Author Topic: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread  (Read 429255 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52946
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #350 on: September 04, 2013, 06:23:27 AM »
Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #351 on: September 04, 2013, 09:18:42 AM »
that article is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52946
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #352 on: September 04, 2013, 12:17:21 PM »
Warmists . . . The New Denialists


Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #353 on: September 04, 2013, 01:32:08 PM »
Warmists . . . The New Denialists

dax, the article is Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) (or written for an intended audience of retards), if you read the article and didn't pick up on that, then you need to work on reading comprehension.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #354 on: September 04, 2013, 01:44:06 PM »
i think it's important to be able to retain the ability to detect bullshit, even when it is spewed in support of a thesis you favor.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Dugout DickStone

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 51303
  • BSPAC
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #355 on: September 04, 2013, 01:51:08 PM »
If I plant a redwood this weekend, will it me big enough to drive my car through by next fall?

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52946
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #356 on: September 04, 2013, 02:48:03 PM »
The Bullshit detector went off a long time ago sys . . . when the warmists/propagandists tried to foist this "consensus" bullshit on the rest of us.

« Last Edit: September 04, 2013, 04:14:09 PM by sonofdaxjones »

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #357 on: September 06, 2013, 03:05:04 PM »

Offline EMAWican

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1202
  • 'Murica
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #358 on: September 06, 2013, 03:29:53 PM »
lib university study:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130904161219.htm

Quote
"We don't know what the future holds," Barkley said. "The research does not predict climate change, or forecast future weather conditions. Instead, it shows the predicted change in Kansas wheat yields if we were to experience a 1 degree (C) increase (1.8 degrees F) in temperature. If the average temperature does increase, this research helps us to understand the potential impact on wheat production."

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52946
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #359 on: September 06, 2013, 03:37:49 PM »
Same lib school did a study that said that a higher CO2 content climate allows wheat to survive and produce in dry conditions.





Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63767
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #360 on: September 06, 2013, 03:59:31 PM »
Same lib school did a study that said that a higher CO2 content climate allows wheat to survive and produce in dry conditions.

how well do the people that eat the wheat survive in higher CO2 content climates?   :excited:
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #361 on: September 06, 2013, 04:14:21 PM »
lib university study:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130904161219.htm

Quote
"We don't know what the future holds," Barkley said. "The research does not predict climate change, or forecast future weather conditions. Instead, it shows the predicted change in Kansas wheat yields if we were to experience a 1 degree (C) increase (1.8 degrees F) in temperature. If the average temperature does increase, this research helps us to understand the potential impact on wheat production."


also,

Quote
"Given weather trends in recent years, climate change is expected to increase temperatures, and this is likely to lower wheat yields in Kansas," Barkley said.

:dunno:

Offline EMAWican

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1202
  • 'Murica
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #362 on: September 06, 2013, 04:30:08 PM »
lib university study:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130904161219.htm

Quote
"We don't know what the future holds," Barkley said. "The research does not predict climate change, or forecast future weather conditions. Instead, it shows the predicted change in Kansas wheat yields if we were to experience a 1 degree (C) increase (1.8 degrees F) in temperature. If the average temperature does increase, this research helps us to understand the potential impact on wheat production."


also,

Quote
"Given weather trends in recent years, climate change is expected to increase temperatures, and this is likely to lower wheat yields in Kansas," Barkley said.

:dunno:

Add another wheat researcher/expert to the climate change consensus.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53674
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #363 on: September 06, 2013, 04:31:26 PM »
That makes it 0.11% consensus

Offline john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7626
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #364 on: September 06, 2013, 06:17:59 PM »
lib university study:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130904161219.htm

Quote
"We don't know what the future holds," Barkley said. "The research does not predict climate change, or forecast future weather conditions. Instead, it shows the predicted change in Kansas wheat yields if we were to experience a 1 degree (C) increase (1.8 degrees F) in temperature. If the average temperature does increase, this research helps us to understand the potential impact on wheat production."


also,

Quote
"Given weather trends in recent years, climate change is expected to increase temperatures, and this is likely to lower wheat yields in Kansas," Barkley said.

:dunno:

I love this kind of comment regarding climate.

