The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread

[sonofdaxjones]

So we went from a Physicist to



This truly is Trumps America.

Nope, denied.   The warmist alarmists have already decreed that physicists do not count (unless they agree with them).

[star seed 7]

Meanwhile dax only trusts climate science from energy companies

[star seed 7]

Dax also believes coke when they fund studies that prove soda is totally healthy

[sonofdaxjones]

Meanwhile dax only trusts climate science from energy companies

liblogic aka I'll Take Alex Jones for $1000:  Anyone not in total agreement with our propaganda has been "bought off" by Big Energy

[sonofdaxjones]

Dax also believes coke when they fund studies that prove soda is totally healthy

I don't answer to the Coca-Cola bottling company, lib.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

The ocean doesn't effect climate, per the libtard. 

:chrisfarleyelnino:

[bucket]

The ocean doesn't effect climate, per the libtard. 

:chrisfarleyelnino:

What do you think is raising the ocean temp? 

[Emo EMAW]

What raised it the last time?

[bucket]

What raised it the last time?

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

The ocean doesn't effect climate, per the libtard. 

:chrisfarleyelnino:

What do you think is raising the ocean temp? 

T-Y 

[Dugout DickStone]

Lol at Rick perry

[bucket]

The ocean doesn't effect climate, per the libtard. 

:chrisfarleyelnino:

What do you think is raising the ocean temp? 

T-Y 

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Well, it's a start! Several prominent warmists acknowledge there's a big discrepancy between their models and measured temperatures (see post 1 this thread) and are studying why.

https://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo2973.html

TL-DNR: Our models have overestimated climate sensitivity to CO2.

Causes of differences in model and satellite tropospheric warming rates

Ben Santer, et al.

Abstract

In the early twenty-first century, satellite-derived tropospheric warming trends were generally smaller than trends estimated from a large multi-model ensemble. Because observations and coupled model simulations do not have the same phasing of natural internal variability, such decadal differences in simulated and observed warming rates invariably occur. Here we analyse global-mean tropospheric temperatures from satellites and climate model simulations to examine whether warming rate differences over the satellite era can be explained by internal climate variability alone. We find that in the last two decades of the twentieth century, differences between modelled and observed tropospheric temperature trends are broadly consistent with internal variability. Over most of the early twenty-first century, however, model tropospheric warming is substantially larger than observed; warming rate differences are generally outside the range of trends arising from internal variability. The probability that multi-decadal internal variability fully explains the asymmetry between the late twentieth and early twenty-first century results is low (between zero and about 9%). It is also unlikely that this asymmetry is due to the combined effects of internal variability and a model error in climate sensitivity. We conclude that model overestimation of tropospheric warming in the early twenty-first century is partly due to systematic deficiencies in some of the post-2000 external forcings used in the model simulations.

[sonofdaxjones]

Their models are repeatedly way off.  But that doesn't stop the propaganda. 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Clearly, climate change is to blame for the inaccuracies of the models. Gotta fix it quick or the models arr doomed!

[SdK]

Refresh me, please. Are there posters on here that think climate change isn't happening? Or do they just believe it isn't caused by man?

[star seed 7]

Dax thinks it's a hoax by the Chinese

[sonofdaxjones]

Poor lib, just reduced to really bad sarcasm from the cheapseats, if not straight up tapping out before he even gets started these days.

Sad

[camKSU]

Refresh me, please. Are there posters on here that think climate change isn't happening? Or do they just believe it isn't caused by man?

In true shill fashion, the deniers are now pivoting to climate change may be real but not significantly affected by man. And when that fails they then move to their next argument that china/india/developing countries are way worse so why should we change our lifestyles/society here in the west. And when that fails then they argue if you don't live completely off-grid, ride a bike everywhere, only eat vegan, then you are hypocrite and shouldn't even try to live a cleaner life. And when that fails they say the collection data and models are flawed, despite many studies and science refuting their claims. And on, and on, and on.

But really what it all boils down to is that they are change-averse. They can't handle having to adjust their decisions/lives or having the government put in place regulations that force them to think about the impacts of the status quo. They grasp with all their might to save 50k coal jobs, dying industries, and nostalgia to a bygone era when you could burn tires in your back yard, fill up with leaded gasoline, and sit by grandpas bedside while he died of black lung.

