Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: We take Nothing for Granted.

Topic: NH winter cooling (Read 591 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #25
Just as a clue, if our data set happened to be planetary surface temperatures between, but not inclusive of, the orbits of Mercury and Mars and we determine an average temperature for that set - do you think there would be outliers?
BTW, I bet this is a pretty devastating point in the argument with the strawman "alarmist" you always seem to think you're having.

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #26
What's funny is a matter of individual taste and perception.

Also it depends on who falls into a open sewer and dies.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #27
True. It was a blatant lie anyway. Unclear antecedents can be a great source of humor.

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #28
It was a blatant lie anyway.
There you again. What exactly was "it" that you lied about?

What does "it" mean in your statement?  Lack of clarity is the bane of science.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #29
As for the US cooling trend, it shows up clearly in the data.  Even GISS hasn't adjusted the data enough to remove the puzzling "warming hole".

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #30
It was a blatant lie anyway.
There you again. What exactly was "it" that you lied about?

What does "it" mean in your statement?  Lack of clarity is the bane of science.

See? It's hilarious!

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #31
As for the US cooling trend, it shows up clearly in the data.  Even GISS hasn't adjusted the data enough to remove the puzzling "warming hole".
Yes, it's interesting that certain areas during certain times of the year show cooling trends over certain periods while the global average for the year as a whole shows a warming trend. It's not amazing, and it doesn't mean that climate science is bullshit, but it's interesting.
  • Last Edit: October 10, 2017, 09:32:44 AM by BenTheBiased

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #32
..  it doesn't mean that climate science is bullshit, but it's interesting.
It's a shame some fuckhead moved the topic where I was explaining exactly what I find bullshit, and why.

In fact, moving the topic was bullshit.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #33
If the NH winter (boreal winter) cooling trend was just regional cooling, natural variation, where small areas showed cooling rather than the expected warming, it certainly could be handwaved away and ignored. 

The best handwaving is to say "yeah, but it's not global" ...

A direct question: is it global?

Please provide a direct answer (a direct answer to a "yes or no" question can only be "yes" or "no" - anything else is dissembling).

Thanks.

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #34
The best handwaving is to say "yeah, but it's not global" which is almost the last bastion of the true believer in "global warming is a fact no matter what any evidence shows".  The next to last one is "you have to look at a longer trend". (the very last bastion is "So what?")
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #35
The best handwaving is to say "yeah, but it's not global" ...
A direct question: is it global?
I'm betting you don't see the irony.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #36


It's almost as if warm air masses and cold air masses are moving around to places they don't usually go. And the warm air masses seem to be warmer than usual, more often than the cold air masses are colder than usual. Wonder what it means?
  • Last Edit: November 10, 2017, 01:28:23 PM by Autonemesis

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #37
It means you need to up the dosage.

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #38
It's almost as if warm air masses and cold air masses are moving around to places they don't usually go.
No, it just means you are an idiot.  One station, one year, well lets's just say using such data to try and make a point about climate is idiotic.

Wonder what it means?

"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #39
It's almost as if warm air masses and cold air masses are moving around to places they don't usually go.
No, it just means you are an idiot.  One station, one year, well lets's just say using such data to try and make a point about climate is idiotic.

What point do you think I'm trying to make about climate?

The best handwaving is to say "yeah, but it's not global" ...
A direct question: is it global?
I'm betting you don't see the irony.

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #40
... the NH winter (boreal winter) cooling trend ..
A direct question: is it global?
  No, the Northern Hemisphere (boreal) winter is not global, and can't be global.  By definition it means the Northern Hemisphere winter,  If the austral summer was also showing cooling then one might say the D-J-F time period was a global trend, but that is not how things work.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #41
The twisted shit about the record cold winters in the US is that some idiots actually are, at the same time, blaming the record cold winters (with record snow) on global warming, and also claiming the record snow is from the winters being warmer.

