chenille sniped: “Well, I’m sorry to see the exact same disingenuous line fits I complained about earlier.”
That NOAA (or any kid with a ruler) are such manipulative liars that the whole world must frustrate you to no end. I had to look up Gish gallop, which means drowning a thread in half-truths. Official tide gauges, the official thermometer record, and quotes from NASA insiders do not represent Gish gallop.
1Denier, n. One who denies (first known use 15th century)
2Denier, n. 1. A small originally silver coin formerly used in western Europe; 2. A unit of fineness for yarn equal to the fineness of a yarn weighing one gram for each 9000 meters (first known use 15th century)
So, no. And you’d think someone who uses “begs the question” to mean raising a question would accept how words are actually used instead of trying to be pedantic about them, but apparently irony is mandatory.
You know we can see what you wrote, right? A large body of scientists, including nearly everyone who specializes in climate science, has been propagating the existence of anthropogenic global warming, and yet:
So are we done here, or do you feel the need to back-peddle more?
That NOAA (or any kid with a ruler) are such manipulative liars
Wait a sec… you just spammed a bunch of cherry-picked NOAA charts as the basis of your argument here earlier in this thread.
You used the data from an organization you claim are “manipulative liars”. Wow, you’re so entrenched in your own half-truths and lies you don’t know which way is up anymore.
BUSTED
I had to look up Gish gallop, which means drowning a thread in half-truths.
Indeed…
Don’t Feed The Trolls.
We must never forget that before anything else, Google is the largest advertising company in the world. Full stop.
That plot as you probably well know should not be labelled “sea level” at all and is from Church & White 2008. The record I showed above is from Church & White 2011 which shows the real average of world tide gauges. Your plot involves not just “global” which my above plot also is, but “adjustments” to actual sea level that destroy the scientific process by making data fit theory instead of try to correct for errors in that data to make data reflect reality better. It also combines very short data with long continuous records. If you leave out “corrections” that amount to hand-waving hypothesizing about ocean floor movements and water reservoirs on land, you obtain a pencil straight line. Even your curving plot is obviously much better line fit by two lines that change slope in 1925 and since then show no recent trend change at all.
Basic logic, basic reason itself simply dictates to any rational person that if the vast majority of real long tide gauge records, worldwide, fail to show the claimed global trend surge that the claim that sea level is suddenly surging stands falsified. The skeptical argument is that climatology has been corrupted by activist funding that punishes in the extreme (see the above thread!) those working scientists who dare to speak up. Posting a statistical mashup of short and long records that “correct” not towards but away from actual sea level on the shore, simply reflects the extreme conflict of interest involved in a sliver of science which suffers from a highly political conflict of interest since unlike other scientific fields, a specific result is what the vast bulk of their funding fully relies upon!
“Typical denier cherry-picking that means nothing.”
Your name calling reveals something important. The NOAA site of real tide gauge records is fully available to you in order to be able to actually demonstrate whether my selections are in fact misrepresentative “cherry picks” or whether they are in fact fully representative and fully sincere attempts to expose real facts on the ground. But you can’t do it since there are no up-curving long records for your side to offer!
The link is here, with locations along the left of the page: http://tidesandcurrents.noaa.gov/sltrends/sltrends.shtml
Defense lawyer for CO₂: “If the undeviating line fits you must acquit!”
That plot as you probably well know should not be labelled “sea level” at all and is from Church & White 2008. The record I showed above is from Church & White 2011 which shows the real average of world tide gauges. Your plot involves not just “global” which my above plot also is, but “adjustments” to actual sea level that destroy the scientific process by making data fit theory instead of try to correct for errors in that data to make data reflect reality better. It also combines very short data with long continuous records.
Just be honest, no matter which chart I show you if it doesn’t lend itself to your predetermined mindset, you’re going to reject it. It’s how you deniers work.
Beginning to see a pattern there? No, you can’t… won’t… dare… see it. Brain can’t be wrong. Brain can’t be wrong. Argggghhh… Heh…heh…
Basic logic
That’s a good one…
This isn’t feeding trolls. It’s destroying astroturfers with science. There’s a difference and allowing these schmucks to control the conversation all these years without rebutting them is part of the reason we’re in this horrible mess in the first place.
Set phasers on kill.
