Author Topic: Pathological Science  (Read 411796 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Pathological Science, Adjusted Temperature data, Statistical Fraud?
« Reply #950 on: April 06, 2018, 07:46:04 AM »
Where is the taxpayer funded government agency rebuttal to these charges of manipulated data?
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-stunning-statistical-fraud-behind-the-global-warming-scare/
https://www.sott.net/article/381722-NOAAs-adjustments-The-stunning-statistical-fraud-behind-the-Global-Warming-scare

NOAA's 'adjustments': The stunning statistical fraud behind the 'Global Warming' scare

Business Investors Daily
Mon, 02 Apr 2018 03:12 UTC
Arctic sea ice
© YouTube/Adapt 2030 (screen capture)


Global Warming

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration may have a boring name, but it has a very important job: It measures U.S. temperatures. Unfortunately, it seems to be a captive of the global warming religion. Its data are fraudulent.

What do we mean by fraudulent? How about this: NOAA has made repeated "adjustments" to its data, for the presumed scientific reason of making the data sets more accurate.

Nothing wrong with that. Except, all their changes point to one thing - lowering previously measured temperatures to show cooler weather in the past, and raising more recent temperatures to show warming in the recent present.

This creates a data illusion of ever-rising temperatures to match the increase in CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere since the mid-1800s, which global warming advocates say is a cause-and-effect relationship. The more CO2, the more warming.

But the actual measured temperature record shows something different: There have been hot years and hot decades since the turn of the last century, and colder years and colder decades. But the overall measured temperature shows no clear trend over the last century, at least not one that suggests runaway warming.

That is, until the NOAA's statisticians "adjust" the data. Using complex statistical models, they change the data to reflect not reality, but their underlying theories of global warming. That's clear from a simple fact of statistics: Data generate random errors, which cancel out over time. So by averaging data, the errors mostly disappear.

That's not what NOAA does.

According to the NOAA, the errors aren't random. They're systematic. As we noted, all of their temperature adjustments lean cooler in the distant past, and warmer in the more recent past. But they're very fuzzy about why this should be.

Far from legitimately "adjusting" anything, it appears they are cooking the data to show a politically correct trend toward global warming. Not by coincidence, that has been part and parcel of the government's underlying policies for the better part of two decades.

What NOAA does aren't niggling little changes, either.

As Tony Heller at the Real Climate Science web site notes, "Pre-2000 temperatures are progressively cooled, and post-2000 temperatures are warmed. This year has been a particularly spectacular episode of data tampering by NOAA, as they introduce nearly 2.5 degrees of fake warming since 1895."

Other stories:
https://www.sott.net/article/323047-The-coming-ice-age-Antarctic-peninsula-has-been-cooling-not-warming
https://www.sott.net/article/378727-Austrian-ski-industry-researcher-declares-every-mountain-station-in-the-Alps-shows-winters-have-gotten-colder
« Last Edit: April 06, 2018, 07:54:55 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
More anecdotal evidence NOT of global warming
« Reply #952 on: May 07, 2018, 01:08:55 PM »
http://www.startribune.com/lake-minnetonka-ice-out-ties-record-set-in-1857/481831301/

Lake Minnetonka late ice-out ties record set in 1857

Just after noon Saturday, the Freshwater Society and the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office water patrol declared ice-out on the 14,500-acre lake, the largest in the metro area. This year’s ice-out date tied May 5, 1857, for late ice-out honors.

That means roughly: coldest winter and latest spring in the Twin Cities (MN) in recorded history.  Right after the coldest summer in Rochester MN last year.  

And later next month the days will start getting shorter again...

I wonder if LA who stole our basketball team will start calling them the Icers.

I don't believe in anecdotal evidence of anything, just sick of hearing it - selectively - from the other side.
------------------------
Update:  hERE IS ONE EXAMPLE I see a minute after posting that.  Because it will be hot on one day in one place next week, a state will be unlivable by 2050.  Note to idiot experts, without you people burning fossil fuels for air conditioning, IT IS UNLIVABLE NOW for the retired people who are moving there.