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13548
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #365 on: September 06, 2013, 11:22:40 PM »
Same lib school did a study that said that a higher CO2 content climate allows wheat to survive and produce in dry conditions.

how well do the people that eat the wheat survive in higher CO2 content climates?   :excited:

Wgaf

Offline gatoveintisiete

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4036
  • Cold Ass Honkey
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #366 on: September 07, 2013, 12:56:35 AM »
How is it that dax is so good and the rest of you are so bad?
it’s not like I’m tired of WINNING, but dude, let me catch my breath.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #367 on: September 09, 2013, 09:21:30 AM »
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html

Quote
A chilly Arctic summer has left nearly a million more square miles of ocean covered with ice than at the same time last year – an increase of 60 per cent. The rebound from 2012’s record low comes six years after the BBC reported that global warming would leave the Arctic ice-free in summer by 2013.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/09/climate-change-arctic-sea-ice-delusions

Quote
When it comes to climate science reporting, the Mail on Sunday and Telegraph are only reliable in the sense that you can rely on them to usually get the science wrong. This weekend's Arctic sea ice articles from David Rose of the Mail and Hayley Dixon at the Telegraph unfortunately fit that pattern.

Both articles claimed that Arctic sea ice extent grew 60 percent in August 2013 as compared to August 2012. While this factoid is technically true, it's also largely irrelevant. For one thing, the annual Arctic sea ice minimum occurs in September – we're not there yet. And while this year's minimum extent will certainly be higher than last year's, that's not the least bit surprising.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #368 on: September 09, 2013, 12:52:29 PM »
http://climate.nasa.gov/news/975


Quote
The melting of sea ice in the Arctic is well on its way toward its annual "minimum," that time when the floating ice cap covers less of the Arctic Ocean than at any other period during the year. While the ice will continue to shrink until around mid-September, it is unlikely that this year’s summer low will break a new record. Still, this year’s melt rates are in line with the sustained decline of the Arctic ice cover observed by NASA and other satellites over the last several decades.

“Even if this year ends up being the sixth- or seventh-lowest extent, what matters is that the 10 lowest extents recorded have happened during the last 10 years,” said Walt Meier, a glaciologist with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. “The long-term trend is strongly downward.”

The icy cover of the Arctic Ocean was measured at 2.25 million square miles (5.83 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. For comparison, the smallest Arctic sea ice extent on record for this date, recorded in 2012, was 1.67 million square miles (4.34 million square kilometers), and the largest recorded for this date was in 1996, when ice covered 3.16 millions square miles (8.2 million square kilometers) of the Arctic Ocean.

Offline john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7626
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #369 on: September 09, 2013, 02:28:56 PM »
http://climate.nasa.gov/news/975


Quote
The melting of sea ice in the Arctic is well on its way toward its annual "minimum," that time when the floating ice cap covers less of the Arctic Ocean than at any other period during the year. While the ice will continue to shrink until around mid-September, it is unlikely that this year’s summer low will break a new record. Still, this year’s melt rates are in line with the sustained decline of the Arctic ice cover observed by NASA and other satellites over the last several decades.

“Even if this year ends up being the sixth- or seventh-lowest extent, what matters is that the 10 lowest extents recorded have happened during the last 10 years,” said Walt Meier, a glaciologist with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. “The long-term trend is strongly downward.”

The icy cover of the Arctic Ocean was measured at 2.25 million square miles (5.83 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. For comparison, the smallest Arctic sea ice extent on record for this date, recorded in 2012, was 1.67 million square miles (4.34 million square kilometers), and the largest recorded for this date was in 1996, when ice covered 3.16 millions square miles (8.2 million square kilometers) of the Arctic Ocean.

Well, in the last year we have had a huge increase, so we should all assume the next ice age is coming. How are we going to stop it?

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #370 on: September 09, 2013, 02:53:21 PM »
http://climate.nasa.gov/news/975


Quote
The melting of sea ice in the Arctic is well on its way toward its annual "minimum," that time when the floating ice cap covers less of the Arctic Ocean than at any other period during the year. While the ice will continue to shrink until around mid-September, it is unlikely that this year’s summer low will break a new record. Still, this year’s melt rates are in line with the sustained decline of the Arctic ice cover observed by NASA and other satellites over the last several decades.

“Even if this year ends up being the sixth- or seventh-lowest extent, what matters is that the buzz lowest extents recorded have happened during the last buzz years,” said Walt Meier, a glaciologist with NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. “The long-term trend is strongly downward.”

The icy cover of the Arctic Ocean was measured at 2.25 million square miles (buzz.83 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. For comparison, the smallest Arctic sea ice extent on record for this date, recorded in 2012, was 1.67 million square miles (4.34 million square kilometers), and the largest recorded for this date was in 1996, when ice covered fizz.16 millions square miles (8.2 million square kilometers) of the Arctic Ocean.

