1 Record cold is predicted by the global warmistas, haven't you heard.  They have $2 on every horse in the field.  Shrewd gamblers they are.

2 You wingnuts and your falsifiability.

Real SCIENCE!!! is made by self selected elites opining from on high.

Do they teach nothing in schools any more?

3 the global warming disciples really need to put some W's up. This is getting embarrassing.

Tell me about it.

4 And bite me, Michael Mann.

5 Man. I froze my nuts off this morning. All three of them.

6 LOL, this is the guy who was on Fox a few mornings ago and who flat out said the data for "hottest decade on record" was fraudulent.

I loved it. It also took the F&F crew by surprise.

7 5 Man. I froze my nuts off this morning. All three of them.

Yea, that's a part of my daily routine.  Otherwise, they keep growing.

8 And finally, a thread that the Morons can discuss w/o a flame war.

9 Record cold is predicted by the global warmistas, haven't you heard.  They have $2 on every horse in the field.  Shrewd gamblers they are.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at December 29, 2010 12:57 PM (71LDo)

As yes, "Global Climate Change". So what do you call a "theory" that can be "proved" by *any* data set?

10 Ah for the halcyon days of my youth when the only people obsessed with weather were farmers.

11 And finally, a thread that the Morons can discuss w/o a flame war.

Posted by: Vic at December 29, 2010 12:59 PM (M9Ie6)

Bite Me.

12 NFL hardest hit.

13 According to his website he also predicted, "the changes in the jet stream that caused the West Russian heatwave and the Pakistan floods and marked their ending in mid August 2010". I think that makes him a little better then 1 for 1.


http://www.weatheraction.com/pages/pv.asp?p=wact1&fsize=0

14 And bite me, Michael Mann.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at December 29, 2010 12:58 PM (71LDo)

How many grants have you gotten? I spent 20 years making that hockey stick dammit and I'm not going to let a little thing like the truth undermine all that work

15 Will Bloomberg still be running the snow plows?

16 He predicted this current winter would be the coldest in 100 years, and that the Northeast US would suffer the worst blizzards in decades

Aww, hell no!

17 I only wish I was kidding about covering all the horses in the field.

18

I was watching one of those James Burke "Connections" episodes from the '70s a couple of nights ago. In it he attributed the investment of english landowners in Dutch shipping to crop rotation and a "warming" for several years around 1720 which produced bumper crops.

I was thinking about that as they discussed the citrus crops freezing in Florida. Of course, "extremes" are just man made. It's a consensus. Or a religion. I forget which.

19 You don't get to cherry pick the data Ace.  I guess you "forgot" to mention obvious global warming caused catastrophes like the Haitian earthquake or Al Gore's divorce.  How convenient.

20 Grab a look at this superb presentation before Google hauls it down.

It is more than an hour in length, but well worth it. Especially toward the last 15 minutes in which the real agenda of the warmists is revealed.

21  I guess you "forgot" to mention obvious global warming caused catastrophes like the Haitian earthquake or Al Gore's divorce.  How convenient.

Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at December 29, 2010 01:03 PM (+lsX1)

Don't forget the 2010 elections.

22 We'll never survive the impending Ice Age because we are a Country of Skirts!

23 I predicted heat last summer and cold this winter. Do I get a prize?

24 This news will not help algore's second chakra get released.

25

And finally, a thread that the Morons can discuss w/o a flame war.

Fuck You, Denier!

26 15 Will Bloomberg still be running the snow plows?

Posted by: Cherry π at December 29, 2010 01:03 PM (+sBB4)

He really isn't now.

27

As yes, "Global Climate Change". So what do you call a "theory" that can be "proved" by *any* data set?

Posted by: 18-1 at December 29, 2010 01:00 PM (7BU4a)

You must not have gotten the memo.  It is now to be officially referred to as  'Global Climate Disruption'.

Please make sure to change any current and all future postings accordingly.

28 And finally, a thread that the Morons can discuss w/o a flame war.

Now is the time on Sprokets when we dance.

29 Posted by: Vic at December 29, 2010 12:59 PM (M9Ie6)

The Morons can have a flame war over anything, Vic.

