOB, and the explanation is absolutely laughable.

"Oribit Wobble" for satellites would not change the IR readings at all. It takes an IQ over 5 to comprehend that.

For the balloons, they claim a "shade issue" required a "correction." Even if true, such a "correction" would be to add a CONSTANT to the entire data series, hence keeping a flat line a FLAT LINE, but somehow this "correction" of a CONSTANT changed a flat line into an upward slope.


IQ over 5 required, and you sure as heck do not have that, Sherlock...

The real Sherlock Holmes was not a parrot of lies, he was a brilliant investigator who questioned everything. You are completely unworthy of his poster name...

 

[JimH52]

Your post seems self contradcitory. That article you cited shows how skeptics of global warming were in fact wrong when they said the atmosphere was actually cooling, but a new study explains the problem and that in reality the atmosphere is indeed warming.

In ten years when weather extremes become unbearable and Miami is an island slowly becoming a victim of the ocean, the maga idiots will come up with another excuse.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Another CO2 FRAUD "Climate Church" member documents he doesn't understand the difference between DATA, which is from instruments, and FUDGE, which is altering DATA that did not fit the politicized narrative into FUDGE that does.

You mean the instruments that were behaving differently to what was believed? Data from instruments reflects characteristics of both the measured quantity and the instrument's idiosyncrasies. I work with electronics and computers, I know rather more about this than you seem to be assuming.

What you call "instruments" are in fact transducers and transducers have all sorts of bothersome characteristics like repeatability, linearity, sensitivity, tolerances, aging, hysteresis and so on.

The article also explains the FUDGE JOB, and the explanation is absolutely laughable.

"Oribit Wobble" for satellites would not change the IR readings at all. It takes an IQ over 5 to comprehend that.

For the balloons, they claim a "shade issue" required a "correction." Even if true, such a "correction" would be to add a CONSTANT to the entire data series, hence keeping a flat line a FLAT LINE, but somehow this "correction" of a CONSTANT changed a flat line into an upward slope.

IQ over 5 required, and you sure as heck do not have that, Sherlock...

The real Sherlock Holmes was not a parrot of lies, he was a brilliant investigator who questioned everything. You are completely unworthy of his poster name...

What exactly did I write that you are disputing? can you quote me rather than relying on specious paraphrasing? Enough hysteria and superstitious mumbo jumbo, get to the point.

 

[ReinyDays]

In ten years when weather extremes become unbearable and Miami is an island slowly becoming a victim of the ocean, the maga idiots will come up with another excuse.

Do you mean 100 years ... Miami International will still be high and dry ... why do you think 1ºC warmer is unbearable? ... in 100 years? ...

 

[EMH]

You mean the instruments that were behaving differently to what was believed?

The two data series, satellites and balloons, were highly correlated, both showing a cooler than normal atmosphere in 1998, the first time CO2 FRAUD claimed "warmest year ever." There was nothing wrong with either the instruments or the data. The "problem" was the data told the truth....

ATMOSPHERIC CO2 increased, ATMOSPHERIC TEMPERATURE did NOT

and CO2 FRAUD was completely refuted by it, so it FUDGED the data...

I know rather more about this than you seem to be assuming.

Hardly, since the FBI made a case out of what I gave them... more than 15 years ago...

obama climate silence 2010 2012 - Google Search

www.google.com

What you call "instruments" are in fact transducers and transducers have all sorts of bothersome characteristics like repeatability, linearity, sensitivity, tolerances, aging, hysteresis and so on.

Nobody alleged any of that. The excuses used to FUDGE the data were completely inconsistent with reality. And the fudge job of the balloon data was completely inconsistent with the excuse as to why the fudge job was needed.

 

[Mac-7]

How many new nuclear reactors should we build?

And how many more power lines?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

The two data series, satellites and balloons, were highly correlated, both showing a cooler than normal atmosphere in 1998, the first time CO2 FRAUD claimed "warmest year ever." There was nothing wrong with either the instruments or the data. The "problem" was the data told the truth....

ATMOSPHERIC CO2 increased, ATMOSPHERIC TEMPERATURE did NOT

and CO2 FRAUD was completely refuted by it, so it FUDGED the data...






