3 ms·

This makes no sense. We've been assured now for years AGW is true because it's the scientific consensus. Isn't that how it became "settled science", after all

by tsotha 15y ago

This makes no sense. We've been assured now for years AGW is true because it's the scientific consensus. Isn't that how it became "settled science", after all? And now you say it doesn't matter how many scientists are skeptical. Is this some kind of one-way street, this settled science? I mean, clearly the models are wrong, so it wasn't that. They've utterly failed to predict the lack of temperature rise in the last decade or so. Come to think of it, besides the models, what makes anyone think it's real? Oh yeah, settled science. So... it's like phrenology, then?

yequalsx 15y ago
Your claim about temperatures not rising over the last 10 years is not true. [1] [1] http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&catid=115:cm2&id=359:myth-two-in-the-past-10-years-since-1998-temperatures-have-been-dropping http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/index.php?option=com_cont...
- tsotha 15y ago
  Hah! I also used to do crap fits to curves like that when my data didn't work. You can only fit a line to the graph like that if you assume temperatures are going to rise quickly in the future. This is a joke, right?
  - jonhendry 15y ago
    Not as much of a joke as pinning your whole argument on an outlier.
    - tsotha 15y ago
      That's the point though. There's no way to know if it's an outlier or not. The AGW people are assuming it's an outlier. I guess we'll know in ten years. My money's on serious revisions to the model.
- glenra 15y ago
  Do you realize that your chart doesn't actually show "the last ten years"? It stops in 2007. What's happened since 2007 is not irrelevant to the question at hand. Here's an example of a temperature chart that does show "the last 10 years": http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/from:2001/to:2011/normalise http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/from:2001/to:2011/norma... (the "WoodForTrees Index" is a composite created from the mean of HADCRUT3VGL, GISTEMP, RSS and UAH, offset by their baseline differences.)

by tsotha 15y ago

yequalsx 15y ago

Your claim about temperatures not rising over the last 10 years is not true. [1] [1] http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&catid=115:cm2&id=359:myth-two-in-the-past-10-years-since-1998-temperatures-have-been-dropping http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/index.php?option=com_cont...

tsotha 15y ago
Hah! I also used to do crap fits to curves like that when my data didn't work. You can only fit a line to the graph like that if you assume temperatures are going to rise quickly in the future. This is a joke, right?
- jonhendry 15y ago
  Not as much of a joke as pinning your whole argument on an outlier.
  - tsotha 15y ago
    That's the point though. There's no way to know if it's an outlier or not. The AGW people are assuming it's an outlier. I guess we'll know in ten years. My money's on serious revisions to the model.
glenra 15y ago
Do you realize that your chart doesn't actually show "the last ten years"? It stops in 2007. What's happened since 2007 is not irrelevant to the question at hand. Here's an example of a temperature chart that does show "the last 10 years": http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/from:2001/to:2011/normalise http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/wti/from:2001/to:2011/norma... (the "WoodForTrees Index" is a composite created from the mean of HADCRUT3VGL, GISTEMP, RSS and UAH, offset by their baseline differences.)