The debate on climate change is now over. The verdict: Too late to do anything about it!

[Billy_Bob]

Then you will have no problem showing me a legitimate standard-issue peer reviewed journal of significant value that supports you claim that it has been thoroughly debunked.

(I know you won't be able to do so and you won't)

Dr Mann refuses to give up his data and methodology. He is hiding his work from scrutiny. No reputable scientist will do this. Many peer reviewed papers show his work debunked, but until he shares his data and methodology it will remain a disputed work.

Manns inclusion of the instrument record (one year data point plots) on a long-term proxy record using 50–250-year point plots make it scientific fraud of the worst kind. IF we take the last 250 years and place that point into one point the hockey stick vanishes. That is the deception.

You can play games with Mann's work, but he lost a lawsuit over it and has yet to produce the data and methods as demanded by the court. You want to tell me why?

 

[Flash]

No it hasn't.

Climate Change Indicators: Sea Surface Temperature | US EPA

This indicator describes global trends in sea surface temperature.

www.epa.gov

You believe anything the EPA says? LOL!

I suspect they get their data from NASA.

NASA (like NOAA) has been caught fabricating data.

Besides even if they aren't lying they get their "data" from satellites that are extremely inaccurate. They are calibrated to +/- 4 F but yet NASA report changes much less than that.

That chart goes way past the age of satellites anyway. How in the hell did anyone know that the ocean temperature was in 1880?

 

[Billy_Bob]

You believe anything the EPA says? LOL!

I suspect they get their data from NASA.

NASA (like NOAA) has been caught fabricating data.

Besides even if they aren't lying they get their "data" from satellites that are extremely inaccurate. They are calibrated to +/- 4 F but yet NASA report changes much less than that.

That chart goes way past the age of satellites anyway. How in the hell did anyone know that the ocean temperature was in 1880?

The NASA graph is a model. It's not even the actual measurements. Those have been hidden and even I am not allowed to get them. Just like Mann, they are hiding their work from scrutiny.

 

[Paracetamol63]

Dr Mann refuses to give up his data and methodology.

As you know REPEATED investigations continue to FAIL to find Mann guilty of any fraud.

Federal Investigators Clear Climate Scientist, Again

The Inspector General of the National Science Foundation has closed its investigation into climatologist Michael Mann after failing to find any evidence of misconduct

www.scientificamerican.com

Michael Mann cleared of science fraud charges made by climate sceptics,

Four-month university investigation clears climate scientist Mann of research misconduct allegations made by climate change deniers

www.theguardian.com

Penn State inquiry finds no evidence for allegations against Michael Mann

An academic inquiry into the so-called “climategate” email scandal has concluded that a well-known U.S. scientist did not directly or indirectly falsify data in his research. The review, by a panel of senior administrators at Pennsylvania State University, found no evidence that climatologist...

grist.org

He is hiding his work from scrutiny. No reputable scientist will do this.

So how many times have YOU had to turn your raw data over to someone else?

Many peer reviewed papers show his work debunked, but until he shares his data and methodology it will remain a disputed work.

Then you will find it QUITE EASY to show me in the legitimate literature where that happened. Thanks.

Manns inclusion of the instrument record (one year data point plots) on a long-term proxy record using 50–250-year point plots make it scientific fraud of the worst kind.

Not in the slightest.

You can play games with Mann's work, but he lost a lawsuit over it and has yet to produce the data and methods as demanded by the court. You want to tell me why?

I am hopeful that a professional such as yourself will actually get around to SUPPORTING HIS CLAIMS with something but apparently I am asking too much?

 

[Paracetamol63]

The NASA graph is a model.

Ummm, you said you were an atmospheric physicist. SURELY you know that your entire FIELD is DOMINATED by models.

 

[Billy_Bob]

No it hasn't.

Climate Change Indicators: Sea Surface Temperature | US EPA

This indicator describes global trends in sea surface temperature.

www.epa.gov

As I suspected, NOAA modeling... I want to know how they collected data from satellites without satellites. You can't make this garbage up. Deception.

 

[Paracetamol63]

View attachment 695645

As I suspected, NOAA modeling... I want to know how they collected data from satellites without satellites. You can't make this garbage up. Deception.

Just stop it. You aren't a physicist of any sort. You aren't even a scientist.

I know this. You know this. Perhaps others don't but you and I do.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Ummm, you said you were an atmospheric physicist. SURELY you know that your entire FIELD is DOMINATED by models.

Models that no one wants to verify by empirical evidence... Yep, I know.. I also know how to falsify models. No one wants their work empirically evaluated. Now why would that be? I verify models. They all fail. They all exaggerate warming by no less than a factor of ten.

Modeling is the very definition of how well we understand our climatic system. When they fail, so does the persons understanding of our climatic system. That is why no one wants to have their models evaluated.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Just stop it. You aren't a physicist of any sort. You aren't even a scientist.

I know this. You know this. Perhaps others don't but you and I do.

Thanks for playing.

Just like Cardinal... I go to the source, grab the data, and you deny it. LOL The source is NOAA. The Source is their climate model when you go to the NOAA site. You were not expecting someone to check your source. Sorry about that, I do check sources.

 

[MisterBeale]

Woo Hoo! Time to party!

View attachment 676472

 

[Paracetamol63]

Models that no one wants to verify by empirical evidence... Yep, I know..

No, no you don't. You don't know what models do in the physical sciences, you don't know how they are constructed.