Well, in the last year we have had a huge increase, so we should all assume the next ice age is coming. How are we going to stop it?


No. 


Quote
Watching the summertime dynamics of the Arctic ice cap has gained considerable attention in recent years as the size of the minimum extent has been diminishing – rapidly. On Sept.16, 2012, Arctic sea ice reached its smallest extent ever recorded by satellites at 1.32 million square miles (3.41 million square kilometers). That is about half the size of the average extent from 1979 to 2010.

Sea ice extent is a measurement of the area of the Arctic Ocean where ice covers at least 15 percent of the ocean surface. For additional information about the evolution of the sea ice cover, scientists also study the sea ice "area," which discards regions of open water among ice floes and only takes into account the parts of the Arctic Ocean completely covered by ice. On Aug. 21, 2013, the Arctic sea ice area was 1.98 million square miles (5.12 million square kilometers).

This year’s melting season included a fast retreat of the sea ice during the first half of July. But low atmospheric pressures and clouds over the central Arctic kept temperatures up north cooler than average, slowing down the plunge.

With about three weeks of melting left, the summer minimum in 2013 is unlikely to be a record low, said Joey Comiso, senior scientist at Goddard and coordinating lead author of the Cryosphere Observations chapter of the upcoming report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

“But average temperatures in the Arctic fluctuate from one week to another, and the occurrence of a powerful storm in August, as happened in 2012, could cause the current rate of decline to change significantly,” Comiso said.

This year, the Arctic has witnessed a few summer storms, but none of them as intense as the cyclone that took place in August 2012.

“Last year’s storm went across an area of open water and mixed the smaller pieces of ice with the relatively warm water, so it melted very rapidly,” Meier said. “This year, the storms hit in an area of more consolidated ice. The storms this year were more typical summer storms; last year’s was the unusual one.”

The Arctic sea ice cap has significantly thinned over the past decade and is now very vulnerable to melt, Comiso said. The multiyear ice cover, consisting of thicker sea ice that has survived at least two summers, has declined at an even faster rate than younger, thinner ice.

Meier said that a thinner, seasonal ice cover might behave more erratically in the summer than multiyear ice.

“First-year ice has a thickness that is borderline: It can melt or not depending on how warm the summer temperatures are, the prevailing winds, etcetera,” Meier said. “This year’s conditions weren’t super-favorable for losing ice throughout spring and summer; last year they were. Whereas with multiyear ice, it takes unusual warm conditions to melt it, which is what we’ve seen in the most recent years.”


On the opposite side of the planet, Antarctic sea ice, which is in the midst of its yearly growing cycle, is heading toward the largest extent on record, having reached 7.45 million square miles (19.3 million square kilometers) on Aug. 21. In 2012, the extent of Antarctic sea ice for the same date was 7.08 million square miles (18.33 million square kilometers). The phenomenon, which appears counter-intuitive but reflects the differences in environment and climate between the Arctic and Antarctica, is currently the subject of many research studies. Still, the rate at which the Arctic is losing sea ice surpasses the speed at which Antarctic sea ice is expanding.

The sea ice minimum extent analysis produced at Goddard – one of many satellite-based scientific analyses of sea ice cover – is compiled from passive microwave data from NASA's Nimbus-7 satellite, which operated from late October 1978 to August 1987, and the U.S. Department of Defense's Defense Meteorological Satellite Program, which has been used to extend the Nimbus 7 sea ice record onwards from August 1987. The record, which began in November 1978, shows an overall downward trend of 14.1 percent per decade in the size of the minimum summer extent, a decline that accelerated after 2007.
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 02:59:09 PM by OregonSmock »

Offline john "teach me how to" dougie

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 7626
  • 1cat
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #371 on: September 09, 2013, 03:12:37 PM »
I thought we were talking short term weather conditions?

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19129
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #372 on: September 09, 2013, 03:25:59 PM »
Did you guys feel that rough ridin' warming this weekend? Jesus Christ, sweat city everywhere.
:adios:

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

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #373 on: September 09, 2013, 10:42:55 PM »
I've decided that talking about this is actually more boring a speculative than talking about the regular weather.

Like hanging out at the Casey's in some podunk town, only the fat old farmers are libtards and won't drink the regular coffee.
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline WillieWatanabe

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 19274
  • We'll always have Salt Lake
    • View Profile
Sometimes I think of the Book of Job and how God likes to really eff with people.
- chunkles