Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 12/08/2009 4:59:24 AM PST by Kaslin
Say it!
Dude, your breath is killing me. EPA says.
Climate models can’t accurately project the weather 100 HOURS in the future
Bookmark
bump
This is the controlling issue for this topic - we DO NOT understand how the earth's climate works at even a fundamental level. If we don't understand how it works, how can we say that it is broken and it is the fault of humans??
How I defeat AGW Cult members.
Me: Was there an ice age 10,000 years ago, where glaciers covered 1/2 of North America?
Cult Member: Yes. So what.
Me: What caused the ice to melt 10,000 years ago? Cars? Factories? Coal plants? Air travel? No, it was called nature. Humans had nothing to do with the cooling/warming cycle.
Cult Member: Derrrr... Does not compute. Attack the messenger.
Michael Mann is a pretty big “hole”, as well as that English bloke who’s ‘t5emporarily’ stepped down for his scientific colonoscopy.
Now I’ll go back and read about the other two... ;-P
It’s worse with people who have the power to put a gun to your head and steal the property that you’ve earned.
They KNOW what they want to do, and no amount of “evidence” to the contrary is going to sway them.
I run into like minded people all the time who say “go to this website to see evidence” or “we should present this evidence to the GW people”.
IT WON’T MATTER. IT DOESN’T MATTER.
These people are hell-bent on destroying our wealth through this farse of AGW, and you’re arguing over the validity of their excuse.
Remember, they are going to USE FORCE to punish your use of energy in this country.
If they were using reason, logic, and the preponderance of evidence, that’s what we should be countering them with.
They aren’t. Prepare.
Consider that for long term data collection, they are talking about weather data collected from over 150 years ago. In that time, land use, population, and measurement technology (accuracy and precision) have all changed. Therefore, when working with (analyzing) data from that far back climate "scientists" (although guessers would also be a good term) have to make adjustments to the data. There are several adjustments made, eg. for land use, population, technology, etc.
The 800 lb gorilla in the room that they don't talk about is that these "adjustments" to the data are larger, far larger, than the supposed man-caused warming trend. That's right. They may predict a 0.2 C increase per century or whatever, but the total adjustments to their temperature data may be well over 2.0 C!!! Obviously, a minor change in the values of the adjusting factors can wipe out, even reverse the man-made contribution.
So, how do the climate "scientists" know they are using the right adjustments? ... {crickets} ... They look at historical data and look for trends based on land use, population, technology... But wait, this is the very same data they are using to support their man-caused global warming...??? That's right, they have multiple unknowns, but only one set of data of questionable accuracy. We're supposed to trust their judgment. Trust the judgement of these same people who have been caught lying and falsifying academic and scientific work.
Man-caused global warming: perhaps the biggest scam ever perpetrated.
Excellent!
Did any other freepers graduate from high school at the end of this era? I did and can testify from personal experience that the same sorry group of eco-freaks was pushing "global cooling" or a "new ice age" based on the supposition that industrialization put carbon particals into the atmosphere and blocked the sun's rays. The scam didn't last quite as long as the global warming scam but it was based on the same supposition that it was man-made and the only solution was some sort of world government to control it lest we all freeze to death.
The next time some alarmist tells you that in 25,50 or 100 years from now the earht will be 3,5 or 8 degrees C warmer, think of long range (5 day) projected path of a tropical storm generated by computer models. Predicting the path of a hurricane 5 days out is a much easier problem then predicting climate 50 years from now. Now how often do tropical storms follow the long range predicted path?
The next time some alarmist tells you that in 25,50 or 100 years from now the earht will be 3,5 or 8 degrees C warmer, think of long range (5 day) projected path of a tropical storm generated by computer models. Predicting the path of a hurricane 5 days out is a much easier problem then predicting climate 50 years from now. Now how often do tropical storms follow the long range predicted path?
#5 You can’t express the temperature of the globe as a scalar value to four decimal places without showing how you did it, and not expect people to doubt your results.
#6 We don’t know enough about what we don’t know about the climate. For instance the Pacific and Atlantic Decadal Oscillations may be on track to produce an unexpected 2 or 3 decade cooling trend.
Just off the top of this Round Earth Skeptics head.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
