| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do hacked e-mails show global-warming fraud? |
| Yes |
|
43% |
[ 19 ] |
| No |
|
56% |
[ 25 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 44 |
|
| Author |
Message |
drizek
n00b
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 32
Location: Believe in America
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:10 am Post subject: |
 |
|
You are right that we can learn from history, and that is usually where I look first. Throughout history I can see that government run health care has been effective, I have seen that stimulus does improve the economy and I have seen that every once in a while we get a president that can actually do great things that are genuinely positive.
_________________
Stand With Mittens |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Old School
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 230
Location: The Covered Bridge Capital of Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 1:41 pm Post subject: [plbe] Climategate |
|
|
Climategate
Hiding evidence
_________________
I am not young enough to know everything.
- Oscar Wilde |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
notageek
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 77
Location: Bangalore, India
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 15989
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:12 pm Post subject: Re: [plbe] Climategate |
|
|
Looks like a dupe to me.
_________________
Safety is my gaol.
US Constitution | Amendments |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Old School
Apprentice
Joined: 20 Nov 2004
Posts: 230
Location: The Covered Bridge Capital of Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:22 pm Post subject: Re: [plbe] Climategate |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | Looks like a dupe to me. |
Thanks pjp.
_________________
I am not young enough to know everything.
- Oscar Wilde |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rtomek
Apprentice
Joined: 05 Jan 2007
Posts: 209
Location: Chicago
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | why is it that it's only americans who argue against scientifically proven global warming? |
You might want to look up the meaning of "Scientifically". Please, for example, explain the growth of the polar ice caps and the cooling we've had since 1998 and make that fit into the "warming" concept. If that can be done, then please explain how all of this is caused by humans and can be fixed by humans. I'd love to see how the human race will stop all volcanic eruptions and plant decay (CO2 levels that make a fleet of SUVs seem like windmills). |
Oh man, limbaugh talked about this once (now all the repubs use it as evidence), it was refuted in like 30 seconds but non of the limbots listened. He's taking the area of ice from both poles added together, and at one specific time point, and comparing it to the area of ice at another single specific time point. Look at the graphs and the amount of variation of the area of each ice cap (not both added together) and you'll see that one year does not constitute a sudden huge growth. Specifically, look at the north pole. The amount of ice at the same point each summer is drastically shrinking. The fear is that if it does hit 0 one summer, that it's harder for ice to grow on its own in the winter than it is for it to grow around a cap that already exists.
Go to a geology conference, or do a google scholar search, you will not find any scientific evidence anywhere or anyone that actually believes that the polar ice caps are growing. Only Limbaugh and his listeners believe that horse shit. That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Believe whatever you want to believe. With all of the conclusions now in total disarray (check out the utterly unscientific methods here), there is no reason to believe the IPCC at all.
Never trust anyone who wants to put more controls over your life, especially when it has been exposed just how political their "science" really is.
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rtomek
Apprentice
Joined: 05 Jan 2007
Posts: 209
Location: Chicago
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | Believe whatever you want to believe. With all of the conclusions now in total disarray (check out the utterly unscientific methods here), there is no reason to believe the IPCC at all.
Never trust anyone who wants to put more controls over your life, especially when it has been exposed just how political their "science" really is. |
all? Since when does one university control all scientific evidence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rtomek wrote: | | Chopinzee wrote: | Believe whatever you want to believe. With all of the conclusions now in total disarray (check out the utterly unscientific methods here), there is no reason to believe the IPCC at all.
Never trust anyone who wants to put more controls over your life, especially when it has been exposed just how political their "science" really is. |
all? Since when does one university control all scientific evidence? |
The data has been shown to have been manipulated for political reasons. Many studies that didn't "tow the line" were ignored. Seeing how they changed the definition of peer reviewed to only include studies that were within their own control shows how devious this entire thing is.
Again, believe whatever you want to believe, I'm just not that credulous.
| Quote: | | “This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board…What do others think?” |
 Really trustworthy
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rtomek
Apprentice
Joined: 05 Jan 2007
Posts: 209
Location: Chicago
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| did you personally read the emails and the articles that were published. Were the articles that were published proving anything that was that major of consequence? I like how you take cherry picked quotes out of context, that are part of a larger email that are part of a larger discussion that OBVIOUSLY have been picked for political reasons stronger than scientific evidence that goes WAY beyond the scope of just average global temperature. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cach0rr0
Moderator
Joined: 13 Nov 2008
Posts: 3847
Location: Houston, Republic of Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
*yawn*
another "discovery" by those looking to make a name for themselves, feel important, etc. both camps.
30 years from now this entire discussion will be laughed at, and most likely scientists on both sides laughed at.
Do not give a shit. Going to go hop in my SUV, crank the 5.7L engine up, and maybe just go sit somewhere and idle - just because I can, and none of you can do a damn thing about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | Believe whatever you want to believe. With all of the conclusions now in total disarray (check out the utterly unscientific methods here), there is no reason to believe the IPCC at all.
Never trust anyone who wants to put more controls over your life, especially when it has been exposed just how political their "science" really is. |
remember, IPCC meets every 4 years and has no agenda. They don't make money and there is nothing to gain from their reporting. They use data from tens-of-thousands of scientists at thousands of universities and scientific institutions. They report on their findings over the past 4 years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cokehabit wrote: | | remember, IPCC meets every 4 years and has no agenda. . |
Remember, I have a bridge for sale.
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cokehabit
Advocate
Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3302
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | remember, IPCC meets every 4 years and has no agenda. . |
Remember, I have a bridge for sale. |
is that london bridge that an american bought thinking it was tower bridge? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1269
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 11:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| shash wrote: | | I believe this refers to one aberrant dataset, which didn't show warming while the others did. They weren't able to correlate that dataset, so they decided not to use it. |
| shash wrote: | | Really, there's nothing "alarming" in this. If it's a nail in any coffin, it's in the coffin of denialism. |
Those statements sound like bullshit to me.
Really, you sound much more like an ideologue intent on minimizing his personal cognitive dissonance than someone interesting in the truth. I see no basis for the first claim, and the second is pure hyperbole. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1269
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cokehabit wrote: | | Chopinzee wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | remember, IPCC meets every 4 years and has no agenda. . |
Remember, I have a bridge for sale. |
is that london bridge that an american bought thinking it was tower bridge? |
Yeah, right after the Moon turned to cheese.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tylerwylie
Guru
Joined: 19 Sep 2004
Posts: 455
Location: /US/Illinois/Champaign
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drizek wrote: | | You are right that we can learn from history, and that is usually where I look first. Throughout history I can see that government run health care has been effective, I have seen that stimulus does improve the economy and I have seen that every once in a while we get a president that can actually do great things that are genuinely positive. |
<twitches>
_________________
POLITICS, n. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drizek
n00b
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 32
Location: Believe in America
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tylerwylie wrote: | | drizek wrote: | | You are right that we can learn from history, and that is usually where I look first. Throughout history I can see that government run health care has been effective, I have seen that stimulus does improve the economy and I have seen that every once in a while we get a president that can actually do great things that are genuinely positive. |
<twitches> |
Is that the sound your brain makes when something new goes in?
I hope so.
_________________
Stand With Mittens |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muso
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 654
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tylerwylie wrote: | | drizek wrote: | | You are right that we can learn from history, and that is usually where I look first. Throughout history I can see that government run health care has been effective, I have seen that stimulus does improve the economy and I have seen that every once in a while we get a president that can actually do great things that are genuinely positive. |
<twitches> |
Especially when history has shown that all of the major depressions in US history corrected themselves quickly without "stimulus". The Great Depression became great because of government interference. First Hoover started down a stupid path that prolonged it, and the FDR tripled down on Hoover's policies and made it much worse. We didn't even get out of that one until the 1950s.
_________________
| ichbinsisyphos wrote: | | You know, personally I've never been the greatest fan of Negroes |
The Philosophy of Liberty |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tylerwylie
Guru
Joined: 19 Sep 2004
Posts: 455
Location: /US/Illinois/Champaign
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drizek wrote: | | tylerwylie wrote: | | drizek wrote: | | You are right that we can learn from history, and that is usually where I look first. Throughout history I can see that government run health care has been effective, I have seen that stimulus does improve the economy and I have seen that every once in a while we get a president that can actually do great things that are genuinely positive. |
<twitches> |
Is that the sound your brain makes when something new goes in?
I hope so. |
Read chop's post.
_________________
POLITICS, n. A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1269
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| drizek wrote: | | You are right that we can learn from history, and that is usually where I look first. Throughout history I can see that government run health care has been effective, I have seen that stimulus does improve the economy and I have seen that every once in a while we get a president that can actually do great things that are genuinely positive. |
Such as?
Latest:
Right Direction 37.7
Wrong Track 57.2
Spread -19.5
Nice picture for you:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drizek
n00b
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 32
Location: Believe in America
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
I prefer looking at that graph with the breakdown according to region. He is only unpopular in the areas that didn't vote for him in the first place, it is just that those people turned the crazy up to 11 in the past few months. Most other Americans are still on board.
_________________
Stand With Mittens |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
warpasaurusREX
Apprentice
Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 215
Location: Midwest, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cokehabit wrote: | | Chopinzee wrote: | Believe whatever you want to believe. With all of the conclusions now in total disarray (check out the utterly unscientific methods here), there is no reason to believe the IPCC at all.
Never trust anyone who wants to put more controls over your life, especially when it has been exposed just how political their "science" really is. |
remember, IPCC meets every 4 years and has no agenda. They don't make money and there is nothing to gain from their reporting. They use data from tens-of-thousands of scientists at thousands of universities and scientific institutions. They report on their findings over the past 4 years. |
The problem isn't necessarily with the IPCC. Currently, the US government pays big bucks for climate research. Coming for a statistical background, it is RIDICULOUSLY easy to manipulate climate data to say pretty much whatever the hell you want. That's why we have morons running around showing how the earth is actually cooling... if you run a linear regression on time series data from 1998/99, which makes absolutely no sense, even though it's true.
But if there wasn't a problem with climate change, then it might be difficult to acquire funding, wouldn't it? In my department, we try to include some sort connection to climate change in nearly every grant application because it's a sure-fire way to actually receive funding, i.e. how the global downturn will reduce greenhouse gases and slow down global climate change, or how greenhouse gases increase medical costs associated with asthmatics. If the hysteria goes away, so does the money. Everyone in academia knows this. Prolonging the climate change debate is money in the bank, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
_________________
Help the unanswered
Please add [solved] to the subject line if your problem is solved.
www.warpasaurusrex.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rtomek
Apprentice
Joined: 05 Jan 2007
Posts: 209
Location: Chicago
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| warpasaurusREX wrote: | | cokehabit wrote: | | Chopinzee wrote: | Believe whatever you want to believe. With all of the conclusions now in total disarray (check out the utterly unscientific methods here), there is no reason to believe the IPCC at all.
Never trust anyone who wants to put more controls over your life, especially when it has been exposed just how political their "science" really is. |
remember, IPCC meets every 4 years and has no agenda. They don't make money and there is nothing to gain from their reporting. They use data from tens-of-thousands of scientists at thousands of universities and scientific institutions. They report on their findings over the past 4 years. |
The problem isn't necessarily with the IPCC. Currently, the US government pays big bucks for climate research. Coming for a statistical background, it is RIDICULOUSLY easy to manipulate climate data to say pretty much whatever the hell you want. That's why we have morons running around showing how the earth is actually cooling... if you run a linear regression on time series data from 1998/99, which makes absolutely no sense, even though it's true.
But if there wasn't a problem with climate change, then it might be difficult to acquire funding, wouldn't it? In my department, we try to include some sort connection to climate change in nearly every grant application because it's a sure-fire way to actually receive funding, i.e. how the global downturn will reduce greenhouse gases and slow down global climate change, or how greenhouse gases increase medical costs associated with asthmatics. If the hysteria goes away, so does the money. Everyone in academia knows this. Prolonging the climate change debate is money in the bank, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. |
Anyone who really thinks that way should be fired for ethical violations. If you're a PhD researcher, you should have the ability to do research in many different fields, not be forced to your one place. If you are stuck in one field, then hope for tenure or expect to have a hard time finding another job. Research moves where the money is, yes, but they don't keep the money there with bullshit publications in some huge collaborative effort.
Yes, you can make statistics say anything if you go on a fishing trip, but at that point, you lose all your statistical backing because your p-value will rocket sky-high. If you attempt two or three different things on your data and find statistical significance, it's good stuff. If you ignore the fact that you went on a fishing trip to find something with a p-value barely under .05 well then you need to find a new field... I think the tobacco companies are hiring |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
warpasaurusREX
Apprentice
Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 215
Location: Midwest, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rtomek wrote: | | warpasaurusREX wrote: | | If the hysteria goes away, so does the money. Everyone in academia knows this. Prolonging the climate change debate is money in the bank, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. |
Anyone who really thinks that way should be fired for ethical violations. If you're a PhD researcher, you should have the ability to do research in many different fields, not be forced to your one place. If you are stuck in one field, then hope for tenure or expect to have a hard time finding another job. Research moves where the money is, yes, but they don't keep the money there with bullshit publications in some huge collaborative effort. |
I'm going to have to stop you right there. This entire thread started with evidence contradicting exactly what you just said. The green movement is a multi-billion dollar per year industry, and there's no way in hell it will go away quietly.
| rtomek wrote: | | Yes, you can make statistics say anything if you go on a fishing trip, but at that point, you lose all your statistical backing because your p-value will rocket sky-high. If you attempt two or three different things on your data and find statistical significance, it's good stuff. If you ignore the fact that you went on a fishing trip to find something with a p-value barely under .05 well then you need to find a new field... I think the tobacco companies are hiring |
You'd be surprised. You can get really low p-values even when you look at something absurd, like temperatures affecting the length of day in Alaska. As temperatures go down, the day shortens, and when temperatures go up, the day lengthens. Absurd? Obviously, but your p-value is probably still statistically significant. You can pat yourself on the back all you want about how low your p-value is, but that doesn't mean your theory isn't garbage.
_________________
Help the unanswered
Please add [solved] to the subject line if your problem is solved.
www.warpasaurusrex.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