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/local/as-thermometer-gets-set-to-climb-climate-experts-worry/article_635c1e7e-519f-11e8-afc2-cfc906c78ed6.html

As thermometer gets set to climb, climate experts worry  [Mesa Arizona]

As temperatures in the East Valley were predicted to hit over 100 the early part of next week, some climate researchers predict Arizona could be unlivable by 2050.

They are worried their climate change budgets will double.

If climate change is warming, why don't they call it warming?  But it's climate change if you have drought, torrential rain or extreme cold too. You can't prove them wrong, all bases are covered. We know exactly what's happening but need more money to study it.

Good f-ing grief.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 01:23:39 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Drought is not caused by global warming IF global warming is caused by fossil fuel emissions.  Combustion releases more H2O than CO2.  It is indisputable math and science.  The worry should be the opposite!
http://dogbrothers.com/phpBB2/index.php?topic=1118.msg106708#msg106708

http://www.kunc.org/post/climate-change-making-droughts-worse-western-us
Climate Change Is Making Droughts Worse In The Western U.S.
"The culprit is human-caused climate change."

https://link.springer.com/epdf/10.1007/s40641-018-0093-2?author_access_token=T1hdYfHGCFbt9ixLNLXzrPe4RwlQNchNByi7wbcMAY7RpRxd_ESwnYfHsVVpnYJ7tBUkUMF8GxzdMENKcFeDyn_cGiqu3A2_SlLGNX7o_2iI1b5DmXeW3uPLfHt9CAbRpjVOpeS_SxHCUZeJ4-nykg==


The release of H20 into the atmosphere causes drought??!!

Warmth may cause evaporation, but evaporation does not destroy water.  Like flushing a toilet or running your faucet, it merely moves it around.  Damming up a river to make a fake lake does not create water either.  Combustion actually creates water. 

The drought crisis is caused by tens of millions of over-taxed and shivering northerners (and illegal immigrants) moving to areas that lack sufficient water.

Maybe I'm biased with 130,340,400,000 gallons out my door and far more than that underneath in the ample aquifers.
https://www.lakelubbers.com/minnesota-largest-lakes-in-minnesota-volume-L34-C7/

Living away from plentiful on earth is a choice.



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Pathological Science, global warming didn't make the Hurricanes worse
« Reply #954 on: September 20, 2018, 06:51:49 AM »
https://nypost.com/2018/09/19/no-global-warming-isnt-causing-worse-hurricanes/
For the United States, the trend of all land-falling hurricanes has been falling since 1900, as has that of major hurricanes. In the 51 years from 1915, Florida and the Atlantic coast were hit by 19 major hurricanes. In the 51 years to 2016, just seven. In the last 11 years, only two hurricanes greater than category 3 hit the continental USA — a record low since 1900. From 1915 to 1926, 12 hit.
--------
But, as the Washington Post editorial board put it, Trump is complicit.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Pathological Science, New UN IPCC report is out
« Reply #955 on: October 08, 2018, 08:40:48 AM »
http://ipcc.ch/report/sr15/
How to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees C instead of 2 degrees C.

Maybe we should have a world government agency manage the temperature of the planet and all of the activities that contribute to it.  Leftist Utopia, what could possibly go wrong?

Watch for future releases of the chapters not covered in the study, such as how much warming we would have had without humans and how much of the warming is contained in the adjustments to the data.

Changing the limit from 2 degrees to 1.5 degrees will allegedly allow the oceans to rise by one tenth of one less.

If this was math or science, the professionals would include certainty level and margin of error with that type of statement.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Pathological Science, hurricane victims blamed for causing the hurricane
« Reply #956 on: October 12, 2018, 07:54:48 AM »
Man-made hurricanes. Funny that my grandpa knew about hurricanes when he bought us East Coast Florida property 75 years ago. But these victims caused this hurricane.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2018/oct/11/victims-of-hurricane-michael-voted-for-climate-deniers

Elections have consequences and professional journalists thoroughly research their topics before going to print.

Reap what we sow, "Victims of Hurricane Michael are represented by (voted for) climate deniers".

What is a "climate denier"?  Same wordsmiths who think killing your young is a "choice" and government paying your housing cost is "affordable housing".

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
Reminded of what we were told in the early 90's
« Reply #957 on: October 12, 2018, 02:22:36 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APFP1OsV02Y

Just rewatched part of this silly movie last night. Totally forgot the dire warnings we had back in the early 90's.



ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9600
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #960 on: November 09, 2018, 03:47:31 PM »
Thanks
CD

There is a lot of fudging and I suspect fraud in the medical literature and it is alarming
as with everything else there is endless studies involving data analyses
and they do these meta analyses taking multiple studies and putting them together in on big data analysis and actually come up with conclusions
the data crunchers try to mathematically correct for the different variables and these get published
and we are supposed to just believe the results.

I really don't believe most if not any of them.

Anyone can make the date come out any way they want.
some do it for the payer of their fees
some do it to make a "name" for themselves as some sort of authority on a topic
some may actually do it for money

not all researchers are crooks but a significant portion are not legit
how many are and are not I really don't know.  I could believe the 25 % estimate from this study would be a good guess.

Ironically ,
I did not renew my membership in the American College of Physicians this year # 1 because of their political correctness   #2 because many of their studies were nothing more then datan analyses of other studies and not worth the toilet paper I wipe my behind on .

They try to claim this is "best available evidence " with the data we have but that does not mean it is any good
I am tired of it.
I am getting bitter in my old age.........



« Last Edit: November 09, 2018, 03:53:31 PM by ccp »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #961 on: November 13, 2018, 10:14:04 AM »
To any unprejudiced person reading [Goklany’s] account, the facts should be obvious: that the non-climatic effects of carbon dioxide as a sustainer of wildlife and crop plants are enormously beneficial, that the possibly harmful climatic effects of carbon dioxide have been greatly exaggerated, and that the benefits clearly outweigh the possible damage.

   - Freeman Dyson, one of the world’s most eminent scientists. Dyson, a theoretical physicist and professor emeritus of Mathematical Physics and Astrophysics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, is famous among other things for unifying the three versions of quantum electrodynamics.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/11/why-wont-liberals-look-at-the-evidence-on-climate.php

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Why we call it Pathological Science
« Reply #962 on: November 15, 2018, 08:26:52 AM »
My own experience with this...

In the very early days of global warming (late 80s - early 90s?), before climate science merged with anti-capitalism and became a religion (all together now, "I Believe!"), I saw a disturbing headline about a study out of NCAR, Boulder Colorado, the National Center for Atmospheric Research (who knew we had one back then?).  Without remembering exact details, the news story made a new and bold claim about warming and human causation.  My reaction included some skepticism so I looked into it, got my hands on the entire report and read it. 

As I read through I discovered some things one step at a time.  The news story was more sensational than the actual title page of the report.  The title of the report was more sensational than the conclusion in the report.  The conclusion was more sensational than the summaries of the sections referred to in the report.  And the summaries of the sections were more sensational than the actual analysis of the data written by the scientists in the detail of the report.  In short, the news story was not backed up at all in the scientists' analysis of the data.

In 'journalism' it is known that the headlines are not written by the writers of the story.  I suddenly realized this was also true inside of so-called scientific reports.  The scientists studying this data did not write the summaries, the conclusions, the titles or the press reports.  Something else was going on.   someone was driving a narrative, not reporting data or science.  Somebody wanted that headline and worked their way backwards to pretend it was backed up in the study.  Criminal fraud IMHO.

It bothered me deeply that I discovered all that only because I invested all that time digging in thoroughly.  No one else was going to hear or know of the falsities and deception.  Others, even the scientists whose work was butchered, never spoke up or objected, apparently liking and embracing the shock appeal of the headline.  Research dollars and prestige to the work they were doing exploded with the new mission and no honest voices objected.

I like that we expose the deception and misuse of science here.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #963 on: November 15, 2018, 09:45:29 PM »
That is an interesting distinction between the researchers and the writers of the headlines and summaries.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9600
    • View Profile
from drudge
« Reply #965 on: December 27, 2018, 04:14:47 AM »
Now who else on this board nwill notice the extraordinarily distinct lack of mention of one key phrase we see nearly everywhere else in this article:

https://www.lmtonline.com/news/article/2018-will-be-the-first-year-with-no-violent-13491861.php

(Hint: " The causes for 2018′s lack of violent tornadoes are many, but one key factor is high pressure tending to be more dominant than normal throughout peak season" )

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Pathological Science, M.I.T. can taste human caused global warming
« Reply #966 on: December 27, 2018, 01:05:14 PM »
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612658/the-day-i-tasted-climate-change/

Like Russian collusion without a Russian, we have extreme damage from global warming without the warming.