It's become so incredibly stupid there isn't any way to counter the madness.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #42
Oh well, you know, that's how it goes.  But that level of fuckwittery cannot last indefinitely of course and there are signs that the hegemony of those pushing the fraud is starting to slip.  Here https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/bix133/4644513 we see the unmistakable signs of desperation beginning to peep through.  In this 'paper' they are attempting to blame the 'denier' blogosphere for the fact that public acceptance of and concern about the trivially absurd pseudoscientific climate alarm meme they've been pushing for nigh on half a century now is on the wane.

Never seems to even cross their minds that just maybe it could be the fact that not a single one of their demented predictions without end has ever come to pass - as the alleged climate 'tipping points' zip by like railroad sleepers with the square root of fuck all happening and they are now reduced to pointing wild-eyed at perfectly ordinary storm systems as the dread fingerprint of man's industrial meddling with the climate.

The public are just bored to tears with their rapture-level lunacy but nevertheless the fear-brokers must have their Dr. Evil and this time around it's not Big Coal or the Koch Bros. or whoever but <drumroll ...> the Blogosphere!  So then this 'paper' is a clarion call to the climate faithful to rally the troops and exhorts them to hunt down fiendish bloggers in their sleazy cyberspace lairs and do righteous battle with them there.  General 'hockey stick' Mikey Mann is describing it as 'trench warfare'.  How the once mighty are fallen and apparently reduced to unseemly brawling in the dirt.

What these nitwits will never comprehend is that there is no denier command centre or GHQ.  They are a ghost army of unpaid guerrilla volunteers.  The alarmists quite pitifully yearn to believe that deniers are all in the pay of Exxon, Kochs, Peabody blah blah but they aren't.  There is nothing to hit and they will never stop as long as the alarmist morons continue with their butchery of science.

Meanwhile the alarmists are all guzzling at the bottomless climate 'science' funding trough and if that funding starts to dry up I seriously doubt those people will be expending their own money, time and effort in promoting something as quacking insane and evidence free as cagw. The concept of Mann and his band of lying data-mangling Climategate pseudoscientists taking down the blogosphere in righteous online combat is hernia-inducing funny.

The alarmist mountebanks refuse debate in every other sphere - muh 97% consensus and settled science donchakno - so exactly why these tools think they're going to venture into a realm outside of their customary censorship where they will have their butts carved into finest wafer-thin pastrami and handed to them on sold silver salvers is a bit of a mystery.

But anyway, my but how the times do change.  Every Western government - bar one of course - and almost every scientist in the world - or so it's claimed - and every academy and august scientific institution and every high-impact learned journal and all but the entirety of the World's legacy media and untold billions in funding cannot stop the public from wandering off-piste on this one.  Yet apparently the Machiavellian blogosphere has insinuated its corrupting tentacles directly into the frontal cortices of a gullible public.

We are asked to believe that a few online heretics have achieved this.  Well we can only hope but whatever, it appears that it's alarmist boo-hoo time.

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #43
Oh well, you know, that's how it goes. 
I'm learning. If you can't convince somebody that is snows more when it's colder, not when it is warmer, which of course the data clearly shows, the more complex things are hopeless.
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #44


Statler and Waldorf's ongoing commentary on climate science continues...
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #45
Nice to see a point I've often made here being made in the article Waldorf linked though:
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/bix133/4644513
Quote
Proponents of creationism and intelligent design use the same strategy: Instead of providing scientific evidence in favor of their opinions, they instead focus selectively on certain lines of evidence for evolution and attempt to cast doubt on them (Nisbet 2009). They then use this as an argument to support their own views, even if these have no conceptual or empirical support.

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #46
we see the unmistakable signs of desperation beginning to peep through

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #47
Meanwhile, in the reality-based community, yet another study finds that most models have underestimated the extent of warming:

https://carnegiescience.edu/news/more-severe-climate-model-predictions-could-be-most-accurate
Quote
The climate models that project greater amounts of warming this century are the ones that best align with observations of the current climate, according to a new paper from Carnegie's Patrick Brown and Ken Caldeira published by Nature.  Their findings suggest that the models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, on average, may be underestimating future warming.