I've actually taken a look at some of this guy's stuff.  They say he has an 85% long-term prediction success rate.  That's about as good as your local weatherman is going to be about tomorrow or the day after- forget a whole summer.

It's not just that he has a falsifiable prediction, its that he's had several and he's been vindicated on almost all of them.

That "almost all" just means he's not accounting for all the factors- but (like anyone with any cognitive abilities would) he understands that the biggest single factor is solar activity.

30 I only wish I was kidding about covering all the horses in the field.

Posted by: dfbaskwill at December 29, 2010 01:03 PM (71LDo)

The loss of Arctic sea ice helps accelerate the warming of the atmosphere in the far north, thanks to what's known as the albedo effect. White ice reflects sunlight into space, cooling the air, but when ice melts and is replaced with dark ocean water, the effect is reversed and more of the sun's heat is absorbed.

Silly me.  I thought that water was colorless.

31 One erroneous prediction doesn't prove or disprove a theory

Perhaps I am not understanding your intent here.  Mathematically, for a statement to be true it must always be true.  For it to be false, it requires only one instance.  That is why science is designed around falsifiable statements. 

32

As yes, "Global Climate Change". So what do you call a "theory" that can be "proved" by *any* data set?

Religion.

33

So when Obama said he would stop the sea levels from rising and covering landmasses that had been "populated for millenia" he meant he was ushering in a new ice age? Cool.

34

I followed this guy on Twitter.

http://twitter.com/piers_corbyn

35 And finally, a thread that the Morons can discuss w/o a flame war.

Cthulhu farts in your general direction.

36 It is more than an hour in length, but well worth it. Especially toward the last 15 minutes in which the real agenda of the warmists is revealed.

Posted by: navybrat at December 29, 2010 01:04 PM (oDy9s)

Is there anyway to download that? 

37 That Ice Ball Earth evidence is some scary shit, or would be scary if we wouldn't already be dead by then.

To the asteroids, men!

38 Posted by: iknowtheleft at December 29, 2010 01:06 PM (G/MYk)

Here's my question about global warming:  So what?  Based on their own theories of mankind's origins, humans have survived at least one major ice-age.  We seem to have come through it well enough.

Instead of worrying about theoretical people who, in the theoretical future, theoretically might die- how about we try to care for those millions-upon-millions of real people who are really dying right now in the real present?  DDT anyone?

I'm willing to bet that if we took all the Federal grant money from climatologists and spent it on DDT to kill off bugs in Africa we'd end malaria there in 5 years.  Tops.

Just sayin'.

39

I wish it was going to be a 'Snow Age' instead of an 'Ice Age'...

Ice is for the unwashed masses.

40

I know that the AGW crowd have tried to walk back the idea of global warming so that "weather" in all forms can now be proof of "climate change", but I think it's a bridge too far for the general public.  It's cliched casual banter to say "how about that global warming" during any unsaesonable cold.  I think the idea of CO2 equals global warming is too firmly embedded, and therefore the flip side of that idea, global cooling mean CO2 is not a big deal, will be unavoidable.  Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of theorists religious disciples.

I hate the idea of a colder planet.  Cold sucks.  I think the frauds who tried to foist a regime of government control under the false flag of a half-formed theory of AGW will actually take some blame if this next ice age comes to pass.  It's irrational, but I think there is a natural desire to place blame, and the crowd who seemed to be wishing for a colder planet is a convenient target for anger when you are shoveling snow.  It's irrational, but given the thin patina of rationality in the AGW tactics, that just makes the irony sweeter. 

I hear that the frozen tears of an AGW true believer provide the perfect accent for a mint julep.

41 I don't know if this has been posted here, yet:

http://tinyurl.com/242sygq

42 There is proof enough for one theory; the theory that the leftists are merely using "climate change" to push a totalitarian agenda.

43 When politicians and regulators start getting involved in a scientific debate you can assume that most of the "science" being done is garbage. The scientist rent-seekers quickly rise to the top and crowd out the competent ones.

44 And on cue, I get a solicitation from the Union of Concerned (BS) Scientists to help "expose and challenge attacks on climate science and scientists".

Wonder when this hive of scum and villainy will commence their own attacks on this scientist who dares to deviate from the accepted climate dogma?

