No systematic errors in climate models, comprehensive statistical analysis reveals

[jc456]

Garbage in garbage out...
Even assuming the models are right...which I doubt.

Has it occurred to ANY of you to read the article at the OP's link? It's all of a page and a half and I'm certain that at least one of you nitwits can follow it.

And I'm still certain that soon you all will provide that experiment that proves any of that hog wash!

 

[Crick]

Your reply is irrelevant and non-sequitur.

If you want to continue to rant about experiments, may I suggest you hit the "START NEW THREAD" button and dedicate your life to filling it with your incessant whinging.

Alternatively, you could read the OP's article and make a pertinent comment.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Discuss amongst yourselves:

Global warming slowdown No systematic errors in climate models comprehensive statistical analysis reveals -- ScienceDaily

Skeptics who still doubt anthropogenic climate change have now been stripped of one of their last-ditch arguments: It is true that there has been a warming hiatus and that the surface of Earth has warmed up much less rapidly since the turn of the millennium than all the relevant climate models had predicted. However, the gap between the calculated and measured warming is not due to systematic errors of the models, as the skeptics had suspected, but because there are always random fluctuations in Earth's climate, according to a comprehensive statistical analysis.

LOLz a AGWCult Model denier the facts and says there really is AGW.

LOLz

Wow

That's what you're reduced to

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"It is true that there has been a warming hiatus and that the surface of Earth has warmed up much less rapidly since the turn of the millennium than all the relevant climate models had predicted."

Hide the decline

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Too Funny...

Our models say our other models are correct..... What a bunch of morons.. this is peer review circle jerk at its finest... And from a left wing group of alarmists to boot..

As science, it's absurd. But this is a Cult, so to them it makes sense

 

[jc456]

Your reply is irrelevant and non-sequitur.

If you want to continue to rant about experiments, may I suggest you hit the "START NEW THREAD" button and dedicate your life to filling it with your incessant whinging.

Alternatively, you could read the OP's article and make a pertinent comment.

Crick, you can make me go away by making but one comment, you don't have the experiment. Just make that comment and buddy, we are all good. And see, the OP is irrelavant without the proof to go after, and that would be an experiment that shows that 120 PPM does anything to climate. But dude, just say the word and I leave you alone.

 

[jc456]

Discuss amongst yourselves:

Global warming slowdown No systematic errors in climate models comprehensive statistical analysis reveals -- ScienceDaily

Skeptics who still doubt anthropogenic climate change have now been stripped of one of their last-ditch arguments: It is true that there has been a warming hiatus and that the surface of Earth has warmed up much less rapidly since the turn of the millennium than all the relevant climate models had predicted. However, the gap between the calculated and measured warming is not due to systematic errors of the models, as the skeptics had suspected, but because there are always random fluctuations in Earth's climate, according to a comprehensive statistical analysis.

LOLz a AGWCult Model denier the facts and says there really is AGW.

LOLz

Wow

That's what you're reduced to

and they don't think they have to prove their claim. That's the funny thing. I laugh at these cockroaches all the time. They are more stupid each day!!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Discuss amongst yourselves:

Global warming slowdown No systematic errors in climate models comprehensive statistical analysis reveals -- ScienceDaily

Skeptics who still doubt anthropogenic climate change have now been stripped of one of their last-ditch arguments: It is true that there has been a warming hiatus and that the surface of Earth has warmed up much less rapidly since the turn of the millennium than all the relevant climate models had predicted. However, the gap between the calculated and measured warming is not due to systematic errors of the models, as the skeptics had suspected, but because there are always random fluctuations in Earth's climate, according to a comprehensive statistical analysis.

LOLz a AGWCult Model denier the facts and says there really is AGW.

LOLz

Wow

That's what you're reduced to

and they don't think they have to prove their claim. That's the funny thing. I laugh at these cockroaches all the time. They are more stupid each day!!!!

"It is true that there has been a warming hiatus and that the surface of Earth has warmed up much less rapidly since the turn of the millennium than all the relevant climate models had predicted."

Translation: our models fail

 

[orogenicman]

Your reply is irrelevant and non-sequitur.

If you want to continue to rant about experiments, may I suggest you hit the "START NEW THREAD" button and dedicate your life to filling it with your incessant whinging.

Alternatively, you could read the OP's article and make a pertinent comment.

Crick, you can make me go away by making but one comment, you don't have the experiment. Just make that comment and buddy, we are all good. And see, the OP is irrelavant without the proof to go after, and that would be an experiment that shows that 120 PPM does anything to climate. But dude, just say the word and I leave you alone.

The experiment consists of heavily documented and validated observations derived from over 100 years of real world climatic measurements supplemented with at least a dozen proxies that cover the past 200,000 years. Next.

 

[jc456]

and yet, you can't prove what 120 PPM of CO2 does to climate. The math says you all are wrong. And yet, you babble. I laugh at your babble daily, see I have science on my side, you have nothing. the earth is your enemy because it doesn't cooperate with you liars.

 

[orogenicman]

and yet, you can't prove what 120 PPM of CO2 does to climate. The math says you all are wrong. And yet, you babble. I laugh at your babble daily, see I have science on my side, you have nothing. the earth is your enemy because it doesn't cooperate with you liars.

What math, where? I doubt you can lay out any climate science math, much less understand much of it, but you are certainly welcome to try.

 

[jc456]

ah, I see, now you want me to do your work for you. Well if I remember correctly you stated something about getting paid to provide information. Well dude, start paying.

 

[orogenicman]

ah, I see, now you want me to do your work for you. Well if I remember correctly you stated something about getting paid to provide information. Well dude, start paying.

Erm, it is your claim (that the math says we are all wrong). Work for it or stfu.

 

[IanC]

Nic Lewis and two other statisticians destroyed the OP's paper. Whether or not Nature will publish the rebuttal is another thing altogether.

Over and over again flawed papers get through peer review only to get crushed after they are published.

 

[jc456]

ah, I see, now you want me to do your work for you. Well if I remember correctly you stated something about getting paid to provide information. Well dude, start paying.

Erm, it is your claim (that the math says we are all wrong). Work for it or stfu.

hahahahhahahahahahhahahaa shows your worth to the board. I'm right here!

 

[orogenicman]

ah, I see, now you want me to do your work for you. Well if I remember correctly you stated something about getting paid to provide information. Well dude, start paying.

Erm, it is your claim (that the math says we are all wrong). Work for it or stfu.

hahahahhahahahahahhahahaa shows your worth to the board. I'm right here!

I don't make claims I cannot support. You never support any of your claims. So what good are You?

 

[jc456]

ah, I see, now you want me to do your work for you. Well if I remember correctly you stated something about getting paid to provide information. Well dude, start paying.

Erm, it is your claim (that the math says we are all wrong). Work for it or stfu.

hahahahhahahahahahhahahaa shows your worth to the board. I'm right here!

I don't make claims I cannot support. You never support any of your claims. So what good are You?

everyday s0n, everyday!! just keep posting the stupid.

 

[skookerasbil]

the stoopid..........

Hey Orangeman........you've had 323 views s0n!! Almost historic for one of your threads. Pretty laughable though compared to some of the ePiC threads posted up by non-religion members!!!