Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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: Wharf Rat who wrote (1025073)	7/19/2017 10:29:57 AM
From: locogringo	Respond to of 1574004

Are you going to report that dopey poll that you mention at the censored dead site over here, or are you afraid the the D +12 sample would be thrown into your face? Good work, comrade. Putin is proud of you and Brumar.

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1025073)	7/22/2017 9:09:48 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 1574004

Does Willis Eschenbach have Any Honor? Posted on July 22, 2017 \| Let’s find out. He wrote a new post at WUWT claiming this about James Hansen’s 1988 prediction of the course of temperature change over the following 30 years: Back then, he said the globe would warm up by two to five degrees by 2018 with five degrees being under the “business as usual” rubric … not. Here’s the story as written up in “Spin” magazine in 1988. I’m familiar with Hansen’s 1988 predictions. I’ve blogged about it. I don’t get my scientific information from “Spin” magazine, and I certainly didn’t get James Hansen’s 1988 predictions from “Spin” magazine. I got it from the source: Hansen’s original publication. Hansen and his co-authors said no such thing. Here’s the graph of projected temperature change under the three scenarios considered: Keep in mind that 2°F is 1.1°C, and 5°F is 2.8°C. Does it look to you like any of the projections reaches 2.8°C? Does it look like none of them is less than 1.1°C? Of course not. Because they don’t. The lowest value in 2018 is 0.6°C (a little more than half of what’s claimed in Willis’s article), the highest is about 1.3°C (less than half what’s claimed in Willis’s article). For those interested in what actually happened, here’s the data from NASA GISS: We haven’t reached 2018 yet, but the 2017-so-far value is 0.93°C — about midway between the extremes in Hansen’s 1988 paper. If we use the smoothed value, so as not to exaggerate because of year-to-year fluctuations, 2017-so-far is at 0.85°C. Willis’s “scholarship” is deplorable. He seems unaware that the numbers in Hansen’s graph are not temperatures “since 1988,” they’re temperature anomalies relative to the 1951-1980 baseline used by NASA. Most of all, he bases his article on an erroneous statement from “Spin” magazine, when it’s ridiculously easy to retrieve the original paper and find out the truth. But that’s not all. He slanders Hansen with this opening line: “Well, Dr. James Hansen, the man who invented the global warming scam …” and later adds this gem: “… running his usual con job …” IF Willis Eschenbach has any honor at all, he will change the post to admit his mistake, and I don’t mean a “see update at the end of the post” so people will start out with the wrong idea. I certainly don’t mean “delete the post” so he can hide his embarrassment. I mean up front, at the top, very first thing, admit that he was wrong and that he failed to find out the truth in spite of the ease of doing so. And he will apologize to James Hansen. Does Willis have enough honor to do so? We’ll find out. tamino.wordpress.com