|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:07 PM Original message |
Global Warming in Last 15 Years Insignificant, U.K.'s Top Climate Scientist Admits |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
xultar (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:10 PM Response to Original message |
1. I don't think anyone expected it to go from normal to fucking HOTTER THAN HELL in 15 years |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
naaman fletcher (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:19 PM Response to Reply #1 |
9. Actually... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:22 PM Response to Reply #9 |
12. Heretic!!!!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
HeresyLives (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:10 PM Response to Original message |
2. The Daily Mail writes it up that way, Fox grabs the ball |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Schema Thing (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:11 PM Response to Original message |
3. This headline is a lie |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ohiodemocratic (188 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:14 PM Response to Original message |
4. Mr. Fox News fan: It's not supposed to be significant in such a relatively short period of time |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:17 PM Response to Reply #4 |
8. So we've got a few centuries to work it out.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grantcart (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:58 PM Response to Reply #8 |
18. No we don't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:11 PM Response to Reply #18 |
22. Simple questions.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grantcart (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:59 PM Response to Reply #22 |
28. lol |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 03:04 PM Response to Reply #28 |
30. So basically, you have no answers. I'll try one more.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:00 PM Response to Reply #30 |
34. At that time the average equatorial temperature was a balmy 135° |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:03 PM Response to Reply #34 |
35. Geologic forces? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:06 PM Response to Reply #35 |
36. That's very cute in a stupid kind of way. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:11 PM Response to Reply #36 |
37. Sooooo... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:24 PM Response to Reply #37 |
38. Though you really don't need any help making an ass out of yourself |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:28 PM Response to Reply #38 |
39. So you attribute the holocene extinction to global warming? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:35 PM Response to Reply #39 |
40. No, many people who are much more knowledgeable than me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:36 PM Response to Reply #40 |
41. Like I said, once man started global warming 10K years ago... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:12 AM Response to Reply #38 |
52. Kind of like what's happening now, no? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:49 AM Response to Reply #52 |
55. Have you heard of the "Sixth Extinction" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:10 PM Response to Reply #55 |
77. Yes I have |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
guardian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:15 PM Response to Reply #77 |
78. excellent point! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:37 PM Response to Reply #78 |
81. Not really, no |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 03:10 PM Response to Reply #81 |
82. Why do you need that? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 03:14 PM Response to Reply #82 |
83. Give me that comprehensive list |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 03:33 PM Response to Reply #83 |
85. Here you go |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 03:42 PM Response to Reply #85 |
87. Hmmm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 03:52 PM Response to Reply #87 |
89. Again proving my point? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 04:39 PM Response to Reply #89 |
96. No, I believe I'll leave it to you to prove your point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 04:22 PM Response to Reply #87 |
94. Deleted message |
guardian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 07:27 PM Response to Reply #87 |
97. "IUCN report identifies over 17,000 species at risk of extinction" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:34 PM Response to Reply #77 |
80. Start here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 03:23 PM Response to Reply #80 |
84. Thanks |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 03:37 PM Response to Reply #84 |
86. Disingenuous much? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 03:49 PM Response to Reply #86 |
88. Not at all |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 04:00 PM Response to Reply #88 |
90. There is no comprehensive list of extant species. They have not all been identified. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 04:04 PM Response to Reply #90 |
92. Question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 04:17 PM Response to Reply #92 |
93. No, I wouldn't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-18-10 01:07 AM Response to Reply #93 |
98. I see |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
beardown (193 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 09:45 PM Response to Reply #22 |
49. More questions. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 10:58 PM Response to Reply #49 |
50. Like I said. I prefer "heretic" or "infidel." nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Abq_Sarah (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 02:58 PM Response to Reply #18 |
29. It's climate change today |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grantcart (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:44 PM Response to Reply #29 |
43. link to a peer review article by a scientist that referred to it as global warming |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:59 PM Response to Reply #43 |
44. How about a govt website? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
grantcart (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 06:30 PM Response to Reply #44 |
46. lol |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 06:33 PM Response to Reply #46 |
47. So the title is global warming... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dalaigh lllama (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:56 PM Response to Reply #4 |
17. Thank you. Reading comprehension evidently isn't a strong suit at Fox |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sui generis (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:14 PM Response to Original message |
5. wow how this could get "will get" mischaracterized |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mix (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:15 PM Response to Original message |
