It is currently Wed Oct 16, 2019 9:22 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 307 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions...
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:18 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:19 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Multiverse
The AGW Agenda. How cool. Kind of makes you wonder about the Quantum Gravity Agenda and the Doppler Shift Agenda...we already know not to trust the Carbon Dating Agenda and the Mitochondrial DNA Agenda. :lol:

_________________
When a master has a Negro and uses him well, he is much better off than if he was free.-Brigham Young


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth... Stu
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:18 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
ldsfaqs wrote:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/19/the-1970s-global-cooling-consensus-was-not-a-myth/

This page overviews the original review of papers that tried to claim the "70's Cooling Consensus was a Myth", and then it presents an overview of the review of papers that debunks that review.
It further shows that AGW "scientists" and proponents are unethical, by clearly omitting key sources and studies that were in fact accessible (as they were to this new reviewer) in order to make their claims.

This is not "science" and valid scholarship that is occurring by AGW proponents it's propaganda.

Conclusion of the review of all available/accessible scientific papers related to the climate.

86 Papers supported Global Cooling
58 Papers were neutral
46 Papers supported Global Warming
30 of the above studies supported a possible coming Ice Age.

Also, at the bottom of the page, there is a link listing all papers and scientific journals etc. reviewed.


When will you stop lying, FAQs. The blog post you've now linked to twice was not a review of all available/accessible scientific papers related to the climate. Doing that kind of review requires you to set up search parameters in advance, look at all the papers found by the search, and then classifying them. That's not what the author of your linked blog post did. The author combined the original paper, which was done properly, with someone else's search to find only cooling papers. That's cherry picking -- not a valid survey of all literature.

By the way, I'm still waiting on that testimony about Michael Mann...

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:22 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 7870
Res Ipsa wrote:
FAQS, you are completely delusional. I know the quote that you are referring to. Mann didn't say it. And you've misquoted what the actual person said in a way that is absolutely misleading. Over and over again you post flat out lies because you are too lazy to check your dishonest sources. So, produce the testimony that Mann said "they need to get rid of the Medieval Warming Period" or be, once again, a proven liar.


"We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1rj00BoItw

"Video of Dr David Deming's statement to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works on December 6, 2006. Dr Deming reveals that in 1995 a leading scientist emailed him saying "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period". A few years later, Michael Mann and the IPCC did just that by publishing the now thoroughly discredited hockey stick graph."

---

I live by facts and evidence, not delusion.
However, you most certainly live by delusion by believing made-up "science" by LYING about the quote and my quoting it, and for the sole purpose of a Leftist agenda.

While Dr. Deming doesn't outright say his name with the quote, from statements he later makes in the video, it's clear who he's referring to, or those associated to Mann because he states in the original quote that the email came from a "major researcher in climate change".
Also, other evidence I've seen over the years further verifies this that it was either directly Mann or someone closely working with him. Since Mann with the IPCC was the first to come up with the Hockey Stick and the removed Medieval Warm Period some 4 years after this email Dr. Deming received, it's clear what we have happening here.

_________________
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:43 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:19 pm
Posts: 12045
Location: Multiverse
ldsfaqs wrote:
However, you most certainly live by delusion by believing made-up "science" by LYING about the quote and my quoting it, and for the sole purpose of a Leftist agenda.



Image

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

_________________
When a master has a Negro and uses him well, he is much better off than if he was free.-Brigham Young


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth... Stu
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:47 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 7870
Res Ipsa wrote:
When will you stop lying, FAQs. The blog post you've now linked to twice was not a review of all available/accessible scientific papers related to the climate. Doing that kind of review requires you to set up search parameters in advance, look at all the papers found by the search, and then classifying them. That's not what the author of your linked blog post did. The author combined the original paper, which was done properly, with someone else's search to find only cooling papers. That's cherry picking -- not a valid survey of all literature.

By the way, I'm still waiting on that testimony about Michael Mann...


What you just stated is an absolute LIE... and you have the gall to claim I'm the one lying.
What actually occurred contrary to your lie is the new researcher found MUCH MORE sources and thus climate papers, thus creating a new and more COMPLETE study of the issue.

You outright LIE here by claiming he only found more "cooling" papers, and I can prove it.