Sad. Almost feel bad for them. My only solace is that they will soon die and not have to bear the discomfort of having to breathe clean air or drink clean water... And we can all move on from their willful ignorance and join the rest of the modern world, embracing technological progress, alternative energy, building efficiency, and sustainability.

RIP deniers.

[sonofdaxjones]

Refresh me, please. Are there posters on here that think climate change isn't happening? Or do they just believe it isn't caused by man?

In true shill fashion, the deniers are now pivoting to climate change may be real but not significantly affected by man. And when that fails they then move to their next argument that china/india/developing countries are way worse so why should we change our lifestyles/society here in the west. And when that fails then they argue if you don't live completely off-grid, ride a bike everywhere, only eat vegan, then you are hypocrite and shouldn't even try to live a cleaner life. And when that fails they say the collection data and models are flawed, despite many studies and science refuting their claims. And on, and on, and on.

But really what it all boils down to is that they are change-averse. They can't handle having to adjust their decisions/lives or having the government put in place regulations that force them to think about the impacts of the status quo. They grasp with all their might to save 50k coal jobs, dying industries, and nostalgia to a bygone era when you could burn tires in your back yard, fill up with leaded gasoline, and sit by grandpas bedside while he died of black lung.

Sad. Almost feel bad for them. My only solace is that they will soon die and not have to bear the discomfort of having to breathe clean air or drink clean water... And we can all move on from their willful ignorance and join the rest of the modern world, embracing technological progress, alternative energy, building efficiency, and sustainability.

RIP deniers.

LOL, the simple facts are the biggest advocates of AGW, are also some of the biggest individual consumers of fossil fuels on the planet.   Always willing to hop into airplanes and fly all over the planet to tell everyone else how they need to live their lives.  But I digress.

Just because you want to hook your wagon to an utterly meaningless Paris Accord which affords absolutely ZERO accountability to some of the biggest polluters (countries) on the planet, doesn't mean it shouldn't be subjected to the scorn and ridicule it so rightly deserves.

As we've discussed.  AGW propagandists are once again being shown trying to play both sides of the coin in order to advance their political agenda.

[camKSU]

Refresh me, please. Are there posters on here that think climate change isn't happening? Or do they just believe it isn't caused by man?

In true shill fashion, the deniers are now pivoting to climate change may be real but not significantly affected by man. And when that fails they then move to their next argument that china/india/developing countries are way worse so why should we change our lifestyles/society here in the west. And when that fails then they argue if you don't live completely off-grid, ride a bike everywhere, only eat vegan, then you are hypocrite and shouldn't even try to live a cleaner life. And when that fails they say the collection data and models are flawed, despite many studies and science refuting their claims. And on, and on, and on.

But really what it all boils down to is that they are change-averse. They can't handle having to adjust their decisions/lives or having the government put in place regulations that force them to think about the impacts of the status quo. They grasp with all their might to save 50k coal jobs, dying industries, and nostalgia to a bygone era when you could burn tires in your back yard, fill up with leaded gasoline, and sit by grandpas bedside while he died of black lung.

Sad. Almost feel bad for them. My only solace is that they will soon die and not have to bear the discomfort of having to breathe clean air or drink clean water... And we can all move on from their willful ignorance and join the rest of the modern world, embracing technological progress, alternative energy, building efficiency, and sustainability.

RIP deniers.

LOL, the simple facts are the biggest advocates of AGW, are also some of the biggest individual consumers of fossil fuels on the planet.   Always willing to hop into airplanes and fly all over the planet to tell everyone else how they need to live their lives.  But I digress.

Just because you want to hook your wagon to an utterly meaningless Paris Accord which affords absolutely ZERO accountability to some of the biggest polluters (countries) on the planet, doesn't mean it shouldn't be subjected to the scorn and ridicule it so rightly deserves.

As we've discussed.  AGW propagandists are once again being shown trying to play both sides of the coin in order to advance their political agenda.

So because the Paris Accord doesn't go far enough to address climate change the US should then lead the rest of the world by throwing the whole thing in trash? Doesn't that conflict with your viewpoint that climate change isn't a big deal? Great logic, dax!

And to say that the people trying to change things are some of the biggest polluters and because of that we shouldn't listen to them is another logical fallacy. It neither refutes what they are saying or why we should change.