Cue ad-hom attacks on the authors and/or accusations of chasing money on the part of the (non-profit) funding source and/or evidence-free denial of the science and/or any number of other desperate excuses to wave away reality.

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #48
By the fact that you're babbling a hysterical defense before I've even read it I'm going to assume it's even more retarded than your usual stuff.

I'm also going to assume that it's more junk science modelling.  Just because it always is.

Aaaand ...

:facepalm:

It is both of those things.  Firstly you link to a bunch of cheerleading from Carnegie about a paper they had published in Nature which doesn't even contain a reference to the paper.  Nevertheless I found the paper - paywalled - but here's the abstract.

Quote
Greater future global warming inferred from Earth's recent energy budget
Patrick T. Brown & Ken Caldeira
Nature 552, 45-50 (07 December 2017)
doi:10.1038/nature24672

Abstract
Climate models provide the principal means of projecting global warming over the remainder of the twenty-first century but modelled estimates of warming vary by a factor of approximately two even under the same radiative forcing scenarios. Across-model relationships between currently observable attributes of the climate system and the simulated magnitude of future warming have the potential to inform projections. Here we show that robust across-model relationships exist between the global spatial patterns of several fundamental attributes of Earth's top-of-atmosphere energy budget and the magnitude of projected global warming. When we constrain the model projections with observations, we obtain greater means and narrower ranges of future global warming across the major radiative forcing scenarios, in general. In particular, we find that the observationally informed warming projection for the end of the twenty-first century for the steepest radiative forcing scenario is about 15 per cent warmer (+0.5 degrees Celsius) with a reduction of about a third in the two-standard-deviation spread (−1.2 degrees Celsius) relative to the raw model projections reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Our results suggest that achieving any given global temperature stabilization target will require steeper greenhouse gas emissions reductions than previously calculated.

The abstract appears to be pointing towards the latest modelling paradigm shift designed to slither over the abject failures of the models to date.  You probably already know that climate models form an ensemble and the simulated climate is generally deemed to be the average output over the ensemble.  A strange thing you might think, although probably don't, but in alarmist climate science the average of false = true - apparently.  Why don't they simply throw out the more obviously dud of the current ensemble of duds?  Seems to be a reasonable question to ask.  The answer is that the total ensemble is effectively outputting the full spectrum of what is mostly feasible in a warming world but the problem is the average over the spread of possible climate behaviours doesn't really represent the real climate and it's no surprise that this absurd approach has been failing.  They have no earthly idea why one model outperforms the other at some point nor why it stops doing so at some other time.  They just go with the absurd idea that an average of them all has some sort of physical meaning.  It doesn't.

The new paradigm is to look at the actual observations and compare them with the individual ensemble outputs.  They then identify which models are closest to the observations and give those model outputs a higher weighting in computing the grand canonical average.  Obviously enough If you arrange for some algorithmic procedure to generate a combined output whilst weighting those which are currently running closest to the observations then you can in effect never be wrong.  Unless it becomes a cooling world of course.  What they are doing is constraining their averaged ensemble model output to track the real climate by inputting the actually measured climate into the total climate model phase space and forcing the output to follow it by applying weightings.  Then they run with the models closest to the real climate for their future projections.  Rinse and repeat but next time it most likely will not be the same models which are closest to the real climate.  They call this procedure "observationally informed warming projection".  It appears to be nothing more than the usual trivially idiotic modelling charade which everyone is now thoroughly accustomed to.  This time it attempts to place the modelling effort on the same forever unfalsifiable footing as the 'human caused climate change' hypothesis itself.  The alarmists are busy attempting to put statistical lipstick on this abject nonsense of a climate model pig and informing us all that it's the 'sophisticated' thing to do.
  • Last Edit: December 07, 2017, 01:32:38 PM by Cephus0

Re: NH winter cooling
Reply #49