"Hottest Decade on Record"

"Hottest Decade on Record" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

FirmhandKY -> "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/14/2010 5:28:20 PM)
Saturday, 13 February 2010 Q&A: Professor Phil Jones B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming? Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods. I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread. Firm

pahunkboy -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/14/2010 6:54:58 PM)
NO. The men I see were hotter last decade- not this decade. most are old farts- not hot this year at all.

Real0ne -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/14/2010 8:28:32 PM)
Hey julia Firm has given you an invitation :)

DomKen -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/14/2010 8:45:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Saturday, 13 February 2010 Q&A: Professor Phil Jones B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming? Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods. I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread. Firm Maybe you don't understand the meaning of the term "statistically significant"? Or maybe you're attempting to misrepresent the data? It's really easy to find the warmest decade on record. Take theaverage temperature of each 1o year span as far back as we have records. Order them from highest to lowest. Don't be surprised when 2000 to 2009 comes out on top.

WildRebel -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/14/2010 8:50:23 PM)
Well nature is certainly trying to change things this decade if the start of this year is any indication. I guess we'll see what happens though.

EbonyWood -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/14/2010 8:57:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread. Firm See, not hear. To reduce claptrap, just block Republicans, conspiratorialists, deniers, gun pushers, creationists and throw in those from some of the backward states, like say, Kentucky. Job done.

AnimusRex -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/14/2010 9:07:26 PM)
We would certainly need a large place to put all them, don'tya think? Maybe some gubbmint agency, like maybe FEMA can build some camps to put them all in. I will forward a memo to George Soros, cc to Al Gore.

FirmhandKY -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/14/2010 9:43:51 PM)
You guys are in the wrong thread. You belong here. I think. Firm

Sanity -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 9:18:50 AM)
quote: [img]http://media.eyeblast.org/newsbusters/2010/02/Donald%20Trump%20Wants%20Al%20Gore%27s%20Nobel%20Peace%20Prize%20Stripped.jpg[/img] Donald Trump is not a big believer in global warming. "With the coldest winter ever recorded, with snow setting record levels up and down the coast, the Nobel committee should take the Nobel Prize back from Al Gore," the tycoon told members of his Trump National Golf Club in Westchester in a recent speech. "Gore wants us to clean up our factories and plants in order to protect us from global warming, when China and other countries couldn't care less. It would make us totally noncompetitive in the manufacturing world, and China, Japan and India are laughing at America's stupidity." The crowd of 500 stood up and cheered. Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/global_cooling_7njz5ZtpFblMuF5Vf7LJmN#ixzz0fcrLKcsR

subrob1967 -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 9:53:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Saturday, 13 February 2010 Q&A: Professor Phil Jones B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming? Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods. I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread. Firm Maybe you don't understand the meaning of the term "statistically significant"? Or maybe you're attempting to misrepresent the data? It's really easy to find the warmest decade on record. Take theaverage temperature of each 1o year span as far back as we have records. Order them from highest to lowest. Don't be surprised when 2000 to 2009 comes out on top. 1999-2008 is a decade, 1998-2007 is a decade, 1997-2006 is a decade...etc. Which is hottest?

domiguy -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 10:51:05 AM)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm Q&A: Professor Phil Jones D -Question: Do you agree that natural influences could have contributed significantly to the global warming observed from 1975-1998, and, if so, please could you specify each natural influence and express its radiative forcing over the period in Watts per square metre. Answer: This area is slightly outside my area of expertise. When considering changes over this period we need to consider all possible factors (so human and natural influences as well as natural internal variability of the climate system). Natural influences (from volcanoes and the Sun) over this period could have contributed to the change over this period. Volcanic influences from the two large eruptions (El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991) would exert a negative influence. Solar influence was about flat over this period. Combining only these two natural influences, therefore, we might have expected some cooling over this period. E. Question: E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible? Answer: I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity. ________________________ Firm, I hope by including some of the other questions asked and answered from the rest of this interview will illuminate to others the type of a man that you are. It goes to show how manipulative certain people can be when they employ a "pick and choose methodology" in only utilizing the parts of an interview that they feel might aid their side of an argument where the information dispensed throughout the "whole" of the interview clearly shows to refute. You are a dishonest person.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 11:48:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Saturday, 13 February 2010 Q&A: Professor Phil Jones B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no statistically-significant global warming? Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods. I don't want to hear this claptrap brought up again in a thread. Firm Maybe you don't understand the meaning of the term "statistically significant"? Or maybe you're attempting to misrepresent the data? It's really easy to find the warmest decade on record. Take theaverage temperature of each 1o year span as far back as we have records. Order them from highest to lowest. Don't be surprised when 2000 to 2009 comes out on top. 1999-2008 is a decade, 1998-2007 is a decade, 1997-2006 is a decade...etc. Which is hottest? Yes, any ten year span can be considered a "decade", but thats not the common usage in this context. What KenDoll, with his great knowledge of statistics is missing, is that temperature measures a dependent variable and therefore is subject to statistical tests of signficance. Simply ordering them from hottest to coldest and seeing which is on top doesnt mean that it is hotter than number 2 with statistical signficance. Even his guru Phil baby admitted that.

domiguy -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 12:05:19 PM)
But as firm obviously "chose" to omit... Guru Phil baby said.... E. Question: E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible? Answer: I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity. The debate continues!!!!!!! Idiots.

