The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Study shakes foundation of climate theory! (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2009-10-13 11:01, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
To be clear, I try to reference independent scientists who publish through anonymous peer review.

Usually when links are posted to popular press, the material bears little resemblance to the anonymous peer-reviewed science. Often the momentary fame of these scientists is due to the press using their names, rather than their putting their names forward.

Now, without Google--can anyone name a famous climate scientist?


Didn't think so.

John


Al Gore.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Zero so far.
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On 2009-10-12 22:59, Tom Bartlett wrote:
Quote:
On 2009-10-12 22:42, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Quote:
On 2009-10-12 21:07, Tom Bartlett wrote:
Most of the scientists today, which are well known and quoted by the press, have learned to gain financial and political support the same way top paid CEOs would. They present only the evidence that supports their theories and point of view and ignore any that does not.


Do you actually know any research scientists? I know many, and this is an enormous piece of crap.

I've written research grant proposals: the conclusions are not and never will be part of the process.

John

No! I do know people that hire scientist especially ones with the most impressive credentials for legal battles.

Like I said the really smart ones are quoted in the media and testify in court as expert witnesses for the highest bidders. Your post supports mine. You are neither well known nor quoted by the press because you have not learned the really important part of being a scientist. It's all about marketing!

It's unfortunate that you do not know any actual real research scientists. It appears that you've based your conclusions on second hand and anecdotal evidence. Dare I say, you would make a bad scientist. Smile

Tom, of course there are exceptions, but most real, world class, research scientistss would do anything they could in order to avoid being in court. They would rather be working (in the field or in the lab). That the people you are talking about sell out to the highest bidder (as you said) suggests that, while they may have 'qualifications', they are not respected scientists.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Just to point out that I know scientist, just useful ones not temp takers.
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2556 Posts

Profile of critter
The problem with most people's views of scientists is that those people just want immediate solutions to everything. That's just not reality. We're still working bugs out in gravity for cryin' out loud. Science is just a process to find the best possible explanation at a given point in time. That's it.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Let's study tree sap to see if it spreads further in warmer weather! Then we can measure the spread in 1734 vs today and then multiple the difference in temp by, say 15000, and put out a press release expressing our concern for the polar ice cap and ask for money to do research!
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2556 Posts

Profile of critter
I suppose instead of following the scientific method we could just make things up, but then it would be mythology.
Not that there aren't "scientists" who just make stuff up, but if they can't support their conclusions they will be rejected by better scientists. The media just doesn't bother to tell you when one crackpot's stupid ideas are more widely considered bunk. The media only reports the sensational. That's what sells.
Meanwhile, real scientists are testing the microbial content of lake water, which doesn't sell advertising space.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
I appreciate those that test the microbial level of lake water, that is very important for our health in the real world.
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2556 Posts

Profile of critter
So we are aware that not all of the details are in on climate change. I don't understand where the critique of mathematical models comes in. I mean, engineering uses mathematical models too. We are using established and known formulas, entering current data into them, and from that is produced a plausible scenario. It's not the scientists fault if people panic at what is presented. To a scientist our results are just a plausible explanation. I can see calling out bad scientists who intentionally create panic for publicity, but to go after the rest (who are the majority) seems out of place.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Here's an amusing article: A Cherry-Picker's Guide to Temperature Trends where the author takes a pot-shot at everybody who claims a)no trend, b)warming or c)cooling over the past 20 years.

I haven't taken the time to read it carefully, but even if his details are out, the moral of the story is a good one.

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Just to explain, I am not questioning if average temps have risen minimally over the last x number of years, those are based on facts, such as temp.

What I am questioning is the motivation behind those that want to exempt China and India as polluters yet want the US, the most productive country in the world (with Norways five employees hanging in there) should be blamed for the so called global warming. This is one of those agenda's that tick me off, the agenda is to try to weaken the US and add streangth to their own situation. The EU did this with their 'spank the US' taxes which has been complained about by many in the UK who don't like it. The simple facts are that the air is cleaner now in the US, unless that wonderful cloud of pollution from China is rolling through, than it was in the 1950's. People and companies in the US are aware of concerns about the environment and put in a tremendous amount of money and effort to reduce the pollutants that will always accompany manufacturing, which is neccessary of course. It will never, ever, with all the whining and finger pointing, ever, be pollution free but at least in the US and other countries they work at reducing output as much as possible.

Is there climate change? Of course! This is a planet! It changes and moves and wobbles and all that good stuff. It has oceans with currentss that effect weather, volcanos that erupt and put out more pollutants and carbon than man ever has. I've not tollerance for the 'we can save the world' or the 'we can destroy the world' types because you can do neither. You can just take personal responsibility for your own actions and not toss garbage out of the window of your car or flick your cigs toward dry brush. It makes you feel better about yourself and you wont burn some gophers to death.

I ask that some 'scientist' stop with the press mongering and going for the extreme. If the statistics indicate that a 0.02 centigrade increase in temps might occur in Kansas don't release "If temps increase 15 degrees dogs will burst into flames". Enough already.
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On 2009-10-15 21:34, MagicSanta wrote:
Just to explain, I am not questioning if average temps have risen minimally over the last x number of years, those are based on facts, such as temp.