The original study found: (quoting the article)
"In total, PCF-08 reviewed 71 papers and their survey found 7 cooling papers, 20 neutral papers and 44 warming papers."

The new study found: (which included the ones found in the original)
86 Papers supported Global Cooling
58 Papers were Neutral
46 Papers supported Global Warming
TOTAL 190
30 of the above studies supported a possible coming Ice Age.

Now, do you know how to do MATH???

Showing this to you clearly shows how the original researchers were clearly omitting Global Cooling and Neutral papers to support their agenda, since the new researchers only found 2 more global warming papers than the original researchers. But the original researchers OMITTED 79 Global Cooling Papers saying there were only "7"!!! Neutral they omitted 38.

It's not simply a "bad" researcher that finds only 71 Climate-related scientific papers when there are 119 MORE they could have found.

You just see what you want to see buddy, not the full facts and truth!

_________________
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 4:49 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
ldsfaqs wrote:
Res Ipsa wrote:
FAQS, you are completely delusional. I know the quote that you are referring to. Mann didn't say it. And you've misquoted what the actual person said in a way that is absolutely misleading. Over and over again you post flat out lies because you are too lazy to check your dishonest sources. So, produce the testimony that Mann said "they need to get rid of the Medieval Warming Period" or be, once again, a proven liar.


"We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1rj00BoItw

"Video of Dr David Deming's statement to the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works on December 6, 2006. Dr Deming reveals that in 1995 a leading scientist emailed him saying "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period". A few years later, Michael Mann and the IPCC did just that by publishing the now thoroughly discredited hockey stick graph."

---

I live by facts and evidence, not delusion.
However, you most certainly live by delusion by believing made-up "science" for the sole purpose of a Leftist agenda.


Okay, lying liar. Here's the actual e-mail: http://di2.nu/foia/1105670738.txt Deming completely misrepresented what it said.

Quote:
Hi Keith and Tim – since you’re off the 6.2.2 hook until Eystein hangs you back up on it, you have more time to focus on that new Box. In reading Valerie’s Holocene section, I get the sense that I’m not the only one who would like to deal a mortal blow to the misuse of supposed warm period terms and myths in the literature. The sceptics and uninformed love to cite these periods as natural analogs for current warming too – pure rubbish.
Mann was neither the author nor the recipient.

He didn't say he wanted to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period. He wanted to deal a mortal blow to the assholes like Monckton and Heller and you who "misuse" myths like a global medieval warm period. Just like you do now. The medieval warm period was not global. That's what the actual science says. But you can't face up to the simple truth, and so you have to create wild conspiracies and falsely defame scientists whose only crime has been trying to figure out what's going on with the climate. Shame on you. Really.

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth... Stu
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:06 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 7870
Quote:
It appears that the PCF-08 authors have committed the transgression of which they accuse others; namely, “selectively misreading the texts” of the climate science literature from 1965 to 1979. The PCF-08 authors appear to have done this by neglecting the large number of peer-reviewed papers that were pro-cooling.

I find it very surprising that PCF-08 only uncovered 7 cooling papers and did not uncover the 86 cooling papers in major scientific journals, such as, Journal of American Meteorological Society, Nature, Science, Quaternary Research and similar scientific papers that they reviewed. For example, PCF-08 only found 1 paper in Quaternary Research, namely the warming paper by Mitchell (1976), however, this review found 19 additional papers in that journal, comprising 15 cooling, 3 neutral and 1 warming.

I can only suggest that the authors of PCF-08 concentrated on finding warming papers instead of conducting the impartial “rigorous literature review” that they profess.

If the current climate science debate were more neutral, the PCF-08 paper would either be withdrawn or subjected to a detailed corrigendum to correct its obvious inaccuracies.


As this study clearly shows, agenda from Leftists overrides doing actual fair, impartial, and accurate science.

_________________
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro


Last edited by ldsfaqs on Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth... Stu
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:11 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
You actually have the read, FAQs. Direct quote from the blog post:

Quote:
However, my literature survey was facilitated by the work of Kenneth Richard in 2016 (hereinafter, KR-16) at NoTricksZone, in which he has assembled a large database of sceptical peer-reviewed literature.


My description, and my criticism of what the author did, is accurate. He should not have just added a bunch of pre-selected skeptical literature to the database. If the original search parameters were too narrow and missed articles, he should have formulated a new search and used the results of that.

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth... Stu
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:16 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 7870
Res Ipsa wrote:
You actually have the read, FAQs. Direct quote from the blog post:

Quote:
However, my literature survey was facilitated by the work of Kenneth Richard in 2016 (hereinafter, KR-16) at NoTricksZone, in which he has assembled a large database of sceptical peer-reviewed literature.

My description, and my criticism of what the author did, is accurate.


It is NOT... You've clearly not done a professional study, because if you had you would know that "facilitated" means it was a reference point to help in ones own work.

Those papers DO exist... AND he found more than just Global Cooling Papers.
Did your math brain somehow not process the 38 more NEUTRAL Papers he found, and the 2 more Global Warming Papers?

I mean, you also completely ignored his methodology, that he DID do his OWN SEARCH!!!
Such as the ADDITIONAL Search Terms he used, etc. That doesn't come from simply "copying" someone else data collection.
FYI, he did not say he "added" someone elses work to his. Those are your lying words because you want to cover up your lie.

by the way, I like how you don't correct yourself on everything else I debunked you for.

Let me put this another way for you to understand the word "facilitated".
Someone makes a claim, such as the original study.
Someone else finds that claim "wanting" by doing a basic overview of research papers.
Someone else comes along, says to themselves "hmmm, that's right, I'm going to do my own full and proper study to see if this is accurate".
That someone then conducts their OWN STUDY, due to the above study facilitating the idea and information related to it.
NONE of this means he didn't do his own study... The information clearly shows he did, if you had actually fully read it, instead of stopping where you thought you could get an "aha... I can debunk the study cause someone else gave him the idea, though I'm going to claim he just took the info from the other individual, that he didn't do his own search".

_________________
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth... Stu
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:29 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
ldsfaqs wrote:

It is NOT... You've clearly not done a professional study, because if you had you would know that "facilitated" means it was a reference point to help in ones own work.

Those papers DO exist... AND he found more than just Global Cooling Papers.
Did your math brain somehow not process the 38 more NEUTRAL Papers he found, and the 2 more Global Warming Papers?

I mean, you also completely ignored his methodology, that he DID do his OWN SEARCH!!!
Such as the ADDITIONAL Search Terms he used, etc. That doesn't come from simply "copying" someone else data collection.
FYI, he did not say he "added" someone elses work to his. Those are your lying words because you want to cover up your lie.

by the way, I like how you don't correct yourself on everything else I debunked you for.

Let me put this another way for you to understand the word "facilitated".
Someone makes a claim, such as the original study.
Someone else finds that claim "wanting" by doing a basic overview of research papers.
Someone else comes along, says to themselves "hmmm, that's right, I'm going to do my own full and proper study to see if this is accurate".
That someone then conducts their OWN STUDY, due to the above study facilitating the idea and information related to it.
NONE of this means he didn't do his own study... The information clearly shows he did, if you had actually fully read it, instead of stopping where you thought you could get an "aha... I can debunk the study cause someone else gave him the idea, though I'm going to claim he just took the info from the other individual, that he didn't do his own search".


My God, FAQs, you actually didn't read the blog post, did you? You keep contradicting the author.

Quote:
Some people may wish to ignore the KR-16 database as being from a so-called “climate denier” blog. However, almost all of the papers in KR-16 are from peer-reviewed literature and consequently it is a valid database. It is also worth noting that 16 of the papers used in the KR-16 database are also contained in the PCF-08 database.

The combined PCF-08 and KR-16 databases form the benchmark database for the current review. It was intended to significantly extend the benchmark database but, on searching the relevant journals, only 2 additional papers were found and these were added to form the database for this review.


Nope. You didn't bother to read it at all.

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth... Stu
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:32 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
by the way, Skeptical Science went through the No Trick's Zone database, and his material doesn't refute the original paper. At all. It's a giant exercise in goalpost moving. https://skepticalscience.com/70s-coolin ... art-I.html

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:33 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 7870
Res Ipsa wrote:
Okay, lying liar. Here's the actual e-mail: http://di2.nu/foia/1105670738.txt Deming completely misrepresented what it said.

