Australian Politics Forum - Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #195 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:02pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 3:56pm:

I know that the AGW alarmists just love colourful little graphs, so here's one for Bunny to enjoy:

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/98_percent_climate_scientists...

Yes.. THat is correct. Thank you. I hope Gold Medal looks at it.

It may stop him telling further lies like:
it was sent out to 10,000+ 'climate scientists' a massive number of 76 responded

Your graph shows he clearly lied.

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 137502
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #196 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:03pm

While not accurate, it was not a deliberate lie.

"it was sent out to 10,000+ 'climate scientists' a massive number of 76 responded"

... should have read:

"it was sent out to 10,000+ 'climate scientists' a massive number of 76 respondents were used to create the 97% figure"

Everybody knew exactly what he was talking about.

You're just being petulant.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6646	Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings. Reply #197 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:06pm Rider wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:01pm: So 75 out of 10000 odd 'climate' scientists believe in AGW. The power of consensus .... That's pretty embarrassing. Earth scientists, rider. Climate scientists are a much smaller subset. Your comprehension skills barely rise above moronic.
Back to top	Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings "What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions." IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 137502
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #198 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:07pm

This is the important information which you're trying to ignore:

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past, where a survey of 10,256 with 3146 respondents was whittled down to 75 out of 77 “expert” ’active climate researchers’ (ACR) to give the 97% figure, based on just two very simplistic (shallow) questions ... "

We all knew this was what he was referring to.

There was no deliberate lie: just a poorly worded sentence.

Back to top

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #199 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:10pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:03pm:

While not accurate, it was not a deliberate lie.

"it was sent out to 10,000+ 'climate scientists' a massive number of 76 responded"

... should have read:

"it was sent out to 10,000+ 'climate scientists' a massive number of 76 respondents were used to create the 97% figure"

Everybody knew exactly what he was talking about.

You're just being petulant.

http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/98_percent_climate_scientists...

ONLY THE BORN TO RULE DADDY-LOVERS ARE ALLOWED TO GET PETULANT APPARENTLY!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #200 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:12pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

This is the important information which you're trying to ignore:

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past, where a survey of 10,256 with 3146 respondents was whittled down to 75 out of 77 “expert” ’active climate researchers’ (ACR) to give the 97% figure, based on just two very simplistic (shallow) questions ... "

We all knew this was what he was referring to.

There was no deliberate lie: just a poorly worded sentence.

WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER!!

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

Rider

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2669
OnTheRoad
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #201 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:15pm

MOTR wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:06pm:

Rider wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:01pm:

So 75 out of 10000 odd 'climate' scientists believe in AGW. The power of consensus .... Cheesy

That's pretty embarrassing.

Earth scientists, rider. Climate scientists are a much smaller subset. Your comprehension skills barely rise above moronic.

I comprehend that you constantly refer to this study as some form of proof of consensus, you are the moron.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #202 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:16pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

This is the important information which you're trying to ignore:

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past, where a survey of 10,256 with 3146 respondents was whittled down to 75 out of 77 “expert” ’active climate researchers’ (ACR) to give the 97% figure, based on just two very simplistic (shallow) questions ... "

We all knew this was what he was referring to.

There was no deliberate lie: just a poorly worded sentence.

No - it was a deliberate lie.
The survey of 10,256 had 3146 respondents. Not 79.

Of the 3146 respondents - 79 individuals were identified as having particular expertise in climate change, having published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change. Of these 79 individuals 97% of them answered "YES" to the question:
"Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?"

Where on earth do you get this nonsense about respondents being "whittled down"?!?!? All of the responses from the 3146 respondents are included in the report. But the report also highlights that a small subset of these respondents had particular expertise in the field.

It is all very clearly spelled out in the report and there is no attempt to hide the fact that this small sub-set consisted of 79 individuals.

Back to top

IP Logged

MOTR

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6646

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #203 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:16pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

This is the important information which you're trying to ignore:

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past, where a survey of 10,256 with 3146 respondents was whittled down to 75 out of 77 “expert” ’active climate researchers’ (ACR) to give the 97% figure, based on just two very simplistic (shallow) questions ... "

We all knew this was what he was referring to.

There was no deliberate lie: just a poorly worded sentence.

geggery, how many climate scientist received the survey?

Back to top

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #204 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:17pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 1:28pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 1:18pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 1:15pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 1:10pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 1:05pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 7:07am:

Maqqa wrote on Jan 7^th, 2013 at 8:21pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jan 1^st, 2013 at 8:21am:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 3:12pm:

MOTR wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 1:28pm:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 1:21pm:

Maqqa wrote on Dec 31^st, 2012 at 12:37pm:

Interesting to note:

(1) If the ice and the water it floats in are of different composition then the water is displaced ie freshwater ice in salt water. The pictures we've been seeing is from Antarctica and Greenland (freshwater ice)

(2) Does anyone know what the IPCC say about recent rises in sea-level and how much it contributes to Antarctica and Greenland?