I can't for the life of me find the part where they say the opinions expressed here are those of the author only. Nor can I find where they even label this bunk opinion.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2018, 01:11:16 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
First year in modern history with no violent tornadoes in the US
« Reply #967 on: December 27, 2018, 01:15:32 PM »
Now who else on this board nwill notice the extraordinarily distinct lack of mention of one key phrase we see nearly everywhere else in this article:

https://www.lmtonline.com/news/article/2018-will-be-the-first-year-with-no-violent-13491861.php

(Hint: " The causes for 2018′s lack of violent tornadoes are many, but one key factor is high pressure tending to be more dominant than normal throughout peak season" )

If it refutes global warming it is anecdotal and if it affirms it, it is proof.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
Re: First year in modern history with no violent tornadoes in the US
« Reply #968 on: December 27, 2018, 03:55:13 PM »
Now who else on this board nwill notice the extraordinarily distinct lack of mention of one key phrase we see nearly everywhere else in this article:

https://www.lmtonline.com/news/article/2018-will-be-the-first-year-with-no-violent-13491861.php

(Hint: " The causes for 2018′s lack of violent tornadoes are many, but one key factor is high pressure tending to be more dominant than normal throughout peak season" )

If it refutes global warming it is anecdotal and if it affirms it, it is proof.

That's the game.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9600
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #969 on: December 27, 2018, 04:12:18 PM »
Yes and I was thinking that if the number of tornados was going up the title and everything in the article would be global warming .

But since the count is down, one would think a good thing suddenly there is ZERO even a mention of it.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
It snowed in Vegas the other day
« Reply #970 on: December 29, 2018, 06:15:34 AM »
Global warming!



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
This makes no sense...
« Reply #973 on: January 13, 2019, 07:34:29 PM »
"Global warming is bringing ice and snow to Vegas, just like Al Gore predicted!"

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/01/08/global-warming-brings-deadly-snowfall-to-germany-and-austria/

Ski resorts in the Austrian Alps reported up to seven feet of snow in the first days of January, which lead to many resorts closing amid safety fears.
----------------
10 feet of snow in one week in places.
'Your children and grandchildren may never see snow.'     Oops.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Climate change accelerating like a “speeding freight train,”
« Reply #974 on: January 17, 2019, 08:23:05 AM »
accelerating like a “speeding freight train,” as one scientist put it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/climate/greenhouse-gas-emissions-2018.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/01/rcp-85-the-climate-change-disaster-scenario/579700/

Does a speeding freight train have high or low acceleration?  Just curious.  And what kind of 'scientist' doesn't know acceleration from velocity?

Reminds me of Al Gore and the "explicit implication".

Blah, blah blah!  For all the bunk they never tell us how much the earth has warmed in the last hundred years in unadjusted data and what part of that warming is demonstrably attributable to the cause they are suggesting.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Pathological Science, Pacific Islands not sinking
« Reply #975 on: January 18, 2019, 06:31:31 AM »
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/abc-disappearing-islands-claim-proved-false-again/news-story/3fcaf6b1187d279f06f0bcb9e794db84

http://sci-hub.tw/10.1002/wcc.557

So there is zero evidence for the ABC's claim that Kiribati is sinking, but there is plenty of evidence for the opposite - that such low-lying atoll islands are not sinking, but growing.

From a new paper by Virginie K. E. Duvat, of the Institut du Littoral et de l'Environnement, University of la Rochelle, France:

A reanalysis of available data, which cover 30 Pacific and Indian Ocean atolls including 709 islands, reveals that no atoll lost land area and that 88.6% of islands were either stable or increased in area, while only 11.4% contracted.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science, Pacific Islands not sinking
« Reply #976 on: January 19, 2019, 10:15:11 PM »
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/abc-disappearing-islands-claim-proved-false-again/news-story/3fcaf6b1187d279f06f0bcb9e794db84

http://sci-hub.tw/10.1002/wcc.557

So there is zero evidence for the ABC's claim that Kiribati is sinking, but there is plenty of evidence for the opposite - that such low-lying atoll islands are not sinking, but growing.

From a new paper by Virginie K. E. Duvat, of the Institut du Littoral et de l'Environnement, University of la Rochelle, France:

A reanalysis of available data, which cover 30 Pacific and Indian Ocean atolls including 709 islands, reveals that no atoll lost land area and that 88.6% of islands were either stable or increased in area, while only 11.4% contracted.

Any islands flipping over?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bs23CjIWMgA


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Dangerous, Record-Breaking Cold to Invade Midwest
« Reply #977 on: January 28, 2019, 07:49:15 AM »
Dangerous, Record-Breaking Cold to Invade Midwest

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2019/01/dangerous-record-breaking-cold-to-invade-midwest-chicago/
-----------------------------------------------
Record cold is an unexpected consequence of global warming. 
High of -15 with sunshine!

Accuweather Forecast this week at home:

TODAY
JAN 28
-15°F
Mostly cloudy; blowing snow
 
TUE
JAN 29
-10° /-30°
Periods of sun; frigid

WED
JAN 30
-15° /-31°
Partly sunny; bitterly cold

THU
JAN 31
-6° /-10°
Mostly cloudy; frigid

RealFeel®   Wednesday hourly
-50°
-50°
-50°
-51°
-52°
-50°
-50°
-49°

How helpful is that?  What does -52 'feel like'?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9600
    • View Profile
Doug asked : What does -52 'feel like'?
« Reply #978 on: January 28, 2019, 07:59:08 AM »
Well according to this you would be dead in less than five minutes:

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-long-can-you-stay-outside-in-cold-temperatures-2014-1

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Re: Doug asked : What does -52 'feel like'?
« Reply #979 on: January 28, 2019, 10:17:19 AM »
Well according to this you would be dead in less than five minutes:

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-long-can-you-stay-outside-in-cold-temperatures-2014-1

We have a trick to avoid that, wear clothes.  And burn fossil fuels!

What 52 Below looks like from the living room:

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
Re: Doug asked : What does -52 'feel like'?
« Reply #980 on: January 28, 2019, 01:38:56 PM »
Well according to this you would be dead in less than five minutes:

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-long-can-you-stay-outside-in-cold-temperatures-2014-1

We have a trick to avoid that, wear clothes.  And burn fossil fuels!

What 52 Below looks like from the living room:


Well, if it weren't for global warming, it would be -100!

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9600
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #981 on: January 28, 2019, 03:00:04 PM »
"We have a trick to avoid that, wear clothes.  And burn fossil fuels!"

and probably hunt for arctic animal skins!

I remember buying one of those alpaka pillows at the Disney store and within 5 minutes or putting my face on it I had sweat dripping down my neck.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9600
    • View Profile
polar vortex - eyes roll
« Reply #982 on: January 29, 2019, 08:04:03 AM »
Of course :

https://www.yahoo.com/news/science-says-used-polar-vortex-outbreaks-205751811.html

along with the phobias me too lexicon we now have to have shoved in our facies this phrase "polar vortex"   :roll:


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
Re: polar vortex - eyes roll
« Reply #983 on: January 29, 2019, 11:39:07 AM »
Of course :

https://www.yahoo.com/news/science-says-used-polar-vortex-outbreaks-205751811.html

along with the phobias me too lexicon we now have to have shoved in our facies this phrase "polar vortex"   :roll:



We have always been at war with Eastasia global warming the POLAR VORTEX!

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #984 on: January 29, 2019, 05:29:05 PM »
I gather this is the coldest it has been since 1985?

I note that now temps are reported including "wind chill" factor.  Better click bait effect?

OTOH I must say on an intuitive level I'm beginning to wonder "WTF?".

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #985 on: January 29, 2019, 06:44:23 PM »
Windchill or 'realfeel' is the temp exposed skin feels.  They do use it for shock appeal but in the very extreme weather there is a very real life and death aspect to it.  Convincing people to stay home saves lives. 

