Opps that’s from 2005.
Comment on IPCC and treatment of uncertainties by ordvic
↧
↧
Comment on IPCC and treatment of uncertainties by Michael
Brilliant paper;
Bottom line- we need to work towards consensus.
OK.
↧
Comment on IPCC and treatment of uncertainties by NikFromNYC
Learn to say no; it will be of more use to you than to be able to read Latin. – Charles Haddon Spurgeon
What is time but others’ expectations of us? That game we can refuse to play. – Joyce Carol Oates (“Blonde” 2000)
What is a rebel? A man who says no. – Albert Camus (“The Rebel” 1953)
The average American cannot say no. This is why he is average. – Roy H. Williams (“The Wizard of Ads” 1999)
If you keep your mind sufficiently open, people will throw a lot of rubbish into it. – William A. Orton
The eye of the painter is a battle field, and at the same time an idyllic prairie. Certain images, in fact, shock the eye while others caress it, some nourish it and others denutrify it, and so on. Consequently, if you wish to make your eye vibrate happily, remembering that your eye will be ceaselessly engaged in choosing, in struggling for holy unity, which is your holy unity, you must treat it with very special care…. You should surround yourself with a prison for your eye. For nothing is more harmful to it than the freedom to see everything, to attempt to embrace everything, to want to admire everything all at once. But the prison which I advise for you eye must be mobile, transparent, and its flying bars aerial and tiny. – Salvador Dali (“50 Secrets Of Magic Craftsmanship” 1948)
He who controls your eyes controls your mind. – Timothy Leary
The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thy eye be evil, they whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great isthat darkness. – Jesus of Nazareth (“The Bible”)
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by ClimateGuy
Jan Perlwitz wrote
“You do this to “prove” that the trend was Zero, i.e. that there was a “pause”. You confirm what you assumed. This isn’t just cherry picking of data, it’s also circular reasoning.”
Jan, you prove your critical thinking is flawed. Circular reasoning is such:
“”A is true because B is true; B is true because A is true.”
You prove to yourself that no circular reasoning was used when you say that Corey searched back and found “a time period for which the trend estimate was Zero”.
The trend of zero is the evidence used to say A is true. Therefore not circular reasoning, since he found evidence to say that A is true. If he could not find that evidence, then proposition A would be false.
Circular reasoning would be this:
“That there is a pause is true, because the trend is flat is true.
The trend is flat is true because that there is a pause is true.”.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by WebHubTelescope (@WHUT)
Springfield for GISS matches Springfield for BEST.
I have no idea how Brandon Shollenberger messed it up, but he did.
Anybody can do the comparison, except for him.
↧
↧
Comment on IPCC and treatment of uncertainties by David in Cal
I have dealt with this sort of thing as a casualty actuary. In the case of climate, I see the following sources of uncertainty:
1. The original data may be somewhat inaccurate.
2. Adjustments made to the original data may be inaccurate.
3. The model may be wrong.
4. Parameters for the model may be wrong.
5. Just by randomness, the actual results for a future period may differ from the model.
6. Conditions in the future may be different from what they were in the past. Thus a model based on the past may not be right for the future.
Numbers (4) and (5) might be subject to mathematical calculation. The others would be purely judgmental. I think a reasonable assessment combining each of these sources of uncertainty or error would produce an enormous error range.
↧
Comment on Phunny Physics by Mairi
WebHubTelescope (@WHUT) | July 6, 2014 at 4:29 pm |
It’s strange that any discussion with a contrarian about climate science invariably ends up being about economics. Why is that?— There’s Physics (@theresphysics) July 4, 2014
Not strange at all – he who pays the scientist calls the tune.
Governments are always looking for more reasons to tax and control us, and governments are the ones that finance climate science. So they selectively pick the science that supports their objectives.
Since this point is doggedly avoided in order to reinforce the deceit, and so give this skewed science the false image of dispassioned objectivity, it needs frequent restatement by those actually interested in getting to the truth.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by WebHubTelescope (@WHUT)
ClimateGuy | July 11, 2014 at 9:30 pm | said
<blockquote>
“Confess your crimes!”
…sounds like a Scientologist.