Well, he picked one himself: Church & White 2011, which is available here. Their chart looks like this:
Now he’s only using the simple average of the tidal gauges, which happens to curve the least. Church & White seem to think that a signal that jumps a whole 10 mm in some years is not trustworthy, but what would they know? They do sneaky things like correct for aquifers, clearly politically motivated, seeing as how they and all the other studies get the same result you posted.
A link bomber calls me a Gish gallop!? Why not just post a bunch of Drug War propaganda posters? You’d be just as convincing about those being “THE PLANET ON CO2!”
Real tide gauge records, linked multiple times here, falsify all of your exponential plots. Nobody needs a degree to see. But they do need working eye muscles. Since we already have most reasonable people on our side, guys like Cowicide can only issue death threats to try to intimidate skeptics. That doesn’t work too well on use New Yorkers though.
To see real AstroTurfing, take a look at Al Gore’s multi-hundred thousand dollar effort at RealityDrop.com:
To see real AstroTurfing, take a look at Al Gore’s multi-hundred thousand dollar effort at RealityDrop.com:
Thanks for the link! I’ll be sure to spread it everywhere…
Strangely, us “hipsters” that “hate half of the population” don’t have a problem with money spent on educating people on relatively sound science, but for some bizarre reason we recoil when money is dumped by the fossil fuel industry, etc. into bullshit “think tanks” that propagate half-truths and lies with astroturfers.
Why could this be?
You keep investigating this strange phenomenon, but the answer continues to allude you. It’s almost as if you’re inept at coming up with answers derived from critical thinking or something.
The glaciers use too reach the Gulf of Mexico and have retreated since towards the poles.
It is possible the sun pulses in cycles of outward expansion creating greater heat and contractions providing less heat. Then there are the theories of volcanic ash cover and asteroid strikes blanketing cooling and then heating up after its dispersement.
Our limited scientific research could hardly determine the sun’s nature of heat distribution. Although it can be agreed the earth has experienced temperate fluctuations over the millenniums.
Fortunately, we no longer have too contend with theologians inciting heresy and commutes of death.
In real science, the sea level is the sea level is the sea level. In agenda driven pseudoscience, theory (even the whole concept of “climate” is theory) is used to adjust data without saying so on the plots that you offer policy makers and the public! You confirm my argument exactly, by promoting pseudoscience, waving it in my face like a good old Drug Warrior who wants to jail my friends and steal their homes if they disbelieve your junk science hype. You don’t “correct for non-climate factors” except to force data to fit your single bullet theory that get you all of your research funding. The whole concept of “non-climate factors” lays the scam bare.
If there were even a significant minority of single site sea level records going back to the 1800s that did show an up-curve, there would be no skeptical movement since we would agree with you!
Don’t worry, Nik, I don’t think Cowicide has any phasers. He can only try to make you look foolish… and much as I appreciate his efforts, I think you have now made it certain that he is not going to be responsible for that.
Good one Cowicide.
But the big one for me is Email. Where do I go for an alternitive to that?
Yahoo? Drop Dead.
MSN? No.
I mean yea there are pay options but being broke leaves you looking in the suboptimal places.
sea level is the sea level is the sea level … significant minority of single site sea level … agenda driven pseudoscience … good old Drug Warrior who wants to jail my friends … single bullet theory … steal their homes …
You’re crackin’ up, Nik. You’re crackin’ up.
I hear ya. To be honest, there’s not fantastic email options out there (they’ve been shut down by our authoritarian government as you probably already know), but it’s being worked on. This is a political-technological issue. That’s why donating to the EFF is just as vital (if not more so) than creating better email alternatives.
I’d keep an eye out here:
Inside the Effort to Crowdfund NSA-Proof Email and Chat Services
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/inside-the-effort-to-crowdfund-nsa-proof-email-and-chat-services
Also:
For a second there I thought you referred too Nash the Slash
Yeah, it just burns my ass when I see all those climatologists buzzing around in their fancy cars with their fast women when poor, hard-working oil company executives have to get by on Kraft dinner and catsup. Those rich, playboy scientists will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes!
Was looking at Open Mailbox but I dunno can’t find too much on it right now.
http://www.perseosblog.com/en/posts/openmailbox-an-alternative-to-gmail-based-on-free-software/
I mean I signed up for it (doesn’t require an existing email address for verification.) Annoying thing is the site keeps defaulting to french until after signup you go into the language menue.
Eh I’ll give it a month see if spam starts accumulating. Would like thoughts in another thread.