45 Looks like yeaterday was the right day to buy thos Cross Country Skis!

46 The weather guy on the TV station that I watch in the morning (out of Scranton) said the daily high temperature was below normal 23 days so far this month. And as far as these hottest decades and hottest years on record I think they're full of shit. I started to really take notice of the daily record highs and lows for my area on the Weather Channel this past summer when I saw that so many of the record highs were in the late 19th. and early 20th. century; 1896, 1902, etc. It sure looked like a pattern. Stick to the Old Farmer's Almanac, it's probably as accurate as these assholes.

47 Cold sucks.

You have no idea.  The ice is spreading, and we're coming for you.

48 Posted by: countrydoc at December 29, 2010 01:10 PM (131HS)

With scientific method (as taught in my 8th grade science class) you can get three answers from an experiment: 'True,' 'False,' 'Do More Research.'  Basically, if he's getting 85% of his predictions right, then the ones that are wrong fall into the 'Do More Research' category.

As for the One-World-Government types who are pushing this scam- since they've never been right (that I know of) I think we can safely call their stance "not a theory."  And I'm pretty sure we can go so far as to say "not science."

he was ushering in a new ice age? Cool.

I see what you did, there.

49 I have a theory:  Global Warming predictions are like illegitimate children; - they're fun to make, but really, who needs them?

50 And on cue, I get a solicitation from the Union of Concerned (BS) Scientists to help "expose and challenge attacks on climate science and scientists".

I used to be a member back in the '70s.  Just so I could sign my rightwing neofacist Letters to the Editor as Tobias Took, Union of Concerned Scientists.

Like an online PHD, all it took was enough concern to write a $25 check.

51

I watch in the morning (out of Scranton)

"Check it out, y'all - The Anthracite Museum!"

 

 

52 The entire premise of the warmists is that CO2 levels drive warming climate change.

Let us note that CO2 represents far less than 1% in the atmosphere. The rest is nitrogen, oxygen, argon, et al.

The amount of CO2 that all of human activity contributes is an even smaller fraction of that.

And somehow, the warmists would have us believe that this miniscule variance drives the climate on the entire planet, and that the sun plays no role whatsoever.

Truly, this is a big fat slow ball coming right over home plate. They have built their entire argument on a premise so ridiculous, I am amazed that any thinking person can still attempt to buttress it.

53 actually, it was the '80s now that I think about it, because Reagan was president.

either or

54

 this miniscule variance drives the climate on the entire planet, and that the sun plays no role whatsoever.

Consider this your first and only warning.

55 But Charles Johnson has personally done the science!!!!!

56 >>The global warming lunatics have been staring at this same exact data for many years, but all they ever saw was the correlation between CO2 and the climate, which they just assumed meant that CO2 drives climate. That's not entirely true. The UNEP and the WMO decided a long time they needed to restrict economic development in the west and transfer wealth to poorer, less developed countries. They invented out of whole cloth man made climate change and then hunted around for a couple "scientists" who would support their crackpot hypothesis with cherry picked data. They reached their conclusion and then tried to force fit data to support it. This bullshit has been going on mostly in the shadows for decades. Ironically, dumbass Gore helped kill this crap by making it such a high profile "crisis". Once the public started really paying attention the whole thing started crumbling.

57 Tobias Took

Good gracious! The hobbits have gotten loose among us.

58 Ice Age: It's Sarah Palin's evil plan to become dominatrix of the world

59 this was all mathematically clear long ago to anyone who calculated the odds that Al Gore would be right about any given thing.

60 You have no idea.  The ice is spreading, and we're coming for you.

Posted by: Polar bears at December 29, 2010 01:17 PM (8lSIO)

Awesome.  Please take your time as I don't want my bear steaks all tough and stringy from too much exertion.

Can't wait for the new rug as well, but really, take your time.

61 Posted by: navybrat at December 29, 2010 01:20 PM (oDy9s)

I just figured it out!  It's Mythbusters science!

Ever seen an episode where they make one of their "scale models" and get one result, then get a completely different one with the real thing?  And then they're surprised?  "Oh my gosh," (best Adam voice), "I would not have expected that!"