Sanity -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 12:07:35 PM)
Why do you sign your posts "Idiots". How many of you are there?

Thadius -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 12:21:23 PM)
The debate indeed continues. Chapter 9 seems to be the most hotly debated of the report, and with the recent recants about the number of authors and those involved in reviewing this particular chapter, one would think the debate will become even hotter. The half truths and such related to that chapter are telling, no?

domiguy -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 12:27:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity Why do you sign your posts "Idiots". How many of you are there? Here is the deal..You ask why liberals are so condescending? It might have to do with the "idiots" that routinely post "only" those things that fit their weak political agendas. The scope of the interview when viewed in it's totality is clearly in it's support that global worming is not only occurring but in fact is "man made." But Firm, like so many others out here, will only use "snippets" that supposedly come to the rescue of their overall unfounded views. But on further analysis "the whole", when viewed in it's entirety, achieves the total opposite...What would you call this type of person that pursues this course of action?? Admirable? I am totally condescending of people that post in a manipulative manner. I am totally condescending of people that will do anything possible to distort the facts as laid out. I am totally condescending of people that take sound bites and things out of context and work them to their advantage. Firm does this shit on a regular basis. I don't really like to dwell in this section of CM any longer. I enjoy a good healthy and honest debate. You fuckers seem continually to be unable to hold up your end of that bargian. Why am I condescending?....The answer is easy!!!... You "idiots" are beneath me.

DarlingSavage -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 12:45:50 PM)
It doesn't matter whether or not you believe in global warming, global warming believes in you!

TheHeretic -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 12:48:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm Q&A: Professor Phil Jones D -Question: Do you agree that natural influences could have contributed significantly to the global warming observed from 1975-1998, and, if so, please could you specify each natural influence and express its radiative forcing over the period in Watts per square metre. Answer: This area is slightly outside my area of expertise. When considering changes over this period we need to consider all possible factors (so human and natural influences as well as natural internal variability of the climate system). Natural influences (from volcanoes and the Sun) over this period could have contributed to the change over this period. Volcanic influences from the two large eruptions (El Chichon in 1982 and Pinatubo in 1991) would exert a negative influence. Solar influence was about flat over this period. Combining only these two natural influences, therefore, we might have expected some cooling over this period. E. Question: E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that humans are mainly responsible? Answer: I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity. ________________________ Firm, I hope by including some of the other questions asked and answered from the rest of this interview will illuminate to others the type of a man that you are. It goes to show how manipulative certain people can be when they employ a "pick and choose methodology" in only utilizing the parts of an interview that they feel might aid their side of an argument where the information dispensed throughout the "whole" of the interview clearly shows to refute. You are a dishonest person. Those answers just strike you as the simple and honest responses of a poor victim, huh, DG? No problem with a cult leader suddenly making common sense admissions his followers would have attacked as on par with denying the Holocaust, not so very long ago? I see desperate spinning, from a desperate man. The sooner the actual environmentalists denounce these spokesholes, the better. add; That wasn't very nice, what you said to Firm. The link was there, and the snipped portion was an accurate reflection of Jones fancy footwork throughout the whole.

domiguy -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 1:15:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Those answers just strike you as the simple and honest responses of a poor victim, huh, DG? No problem with a cult leader suddenly making common sense admissions his followers would have attacked as on par with denying the Holocaust, not so very long ago? I see desperate spinning, from a desperate man. The sooner the actual environmentalists denounce these spokesholes, the better. add; That wasn't very nice, what you said to Firm. The link was there, and the snipped portion was an accurate reflection of Jones fancy footwork throughout the whole. Please...Firm intentionally edited that part that did not fit his agenda. He does the same here.... http://www.collarchat.com/m_3066923/tm.htm He lists only the part of the article that will support his views. When the article is taken as a "whole" it paints a much different picture as to why the "kill rate" has increased. It is not only dishonest it is an established pattern.

servantforuse -> RE: "Hottest Decade on Record" (2/15/2010 1:18:17 PM)
2 days ago, 49 of 50 states had snow on the ground. Go ask the folks still buried in DC and Philly what they think of global warming. Be careful though, you might get hit in the head with a snow shovel..

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875