The forum for general posting. Come join the madness.
-
eyégor
- ???????
- Posts: 1139
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:26 am
- Location: Trollsberg
#76
Post
by eyégor » Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:44 am
Interesting tidbit in regard to the BEST study that I stumbled upon the other day.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... eague.html
Emphasis below is mine. long time no see, btw.
But although Prof Curry is the second named author of all four papers, Prof Muller failed to consult her before deciding to put them on the internet earlier this month, when the peer review process had barely started, and to issue a detailed press release at the same time.
He also briefed selected journalists individually. ‘It is not how I would have played it,’ Prof Curry said. ‘I was informed only when I got a group email. I think they have made errors and I distance myself from what they did.
‘It would have been smart to consult me.’ She said it was unfortunate that although the Journal of Geophysical Research had allowed Prof Muller to issue the papers, the reviewers were, under the journal’s policy, forbidden from public comment.
Prof McKittrick added: ‘The fact is that many of the people who are in a position to provide informed criticism of this work are currently bound by confidentiality agreements.
‘For the Berkeley team to have chosen this particular moment to launch a major international publicity blitz is a highly unethical sabotage of the peer review process.’
In Prof Curry’s view, two of the papers were not ready to be published, in part because they did not properly address the arguments of climate sceptics.
As for the graph disseminated to the media, she said: ‘This is “hide the decline” stuff. Our data show the pause, just as the other sets of data do. Muller is hiding the decline.
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#77
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Thu Nov 03, 2011 12:12 pm
Muller's BEST study appears to have been mangled by the press, and he's tried to walk some of it back.
http://www.capitolreportnewmexico.com/?p=6691
Remember this?
Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”
― Michael Crichton
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#78
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:11 pm
The Epitaph now in book form form Donna Laframboise
The IPCC has been around for 22 years and has been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. And yet my newly published book is the first time anyone has taken a close, critical look at this organization. After two years of research, I've discovered that almost nothing we've been told about the IPCC is actually true. Rather than being written by a meticulous, upstanding professional in business attire, it turns out the Climate Bible is being produced by a slapdash, rule-breaking, not-to-be-trusted teenager.
Read more:
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/11/ ... z1d3n4mPe7
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#79
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Sun Nov 20, 2011 10:29 am
When Esbjorn Wilmar, of Infinergy, which builds and operates [wind] turbines, introduced himself to the Duke [of Edinburgh] at a reception in London, he found himself on the end of an outspoken attack on his industry.
“He said they were absolutely useless, completely reliant on subsidies and an absolute disgrace,” said Mr Wilmar. “I was surprised by his very frank views.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -Duke.html
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#80
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:17 am
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#81
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Mon Dec 12, 2011 7:14 pm
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
etaoin22
- FNGD Forum Moderator
- Posts: 3655
- Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 6:09 pm
#82
Post
by etaoin22 » Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:36 pm
I do not understand the choice of my government to leave the Kyoto accord, given that the accord had already been butchered into meaninglessness by the Great Powers. The action will not change any other government''s point of view, nor the plans of any state, nor will it be remembered at all in five years when the next risible attempt at international negotiation takes place. What it will do is increase the burden on small business, trying to export to the world, but stymied by the Canadian reputation of environmental laggardism.
And if the so-called experts have 'proven' that 'global warming is a myth', why, nowadays, is my Port of Montreal wide-open and ice-free every winter? With the gold-headed cane traditionally awarded to the first ocean-going ship of the spring, being awarded every year on the first of January?
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#83
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:19 am
Tell me again which side of the CAGW argument denied the Little Ice Age?
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
Flybrick
- Posts: 1570
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:44 am
#84
Post
by Flybrick » Tue Dec 13, 2011 7:02 am
etaoin22 wrote:
I do not understand the choice of my government to leave the Kyoto accord, given that the accord had already been butchered into meaninglessness by the Great Powers. The action will not change any other government''s point of view, nor the plans of any state, nor will it be remembered at all in five years when the next risible attempt at international negotiation takes place. What it will do is increase the burden on small business, trying to export to the world, but stymied by the Canadian reputation of environmental laggardism.
And if the so-called experts have 'proven' that 'global warming is a myth', why, nowadays, is my Port of Montreal wide-open and ice-free every winter? With the gold-headed cane traditionally awarded to the first ocean-going ship of the spring, being awarded every year on the first of January?
I view it as Canada reassessing its position that had been based on erroneous advice and acted in its national self-interest.
I'm impressed, but then I usually have been by Canada (some uber-liberal governments and resulting decisions aside).
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#85
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Fri Dec 30, 2011 8:31 am
Wine, Terroir and Climate Change
This book is a scientific analysis of the soil and climatic factors affecting wine grape production, and thus, ultimately, wine itself. It provides a reasoned basis for the term 'terroir', and critically examines the science of climate change and how it could affect viticulture and winemaking. Dr John Gladstones is an internationally recognised authority on climate and viticulture, and among other achievements was instrumental in the establishment of the Margaret River wine district in Western Australia.
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
Bob Juch
- Posts: 26750
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
- Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
-
Contact:
#86
Post
by Bob Juch » Fri Dec 30, 2011 5:02 pm
themanintheseersuckersuit wrote:Wine, Terroir and Climate Change
This book is a scientific analysis of the soil and climatic factors affecting wine grape production, and thus, ultimately, wine itself. It provides a reasoned basis for the term 'terroir', and critically examines the science of climate change and how it could affect viticulture and winemaking. Dr John Gladstones is an internationally recognised authority on climate and viticulture, and among other achievements was instrumental in the establishment of the Margaret River wine district in Western Australia.
So you're promoting someone who
does believe in climate change?
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)
Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.
Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.
-
Bob Juch
- Posts: 26750
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
- Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
-
Contact:
#87
Post
by Bob Juch » Wed Jan 25, 2012 10:55 am
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)
Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.
Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#88
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:58 am
This issue is Hysteria, its been warming since the LIA
http://joannenova.com.au/2012/01/dr-dav ... tics-case/
We check the main predictions of the climate models against the best and latest data. Fortunately the climate models got all their major predictions wrong. Why? Every serious skeptical scientist has been consistently saying essentially the same thing for over 20 years, yet most people have never heard the message — here it is, put simply enough for any lay reader willing to pay attention.
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
BackInTex
- Posts: 13190
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
- Location: In Texas of course!
#89
Post
by BackInTex » Wed Jan 25, 2012 11:59 am
Maybe its just that the plants are evolving.
..what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? let them take arms.
~~ Thomas Jefferson
War is where the government tells you who the bad guy is.
Revolution is when you decide that for yourself.
-- Benjamin Franklin (maybe)
-
MarleysGh0st
- Posts: 27950
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:55 am
- Location: Elsewhere
#90
Post
by MarleysGh0st » Wed Jan 25, 2012 7:07 pm
BackInTex wrote:Maybe its just that the plants are evolving.
Are you conceding that evolution is true?
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#91
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:47 pm
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
flockofseagulls104
- Posts: 8538
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA
#92
Post
by flockofseagulls104 » Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:49 pm
MarleysGh0st wrote:BackInTex wrote:Maybe its just that the plants are evolving.
Are you conceding that evolution is true?
yeah, but God created it.
Your friendly neighborhood racist. On the waiting list to be a nazi. Designated an honorary 'snowflake'. Trolled by the very best, as well as by BJ. Always typical, unlike others.., Fulminator, Hopelessly in the tank for trump... inappropriate... Flocking himself... Probably a tucking sexist, too... A clear and present threat to The Future Of Our Democracy.. Doesn't understand anything... Made the trump apologist and enabler playoffs... Heathen bastard... Knows nothing about history... Liar.... don't know much about statistics and polling... Nothing at all about biology... Ignorant Bigot... Potential Future Pariah... Big Nerd... Spiraling, Anti-Trans Bigot.. A Lunatic AND a Bigot.. Very Ignorant of the World in General... Sounds deranged... Fake Christian... Weird... has the mind of a child... Simpleton... gullible idiot... a coward who can't face facts... insufferable and obnoxious dumbass... the usual dum dum... idolatrous donkey-person!... Mouth-breathing moron
-
MarleysGh0st
- Posts: 27950
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:55 am
- Location: Elsewhere
#93
Post
by MarleysGh0st » Sat Jan 28, 2012 12:13 am
Flock, are you channeling BiT, now?
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#94
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Sat Jan 28, 2012 12:57 pm
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.
-
Ritterskoop
- Posts: 5798
- Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 10:16 pm
- Location: Charlotte, NC
#95
Post
by Ritterskoop » Sat Jan 28, 2012 2:07 pm
Is this the longest epitaph ever?
If you fail to pilot your own ship, don't be surprised at what inappropriate port you find yourself docked. - Tom Robbins
--------
At the moment of commitment, the universe conspires to assist you. - attributed to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
-
silvercamaro
- Dog's Best Friend
- Posts: 9608
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:45 am
#96
Post
by silvercamaro » Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:26 pm
Ritterskoop wrote:Is this the longest epitaph ever?
Maybe, but some o' them sumbidges are harder to kill than others.
Now generating the White Hot Glare of Righteousness on behalf of BBs everywhere.
-
ulysses5019
- Purveyor of Avatars
- Posts: 19442
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:52 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
#97
Post
by ulysses5019 » Sat Jan 28, 2012 6:20 pm
silvercamaro wrote:Ritterskoop wrote:Is this the longest epitaph ever?
Maybe, but some o' them sumbidges are harder to kill than others.
Maybe they should try lethal injection.
I believe in the usefulness of useless information.
-
Bob78164
- Bored Moderator
- Posts: 21863
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
- Location: By the phone
#98
Post
by Bob78164 » Sun Jan 29, 2012 12:01 am
I'll give you some help, with
the help of 255 members of the National Academy of Sciences. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson
-
themanintheseersuckersuit
- Posts: 7625
- Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 6:37 pm
- Location: South Carolina
#99
Post
by themanintheseersuckersuit » Sun Jan 29, 2012 8:07 am
Peter Gleick sounds a little butt hurt in that letter.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor ... science/2/
Suitguy is not bitter.
feels he represents the many educated and rational onlookers who believe that the hysterical denouncement of lay scepticism is both unwarranted and counter-productive
The problem, then, is that such calls do not address an opposition audience so much as they signal virtue. They talk past those who need convincing. They ignore actual facts and counterargument. And they are irreparably smug.