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf

Antarctic and Greenland ice sheet mass contributed to sea level rise between 1993 and 2003

Antarctica ==>> 0.21 ± 0.35 mm/year
Greenland ==>> 0.21 ± 0.07 mm/year

things to note:
(a) This is an estimate
(b) The rise is in millimetres
(c) The Antarctic margin of error wipes out the Antarctic contribution as well as offsets the Greenland contribution

not one leftie commented on this IPCC finding?

you don't know what 0.21mm looks like? - look in your pants and multiply that by 1,000

talking about multiplying by 1,000

if we multiply 0.21mm by 1,000 years = 210mm = 21cm in 1,000 years???

Give me time, Maqqa.

Have you thought about using a metric other than your penis size. It doesn't seem to match any standard I'm aware of.

penis size is about the only measurement lefties understand

you guys haven't discovered the Empirical Measurement let alone the Metric

Still nothing from the left about these sea level increases?

Still nothing from the left about these IPCC figures?

too smug about a few hot days around the country. NOW it is global warming because it is hot and not even close to the hottest.

Why did you tell this outright lie here:
gold_medal wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 8:05pm:

well let's look at the '97% of climate scientists' claim that MOTR makes.

the source of this data is a survey of just two questions - both poorly written and subjective.

it was sent out to 10,000+ 'climate scientists' a massive number of 76 responded. yep, SEVENTY SIX. so in the mother of all self-selction bias surveys, 97% say they support a poorly defined ACC.

there are Womens Day surveys with more statistical credibility than that.

this is an example of the statistical nonsense that passes for science over in the climate hysterical corner.

THere were 3146 respondents to the survey. Not 76.

What did you hope to gain by telling such a ridiculous lie?

That same as when you lied about glaciers receding. When are going to apologise to the forum for that lie?

You need to keep up. You sound like you are so far from the information at hand, you almost sound like that useful idiot I was talking about.

Do you know why Gold Medal told such a silly lie? Could you explain?

I know of the information of the 76 because I linked to it. It is not a lie. The 97% comes from 76 climate scientist who had published a paper that was accepted withn xxxx. Big number hey considering 3000+ respondents.

Pathetic. Started with 10000. Ended up with 3000 something responses and only ended with a 97% number of 76 out of 3000 something respondents.

Gold Medal lied.

He wrote that
it was sent out to 10,000+ 'climate scientists' a massive number of 76 responded.

That is false

And of the 10, 257 people approached to take part in this survey, 3,146 or 30.7% chose to participate.
http://www.garnautreview.org.au/update-2011/commissioned-work/the-'scientigic-co...

79 of the 3,149 respondants were "defined as those who had both ‘nominated climate science as their area of expertise’ and ‘published more than 50% of their recent peer- reviewed papers on... climate change’"

Gold Medal told a deliberate lie. Just as he did when he told a deliberate lie about glaciers receding.

tell me again about how those 79 scientists are a meaningdul sample to draw from. is statistics yet another topic you know nothing about? it is as meaningful as a yahoo poll and less accurate.

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #205 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:19pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

This is the important information which you're trying to ignore:

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past, where a survey of 10,256 with 3146 respondents was whittled down to 75 out of 77 “expert” ’active climate researchers’ (ACR) to give the 97% figure, based on just two very simplistic (shallow) questions ... "

You forgot to give your source:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

Great website! Did Jonesy put you on to that one!!!!
You will be quoting Bolty for us next!

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #206 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:21pm

Apart from the fact that consensus is a near-worthless value in science, we now see that this 'consensus' was achieved using a high-school level survey that had sample set that invalidated it at every turn.

The real concern is that ANYONE uses the survey to say anything at all. if this is a sample of climatologists statistics (and unfortunately it is) then the entire discipline is fatally discredited.

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #207 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:23pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:19pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:07pm:

This is the important information which you're trying to ignore:

"The Doran paper has been criticised by many sceptics in the past, where a survey of 10,256 with 3146 respondents was whittled down to 75 out of 77 “expert” ’active climate researchers’ (ACR) to give the 97% figure, based on just two very simplistic (shallow) questions ... "

You forgot to give your source:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

Great website! Did Jonesy put you on to that one!!!!
You will be quoting Bolty for us next!

as if to prove the point that you ignore any evidence you simply dont like.

Back to top

IP Logged

Rider Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 2669 OnTheRoad Gender:	Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings. Reply #208 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:23pm It could be also be suggested that 70% of survey recipients thought the survey not worthy of their time as it was a total suck, poorly drafted and clearly intentioned to garner a pre determined headline.
Back to top	IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #209 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:24pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 4:17pm:

tell me again about how those 79 scientists are a meaningdul sample to draw from. is statistics yet another topic you know nothing about? it is as meaningful as a yahoo poll and less accurate.

First - tell us why you chose to deliberately lie, rather than representing the survey honestly.

Then you can read this review of the Doran survey which explains why those 79 scientists are a meaningdul sample to draw from:

The number of respondents for the survey as a whole is large; leaving aside the question of response rates, 3,146 is a large sample by almost any measure. And with 82% of respondents as a whole agreeing that ‘human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures’ we might reasonably conclude that in this survey the proposition in question was overwhelmingly supported.

...In a simple random survey the standard error for a sample of 79, assuming a 95% confidence interval, would be eleven percentage points; so we might interpret the result, within this confidence band, as falling somewhere between 86% and 100%.
http://www.garnautreview.org.au/update-2011/commissioned-work/the-'scientigic-co...

Back to top

IP Logged