And you're yelling at the screen: "60 'scale' miles-per-hour is not the same as 60 miles per hour, dolt!" or something similar.

Like when they tried to prove that a submarine submerging wouldn't drag people down with it- despite recorded evidence otherwise- but they couldn't get an actual submarine, so they just sank a boat?

The Warmists are exactly the same:  They see that in a Greenhouse, the temperature is higher when there is a greater concentration of CO2 and completely forget the fact that- oh yeah- there's also glass or plastic which might retard the exchange of heat just a little bit.  I'm pretty sure my car isn't 115 degrees when I get in it on a hot day because of higher CO2.

62 Big fat ass Al Gore has a problem with heavy skid stains.  He crapped his skivvies after this latest storm to hit the south, and east.  Poor dumb liberal bastard.

63 32 Silly me. I thought that water was colorless. --------- So China has no hope for their ambition to build a blue-water navy?

64 We're all going to

Burn up! Crops will fail massive starvation. cities flooded . Millions displaced.

I mean freeze! Crops will fail massive starvation. Cities frozen in glaciers. Millions displaced.

_{(Quick which is it this decade?)}

Unless the developed world stops all economic activity NOW!!!

65 Crops will fail massive starvation. Cities frozen in glaciers. Millions displaced.

I call dibs on our liberal Eloi.

66 The weather guy on the TV station that I watch in the morning (out of Scranton) said the daily high temperature was below normal 23 days so far this month.

I have been tracking the highs and lows for my area using my own thermometers for three years now. This Dec is running 10° lower than last Dec. Last Dec was about 5° lower than the one before it.

Also last year we did an experiment with a bunch of the morons. We used the local weather records for each of our areas from Wonderweather and averaged the entire month and compared it with the same month during the previous year. In all cases it was cooler.
 
Stick to the Old Farmer's Almanac, it's probably as accurate as these assholes.

Posted by: PoconoJoe at December 29, 2010 01:17 PM (bmOHi)

The old Farmer's Almanac is much more accurate than the idiot AGW people AND the U.S. weather service for long range weather forecasts,

That is because they base their predictions on the Sun. Imagine that.

67 I call dibs on our liberal Eloi.
I wouldn't want to get the prion disease they are all clearly carrying.

68 Silly me. I thought that water was colorless. Posted by: CUS at December 29, 2010 01:10 PM (wOGfT) Water is colorless and is an excellent absorber of Solar radiation. Dark in this case means lower albedo than ice.

69 It is a far safer bet to make climate predictions based on solar activity than anything else, but that won't increase taxes, distribute wealth, or increase government hegemony. AGW is the Hoax of the Millennium, so far.

70

They have $2 on every horse in the field. 

Dark in this case means lower albedo than ice.

So...if you bet on the dark horse, that means albedo's are off. 

And land is only 30% of the Urf's surface...if I'm not mistaken, 70-75% (check my math AmishDude) of the Earth is covered by water.  I think we're being surfacist about the whole global warming/cooling issue.  What's going on in our underwater world, where Aquaman, Ariel, and the Gungans (Gungas?) reside?

71 What's going on in our underwater world, where Aquaman, Ariel, and the Gungans (Gungas?) reside? Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at December 29, 2010 02:00 PM (3iMgs) It's a party, 24/7.

72 One erroneous prediction doesn't prove or disprove a theory ______________________________ Actually, in what Whoopie would call "science-science" one erroneous prediction does disprove a theory.

73 #56, Charles Johnson can blow me.

As for the mechanics of a a Little Ice Age, and the resulting chaos and probable pestilence and famine, check out The Last Centurion by John Ringo. Pretty good novel, he had some other folk in his fan base check the science end.

74 The UK weather people denied they predicted a mild winter and removed the forecast from their website.

75 Actually, in what Whoopie would call "science-science" one erroneous prediction does disprove a theory.

That's why you always include some form of the All things being equal disclaimer in your predictions.  That way, if you find out that you failed to control for a contributing factor, it means the experiment was bad, not your theory.

76 Ugly Fact: 1 Beautiful Hypothesis: 0 That's the way it works, Warmists.

77 I saw this over at Jawa yesterday. Global Warming would be a good thing were it true. Can I haz my real light bulbs back?