What I am questioning is the motivation behind those that want to exempt China and India as polluters yet want the US, the most productive country in the world (with Norways five employees hanging in there) should be blamed for the so called global warming.


This is a fair thing to question. (Although far more than just the US are the objects of this movement.) It seems to me to be far more productive (and honest) to separate the scientific critique and the political one.

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2556 Posts

Profile of critter
Well that's a horse of a different color.
Politics is bigger than me.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
These links are about the “evidence” used by leading research scientist studying global warming. It sees as though the evidence has been destroyed to keep anyone from finding fault with it.


http://3pts.wordpress.com/2009/10/07/cli......armists/

http://minx.cc/?post=292770
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5154 Posts

Profile of landmark
Couldn't get the first link to work, but the second one's story was definitely appalling. Interesting weblog. I'll agree to read it from time to time, if you agree to read Glenn Greenwald's blog . . . Smile

BTW speaking of suppressed documents, here's a breaking story about the systematic suppression of evidence of Bush's own EPA by his own administration when it came to climate change.
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On 2009-10-17 01:54, Tom Bartlett wrote:
These links are about the “evidence” used by leading research scientist studying global warming. It sees as though the evidence has been destroyed to keep anyone from finding fault with it.


http://3pts.wordpress.com/2009/10/07/cli......[/quote]

This anonymous blogger failed to check his sources. The source data was destroyed in the 1980s but the derived data products were kept. Here is the University of East Anglia's statement: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/availability/

"The Admiral" is either lazy or dishonest and expects the same from his readers.

Quote:
http://minx.cc/?post=292770


This one is even worse. It quotes Warwick Hughes, a self-styled "free-lance earth scientist" whose qualifications seem to consist in having a web site. The blogger quotes Ghostbusters, then gives a highly elliptical quotation in which Hughes apparently asked a Phil Jones for "original data". Jones didn't supply it. And this proves.....what?

Surely you can do better than this, Tom.

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
[quote]On 2009-10-17 11:59, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Quote:
On 2009-10-17 01:54, Tom Bartlett wrote:
These links are about the “evidence” used by leading research scientist studying global warming. It sees as though the evidence has been destroyed to keep anyone from finding fault with it.


http://3pts.wordpress.com/2009/10/07/climate-evidence-destroyed-by-climate-alarmists/</BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></TD></TR><TR><TD><HR></TD></TR></TABLE><!-- BBCode Quote End -->

This anonymous blogger failed to check his sources. The source data was destroyed in the 1980s but the derived data products were kept. Here is the University of East Anglia's statement: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/availability/

"The Admiral" is either lazy or dishonest and expects the same from his readers.

Quote:
http://minx.cc/?post=292770


This one is even worse. It quotes Warwick Hughes, a self-styled "free-lance earth scientist" whose qualifications seem to consist in having a web site. The blogger quotes Ghostbusters, then gives a highly elliptical quotation in which Hughes apparently asked a Phil Jones for "original data". Jones didn't supply it. And this proves.....what?

Surely you can do better than this, Tom.

John
John,

Did you read the post from the link you provided? I t seems to confirm that some of the data has been lost or destroyed or are unavailable.

After reading the entire seven paragraphs, it does appear that the data to do an accurate scientific research study is not available. So John, just keep on defending your irreproachable scientist and their published studies using less than complete or accurate data.
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Tom, yes I did. The post is very clear that some of the data from before the 1990s was destroyed in its original form because of storage issues. This is very common. "The Admiral" did not read this, as he rants about cheap large storage available TODAY.

The content of much of that original data still remains, but the original "printouts" are long gone. This is not a big deal. We don't have Galileo's source data, but we have records of how he used it and dealt with it. It would be nice to have his original measurements, but we don't. It doesn't make him a liar or deceiver.

It is also not the only source of data.

As for "my irreproachable scientist" I don't know where you get that. I know nothing about the scientists involved; in fact I had never even heard of the University of East Anglia before today.

Let me be perfectly clear: I'm not defending a scientist. I am pointing out the dishonesty of the "The Admiral". If you want to attack Dr. Jones, fine. But the links you provided wouldn't count as acceptable evidence in a high school essay.

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Tom Bartlett
View Profile
Special user
Our southern border could use
763 Posts

Profile of Tom Bartlett
Without complete or accurate data, how could any research paper be of real value? Why would research scientists accept without question, evidence gathered and provided by others, others that might want a specific results? After all, the omission of a single piece of data would change the out come of any experiment.
Our friends don't have to agree with me about everything and some that I hold very dear don't have to agree about anything, except where we are going to meet them for dinner.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27243 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
Quote:
On 2009-10-18 11:23, Tom Bartlett wrote:
Without complete or accurate data, how could any research paper be of real value? Why would research scientists accept without question, evidence gathered and provided by others, others that might want a specific results? After all, the omission of a single piece of data would change the out come of any experiment.


? outlier data is removed from data sets often. And one point on the graph does not invalidate a study - though it might change the outcome of a comparison of that study's data with the data collected in an independent study. Lots of independent verification process in real science.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Study shakes foundation of climate theory! (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2022 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.05 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL