Wow this thread gets a lot of views!
Error=scam revealed
Somewhere in the world right now there is a climatologist going “ oh crap, i forgot to carry the 3”.
CC
So much for “peer review”.
Personally, I don’t believe it was an error at all, not after the global warming crowd has been caught in fraud after fraud after fraud.
I say it’s on purpose and if they want to change my mind they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
If you watch the ten day forecast, they often get tomorrow correct, along with, to a lesser degree, the day after tomorrow. But the tenth day forecast has a very small percentage, on average, of being even close. That’s why that section of the forecast changes almost daily. So, scientists, working with tenth of a degree increments, can forecast the temperature ten and twenty years hence? And, we should spend billions and billions of dollars on modifying that forecast?
Almost every article you read on global warming is a bid for funding. The more hysterical the forecast, the more likely they writer will get funding. This is how they make their living. And, like any other worker, they are trying to maximize their income. Global warming is bigger than the Bernie Madoff fraud.
Next time you are in some tourist restaurant on the coast, look at the photos of the beach. None of that area is under water. The beach in most places hasn’t moved much in a hundred years. It will look much the same a hundred years hence. At that point society will either be richer for not having bought the global warming scam, or we will be much poorer for the fraud.
Is this yhe same ipcc expert who claimed the Himalayas would melt by 2020. He had a decimal error.
I had one decimal error in chemistry and got a serious warning from my prof.
Can’t the experts do math anymore. Bet they got their math on taxpayer funding correct.
btt
Just how does one propose to take the temperature of the ocean? A temperature probe every cubic mile? How many would be needed?
In the end, there is no way to take the temperature of the ocean. The ocean is not a single object. It is huge, vast, enormous.
IMHO, the whole “global warming/climate change” debacle has been based on erroneous math, bad computer models, and Al Gores pocket book.
For instance, when we had lots of sunspot activity, it was warmer...now, few sunspots, and they’re predicting a colder than usual winter.
It’s not the SUV’s and it’s not man made, IF, it actually exists.
:: its scientific errors “do not invalidate the study’s methodology. ::
That is true. Although, it does invalidate the study itself as well as the “scientists” who put the methodology together.
Let's not jump to conclusions here. The study could be salvaged I'm sure. Best thing to do now is for the authors to take a breather break. Play a game of hockey. I'm sure after a taking their minds off work with nice game, they'll be freshened and rarin' to go to fix the study. I'll even send them a hockey stick.
Ping
Bookmark
A temperature change of .016 degree per century, vs .01 degree / century is still a 60% change. But "SIXTY PERCENT" is a far more attention-getting figure....
Barbie: “Math is hard.”
Is there a list of global warming science fails anywhere?
Correction= We got caught.
The global warming scam is much greater.
My takeaway is the IPCC can't be rescued from it's past near-frauds no matter how well-intentioned the participants, because they refuse to identify or acknowledge the consequence of such mistakes while still recommending action based on their "findings".