Global warming saves lives.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 47759
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #986 on: January 29, 2019, 06:55:46 PM »
I agree wind chill numbers are highly relevant.  My only point in this moment however is that, IIRC, when I was younger, the wind chill number was not the primary reported number and now it seems to be and that this heightens the perception that things are different this time.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #987 on: January 30, 2019, 06:07:41 AM »
I agree wind chill numbers are highly relevant.  My only point in this moment however is that, IIRC, when I was younger, the wind chill number was not the primary reported number and now it seems to be and that this heightens the perception that things are different this time.

Agree, same for 'heat index'.  Interesting that the extreme cold doesn't fit the preferred narrative but they can't stop themselves from dramatizing it.  

I can say from a MN perspective, people talk windchill only when it allows you to say 'below zero'.  When temp or windchill is below zero, everyone around you is experiencing something of challenge and you need to check in on your more vulnerable friends and family.

It is +44 C in Melbourne today, 111 F, and when we have extreme heat across the US, you can always find extreme cold somewhere else on the globe.  Amazing how adaptable the human body is to temperature fluctuations even if we can't handle full exposure to the real extremes.  

The deaths certain to happen from cold today are because of extremely cold weather, not global cooling.  When they report extreme heat or drought it too often gets labeled 'proof' of catastrophic, human caused global warming.  Now we find out the California wild fires were ignited by public utility failures?

-28 F and clear here this am, not figuring windchill.

Newer high efficiency furnaces, now mandated, are less reliable than older simpler types.  Condensation from the combustion process freezes in the exhaust pipes, wind blown snow clogs them from the outside and then the pressure switch shuts the furnace off and doesn't allow it to restart.  Power outages were reported over night as grid equipment fails and natural gas furnaces won't work at all without electricity.  Cell chargers go off with the power and people don't have landlines anymore.  Drive to safety but car batteries lose 70% of their power, all the old ones fail and the viscosity of motor oil can turn to sledge.  Moisture freezes in fuel lines, tires lose pressure and salt is ineffective with ice on roads.  Furnace (and car) repairmen are fully booked up, stores are closing early and shelters are full. What could possibly go wrong?

I posted the peaceful frozen lake picture to note that our extreme weather, if you are fully prepared for it, is not as bad as other things like being in a hurricane, tornado, earthquake, monsoon, forest fire or beneath a volcano.

Tell me again about half a degree per century of warming; I wish I could live long enough to fully appreciate it.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2019, 06:20:20 AM by DougMacG »


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
Global warming brings snow to Hawaii
« Reply #989 on: February 11, 2019, 12:28:53 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9600
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science
« Reply #990 on: February 11, 2019, 12:34:23 PM »
GM posted:

" http://bigislandnow.com/2019/02/10/first-time-snow-falls-at-hawaii-state-park/

Just like Al Gore predicted!"

https://www.bankrate.com/lifestyle/celebrity-money/al-gore-net-worth/

Gore is probably chasing 20 something girls around his private jet laughing hahahahahahhahahah.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming continues to make it snow in Las Vegas
« Reply #992 on: February 12, 2019, 06:43:24 AM »
https://www.reviewjournal.com/weather/las-vegas-valley-snow-comes-and-goes-leaves-cold-temps-1594556/

Yes, like they say in Antarctica with its increasing ice mass, global warming causes more snowfall because [Las Vegas?] would otherwise be too cold to snow. ??

When do they update their Orwellian misdirection and erase all previous explanations?

Global warming caused California forest fires - on every network - although 95% are human started and 2000 of them over the last 3 years were caused by utility lines.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-california-utilities-wildfires-regulators-20190128-story.html

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science, How did YOU get here?
« Reply #993 on: February 15, 2019, 09:24:04 AM »
Rep Liz Cheney to expert climate witnesses pushing for ban of the use of all fossil fuels and air travel, 'How did you get here today?'

https://dailycaller.com/2019/02/12/liz-cheney-green-new-deal-question/

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming continues to make it snow in Las Vegas
« Reply #994 on: February 17, 2019, 09:03:41 AM »
https://www.reviewjournal.com/weather/las-vegas-valley-snow-comes-and-goes-leaves-cold-temps-1594556/

Yes, like they say in Antarctica with its increasing ice mass, global warming causes more snowfall because [Las Vegas?] would otherwise be too cold to snow. ??

When do they update their Orwellian misdirection and erase all previous explanations?

Global warming caused California forest fires - on every network - although 95% are human started and 2000 of them over the last 3 years were caused by utility lines.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-california-utilities-wildfires-regulators-20190128-story.html

https://www.reviewjournal.com/weather/las-vegas-valley-may-see-more-snow-after-summerlin-flurries-1598808/

More global warming snowstorms hit Vegas.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 16944
    • View Profile
Re: Global warming continues to make it snow in Las Vegas
« Reply #995 on: February 18, 2019, 01:56:15 AM »
https://www.reviewjournal.com/weather/las-vegas-valley-snow-comes-and-goes-leaves-cold-temps-1594556/

Yes, like they say in Antarctica with its increasing ice mass, global warming causes more snowfall because [Las Vegas?] would otherwise be too cold to snow. ??

When do they update their Orwellian misdirection and erase all previous explanations?

Global warming caused California forest fires - on every network - although 95% are human started and 2000 of them over the last 3 years were caused by utility lines.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-california-utilities-wildfires-regulators-20190128-story.html

https://www.reviewjournal.com/weather/las-vegas-valley-may-see-more-snow-after-summerlin-flurries-1598808/

More global warming snowstorms hit Vegas.

https://www.reviewjournal.com/weather/las-vegas-snow-blankets-parts-of-valley-more-coming-overnight-1599300/


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science: WHEN DOES IT END?
« Reply #996 on: March 26, 2019, 08:40:10 PM »
I'm trying to make some plans here but I can't figure out how many years we have left now.

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/319399/

In 1989 we had 10 years left:
https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0
A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.
Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of “eco- refugees,” threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.
He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.
—AP, June 29, 1989.


[Note that only governments can do it.]

In 2006 we had 10 years left:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14834318/ns/us_news-environment/t/warming-expert-only-decade-left-act-time/

In 2009 we had 4 years left:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/jan/18/jim-hansen-obama

In 2018 we had 10 years left:


[Big break, net gain of 15 years there.]

In 2019, we are up to 12 years left:
https://news.grabien.com/story-ocasio-cortez-millennials-were-world-going-end-12-years-if-w
[One year went by and we gained two for a net gain of three additional.]

Am I taking them too literally here?  If the world like ends, did it end or not end?

And their main complaint with Trump is that he is inaccurate and imprecise!
---------------
58% of millennials believe this is the most stressful time to be alive, ever! 
Is it global warming?  Nope.
Of the very top stressers affecting an entire generation, experiencing slow wifi is number 6, not having your cell phone charger is number 10.  Global warming and fear of getting raped on campus do not make the top 16. 
https://www.theblaze.com/glenn-radio/millennials-say-life-today-is-more-stressful-than-ever-before-here-are-their-top-16-reasons

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Anthropogenic Continental Drift
« Reply #997 on: April 07, 2019, 03:01:23 PM »
I'm still worried about dihydrogen monoxide and now this:

http://thepeoplescube.com/current-truth/anthropogenic-continental-drift-an-incoherent-truth-t1668.html

Industrial Nations Threaten Globe Again

A new menace to the planet has been discovered and validated by a consensus of politically reliable scientists: Anthropogenic Continental Drift (ACD) will result in catastrophic damage and untold suffering, unless immediate indemnity payments from the United Sates, Europe, and Australia be made to the governments of non-industrial nations, to counteract this man-made threat to the world's habitats.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Re: Pathological Science, Winter storm in spring
« Reply #998 on: April 12, 2019, 11:51:31 AM »
Day three of major winter snowstorm blanketing the midwest - in mid-April!. 
http://www.startribune.com/recovery-is-name-of-the-game-on-day-3-of-major-snowstorm/508482702/
Why?  Weather, random occurrence.

If this was record warming the story is climate change and global warming.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1116443502689255424

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11281
    • View Profile
Pathological Science, Bret Stephens Climate Uncertainty NYT
« Reply #999 on: April 24, 2019, 08:01:53 AM »
Mentioned on radio yesterday, I thought I would capture this column on the forum.  Stephens, an anti-Trumper, was hired away from WSJ by the NYT and this was his first column, causing liberals to cancel their all liberal all the time subscriptions.  [I hope the leftists leaving didn't miss the Pulitzer winning 10 articles of fake news on Russian collusion.]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/28/opinion/climate-of-complete-certainty.html

Climate of Complete Certainty
By Bret Stephens
April 28, 2017

When someone is honestly 55 percent right, that’s very good and there’s no use wrangling. And if someone is 60 percent right, it’s wonderful, it’s great luck, and let him thank God.

