The Hockey Stick Graph Reality

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by livefree, Feb 27, 2017.

  1. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    No one ever said but we said.
    Nor has anyone ever claimed but IPCC claims.
    As funny as that.
    None of the IPCC predictions has ever happened.
    As funny as that.
     
  2. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    There is no such thing as world climate.
    It is an idiotic term invented by climate scientists to serve only to their idiotic claims.
    No change in climate was reported for any geographical area for which it was defined and written down when the hoaxers started their climate "science".
    No change has been reported since.
    Climate " science" is all fake to the core.
     
  3. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Denier cult insanity and rejection of reality in its purest form. Hilarious....but very sad!
     
  4. Media_Truth

    Media_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lindzen has been widely debunked by others. For example:

    https://www.skepticalscience.com/skeptic_Richard_Lindzen.htm

    Lindzen: "In the North Pole, you don’t have a [ice] cap, you have sea ice; it’s very variable. And as far as Greenland and Antarctica go, there’s no evidence of any significant change. I mean, you know, again your measurements aren’t that great, but any reports you hear are again focusing on tiny changes that would have no implication."

    Rebuttal: Arctic sea ice has shrunk by an area equal to Western Australia, and summer or multi-year sea ice might be all gone within a decade.

     
  5. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The thing about skeptical scientist is they are amateurs. Posers if you prefer.

    I believe at Antarctica there is more and more ice, not less.

    Sea ice in the Arctic is a non stable environment. We know this due to discoveries made there.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/01/science/earth/01climate.html

     
  6. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,794
    Likes Received:
    8,619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Skeptical Science is a creation of the dishonest hockey stick team. They've been pedaling dishonest hockey stick science for years.
     
  7. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,794
    Likes Received:
    8,619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Skeptical Sience is run by the hockey stick team. The basis of alarmism was the hockey stick papers published ~ 20 years ago. These have been shown to be dishonest and are no longer even mentioned by the IPCC which at one time used the hockey stick as part of their logo.
     
  8. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Wow, accept that language as were it used on you and not on AFM. Does that look compelling? :roflol:
     
  9. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Let's check out one of Skeptical sciences "experts."

    Dana 1981 posted to the site and was accepted to the team.

    https://www.skepticalscience.com/going-down-the-up-escalator-part-1.html

    What she says is typical of such sites. But then there is a lot more.

    http://notrickszone.com/2011/02/22/...oved-climate-disruption/#sthash.ZHgSnwb2.dpbs

     
  10. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You are actually citing Pierre Gosselin and his crackpot denier cult website 'notrickszone.com'???.....LOLOLOLOLOL...

    Here's some accurate info relating to that garbage....
    Denier weirdness: The crank blog popularity contest

    And Lubos Motl???......LOLOLOLOLOL......

    Lubos Motl, the crackpot Czech theoretical physicist and rabid AGW denier, specializing in String Theory, who has never published anything that is in any way connected to climate science or climate change, but who nonetheless keeps up a steady stream of web assaults on far more competent scientists he calls "fringe kibitzers who want to become universal dictators" who should "be thinking how to undo your inexcusable behavior so that you will spend as little time in prison as possible"? LOLOLOL.

    Luboš Motl
    RationalWiki
    - “Your humble correspondent realizes that many readers are left-wing, anti-string-theory fighters. So they probably smoke marijuana and this is my modest attempt to help them.”
    Marijuana creates holes in lungs[1]

    Luboš Motl (born 1973) is a Czech physicist specializing in string theory. During his active career, he was a competent scientist and an author of mathematics textbooks. Now he is mostly a raging ******* from hell.

    Between 2004 and 2007, Motl was an assistant professor at Harvard University. He got the job through competence and talent, and lost it by being a raging *******. He has not held a university position since. Motl's Wikipedia article is anodyne, but proudly lists all his arXiv submissions. He has not published a single paper there or anywhere else since 2007, when he split from Harvard. He originally got his Ph.D. scholarship because of a paper he posted on the arXiv as an undergraduate.[2]

    The Reference Frame
    His blog, The Reference Frame, consists of abuse and insults hurled at anyone he disagrees with, mostly concerning physics. He has an annoying habit of continuing to edit posts for months after making them, making citation difficult, but at least he doesn't change his stated opinions and makes the abuse and insults more refined. PZ Myers has called Motl a "crackpot"[3] (which is also Motl's favoured word for anyone who disagrees with him). It is true that Luboš is willing to embrace crackpot ideas[4][5][6] when it suits his politics. However, his science is generally good within his sphere of competence. The problem is his refusal to recognize that his sphere of competence is finite.