Quote:
Hi Keith and Tim – since you’re off the 6.2.2 hook until Eystein hangs you back up on it, you have more time to focus on that new Box. In reading Valerie’s Holocene section, I get the sense that I’m not the only one who would like to deal a mortal blow to the misuse of supposed warm period terms and myths in the literature. The sceptics and uninformed love to cite these periods as natural analogs for current warming too – pure rubbish.
Mann was neither the author nor the recipient.

He didn't say he wanted to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period. He wanted to deal a mortal blow to the assholes like Monckton and Heller and you who "misuse" myths like a global medieval warm period. Just like you do now. The medieval warm period was not global. That's what the actual science says. But you can't face up to the simple truth, and so you have to create wild conspiracies and falsely defame scientists whose only crime has been trying to figure out what's going on with the climate. Shame on you. Really.


LOL... YOu are the funniest most corrupt person on the planet.
You don't even know what you're referencing...

That "email" is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT EMAIL then the one Dr David Deming got.
Dr. Deming doesn't live and work in the UK and his name isn't Keith Briffa <k.briffa@uea.ac.uk>, t.osborn@uea.ac.uk nor does he live/work in Norway or France you *****!
by the way, Dr. Deming to my knowledge has NEVER released the email he got.

You're referencing an entirely different email.
Wow, the utter willful blindness and lying is fascinating...

And by the way, the Global Medieval Warm Period is NOT a "myth"... Why you are just so gullible.
It's been established science for some 100 years, again from Ice Cores, Tree Rings, etc.
That's SCIENCE you ****! Some claimed **** "scientist" in 2009 entirely embarrassing that well-established science fact from various disciplines of science is the one that's engaging in MYTH.

_________________
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:40 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
You're right. I relied on the proprietor of the worlds most popular denier blog, who linked the e-mail with Deming's testimony. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/08/ ... m-period/I should know better than to trust deniers.

Odd that Deming didn't identify who sent the e-mail or produce it. So that's the evidence of your grand conspiracy?

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 5:56 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
ldsfaqs wrote:

And by the way, the Global Medieval Warm Period is NOT a "myth"... Why you are just so gullible.
It's been established science for some 100 years, again from Ice Cores, Tree Rings, etc.
That's SCIENCE you ****! Some claimed **** "scientist" in 2009 entirely embarrassing that well-established science fact from various disciplines of science is the one that's engaging in MYTH.


Okay, show me the evidence from 100 years ago that demonstrated a "global" medieval warming period. Show me the ice core and tree ring data.

Here's the abstract from a paper in July. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1401-2

Quote:
Earth’s climate history is often understood by breaking it down into constituent climatic epochs1. Over the Common Era (the past 2,000 years) these epochs, such as the Little Ice Age2,3,4, have been characterized as having occurred at the same time across extensive spatial scales5. Although the rapid global warming seen in observations over the past 150 years does show nearly global coherence6, the spatiotemporal coherence of climate epochs earlier in the Common Era has yet to be robustly tested. Here we use global palaeoclimate reconstructions for the past 2,000 years, and find no evidence for preindustrial globally coherent cold and warm epochs. In particular, we find that the coldest epoch of the last millennium—the putative Little Ice Age—is most likely to have experienced the coldest temperatures during the fifteenth century in the central and eastern Pacific Ocean, during the seventeenth century in northwestern Europe and southeastern North America, and during the mid-nineteenth century over most of the remaining regions. Furthermore, the spatial coherence that does exist over the preindustrial Common Era is consistent with the spatial coherence of stochastic climatic variability. This lack of spatiotemporal coherence indicates that preindustrial forcing was not sufficient to produce globally synchronous extreme temperatures at multidecadal and centennial timescales. By contrast, we find that the warmest period of the past two millennia occurred during the twentieth century for more than 98 per cent of the globe. This provides strong evidence that anthropogenic global warming is not only unparalleled in terms of absolute temperatures5, but also unprecedented in spatial consistency within the context of the past 2,000 years.


Earlier conclusions about the MWP were not based on global data. Science isn't frozen at an arbitrary point in the past. Unless you want to give up stuff like the germ theory of disease or DNA. Scientists do the best they can at any given time based on the data they have. When there is new data, you go with the data. Your approach is to plug your ears and scream "fraud" when science reaches conclusions you don't like. That's not science. That's a tantrum.

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: 50 Years of Failed Eco-pocalyptic Predictions...
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:02 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:54 am
Posts: 7484
ldsfaqs wrote:
They were ALL valid accept the one. All the valid ones referred to some "extreme cold" issue.

“The one” that you’re referring to as the only invalid example was the photoshopped cover. I had to point that one out to you, as clearly you were posting a cover that never existed.

But let’s look at the others individually. Start with this one, by explaining this problem for you that what was pointed out by Doc Steuss:

Quote:
December 1973, “The Big Freeze.” This one is one of the best of the bunch, because the cover story isn’t even about weather. It’s about the 1973 oil crisis.


You have two choices: either show that part of the article that talks about ‘global cooling’, or just accept the fact that you’re a terrible, wife-punching, morally-deficient liar.

The choice is yours.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:02 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 7870
Res Ipsa wrote:
You're right. I relied on the proprietor of the worlds most popular denier blog, who linked the e-mail with Deming's testimony. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/08/ ... m-period/I should know better than to trust deniers.

Odd that Deming didn't identify who sent the e-mail or produce it. So that's the evidence of your grand conspiracy?


LOL... You are just too funny.
1. That's not the most popular blog, in fact it's likely one of the least.
2. Weren't you the one who linked to this very same blog to prove one of YOUR points, that I then debunked? Or was that someone else, like within the last few days?
3. I don't know what they are doing on that page. They are for some reason mixing two vastly different emails as if they are the same.
4. The confusion seems to have been started by a "Robert" who looks like he's a Pro-AGW guy, because he claimed the quote was fraudulent, and then he gives them a different quote that was from one of the climate gate emails.

So, I don't know what's going on there, unless I'm missing something.

Anyway, let's not get distracted. Dr Deming is who we are talking about and who quotes the email HE got, and it was some 4 years before Michael Mann's fake hockey stick, again the FIRST person to create such a graph eliminating the Medieval Warm Period.

Clearly, you have no problem with fraud in science. Okay, then just admit it.
Science is science, I'm certainly not the one "denying" it, you are by denying the Medieval Warm Period.

by the way, I want to point out "why" would Dr. Deming "make up" a clear statement about getting rid of the Medieval Warm Period, LONG before Michael Mann even published his hockey stick removing the period?
I mean, it wasn't an issue publically for some 4 years after Deming's testimony.

_________________
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The 1970s Global Cooling Consensus was not a Myth... Stu
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:16 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 7870
Res Ipsa wrote:
My God, FAQs, you actually didn't read the blog post, did you? You keep contradicting the author.

Quote:
Some people may wish to ignore the KR-16 database as being from a so-called “climate denier” blog. However, almost all of the papers in KR-16 are from peer-reviewed literature and consequently it is a valid database. It is also worth noting that 16 of the papers used in the KR-16 database are also contained in the PCF-08 database.

The combined PCF-08 and KR-16 databases form the benchmark database for the current review. It was intended to significantly extend the benchmark database but, on searching the relevant journals, only 2 additional papers were found and these were added to form the database for this review.


Nope. You didn't bother to read it at all.


LOL, you're the one who doesn't read for "comprehension"...

Let me BOLD the relevant point that debunks your claim.
In other words, yes it's true he combined the databases, but HE STILL DID HIS OWN SEARCH, which included additional NEW search terms, to make sure the information was accurate, which is HOW he could find "2 more papers to add".

Further, you ignore the fact that you claimed he "only added cooling papers".
That was a lie, because he added cooling papers, 38 more Neutral Papers, and two more Warming papers.

So, liar liar pants on fire.
1. He did his OWN search to verify the info, which debunks your claim he just combined the info and pretended things.
2. He didn't just add cooling papers as you claimed
3. All the data STILL proves that the original researchers both ignored cooling papers, ignored important journals, and didn't include useful search terms.

And you won't admit any of these clear facts, thus you support liars and conmen instead of the best, most current, and complete research.
It's just like the various "research" studies done for the 93% or 97% etc. consensus of climate scientists support catastrophic AGW claim.
Those studies are massive CON JOBS, the same kind of shoddy research, though in some cases even worse than your loved methodology of cherry-picking studies to support your claim that there was no global cooling consensus in the 70's!

_________________
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:17 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 12:54 am
Posts: 7484
faqs, who wrote the text in the court doc?

