NOTICE!

The Weatherzone forum has now closed and is in read-only mode until the 1st of November when it will close permanently. We would like to thank everyone who has contributed over the past 18 years.

If you would like to continue the discussion you can follow us on Facebook and Twitter or participate in discussions at AusWeather or Ski.com.au forums.

Page 322 of 323 < 1 2 ... 320 321 322 323 >
Topic Options
#1134751 - 22/10/2012 14:51 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: bd bucketingdown]
CeeBee Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 2654
Originally Posted By: bd bucketingdown
He knew that I do my own weather forecasts refstar, you are correct trolling is all it is!
If I was following the Bureau I would have nothing different and would not last long in business,
as why would you join up with my service if what U can get from the Bureau is free!
Just his usual form ...trolling!


Heh BD - no sense of humour I see. LMAO!

I just did to you what Anthony has been doing repeatedly to me.

Hey Anthony - you're a troll according to BD.
_________________________

Top
#1134754 - 22/10/2012 14:54 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: CeeBee]
CeeBee Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 2654


LMAO @ the fake sceptics and their cherry picking.

If you chose 1999 instead of 1997 then there would be even more warming than what we see using 1997.

Cherry pickers!!
_________________________

Top
#1134759 - 22/10/2012 15:03 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: CeeBee]
CeeBee Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 25/02/2012
Posts: 2654

Back in 2009 WUWT made a big deal about sea level rise having flattened out. He cherry picked just like what the fake sceptics are doing now.




Now look what happened since 2009. He was caught out cherry picking due to the sea level rising since 2009 just like the fake sceptics have been caught cherry picking today!


_________________________

Top
#1134763 - 22/10/2012 15:07 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: CeeBee]
snafu Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/06/2012
Posts: 1437
Loc: Belmont, Lake Macquarie, NSW
Can't use 1999 CeeBee, as according to your rules it's not long enough... poke


Oh, that's right, the climate hypochondriacs make the rules so therefore they can change them without notice.
_________________________
We have about five more years at the outside to do something.
Kenneth Watt, ecologist - Earth Day, 1970
43 years later...we're still here.

Top
#1134766 - 22/10/2012 15:09 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: snafu]
snafu Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/06/2012
Posts: 1437
Loc: Belmont, Lake Macquarie, NSW
Tell me CeeBee.

Why did the IPCC choose 1980 (- 1998) as their starting point?

Wouldn't have anything to do that the planet was in a 'cool' phase between the 1940's - late 1970's by any chance would it?
_________________________
We have about five more years at the outside to do something.
Kenneth Watt, ecologist - Earth Day, 1970
43 years later...we're still here.

Top
#1134776 - 22/10/2012 15:30 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: snafu]
snafu Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/06/2012
Posts: 1437
Loc: Belmont, Lake Macquarie, NSW
Truth of the matter is CeeBee.....people started eating more meat from around 1980.

Quote:
“People don't realise that it's actually the meat on their plate that's causing global warming rather than the car that they're driving.”


/sarc... smirk
_________________________
We have about five more years at the outside to do something.
Kenneth Watt, ecologist - Earth Day, 1970
43 years later...we're still here.

Top
#1134777 - 22/10/2012 15:30 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: CeeBee]
Arnost Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 10/02/2007
Posts: 3909
Quote:
Back in 2009 WUWT made a big deal about sea level rise having flattened out. He cherry picked just like what the fake sceptics are doing now.


I take it to mean that he posted up the data to date... [Where Jason flatlined]

And it was seen that it was not very good and it took the fake scientists up till August this year to figure what to do about it!

This was the Jason 2 data in August after they finally figured out what adjustments they needed.



And the "fake" sceptics suggested that the Jason 2 adjustment was a "bit" unbelievable (there should be a dash more seasonlity really)... and so now we are left with this:



Looks just right. Lots of backslapping by the fake scientists and orders issued to the various usefull what-nots to push the MESSAGE of doom! [Thank you CeeBee]

Would you like to know what Jason 2 looked like before August?

http://www.real-science.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/MSL_Serie_J2_Global_IB_RWT_NoGIA_NoAdjust.png

hmmmmm....

If you include all the Jason 2 data as is - then there is a reall disconnect in the splice - and so you have to mess up the two peaks in 2010 / 2011 and just use the data from the 2009 trough. [Otherwise the data will be well above Jason - 1 and look like you are fudging figures]...

And if someone uses the data just from 2009 - they will get bugger all sea level rise - so on its own you have to use data from 2008...

[You just can't make this up... Or can you?] smile


AVISO data:
http://www.aviso.oceanobs.com/en/news/ocean-indicators/mean-sea-level/products-images/


Edited by Arnost (22/10/2012 15:32)
_________________________
“No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise” ...

And this of course applies to scientific principles. Never compromise these. Never! [Follow the science and you will be shown correct in the end...]

Top
#1134785 - 22/10/2012 16:14 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Arnost]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6050
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
And U think that I did not know that CB, of course I did, that is why I said U were trolling!!!
I only set the record straight for anyone else reading the threads...I was never upset, I can take it all,,,not like some!

Top
#1134797 - 22/10/2012 16:53 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: bd bucketingdown]
Anthony Violi Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 06/11/2001
Posts: 2336
Loc: Mt Barker - SA
Here is a nice graph to ponder....the start lines are when the warming stopped.

Even GISS, as corrupted as it is, has no warming for 11 years.

Thats why the game is over, because CO2 went out of control in the same period.

Oh and hadcrut 16 years with no warming tells you something.

_________________________
https://avweather.net/

Top
#1134798 - 22/10/2012 16:57 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Anthony Violi]
snafu Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/06/2012
Posts: 1437
Loc: Belmont, Lake Macquarie, NSW
Not good enough Anthony.......no hockey stick at the end... laugh
_________________________
We have about five more years at the outside to do something.
Kenneth Watt, ecologist - Earth Day, 1970
43 years later...we're still here.

Top
#1134799 - 22/10/2012 16:59 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6050
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
In fact, CB, I have learnt to take you with a grain of salt always now...all bark no bite...!
Good little SkS doggy!!! grin

Top
#1134803 - 22/10/2012 17:09 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: bd bucketingdown]
Anthony Violi Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 06/11/2001
Posts: 2336
Loc: Mt Barker - SA
Oh no, no cherry picking!!!
_________________________
https://avweather.net/

Top
#1134804 - 22/10/2012 17:09 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: bd bucketingdown]
bd bucketingdown Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2008
Posts: 6050
Loc: Eastern A/Hills SA
That was a joke by the way, you are meant to laugh mate!

Top
#1134809 - 22/10/2012 17:22 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: bd bucketingdown]
snafu Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/06/2012
Posts: 1437
Loc: Belmont, Lake Macquarie, NSW
Don't have to worry about cherry picking here.

They're getting blown off!!.. shocked (84+km/h wind gusts).
_________________________
We have about five more years at the outside to do something.
Kenneth Watt, ecologist - Earth Day, 1970
43 years later...we're still here.

Top
#1134986 - 23/10/2012 03:59 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: snafu]
Arnost Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 10/02/2007
Posts: 3909
Quote:
L'AQUILA, Italy (AP) — An Italian court convicted seven scientists and experts of manslaughter on Monday for failing to adequately warn citizens before an earthquake struck central Italy in 2009, killing more than 300 people.

The court in L'Aquila also sentenced the defendants to six years in prison. Each one is a member of the national Great Risks Commission.


Frankly this is just bizare... However, a word of sage advice from this...

When scientists claim they know everything - they open themselves to unintended consequences.
_________________________
“No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise” ...

And this of course applies to scientific principles. Never compromise these. Never! [Follow the science and you will be shown correct in the end...]

Top
#1135008 - 23/10/2012 09:51 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Arnost]
__PG__ Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 08/02/2010
Posts: 706
BBC Reports on the Italian scientists

Fantastic news. With a bit of luck you'll be able to send geologists, weather forecasters and climate scientists to jail for getting a forecast wrong, or for missing an earthquake/tsunami event.

Maybe you'll also be able to send doctors and medical professionals to jail for failing to predict when you would get cancer.

Do you think they'll ever apply the same standards to the IMF, World Bank and Treasury officials?


Edited by __PG__ (23/10/2012 09:51)

Top
#1135009 - 23/10/2012 09:53 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Arnost]
ROM Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 29/01/2007
Posts: 6628
I agree Arnost.
This is a bizarre legal decision and outcome but perhaps as you point out it might have been seen as coming for quite some time.

A few points I gather out of this circumstance re science.

1 / It is a sad day for the future of science when this sort of action is taken against scientists who were doing nothing more than providing their best estimate on what would happen with the volcanic situation they studied , based on their knowledge and expertise of the known factors of both that particular volcano's characteristics and vulcanology science.

2 / It is a not to be an unexpected outcome indicative of a building backlash from society when so many scientists, by far and most notably in climate science, now take it upon themselves, using the respect and authority that society has endowed them with as scientists, to make all sorts of supposedly inevitable and often bizarre predictions on likely and supposedly catastrophic outcomes arising from some supposedly mankind created [ climate ] situation.
And a few of the less responsible scientists quite deliberately promote fear and despondency in the populace about the future by promoting and reinforcing their depressing predictions through the MSM.

3 / Science and scientists are now being brought down to the same level a all the other experts in other proffessions.
The precedent, unfortunate as it may be, has now been set that scientists are just as responsible for the outcomes and consequences of their predictions as any other proffession.

Just possibly a good thing from science's point of view as it might go some way towards regaining some sense of responsibility for any forecasts and predictions made by scientists and thereby start the long road back to full credibility for science.
A road which is being badly eroded by the stupidity of some so called climate scientists who have made predictions on the future climate events that are quite bizarre and which those shorter term predictions have now failed in every sense when the time of those prediction's fulfillment has arrived and then passed by without any sign of those predictions outcomes being seen by the populace.

4 / There has been a major breakdown in the legal protection, at least in Italy and I suspect generally,[ Not sure if this should apply to Italy but some less developed countries have the best legal system that money can buy! ] for scientists and science disciplines who are asked to give an expert opinion and a prediction on a subject, in this case a very sensitive subject of the possibility of a major volcanic eruption, as it involved heavy potential and sadly, a realised heavy loss of life.
If scientists who are members of a formal government appointed body, who are then asked for opinions and predictions relevant to that body's expertise, those scientists should have full state sponsored legal protection against any failures in their predictions or in the outcomes of those predictions.
Similar to that legal protection given to government legal representatives in legal cases or other similar government appointed bodies..

5 / Science is now getting into a no win situation.
To cover themselves, scientists will tend to provide predictions that are on the serious side of the possible situation and make recommendations when asked for some often quite society disruptive actions, like, say, an evacuation of residents to be immediately undertaken.
If and when those predictions and the following recommendations are followed and the predicted event turns into a very minor or a non event then after two or three aborted such failures of the scientist's predictions and forecasts, the politicians and populace, in the usual human manner, will just simply shut their ears to any further predictions or forecasts of those scientists regardless of the seriousness in which any future situations may be viewed from the science aspect.
And the final act is too abolish the funding and the science body responsible for those predictions.


It is interesting to look at the economics profession which is into predictions almost as a end in itself but which predictions are rarely ever fulfilled and which economists never ever agree even with one another on any outcomes. Yet despite their influence on politics, economics, society, business and etc, economists still are never held responsible for their predictions or the effects on society if their predictions fail. All that happens is after a few failed predictions, a particular individual or a school of economics loses it's credibility and it's influence.
Society makes it's judgement and moves on.


Edited by ROM (23/10/2012 09:57)

Top
#1135014 - 23/10/2012 10:23 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: ROM]
Locke Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 27/12/2007
Posts: 4553
Loc: Brisbane
I think what this ruling might imply is that scientists have an obligation to be clear to the public regarding the degree of uncertainty in any prediction made.

As an example. Could I sue the CSIRO for not adequately explaining the uncertainties in the science of predicting sea level rise if they release a report predicting rises of up to 1m in the next 100 years resulting in a significant decrease in the value of my sea front property?

I'd like to know the substance of the predictions made by these scientists and how they were communicated before expressing any opinion on the adequacy of the courts decision.

Maybe we could expect scientists to be more open about the level of uncertainty in their work and tone down their arrogance a little.


Edited by Locke (23/10/2012 10:24)
_________________________
This post and any other post by Locke is NOT an official forecast & should not be used as such. It's just my opinion & may or may not be backed by sound meteorological data. For official information, refer to Australian Bureau of Meteorology products.

Top
#1135016 - 23/10/2012 10:25 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: Locke]
__PG__ Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 08/02/2010
Posts: 706
Why blame corrupt politicians and lax building codes when you can send a scientist to jail instead?

Burn the witch!

Top
#1135017 - 23/10/2012 10:29 Re: Interesting news articles about AGW [Re: __PG__]
Anthony Violi Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 06/11/2001
Posts: 2336
Loc: Mt Barker - SA
Why not Locke, if you sold a sea side mansion on the premise of the CSIRO report, and the opposite happened and it doubled in value, why couldnt you sue them?

You would be out of pocket by millions. Or, disband the CSIRO, on the proviso that they are held accountable to these predictions on a decadal basis.

So in aother words, if they know they will be de-registered within a decade if the the predictions are incorrect, do you think they would be going for a 1 metre rise in Sea level?
_________________________
https://avweather.net/

Top
Page 322 of 323 < 1 2 ... 320 321 322 323 >


Moderator:  Lindsay Knowles 
Who's Online
0 registered (), 51 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
Blinky_Bill, Blue Sky, cmonrain, hydzy79, Simon Clarke, V8R
Forum Stats
29947 Members
32 Forums
24194 Topics
1529242 Posts

Max Online: 2985 @ 26/01/2019 12:05
Satellite Image