    And God help you if you've ever implied anywhere that string theory is anything less than the revealed secret of the Universe, particularly if you're Lee Smolin, Peter Woit or "similar breathtakingly dishonest far-left anti-scientific subhuman activist garbage".[7] Motl has so far failed to keep their papers entirely off the readable categories of arXiv, but not for want of effort.

    Political views
    “”Sorry, Greek reader who lives outside the reality, but an average Greek surely doesn't deserve and shouldn't have money for a "good German car". It's just your fantasy. The real question is how many millions of Greeks should starve to death and not which good German car they should buy.
    —Luboš Motl[8]

    Motl defines himself as a "Christian atheist." This seems to be due more to anti-Islamic sentiment and belief in "Western values" than the religion itself.[9]

    Feminism
    He's a not a big fan of feminism, either:

    “”Science has been done without women for centuries, and it obviously worked.
    —Luboš Motl[10]

    “”Show me a single influential scholar in a department of women's studies who understands the very basic insight about that discipline, namely why virtually all of scholarly feminism is intellectual garbage.
    —Luboš Motl[11]

    Racism
    Motl doesn't understand the point of Martin Luther King Day celebration. Apparently, black people had to sit in the back of the buses for entirely sensible reasons:

    “”The average U.S. black earns some 65% of the salary of the average white. (…) Some "disadvantaged tickets on the bus" sound rather sensible. Second, the degree of hygiene and safety is simply lower in (black people)
    —Luboš Motl[12]

    “”It would be silly to suggest that a random black American has the same likelihood to do physics (or something similar) well as a random white American. (…) In practice, almost all science in recent 500 years has been done and found by the white people and/or the West.
    —Luboš Motl[13]

    Feminism, homosexuality and the Muslims
    “But needless to say, this is exactly what feminists, homosexualists, and other radical leftists want to do to all inconvenient biological human beings, too. If these individuals are not kept in check, like the Muslim communities, they will simply do their best to kill anyone who realizes that this left-wing ideology is cancer."
    —Luboš Motl[14]

    Climate change
    Motl is a climate change denier, having realized that "left-wing groups want to use this carbon theme as a tool for wealth redistribution."[15] His very… distinctive comments can be found on climate change blogs all over the internet (for example, at Stoat, Deltoid, etc.)

    While commenting on William M. Connolley's blog, Motl wrote:[16]

    “I think that trash like yourself cannot be debated. It must be destroyed. What is written on the "climate denial" page [in Wikipedia] is just crime, the people who are responsible for it are criminals, and as soon as I get the opportunity to collaborate with someone on their liquidation, I will do it."

    In a later comment, Motl clarified:

    “When I say to liquidate them, I don't mean anything illegal. I just mean the same thing that was eventually done with the Nazis during the second war."

    Connolley responded with:
    “Amusingly, I was reading Popper on the Marxists just last night. He lays into them very strongly for using ambiguous language to avoid explicit advocation of violence, but the implications are clear. How odd to find Luboš having this in common with them."

    Skeptical Science has extensively attacked Motl's "arguments".[17]

    On race and picnics
    There was a picnic on Harvard Quad's lawn, with 60 students, primarily black. Police were called in to check their IDs. Motl reacted thus:[11]

    "On May 12th, two groups organized a noisy picnic on the Quad's public lawn. Harvard students were everywhere around. Many of them were studying: it was a reading period. Many of them are sensitive and can't concentrate well if there is noise around.
    It shouldn't be unexpected that someone called the police. If it were a party I couldn't effectively attend and if there were people around me who would also think that the noise is just too much, I would call police, too."

    [....]

    "Wow. If someone makes a huge mess in front of the buildings where some of the smartest young people on the planet are supposed to study, it is illegitimate to call police because it is a black people's party and everyone — the whole community of Harvard students — is instantly accused of racism and the director of the "intercultural foundation" is black, too."

    "Counter's "foundation" is clearly meant to be a tool to intimidate students and other members of the community, politicize all questions, and make sure that a pathetic hypocritical ideology is more important than a tolerable atmosphere during the reading period and other values that used to be associated with the world of Academia."

    [....]

    "These days, the Academia — universities as well as their individual departments — are literally flooded with similar distasteful foundations and committees whose only purpose is to overfill the community with propaganda and fear and to impose very unbalanced, politically biased code of a certain flavor."