I also know how to falsify models. No one wants their work empirically evaluated. Now why would that be? I verify models. They all fail. They all exaggerate warming by no less than a factor of ten.

Sorry, Bob, but you aren't a scientist and you know it.

Modeling is the very definition of how well we understand our climatic system. When they fail, so does the persons understanding of our climatic system. That is why no one wants to have their models evaluated.

Sorry, I simply don't believe you anymore. I will assume you are the fraud you think Michael Mann is. (Only I have far more evidence for my position than you do for yours).

 

[Paracetamol63]

Just like Cardinal... I go to the source, grab the data, and you deny it.

You didn't show anything of value. You noted the "uncertainty band"...as if that means something. YOu don't understand how even data is processed.

LOL The source is NOAA.

And you don't understand it.

The Source is their climate model when you go to the NOAA site. You were not expecting someone to check your source. Sorry about that, I do check sources.

You are not an actual physicist because an actual physicist understands the role of models in science.

 

[Billy_Bob]

No, no you don't. You don't know what models do in the physical sciences, you don't know how they are constructed.



Sorry, Bob, but you aren't a scientist and you know it.



Sorry, I simply don't believe you anymore. I will assume you are the fraud you think Michael Mann is. (Only I have far more evidence for my position than you do for yours).

Just wow... Because I go to the source and look for myself, you are now butt hurt.
Please tell me how your model is constructed. Are you using grid cells? are you stacking these cells and increasing their size. How are you determining the math mathematical equations for each component and effect of other components on that component. How are you representing the pressures of the atmosphere at altitude and the spacial proximity of gas molecules? How are you dealing with the cause effect relationship between gases as you rise in altitude and their proximity increases? How are you dealing with down welling solar radiation on the molecules? How are you dealing with LWIR and its effect on some of the gases and not others?

I can go on and on about modeling and the pitfalls.

It seems you and the other newbie's whole game is demonization of persons who do not think as you want them to.

 

[Billy_Bob]

You didn't show anything of value. You noted the "uncertainty band"...as if that means something. YOu don't understand how even data is processed.



And you don't understand it.



You are not an actual physicist because an actual physicist understands the role of models in science.

Uncertainty of a nonexistent reading. Hmmmmmmmm You do not see the irony in your own post.

Do you even know the date of the launch of the first satellite capable of these readings? It isn't 1880...

 

[Paracetamol63]

Just wow... Because I go to the source and look for myself, you are now butt hurt.

I'm not butthurt. But someone who claims to be a scientist who doesn't know the central role of models in his own field and who thinks "uncertainty bands" are something shocking is NOT a scientist.

It seems you and the other newbie is demonization of persons who do not think as you want them to.

I am no longer interested in your continuing fraud.

 

[Paracetamol63]

Uncertainty of a nonexistent reading.

Do you really not know anything about this?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Do you really not know anything about this?

Let me teach some of the basics..

Climate Modeling – Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory

Climate Modeling What is a Global Climate Model? What Are Their Uses? Why Do We Believe Them? What Do They Agree On? Why Do They Disagree? How Do We Improve Them? Climate models are important tools for improving our understanding and predictability of climate behavior on seasonal, annual...

www.gfdl.noaa.gov

 

[Billy_Bob]

I'm not butthurt. But someone who claims to be a scientist who doesn't know the central role of models in his own field and who thinks "uncertainty bands" are something shocking is NOT a scientist.


I am no longer interested in your continuing fraud.

Funny, that is how I feel when I encounter a fraud who has no idea what he is talking about. All you have presented is attempts to discredit. Never once have you attempted to debate or provide evidence for your position. You just scream "I am right". No matter how many times you spout the deceptions they will not become true.

 

[ReinyDays]

Unfortunately I do not have that volume here. Are you able to explain what they say or quote it?

Any first year physics textbook should do ... just about anything will improve your basic knowledge ...

I don't think I've been particularly nasty to you, so I'm uncertain why you are so aggressive and vicious.

Because you lie ... stop responding to my posts and I'll stop calling you a liar ... or settle on one account, and apologize for puppeteering ...

No, it's how the earth's climate works. It is a complex system. If it gets warm in your part of the country one day...are you of the opinion that it must also be exactly as warm on the other side of the globe as you?

No climate is far more complex. Perhaps you can ask Billy_Bob to explain how air masses work and why when it rains HERE it isn't necessarily RAINING OVER THERE.

One day? ... are you confused about the difference between weather and climate? ... if it's been a single degree warmer on this half of the planet for the past 100 years, then I would expect the other half to also be one single degree warmer these past 100 years ... today alone, not so much ... we have Rossby waves ...

You can twist our words to suit your lying tongue all you want to ... my claim is less power, and you don't know what I'm talking about, so you either change the subject or change the account ...

Fucking liar ...

 

[Paracetamol63]

Any first year physics textbook should do ... just about anything will improve your basic knowledge ...

I see you don't have that. Thanks.

Because you lie ... stop responding to my posts and I'll stop calling you a liar ... or settle on one account, and apologize for puppeteering ...

Have I insulted you somehow? If so please accept my sincerest apologies. You seem overly angry at anyone with whom you disagree. This is a science discussion, you don't have to insult.

You can twist our words to suit your lying tongue all you want to ... my claim is less power, and you don't know what I'm talking about, so you either change the subject or change the account ...

Fucking liar ...

I honestly wish I knew what I had done to make you so unhinged and angry. I bear you no ill will.