6. BS, the interview says no such thing. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Don Caballero (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:17 PM Response to Original message |
7. Anti climate change propaganda |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kingofalldems (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:20 PM Response to Original message |
10. Fox news should not be allowed as a source on DU |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RaleighNCDUer (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:21 PM Response to Original message |
11. This is journalism? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:23 PM Response to Reply #11 |
14. Do you understand what statistical significance is? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:29 PM Response to Reply #14 |
15. Yes, but Fox News hopes its viewers and readers don't |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:30 PM Response to Reply #15 |
16. Please explain it then. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:07 PM Response to Reply #16 |
20. It mean that, with the noise in the values observed, and the number of values in the set, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:09 PM Response to Reply #20 |
21. You have it about 100% wrong. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:14 PM Response to Reply #21 |
23. '1 in 20' is unlikely |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:28 PM Response to Reply #23 |
27. Like I said... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 04:10 PM Response to Reply #27 |
32. And my posts still fits the Wikipedia definition |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 11:18 AM Response to Reply #32 |
58. Let's put it this way... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 11:54 AM Response to Reply #58 |
60. Um... no |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 11:58 AM Response to Reply #60 |
61. How do you explain the large amount of warming from... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:19 PM Response to Reply #61 |
66. The earlier warming period just makes sense. That's from greenhouse gas build-up. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:24 PM Response to Reply #66 |
69. How much C02 was being produced in 1900? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:27 PM Response to Reply #69 |
70. Did you look at the emissions graph? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:32 PM Response to Reply #70 |
71. I did.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:35 PM Response to Reply #71 |
73. Right, my mistake (see below) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:34 PM Response to Reply #70 |
72. Oh! You mean China's sulphur emissions. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 01:02 PM Response to Reply #66 |
74. George W. Bush explains about sulfur emissions and the Greenhouse effect |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:02 PM Response to Reply #58 |
62. Statistical significance, sample size and signal to nouise ratio |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:06 PM Response to Reply #62 |
63. And if something is NOT statistically significant? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:12 PM Response to Reply #63 |
64. Then perhaps the sample size is too low for the chosen confidence level. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:16 PM Response to Reply #64 |
65. And therefore a new study needs to be done.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GliderGuider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:20 PM Response to Reply #65 |
67. The data is available, and has been crunched interminably. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:23 PM Response to Reply #67 |
68. Has it? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
muriel_volestrangler (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 01:06 PM Response to Reply #58 |
75. No, it doesn't imply "the model is off" at all |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:17 PM Response to Reply #21 |
24. Actually m_v is about 95% right |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:24 PM Response to Reply #24 |
26. Do you know that this level was chosen for that reason? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
wtmusic (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 04:16 PM Response to Reply #26 |
33. Well, I know that "margin of error" is not directly related to "statistical significance" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WriteDown (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 11:18 AM Response to Reply #33 |
59. See post 58. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 06:06 PM Response to Reply #14 |
45. Have you considered why the year 1995 was chosen? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 12:57 AM Response to Reply #45 |
51. Interesting graph |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:38 AM Response to Reply #51 |
53. I think you're asking the wrong question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:45 AM Response to Reply #53 |
54. Let me get this straight |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:51 AM Response to Reply #54 |
56. Check back |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:56 AM Response to Reply #54 |
57. You may find this graph to be more helpful |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:01 PM Response to Reply #57 |
76. Those graphs support my argument, not yours |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 02:29 PM Response to Reply #76 |
79. No |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 04:00 PM Response to Reply #79 |
91. Fair enough |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
OKIsItJustMe (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed Feb-17-10 04:30 PM Response to Reply #91 |
95. There are other factors of course |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Nederland (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu Feb-18-10 01:09 AM Response to Reply #95 |
99. At last |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
theHandpuppet (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 12:22 PM Response to Original message |
13. Sorry, but Fox News is not a credible news source |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Birthmark (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:05 PM Response to Original message |
19. Ah, Fox! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Emillereid (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 01:21 PM Response to Original message |
25. It's a full time job keeping up with these deniers!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
guardian (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 05:37 PM Response to Reply #25 |
42. "real climate scientists" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Emillereid (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 06:54 PM Response to Reply #42 |
48. Note the order of the sentences: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jim__ (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Feb-16-10 03:09 PM Response to Original message |
31. Temperature increase projections from the 3rd IPCC Report: 0.1 to 0.2 C per decade. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat May 11th 2024, 08:07 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC