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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (1014127)5/2/2017 8:04:53 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573981
 
They haven't been "proving him wrong."
They have proven him wrong; time and time again.

" Just read what he said there. Very reasonable."

Physics isn't; it's very rigid.



To: Brumar89 who wrote (1014127)5/2/2017 8:57:08 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1573981
 
This sounds like you:

Just asking questions. Why so rude?

The New York Times should not have hired climate change bullshitter Bret Stephens
It’s time for the opinion page to take climate change as seriously as the paper’s reporters do.

Stephens is playing a bit part in a very, very old strategy. It goes like this:

Q: “We’re just asking questions.”]
A: [questions answered]
Q: “We’re just asking questions.”
A: “Yeah, we answered those. Here’s a link.”
Q: “We’re just asking questions.”
A: “We answered the questions. A bunch of times. Please acknowledge our answers.”
Q: “We’re just asking questions.”
A: “Okay, we went back over our answers, double-checked and peer-reviewed them, compiled them in a series of reports with easy-to-read summaries, all of which we have broken down into digestible bits via various blog posts and visual aids.”
Q: “We’re just asking questions.”
A: “It’s beginning to seem like you don’t really care about this issue and are just jerking us around.”
Q: “Hey, we’re just asking questions! Galileo asked questions, didn’t he? Why are you being so intolerant and rude?”

Everyone who has written about climate change on the internet has gone through this ringer dozens of times. Yet relatively few people in US politics or media follow climate closely, or know much about it, so when they do tune in to these controversies, all they see is, heck, some fellas askin’ questions. That a crime?

It is a tiresome game. It’s difficult to see how NYT readers will benefit from it.


vox.com



To: Brumar89 who wrote (1014127)5/2/2017 11:55:09 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573981
 
you might like these graphs

Climate model projections compared to observations
Filed under: — group @ 11 April 2017

Since we have been periodically posting updates (e.g. 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015, 2016) of model output comparisons to observations across a range of variables, we have now set up this page as a permanent placeholder for the most up-to-date comparisons. We include surface temperature projections from 1981, 1988, CMIP3, CMIP5, and satellite products (MSU) from CMIP5, and we will update this on an annual basis, or as new observational products become available. For each comparison, we note the last update date.

Global mean surface temperature anomalies
Hansen et al (1981)




Original discussion (figure courtesy of Geert Jan van Oldenborgh, Hansen et al. (1981)). Observations are the GISTEMP LOTI annual figures and 10 year mean. Last updated: 8th April 2017.

realclimate.org


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News