</blockquote>
Note how he places in quotes something that no one said in this thread, but is commonly heard during the London Dungeons tour. That's real journalistic integrity right there.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Brandon Shollenberger
This is priceless. I specifically explained what WebHubTelescope did wrong, comparing city level records when I compared gridded data, and yet, he promptly follows up with:
Springfield for GISS matches Springfield for BEST.
I have no idea how Brandon Shollenberger messed it up, but he did.Anybody can do the comparison, except for him.
↧
↧
Comment on Phunny Physics by Mairi
<i>claimsgu%y | July 7, 2014 at 2:01 pm |
beecause some would rather argue policy than science. Science is hard. But anyone can have a political opinion.</i>
The problem, claimsguy, is that the 'experts' and the science they produce is corrupt and biased, since it is all paid for Big Government seeking to get even bigger.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Brandon Shollenberger
Don Monfort, you should take a look at <a href="http://judithcurry.com/2014/07/07/understanding-adjustments-to-temperature-data/#comment-607660" rel="nofollow">this</a> comment of mine. It has three different images in it, each comparing the temperatures of NASA gridcell to those of the four BEST gridcells located within it. There's no question the use of uneven grid size has no effect on my results.
And as you may be able to guess from those images, I can now compare any NASA gridcell to the BEST gridcells in the same location. If anyone wants me to compare other areas, I can have it made it posted within a couple minutes.
(Well, any area both data sets have data for.)
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Jim D
oops, I guess Sparta (38 N) would be a choice in the same GISS grid cell, which is also quite flat.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Brandon Shollenberger
Jim D, the fact that GISS gridcell is representing areas south of Springfield was always obvious. If you take a look at <a href="http://www.mapsofworld.com/usa/states/illinois/maps/illinois-lat-long-map.jpg" rel="nofollow">this</a> map of Illinois, you'll see Springfield is just south of the 40N line. That means the GISS gridcell it is in goes from 38N to 40N. That means the gridcell covers area nearly two full degrees south. The only reason there has been any confusion about it going that far south is WebHubTelescope made things up about what data set I used.
(Incidentally, I don't live in Springfield. I live one degree south of it. I just picked Springfield for the name in my text because it is the most known city within that particular area.)
↧
↧
Comment on Open thread by Eric
Warmest April and May in recorded history and yet some claim global warming has paused. Odd.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Jim D
Brandon, your GISS cell to the north looks more like BEST, so you don’t need to be suspicious of BEST anymore.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Don Monfort
I didn’t notice that comment, Brandon. I guess webbeee also missed it : ) Not that it would have had any effect on the clown.
↧
Comment on IPCC and treatment of uncertainties by Alexander Biggs
“Purpose deals with a general contention toward the linear model of expertise enshrined in the IPCC process. In this linear model, the IPCC is said to privilege scientific knowledge as the authority on climate change, thereby constraining political deliberation on whether to react to this information and address problems on the ground.”
This seems to deal with the question of the linear communication of results, not the linearity of the physics of climate. Perhaps the authors of this article were closer to the truth than they thought. The 1940 singularity shows how misleading a linear model can be. In1940 the rate of change of atmospheric temperature changed from + 0.15C/decade to -0.15C/decade in a single year despite an ever increasing concentration of CO2. It is hard to imagine how a linear model could do that.
↧
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Brandon Shollenberger
Jim D, you just looked at three GISS gridcells and 12 BEST gridcells for the same area. Two GISS grid cells had very different trends than the eight BEST grid cells in their area. One GISS grid cell had a trend more like the four BEST gridd cells in its area. From this, you concluded there’s no problem.
That makes no sense at all. The fact GISS and BEST agree for some areas does not magically make the huge disagreements in other areas vanish. I can plot data which shows this sort of thing happens for entire states!
↧
Comment on IPCC and treatment of uncertainties by Stephen Rasey
What is the “Linear Model of Expertise”?
What the heck is linear about political power?
Politics and political influence is a very non-linear, chaotic process.
In fact, I wonder if “Linear Model of Expertise” isn’t really a disinformation ploy to disguise what really goes on.
↧
Comment on Understanding adjustments to temperature data by Don Monfort
The D stands for disingenuous. Webbee’s little helper get’s schooled. Nice work, Brandon. I am drinking a toast to your skill in the graphology.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
