SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Wharf Rat who wrote (764462)1/18/2014 5:54:37 PM
From: Bilow  Read Replies (1) of 1573433
 
Hi Rat; Regarding your graph:



(1) Did you notice that your graph is labeled "skepticalscience.com"? Did you know that skepticalscience.com is not run by an atmospheric scientist? If you're going to claim that the climate predictions worked, and that there was no pause, you need to reference peer reviewed literature, not net garbage.

(2) I realize that true believers have difficulty assessing the compatibility of their own arguments, but don't you find it just a little strange that not only the mainstream media, but also the peer reviewed literature discusses the pause? The fact that you don't believe in it is farily entertaining, given how you used to use MSM and peer reviewed literature to beat our side up.

No, the above graph is a distortion of the record and has nothing to do with reality. The truth is that the climate predictions failed miserably. This *fact* is discussed at length in the peer reviewed literature. Your side, which seems to have an inability to admit its mistakes. This is not an uncommon defect of people with religious beliefs. So do you have a theory on why the BBC is reporting the failure of climate predictions? Is your theory that some secret source of money has corrupted them? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! LOL!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

For example, here's a couple of peer reviewed articles that don't hide from facts like you do:

Overestimated Global Warming over the past 20 years
Fyfe, Gillete, Zwiers, Nature Climate Change, Volume 3, September 2013

Recent observed global warming is significantly less than that simulated by climate models. This difference might be explained by some combination of errors in external forcing, model response and internal climate variability.

see.ed.ac.uk

What are Climate Models Missing?
Stevens & Bony, Science 31 May 2013: Vol. 340 no. 6136 pp. 1053-1054
sciencemag.org

Now, instead of quoting net garbage, why don't you get a PhD in atmospheric chemistry, write a paper on why the climate predictions were accurate, and get it published in Nature.

Of course you won't do that because you're just another idiot, believing what you want to believe, in complete denial of reality (except when some little fact fits into your perverted ideas).

-- Carl
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext