Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Page 5 of 24 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 239
  1. #41
    IncGamers Member Qveasd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Moscow
    Posts
    1,326

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    Quote Originally Posted by krischan View Post
    Is there a kind of Google search where you can upload a picture?
    No, but there are helpful numbers on this one. And a prisoner.



  2. #42
    Europe Trade Moderator krischan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Hamburg, Germany
    Posts
    33,219

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    Quote Originally Posted by BobCox2 View Post
    That link won't help about how to ask the right question. You confused that with the Hitchhiker's Guide.

    Quote Originally Posted by Qveasd View Post
    No, but there are helpful numbers on this one. And a prisoner.
    That helped.

    *slaps own head*



    D3 Trading Forums: Europe - America
    Diablo Wiki / Arreat Summit / ATMA / Forum Rules / Adria
    You know I'm born to lose / and gambling is for fools / but that's the way I like it, baby / I don't want to live forever!

  3. #43
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    Quote Originally Posted by vdzele View Post
    Btw, no one still got it right who is on my tar
    Sure we did. I said that I had <forgotten>, and for some reason was thinking it was Vanzetti. However, the real individual isn't so apropos to Global Warming as he is to American health care, welfare, or social security. GW and particularly AGW are outright fraud - even though GW has occurred (and will again, and will actually destroy the planet at a future date) it doesn't have to do with... what he is known for.

    Anyone who didn't recognize the IPCC as an international put-up job hadn't done their research. The group was filled with watermelons and some of them admitted their bias at the onset. There was even an episode regarding Kyoto where they snickered about turning off the A/C during Congressional testimony.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    I'd like someone to explain to me what exactly they mean by "bias" (Hopefully, it's more than "holds the opposite opinion"). I was very much anti-GW theory for quite a while. Only in the last year or so did I decide there was enough evidence to switch camps.
    It means that you're so convinced that you're unwilling to consider contrary claims, which you appear to do. It doesn't mean that you can't still get smacked with a 2' x 4', but that you have decided that "the science is settled" when it isn't.

    AGW in particular is a house of cards, and this fraud pretty much destroys the claim (as the causal link from CO2 to increased temps was never established with any legitimacy). Correlation is not causation, yet that's precisely what these frauds have claimed - and then demanded socioeconomic changes which won't make much difference. Incandescent light bulbs?

    EDIT - at least one of the AGW leaders, moonbat Monbiot, has recognized that his cause is in deep trouble - in no small part due to the poo-poohing of illegality and fraud.

    EDIT 2 - it also was worthwhile researching the University of East Anglia - apparently it was established by those on the left in a method akin to what in the U.S. would be a private "liberal arts" college, and then put on the public dime by the Labour party.

    EDIT 3 - The computer models redux. And redux some more. And apparently they can't even predict the past accurately.

    EDIT 3a - The BBC smothered the story.

    EDIT 3b - Another of the apparent IPCC climate models is unsupported - and guess where the guy learned the trade?

    EDIT 4 - JunkScience.com has posted the complete set, as well as a link to a search engine at another site. It also asserts that this wasn't a case of the site being cracked, but that the data seems to have been in preparation for a FOIA request that was never published... I wonder why?



    Last edited by jmervyn; 27-11-2009 at 19:17. Reason: Wow. The gift that keeps on giving.

  4. #44

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    It means that you're so convinced that you're unwilling to consider contrary claims, which you appear to do.
    The fact that I've been scouring the net for details on this story since it broke seems to point to the contrary. If I had just said "Nah, I didn't read the emails, but I don't have to because GW is real and anyone who doesn't believe is being paid by big oil" then you would have a point.

    If I look at the same set of facts as you and come to a different conclusion, it doesn't mean I'm ignoring the facts. It means we disagree. The inability of people to grasp that particular truth is at the root of so much unnecessary hostility . . .
    you have decided that "the science is settled" when it isn't.
    Of course it isn't settled. I believe there are enough facts out there currently to throw my lot in with the GW crowd. If someone comes along and turns it all on its head tomorrow, I'll be there.

    EDIT:

    This post hits the nail on the head, I think.

    RE-EDIT:

    And interestingly enough, data and code. Unfortunately, while it looks like a lot to me, I have no idea what (if anything) is missing from the list. I'll have to wait for some analysis to appear, I guess.



    Last edited by SaroDarksbane; 29-11-2009 at 04:45.
    ------------------------------------------
    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

  5. #45
    IncGamers Member vdzele's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    2,482

    Re: Global WarmingGate






  6. #46
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    I may have found why VD considers the tie-in to his avatar comes into play here... specifically the efforts of Ken Lay with Al Gore to set up carbon credits. I still don't know if it's really an accurate use of the contemporary sense of the term.






  7. #47
    IncGamers Member BobCox2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UnderYourDoorMat
    BattleTag What Me Worry?
    Posts
    10,825

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    Who cares if the shoe fit's, can they sell it?



  8. #48
    IncGamers Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    australia
    Posts
    49

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    Quote:
    The New Zealand Government’s chief climate advisory unit NIWA is under fire for allegedly massaging raw climate data to show a global warming trend that wasn’t there.

    The scandal breaks as fears grow worldwide that corruption of climate science is not confined to just Britain’s CRU climate research centre.

    In New Zealand’s case, the figures published on NIWA’s [the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric research] website suggest a strong warming trend in New Zealand over the past century: (graph)
    The caption to the photo on the NiWA site reads:

    From NIWA’s web site — Figure 7: Mean annual temperature over New Zealand, from 1853 to 2008 inclusive, based on between 2 (from 1853) and 7 (from 1908) long-term station records. The blue and red bars show annual differences from the 1971 – 2000 average, the solid black line is a smoothed time series, and the dotted [straight] line is the linear trend over 1909 to 2008 (0.92°C/100 years).

    But analysis of the raw climate data from the same temperature stations has just turned up a very different result: (graph)

    Gone is the relentless rising temperature trend, and instead there appears to have been a much smaller growth in warming, consistent with the warming up of the planet after the end of the Little Ice Age in 1850.

    The revelations are published today in a news alert from The Climate Science Coalition of NZ:

    Straight away you can see there’s no slope—either up or down. The temperatures are remarkably constant way back to the 1850s. Of course, the temperature still varies from year to year, but the trend stays level—statistically insignificant at 0.06°C per century since 1850.

    Putting these two graphs side by side, you can see huge differences. What is going on?

    Why does NIWA’s graph show strong warming, but graphing their own raw data looks completely different? Their graph shows warming, but the actual temperature readings show none whatsoever!

    Have the readings in the official NIWA graph been adjusted?

    It is relatively easy to find out. We compared raw data for each station (from NIWA’s web site) with the adjusted official data, which we obtained from one of Dr Salinger’s colleagues.

    Requests for this information from Dr Salinger himself over the years, by different scientists, have long gone unanswered, but now we might discover the truth.

    What did we find? First, the station histories are unremarkable. There are no reasons for any large corrections. But we were astonished to find that strong adjustments have indeed been made.

    About half the adjustments actually created a warming trend where none existed; the other half greatly exaggerated existing warming. All the adjustments increased or even created a warming trend, with only one (Dunedin) going the other way and slightly reducing the original trend.

    The shocking truth is that the oldest readings have been cranked way down and later readings artificially lifted to give a false impression of warming, as documented below. There is nothing in the station histories to warrant these adjustments and to date Dr Salinger and NIWA have not revealed why they did this.

    One station, Hokitika, had its early temperatures reduced by a huge 1.3°C, creating strong warming from a mild cooling, yet there’s no apparent reason for it.

    We have discovered that the warming in New Zealand over the past 156 years was indeed man-made, but it had nothing to do with emissions of CO2—it was created by man-made adjustments of the temperature. It’s a disgrace.

    NIWA claim their official graph reveals a rising trend of 0.92ºC per century, which means (they claim) we warmed more than the rest of the globe, for according to the IPCC, global warming over the 20th century was only about 0.6°C.

    NIWA’s David Wratt has told Investigate magazine this afternoon his organization denies faking temperature data and he claims NIWA has a good explanation for adjusting the temperature data upward. Wratt says NIWA is drafting a media response for release later this afternoon which will explain why they altered the raw data.

    “Do you agree it might look bad in the wake of the CRU scandal?”

    “No, no,” replied Wratt before hitting out at the Climate Science Coalition and accusing them of “misleading” people about the temperature adjustments.

    Manipulation of raw data is at the heart of recent claims of corrupt scientific practice in climate science, with CRU’s Phil Jones recently claiming old temperature records collected by his organization were “destroyed” or “lost”, meaning researchers can now only access manipulated data.




  9. #49
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,937

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    The fact that I've been scouring the net for details on this story since it broke seems to point to the contrary.
    What you do on your personal computer is of no relevance to me. I've furnished any number of links between the two threads on the respective OTF's.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    The inability of people to grasp that particular truth is at the root of so much unnecessary hostility . . .
    Sorry, but that's not the case. Of <COURSE> people such as myself get hostile when Bill Clinton gets away with talking about what 'is' is, while all & sundry scream to the heavens about how Bush is a liar for making factually correct statements.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    Of course it isn't settled. I believe there are enough facts out there currently to throw my lot in with the GW crowd. If someone comes along and turns it all on its head tomorrow, I'll be there.
    Waiting...
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    This post hits the nail on the head, I think.
    It's good, but some of these are better.
    Quote Originally Posted by SaroDarksbane View Post
    And interestingly enough, data and code. Unfortunately, while it looks like a lot to me, I have no idea what (if anything) is missing from the list. I'll have to wait for some analysis to appear, I guess.
    Does this help? This component of the 'trick' is pretty blatant.




  10. #50

    Re: Global WarmingGate

    @Mowerman:

    The NZ scientists involved have responded that the data used had been taken from various sensors that had been moved (or replaced) over time at different altitudes and locations, and that's where the "adjustments" came from.
    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    What you do on your personal computer is of no relevance to me. I've furnished any number of links between the two threads on the respective OTF's.
    Your claim is that I am biased because I am ignoring the evidence. Since I have read every (yes, every) link you have posted thus far, your claim is wrong. I am not ignoring the evidence, I simply disagree with your conclusions.

    (Oddly enough, when I posted a link to a rebuttal, you dismissed it out of hand as the work of a fraud. If dismissing evidence is your gold-standard of bias, you might have an honest look at yourself.)
    Does this help? This component of the 'trick' is pretty blatant.
    Read it already. Unless they can explain (A) why the "divergence" occurred, and (B) how they are certain that whatever causes the divergence never happened before 1960, I think the tree ring data should be tossed, honestly.

    I don't see what that has to do with the mound of data referenced in my link, though.
    Waiting...
    What kind of study/data would you accept as valid evidence?



    ------------------------------------------
    "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •