Climategate 2.0

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

Science does not work by making an assertion and demanding others prove it wrong.

Maybe not, but you certainly work that way.

[The Lone Ranger]

That the Earth's mean temperature has been rising over the past 50 years (and more) is so thoroughly documented that all but the most dogmatic deniers of anthropogenic climate change freely admit that that the planet is indeed warming, overall.

So how to explain it? One of the more recent claims I've heard is that the Sun has been getting brighter, and that this is the cause. For "proof," they point to the "fact" that the other planets in the Solar System are warming, too. The problem, as astronomer Phil Platt points out, is that both of the claims are demonstrably false.


First, the Sun's yearly output has actually been decreasing, on average, over the past 50 years. So it's definitely not the case that the Sun is pumping more heat into the Solar System and so causing the Earth and the other planets to get warmer.

Second, despite claims that other planets in the Solar System are getting warmer too, no evidence to that effect has been detected. At best, some less-than-honest reporters have noted seasonal changes over a small portion of a planet's surface and claimed that this indicates a global trend. For example, some people claimed that since Neptune's southern hemisphere is currently getting brighter, this means that the whole planet is getting warmer. But keep in mind that Neptune's year is 164.8 Earth-years. In other words, the seasons are 164.8 times longer on Neptune than they are on Earth. Currently, Neptune's southern hemisphere is coming into Summer.

So, looking at Neptune's southern hemisphere for a few (Earth) years and concluding that because the hemisphere is currently warming, the entire planet must be warming [notably, these people don't point out that Neptune's northern hemisphere is currently cooling] is just plain stupid -- if not deliberately dishonest. It would be equivalent to looking at the Earth's southern hemisphere from April to May and noting that because it's cooling, the entire planet must be cooling.

[SR71]

Jerome, feel free to independently verify to your hearts content.

Global Climate Change Indicators

I like the Global Climate Interface on this next one.

NOAA Climate Services


When you get done with all of that, be sure to let NOAA know about any discrepancies you should find.

[Jerome]

[Doctor X]

Why do you hate the Heartland, davidm

--J.D.

[SR71]

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

What is the point of your chart? Glaciation? Milankovitch cycles? Yeah we know that. No shit.

Look at the CO2 Jerome. Its up to about 130% of normal in the Holocene interglacial. Where did all that CO2 come from? When was the last time it was this high?

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by SR71

Look at the CO2 Jerome. Its up to about 130% of normal in the Holocene interglacial. Where did all that CO2 come from? When was the last time it was this high?

We are not using the same methodology for calculations.

[SR71]

That sounds very official. The problem is that it doesn't mean anything.

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by SR71

That sounds very official. The problem is that it doesn't mean anything.

It means everything.

[Ari]

I'm sure you think you are being sly in your head, but you're really just being obtuse.

[SR71]

Obtuse and diffuse. Sweeping generalities! Broad declarations! Methodologies! Calculations! Persuade us with some specifics, Jerome? What specific component of AGW are we supposed to be concerned about? Show us where we have been deceived, that we might understand.

[Pan Narrans]

It's Jerome's usual tactic: just post a graph without any comment, and hope the opposition will make an argument for him. Don't let it fly.

Now, Jerome, what were you trying to say when you posted this:

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

?

[mickthinks]

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

We are not using the same methodology for calculations.

The beauty of a graph like the one you're touting - indeed, the whole point of using a graph to represent data - is that it shows the arithmetic relationships directly in a way that makes calculation unneccessary. It shows that CO2 is now way higher than it has been in the past.

You can see the way that blue line shoots up instead of down at the end of the graph, Jerome, can't you? That's an important truth you are trying to deny by pretending you see things differently.

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

Phil Platt

That dude is a fraud, he had me banned from JREF after he became President because he could not met my challenge to him.

Just think about that, I, meek little Jerome embarrassed him, his response was to run and hide.

[Jerome]

Originally Posted by mickthinks

It shows that CO2 is now way higher than it has been in the past.

It also shows that the current temperature is not rising in relation to the increase of the CO2, thus either the methodology of recent data collection does not correlate with data collection about the past, or the CO2 increases do not cause warming.

[fragment]

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

It also shows that the current temperature is not rising in relation to the increase of the CO2, thus either the methodology of recent data collection does not correlate with data collection about the past, or the CO2 increases do not cause warming.

You can only conclude stuff like this if you know something about the source of the data, how it was gathered, when it ends, yada yada. Do you know that?

BTW did you notice it's labeled as temperature in Antarctica?

[yguy]

Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger

That the Earth's mean temperature has been rising over the past 50 years (and more) is so thoroughly documented

One must be lamentably gullible to be impressed by that.

[Watser?]

yguy's bubble could probably keep him safe from anything short of a direct nuclear hit and possibly even from Global Warming.

[Clutch Munny]

yguy and Sociological Experiment: a perfect storm of nitwits. Was it dark spirits that coloured the HIV?

[Sauron]

Originally Posted by yguy

One must be lamentably gullible to be impressed by that.

And yet, for all your misplaced bluster, you cannot explain *why*.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

It also shows that the current temperature is not rising in relation to the increase of the CO2.

Stop right there, liar. Post proof or retract. A chart showing cooling from ONE weather station will not do.

[davidm]

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

Isn't that interesting! One hundred thousand years ago? Two hundred thousand years ago? WTF? Because at another board, in this thread, Numb is a Young Earth Creationist!

As to the chart itself, Numb Nuts has argued in the past that because there were events of global warming before people were around, then those events were not caused by people; ergo, today's global warming is not caused by people. That's the Numb Logic for you!

[davidm]

Notice also how the chart that Numb posts contradicts his claim that temperature is not rising today in relation to CO2 increase!

[davidm]

Meanwhile, in the real world, nothwithstanding the claims of the paid liars of the fossil fuel industry and dum-dums like Numb, see here.

[Ari]

Ok Jerome, here's your chance to show off Climategate the upgrade in all its glory. I didn't pay attention to climategate 1.0 but now that they've shaken it down and released an upgrade I might give it a go. While I accept global warming I also believe scientists can screw up, make mistakes and lie so while I'm skeptical, I can see how it could happen.

What would convince me to look more into this upgrade are full quotes and context showing hiding of data and other wrong doing. I want to really see what these scientists are saying and how they mean it. Context is everything. I also want to see similar views from different scientists or those that have large pull in climate science.