C’mon, don’t be a lying liary liar. Show us the proof that Mann wrote these words about himself. Not that it says anything about climate change conclusions regardless - I’m just trying to give you an opportunity to be right about something for once. Don’t blow your chance.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:31 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm
Posts: 7870
canpakes wrote:
faqs, who wrote the text in the court doc?

C’mon, don’t be a lying liary liar. Show us the proof that Mann wrote these words about himself. Not that it says anything about climate change conclusions regardless - I’m just trying to give you an opportunity to be right about something for once. Don’t blow your chance.


LOL, they were HIS court docs... Just because his "lawyer" may have wrote it, doesn't mean he didn't review and approve it.
It's HIS Testimony... Do you know what "testimony" is?

Again, I show you you're wrong, yet again.

_________________
"Socialism is Rape and Capitalism is consensual sex" - Ben Shapiro


Last edited by ldsfaqs on Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:32 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
ldsfaqs wrote:
Res Ipsa wrote:
You're right. I relied on the proprietor of the worlds most popular denier blog, who linked the e-mail with Deming's testimony. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/08/ ... m-period/I should know better than to trust deniers.

Odd that Deming didn't identify who sent the e-mail or produce it. So that's the evidence of your grand conspiracy?


LOL... You are just too funny.
1. That's not the most popular blog, in fact it's likely one of the least.
2. Weren't you the one who linked to this very same blog to prove one of YOUR points, that I then debunked? Or was that someone else, like within the last few days?
3. I don't know what they are doing on that page. They are for some reason mixing two vastly different emails as if they are the same.
4. The confusion seems to have been started by a "Robert" who looks like he's a Pro-AGW guy, because he claimed the quote was fraudulent, and then he gives them a different quote that was from one of the climate gate emails.

So, I don't know what's going on there, unless I'm missing something.

Anyway, let's not get distracted. Dr Deming is who we are talking about and who quotes the email HE got, and it was some 4 years before Michael Mann's fake hockey stick, again the FIRST person to create such a graph eliminating the Medieval Warm Period.

Clearly, you have no problem with fraud in science. Okay, then just admit it.
Science is science, I'm certainly not the one "denying" it, you are by denying the Medieval Warm Period.

by the way, I want to point out "why" would Dr. Deming "make up" a clear statement about getting rid of the Medieval Warm Period, LONG before Michael Mann even published his hockey stick removing the period?
I mean, it wasn't an issue publically for some 4 years after Deming's testimony.


Frankly, the whole incident is confusing. Someone else tried to figure it out, but it just doesn't make sense. https://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2012/10/17/1943 I think it's McIntyre who introduced the confusion by linking Deming with the e-mail, but it's really unclear.

But, as evidence of fraud, Deming's testimony is extremely weak as far as evidence goes. He testifies about an e-mail he received 10 years before from a major figure in climate science that said something pretty shocking, but he can't remember who and he doesn't have the e-mail. Frankly, I think he's misremembering. There simply isn't any evidence that Mann was involved. And there isn't any evidence that Mann fraudulently removed evidence of the MWP from his hockey stick paper. (Actually, I don't think the first paper in 1998 even covered the period of the MWP, but I'd have to double check.) If there was, you could easily prove the fraud by showing what he did. Not to mention the fact that there are lots of reconstructions now through the relevant time period, and they all look pretty similar. If you like conspiracy theories, the claim that scientists have all conspired to get rid of the MWP certainly sounds attractive, but where's the evidence? So far you've got a 10 year old recollection by a guy who can't remember who it was.

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Michael Mann... Fake Nobel Prize and Fake Hockey St
PostPosted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 6:35 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
ldsfaqs wrote:
canpakes wrote:
faqs, who wrote the text in the court doc?

C’mon, don’t be a lying liary liar. Show us the proof that Mann wrote these words about himself. Not that it says anything about climate change conclusions regardless - I’m just trying to give you an opportunity to be right about something for once. Don’t blow your chance.


LOL, they were HIS court docs... Just because his "lawyer" may have wrote it, doesn't mean he didn't review and approve it.
It's HIS Testimony... Do you know what "testimony" is?

Again, I show you you're wrong, yet again.


FAQs, and just because his lawyer wrote it doesn't mean he did review and approve it. Not everything filed in a court is "testimony". If you post a link to it, we can all look at it and then we'll know.

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 307 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 ... 15  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Gunnar and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group