78 This global warming thing is a Ponzi scheme.

79 What gets me is that the lying warmies all call it science and yet not one step in what is called "scientific method" has ever been completed.

And nobody ever calls them on this, including the people at Fox.

80 Hypothesis, nothing, conclusion. That is much faster. I have revolutionized the scientific method. Can I haz my Nobel Prize now?

81 Michael Mann must go to prison.

82 #82

Of course they don't call them on it.  They are journalism majors (no math required for degree) and all you have to do to snow them is show them some charts and technical-sounding words.  They are science and math illiterates,  and don't even know enough to ask the questions.

This is how Al Gore (D in earth science in undergrad) got drawn into the entire thing.  Someone showed him some graphs and talked about "greenhouse cases" and showed him a polar bear riding around on a block of ice,  and he went over the edge into full-blown environmental messiah mode.

And then the Gore-on,  whose only math talent is figuring out how to use the carbon credit scam for fun and profit,  became THE expert,  and flew all over the world ringing this tin-can alarm bell, and even more idiots with zero science background climbed on board.

If I ran Fox news,  all people doing science reporting would have to demonstrate their ability to solve a quadratic equation and perform 3 simple lab experiments with proper computations of the result.  Oh,  and also define 3 scientific theories with examples.

Bah.

83

The Warmists are exactly the same:  They see that in a Greenhouse, the temperature is higher when there is a greater concentration of CO2 and completely forget the fact that- oh yeah- there's also glass or plastic which might retard the exchange of heat just a little bit.  I'm pretty sure my car isn't 115 degrees when I get in it on a hot day because of higher CO2.

There's no CO2 in a real greenhouse (well, there is but that's not the point.) The CO2 is supposed to function like the glass itself and trap the heat. That makes the analogy even more tenuous, but that is the proposed mechanism.

Which makes the climate change deal even sillier. "Radical weather, even cold or snow, can be evidence of climate change caused by CO2", they say. No it can't, not when the mechanism is increased heat via the greenhouse effect!

84 Science is the systematic study of the physical world and phenomena.

Scientist is one who does the systematic study described above.

Scientific Method is the way the study is made "systematic". Usually the steps or the "method" are as follows:

1. Make an observation of some natural phenomena
2. Form a question regarding the observation.
3. Study the phenomena and collect complete data.
4. Develop a hypothesis to explain the observation and data.
5. make predictions and logical deductions using the hypothesis and the observed data to explain the phenomena and to develop experiments to explain.
6. Conduct experiments
7. Analyze the data from the experiments and compare to the hypothesis.
8. Develop new hypothesis as necessary and retest.
9. Publish data and tests.

The warmies have not even completed step one.

85 Of course, what really confuses me about the whole global warming thing--why would Canda, Sweeden, etc. object to it at all? Do they think they are going to turn into some hell hole by warming 3 degrees over fifty years? Oh no, then they might have the climate of, say, Montana instead!

86 Last I knew the Arctic is frozen this time of year /norm. The sun don`t shine in the winter time up yonder, therefore no albedo. So what that idiot was saying in the gray mullet wrapper is that summer time Arctic ice extent is causing blizzards in December. I call BS.

87 20 Grab a look at this superb presentation before Google hauls it down.

Thanks Navy Brat.  This is a must see.  Yes. one of the contributors is Steve McIntyre.  And he, along with all of the featured scientists and climatoligists are damned right.   This should be required viewing in every school, university, ngo and hall of governance everywhere.  God it makes me sick how the left have hijacked this science for their... evil, frankly.... ends.  Makes me puke.

88
I like the way this guy thinks and I believe he is probably correct. But belief is not science and he might want to avoid too many detailed "forecasts" because otherwise his credibility will go right in the toilet. You cannot take such a small sample as Gore and his minions have relied upon and show some climatic abnormality, MUCH LESS show same is caused by humans. Same goes for the ice age folks except in their case there is MORE evidence for ice ages than for any abnormal warming (I consider mile-high glaciers bearing down on my backyard damn well abnormal).

89 titip link ya pakde
Wong goblog
Asuhan Keperawatan
ngekngok
Song Lyric
badboybaik