No Matt Tell me exactly what I said and don't just post your butchered comment of mine. Post the exact quote only. Come on you can do it. Post the words I said and prove I was talking about experiments not the "laboratory".
Don't be afraid.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Merged Recent climate observations disagreement with projections
- Thread starter Poptech
- Start date
Don't be afraid.
MattusMaximus
Intellectual Gladiator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2006
- Messages
- 15,948
Fixed that for you.
No it hasn't
No Matt Tell me exactly what I said and don't just post your butchered comment of mine. Post the exact quote only. Come on you can do it. Post the words I said and prove I was talking about experiments not the "laboratory".
Matt why are you dodging?
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
Well, I started with this one:
And look what I found inside:
Oh dear, do you think these models that this report's findings are based on might have been run on a computer, by any chance? Because, if they are, you must reject this report as mere "virtual reality." Or be shown to be inconsistent, if not outright hypocritical. "MS-MRT represents the entire world!" Does it, now? And here I thought that was impossible!
Would you like to retract that citation now, for being nothing but virtual reality?
Going to check out the others now. I wonder what I'll find?
Respectfully,
Myriad
And look what I found inside:
Oh dear, do you think these models that this report's findings are based on might have been run on a computer, by any chance? Because, if they are, you must reject this report as mere "virtual reality." Or be shown to be inconsistent, if not outright hypocritical. "MS-MRT represents the entire world!" Does it, now? And here I thought that was impossible!
Would you like to retract that citation now, for being nothing but virtual reality?
Going to check out the others now. I wonder what I'll find?
Respectfully,
Myriad
MattusMaximus
Intellectual Gladiator
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2006
- Messages
- 15,948
Okay, sure. You asked for it...
Here's the first one:
And here's the second one - the money shot:
And here's my continuing challenge to you.
Don't trip over anything and hurt yourself when you run away... again.
Yes accuracy as in the "laboratory". I made no claim separating or specifically talking about experiments. The "laboratory" has to be 100% accurate. Again this is your constant confusion of which I have attempted to clear up OVER AND OVER AND OVER.
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
When In Darkness / Or In Doubt / Run In Circles / Scream And Shout / Burma Shave
No run a model run, establish the results and then confirm them in the future. That has not been done.
Wowbagger
The Infinitely Prolonged
Where is the evidence that they are not already doing that?
From what I understand, calibrating these models, until they reflect real world data, is what eats most of the modeler's time.
Actually, if you read their publications and supporting materials, you will find that they include a comprehensive mix of computer models and pure empirical studies. They are not relying solely on computer models.
http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data.htm
I am sure the IPCC's conclusions will be adjusted, over time, as the models become more and more accurate, anyway. That is, after all, the general trend one finds in virtually all responsible science policy implementations.
The solutions do not necessarily need to kill the economy. A comprehensive plan can address all of these climate issues, and still work to strengthen the economy for the people.
No one is suggesting that everyone has to substantially change their lifestyle, or move to the poor house, in order to save the planet.
Is that really the core of your concerns?
Last edited:
You will find modeled results. I did not say I supported modeled conclusions but you asked for papers. If you notice some point out the negative effects from proponents models.Oh dear, do you think these models that this report's findings are based on might have been run on a computer, by any chance? Because, if they are, you must reject this report as mere "virtual reality." Or be shown to be inconsistent, if not outright hypocritical. "MS-MRT represents the entire world!" Does it, now? And here I thought that was impossible!
Would you like to retract that citation now, for being nothing but virtual reality?
Going to check out the others now. I wonder what I'll find?
BenBurch
Gatekeeper of The Left
Establish a model - base it on known past conditions - give it no knowledge of events subsequent - run it and compare to reality.
Equivalent and even preferable.
It's been done.
Though I know it does demolish your ideological house of cards, so you cannot accept it.
Do you have it? Don't you think this should be confirmed before any of their results used for policy?
Irrelevant.
Empirical evidence alone in no way supports their conclusions.
It is impossible for government restrictions on energy usage to strengthen the economy. Command and control economics do not work.
The planet is in no danger.
George Carlin - 'Saving The Planet' (Adults Only) (Video) (8min)
Useless, model tuning can get those results. Of course I do not accept something that is nonsense.
Wowbagger
The Infinitely Prolonged
You should notice that all of the papers you've given us, seek to improve the models. Not get rid of them, entirely.
TellyKNeasuss
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 3,808
Which means that data is not accurate, and therefore is useless.
Not all of them. Some just point out contradictory evidence. Some give competing modeled results. Like I said though he asked for papers.
Wowbagger
The Infinitely Prolonged
Climate models are peer reviewed, and replicated, etc. Just like any other scientific tool. Do you have evidence of a scandal, where this was not so?
Then please refute any one of the papers on their site.
No one is suggesting "command and control". What is being proposed is a comprehensive set of solutions.
It may have some large projects, but also many small ones.
Sometimes hard limits (enforced via fiat, but informed by science and practicality) may be established, but also soft ones (enforced via "markets"). Etc.
Either that, or the NWO will take over, and rule everyone with an iron fist. I don't know, anymore.
But, either way should be fun.
So, you now seek to replace climate models with... George Carlin.
Funny.
They are not validated. I made no claims of any scandal.
Independent Summary for Policymakers: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (PDF) (Fraser Institute)
Critical Topics in Global Warming: Supplementary Analysis of the Independent Summary for Policymakers (PDF) (The Fraser Institute)
Climate Change Reconsidered (PDF) (NIPCC)
Inadequacies and criticisms of the IPCC (PDF) (Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Professor of Environmental and Earth Science)
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report 2007 Analysis and Summary (PDF) (Science & Public Policy Institute)
Working Group (WG) I’s Contribution to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4): A Critique (PDF) (The Marshall Institute)
Working Group (WG) II’s Contribution to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4): A Critique (PDF) (The Marshall Institute)
Working Group (WG) III’s Contribution to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4): Be Sure to Read the Fine Print (PDF) (The Marshall Institute)
Cap and Trade is command and control of energy usage thus command and control of the economy.
I do not support NWO conspiracy theories but I do support free markets and world-wide trade.
No I seek to stop using useless computer climate models and simply deal with empirical data and experiments.