You (and your ilk) are so woefully wrapped up in conspiracy theories that you are blind from seeing and accepting the science and facts right in front of you, supported by people educated and devoted to studying it. "If obama, the liberals, and europeans want it then it must be wrong and they must be trying to trick us! TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP! MAGA!"

Sad.

[sonofdaxjones]

Refresh me, please. Are there posters on here that think climate change isn't happening? Or do they just believe it isn't caused by man?

In true shill fashion, the deniers are now pivoting to climate change may be real but not significantly affected by man. And when that fails they then move to their next argument that china/india/developing countries are way worse so why should we change our lifestyles/society here in the west. And when that fails then they argue if you don't live completely off-grid, ride a bike everywhere, only eat vegan, then you are hypocrite and shouldn't even try to live a cleaner life. And when that fails they say the collection data and models are flawed, despite many studies and science refuting their claims. And on, and on, and on.

But really what it all boils down to is that they are change-averse. They can't handle having to adjust their decisions/lives or having the government put in place regulations that force them to think about the impacts of the status quo. They grasp with all their might to save 50k coal jobs, dying industries, and nostalgia to a bygone era when you could burn tires in your back yard, fill up with leaded gasoline, and sit by grandpas bedside while he died of black lung.

Sad. Almost feel bad for them. My only solace is that they will soon die and not have to bear the discomfort of having to breathe clean air or drink clean water... And we can all move on from their willful ignorance and join the rest of the modern world, embracing technological progress, alternative energy, building efficiency, and sustainability.

RIP deniers.

LOL, the simple facts are the biggest advocates of AGW, are also some of the biggest individual consumers of fossil fuels on the planet.   Always willing to hop into airplanes and fly all over the planet to tell everyone else how they need to live their lives.  But I digress.

Just because you want to hook your wagon to an utterly meaningless Paris Accord which affords absolutely ZERO accountability to some of the biggest polluters (countries) on the planet, doesn't mean it shouldn't be subjected to the scorn and ridicule it so rightly deserves.

As we've discussed.  AGW propagandists are once again being shown trying to play both sides of the coin in order to advance their political agenda.

So because the Paris Accord doesn't go far enough to address climate change the US should then lead the rest of the world by throwing the whole thing in trash? Doesn't that conflict with your viewpoint that climate change isn't a big deal? Great logic, dax!  (LOL, climate change, which has occurred since earth existed is always a "big deal", after all climate change buried much of North America under hundreds if not thousands of feet of ice at one time.   The encroachment of the ice and the retreat of the ice formed much of topography we have today which in turn defines all matter of our geological existence.   Just because you're all in on AGW doesn't mean others don't understand or get the impact of climate change.  Idiotic comment CAM).

And to say that the people trying to change things are some of the biggest polluters and because of that we shouldn't listen to them is another logical fallacy. It neither refutes what they are saying or why we should change.  (This is not a difficult concept, it's not the least bit surprising that you're willing to give AGW advocates a pass on their massive hypocrisy).

You (and your ilk) are so woefully wrapped up in conspiracy theories that you are blind from seeing and accepting the science and facts right in front of you, supported by people educated and devoted to studying it. "If obama, the liberals, and europeans want it then it must be wrong and they must be trying to trick us! TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP! MAGA!"   (Just more droll from a guy who will never get it.  You literally end every one of your amateurish screeds with the same dribble.  Sad indeed)

Sad.

[Gooch]

You do realize that the last ice age was due to a global extinction level event (impact from more than likely an asteroid or comet) not just a random fluctuation in the earths climate, right? Ya know that thing that killed off all the dinosaurs.

[sonofdaxjones]

You do realize that the last ice age was due to a global extinction level event (impact from more than likely an asteroid or comet) not just a random fluctuation in the earths climate, right? Ya know that thing that killed off all the dinosaurs.

Who said or claimed a "random fluctuation".   There's also been a series of "mini" ice ages over the Earth's history.   In fact, AGW'ers have done their best to erase the last mini ice age right off the record books. 

Remember, in the 1970's, the headlines were that were headed to another ice age. 

[star seed 7]

Links to those headlines? Must have been a lot of them to make such an impression on you and not just one article once that the author retracted a year later