But what’s to be said about 75 percent right? Wise people say this is suspicious. Well, and what about 100 percent right? Whoever says he’s 100 percent right is a fanatic, a thug, and the worst kind of rascal.

— An old Jew of Galicia

In the final stretch of last year’s presidential race, Hillary Clinton and her team thought they were, if not 100 percent right, then very close.

Right on the merits. Confident in their methods. Sure of their chances. When Bill Clinton suggested to his wife’s advisers that, considering Brexit, they might be underestimating the strength of the populist tide, the campaign manager, Robby Mook, had a bulletproof answer: The data run counter to your anecdotes.

That detail comes from “Shattered,” Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes’s compulsively readable account of Clinton’s 2016 train wreck. Mook belonged to a new breed of political technologists with little time for retail campaigning and limitless faith in the power of models and algorithms to minimize uncertainty and all but predict the future.

“Mook and his ‘Moneyball’ approach to politics rankled the old order of political operatives and consultants because it made some of their work obsolete,” Allen and Parnes write about the campaign’s final days. “The memo that one Hillary adviser had sent months earlier warning that they should add three or four points to Trump’s poll position was a distant memory.”

There’s a lesson here. We live in a world in which data convey authority. But authority has a way of descending to certitude, and certitude begets hubris. From Robert McNamara to Lehman Brothers to Stronger Together, cautionary tales abound.

We ought to know this by now, but we don’t. Instead, we respond to the inherent uncertainties of data by adding more data without revisiting our assumptions, creating an impression of certainty that can be lulling, misleading and often dangerous. Ask Clinton.

With me so far? Good. Let’s turn to climate change.

Last October, the Pew Research Center published a survey on the politics of climate change. Among its findings: Just 36 percent of Americans care “a great deal” about the subject. Despite 30 years of efforts by scientists, politicians and activists to raise the alarm, nearly two-thirds of Americans are either indifferent to or only somewhat bothered by the prospect of planetary calamity.

Why? The science is settled. The threat is clear. Isn’t this one instance, at least, where 100 percent of the truth resides on one side of the argument?

Well, not entirely. As Andrew Revkin wrote last year about his storied career as an environmental reporter at The Times, “I saw a widening gap between what scientists had been learning about global warming and what advocates were claiming as they pushed ever harder to pass climate legislation.” The science was generally scrupulous. The boosters who claimed its authority weren’t.

Anyone who has read the 2014 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change knows that, while the modest (0.85 degrees Celsius, or about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit) warming of the earth since 1880 is indisputable, as is the human influence on that warming, much else that passes as accepted fact is really a matter of probabilities. That’s especially true of the sophisticated but fallible models and simulations by which scientists attempt to peer into the climate future. To say this isn’t to deny science. It’s to acknowledge it honestly.

By now I can almost hear the heads exploding. They shouldn’t, because there’s another lesson here — this one for anyone who wants to advance the cause of good climate policy. As Revkin wisely noted, hyperbole about climate “not only didn’t fit the science at the time but could even be counterproductive if the hope was to engage a distracted public.”

Let me put it another way. Claiming total certainty about the science traduces the spirit of science and creates openings for doubt whenever a climate claim proves wrong. Demanding abrupt and expensive changes in public policy raises fair questions about ideological intentions. Censoriously asserting one’s moral superiority and treating skeptics as imbeciles and deplorables wins few converts.

None of this is to deny climate change or the possible severity of its consequences. But ordinary citizens also have a right to be skeptical of an overweening scientism. They know — as all environmentalists should — that history is littered with the human wreckage of scientific errors married to political power.

I’ve taken the epigraph for this column from the Polish poet Czeslaw Milosz, who knew something about the evils of certitude. Perhaps if there had been less certitude and more second-guessing in Clinton’s campaign, she’d be president. Perhaps if there were less certitude about our climate future, more Americans would be interested in having a reasoned conversation about it.
----------------
Cancellations link:
https://twitter.com/search?q=%23showyourcancellation&src=typd