    On his own greatness
    Motl is smart, though not nearly as smart as he thinks he is. (It's impossible for anyone to be as smart as Motl thinks he is.) This means everyone who disagrees with him is stupid, probably to the point of criminal negligence:

    “I am myself under significant pressure from large groups of crackpots and an effectively infinite sequence of online idiots, many of whom are anonymous and possibly using many pseudonyms to improve their case according to optics of people who are not capable of independent thinking and who judge the truth according to the number of pseudonyms signed under a particular opinion, without realizing that one Motl signature is still more than 50,000 signatures of idiots."
    —Luboš Motl[10]

    “Let me politely assume that your sentence has been just a typo."
    —Luboš Motl[10]

    “You are absolutely wrong and still apparently missing all the basic points I wrote."
    —Luboš Motl[10]

    “Your impression that the battle between crackpots like you and high-energy theoretical physics is the only example of these issues is an artifact of your extremely limited knowledge, intelligence, and partially a consequence of your attempts to promote yourself."
    —Luboš Motl[10]

    “I assure you that I am not making any mistake in the analysis of the relation of capitalism and the planned economy. I have checked and rechecked the texts, and if you have a feeling that something is incorrect, then be sure that the error is on your side."
    —Luboš Motl[10]
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2017
  11. Media_Truth

    Media_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "notrickzone" is one of many organizations that are probably tied to big-money lobbying efforts by the fossil fuel industry. Here is a list, with what is known about them.

    https://insideclimatenews.org/news/...-oreskes-fred-singer-marc-morano-steve-milloy

    Many of those copied on the email thread, such as Singer and communications specialist Steven Milloy, have financial ties to the tobacco, chemical, and oil and gas industries and have worked to defend them since the 1990s. Others seem relatively new to the denialist camp, such as climate scientist Judith Curry. All, however, have been vocal before Congress, on broadcast news or on the Internet in arguing that human activity is not the primarily driver of climate change.

    Here is InsideClimate News' guide to those who were on the emails, in alphabetical order:
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  12. Media_Truth

    Media_Truth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2016
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,031
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No experts about them - they are oil-paid lobby influenced. The fossil fuel industry has paid out so many millions that they get results. The tobacco industry did the same thing in the '50s and '60s. It bought them about 10 years, before the surgeon general took over.
     
  13. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    There is no danger to the oil industry. I understand as China markets to the USA, our tobacco producers market to the world. Where the surgeon general can't reach.
     
  14. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,794
    Likes Received:
    8,619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The tree rings actually show cooling in the last 100 years. The hockey team members who run Skeptical Science most likely believe their conclusions but their science is dishonest. That's been proven. And again the MWP was global and warmer than today.
     
  15. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,878
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Actually the tree ring issue has been resolved
     
  16. livefree

    livefree Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2004
    Messages:
    4,205
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Repeating your fraudulent denier cult myths over and over won't magically make them come true.

    Skeptical Science conveys the actual state of the real climate science reflected in all of the published papers in the major science journals......it is the pseudo-science that the fossil fuel industry's propaganda pushers feed you that is "dishonest".....and the only "proof" you have for your delusions is found in the bogus BS on denier cult blogs.
     
  17. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,794
    Likes Received:
    8,619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Would that be the issue that tree rings are an extremely unreliable way to "measure" temperature ?? The original hockey stick was based on finding data which got rid of the MWP and LIA. Unfortunately those tree ring data showed cooling in the last ~ 100 years (the divergence problem). All that the hockey team has done is find other data sets which agree with their requirement that the MWP and LIA are eliminated/minimized. It's a further demonstration of dishonesty.
     
    Last edited: Apr 10, 2017
  18. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,794
    Likes Received:
    8,619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You reliance on the dishonest scientists which produced the hockey stick papers and climategate is telling.
     
  19. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,422
    Likes Received:
    2,186
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Skeptical Science, for example, isn't doing science. They're reporting on the science. What do you think attacking the messengers accomplishes, other than making you look desperate?

    Attacking the messengers won't make the science go away. However, since all the science says your cult has faked everything, you really have no choice except to attack the messenger. It's not like you can address the actual science, so you have to find some way to run from it.

    It's good to be on the rational side. We only have to point to the facts to "win". We don't have to attack the messengers. We only have to point out your messengers aren't talking about the science, so their message is meaningless.
     
  20. AFM

    AFM Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2014
    Messages:
    35,794
    Likes Received:
    8,619
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nobody is attacking the messengers except for the alarmists that attack those scientists who dispute the alarmist message which is based on dishonest science.
     
  21. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, he has been attacked, pilloried, decried, excoriated, etc., but not debunked. For example:
    That does not rebut or debunk anything Lindzen said. It is coincidence that the beginning of satellite measurement of arctic sea ice corresponded to the end of the 1940-1970 cooling period, when arctic sea ice could be expected to be near its maximum.
     
  22. _Inquisitor_

    _Inquisitor_ Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    161
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It is true. Scientists are dishonest and disgusting creatures - they indeed can be bought very cheap.
     

Share This Page