Hardly, since the FBI made a case out of what I gave them... more than 15 years ago...

obama climate silence 2010 2012 - Google Search

www.google.com

Nobody alleged any of that. The excuses used to FUDGE the data were completely inconsistent with reality. And the fudge job of the balloon data was completely inconsistent with the excuse as to why the fudge job was needed.

Please show me a technically detailed and credible article from a science site or magazine, that supports your conjecture.

Your original post had an articles the explained the inaccuracies and the atmosphere has indeed warmed, you criticized that so please show me something credible that agrees with you.

Finally, not that it matters but do you have any experience with this area? are you an engineer in any sense? have you studied atmospheric science or climatology? do you have any experience of modelling physical systems like the earth? statistics?

All I have at this point is your personal gripe and complaint versus an explanatory scientific article on the NBC website, so you've really not made a credible case here.

Just for the sake of others joining this thread, here is how that NBC article (in your earlier post) begins:

For years, skeptics of global warming have used satellite and weather balloon data to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening.

Now, according to three new studies published in the journal Science, it turns out those conclusions based on satellite and weather balloon data were based on faulty analyses.

The atmosphere is indeed warming, not cooling as the data previously showed.

So there were THREE studies that came to the same conclusion, that the skeptics were wrong so at this point, unless you have a credible source, the skeptics were wrong and the atmosphere has warmed.

So, the ball's in your court, else it's case closed.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Funny

Climate changed before humans roamed the Earth. Let’s discuss that

 

[ding]

Tesla CEO Elon Musk Dismisses Climate Predictions As 'Too Pessimistic,' Says We Have '20 Yrs Or So' To Fix The World - Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA)

Tesla CEO Elon Musk on Tuesday dismissed concerns of the Earth being rendered unlivable soon owing to climate change, saying that climate predictions are too "pessimistic" and "bound to backfire."

www.benzinga.com

Well, Elon...we are about to lose 4 years with your good pal in charge. So, we actually have far less time, and since you are not a scientist and I am tired of hearing your stupid predictions...you only say what you think maga wants to hear. Face it, trump is going to screw over the economy, the environment, and everything else he gets his grubby little hands on.

There’s nothing to fix. Everything is quite normal.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Funny

Climate changed before humans roamed the Earth. Let’s discuss that

Off ya go then...

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Off ya go then...

Did climate change happen before humans roamed the Earth? Yes or no?

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Did climate change happen before humans roamed the Earth? Yes or no?

Probably, it's 4.5 billion years old and was not always in the state it's in today obviously.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Probably, it's 4.5 billion years old and was not always in the state it's in today obviously.

Thank you

Was that so hard?

And the answer isn’t “probably” it’s a resounding, YES!

Dumb lib

 

[JimH52]

Do you mean 100 years ... Miami International will still be high and dry ... why do you think 1ºC warmer is unbearable? ... in 100 years? ...

Where did you get your PhD in Environmental Science? Just another maga cult member trying to be smart.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Thank you

Was that so hard?

And the answer isn’t “probably” it’s a resounding, YES!

Dumb lib

I said "probably" because you never gave dates, just a generic "before humans roamed". Your reasoning is laughable too, even if the earth's climate has changed in the distant past how does that prove that human activity does not cause a change to the climate?

Forest fires occur naturally and have for millions of years and destroy large swathes of forest, does that prove that human's cannot start a forest fire?

This is the mess you'll get yourself into when you attempt to out reason Sherlock Holmes, I'm the world's greatest detective and you're a purple lizard with pointy ears.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Funny

Climate changed before humans roamed the Earth. Let’s discuss that

Joe couldn't skim his 10%.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

How many new nuclear reactors should we build?

"We"? So, government built and owned?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Funny

Climate changed before humans roamed the Earth. Let’s discuss that

Wow!

Have you told that to the scientists who discoverd it and taught it to you?

Won't they be surprised!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Joe couldn't skim his 10%.

He's just not as good at soliciting bribes as the fat rapist is, like he did with the oil execs.

Now that we're fine with the orange charity thief doing it, future presidents won't be so shy.