Australian Politics Forum - Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137500
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #225 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 5:57pm

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 5:51pm:

But but 3146 gives it the credibility it needs. You cant just throw that out. Cant we just forget the 97% comes from only 75 of those.

Yes, that's exactly what Bunny and MOTR would like.

The truth is, however, whenever you hear someone say : "but 97% of climate scientists agree", what they're actually talking about is 75 people.

Just 75 people.

Not 10,256, not 3,146, and not even 3,051. Just 75.

But 75 doesn't sound anywhere near as good as 97%, does it?

Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #226 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:03pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on 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...

ah... quoting a climate hysteric to support the statistically invalid claims of another hysteric? How quaint!!!

Back to top

IP Logged

Rider

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2669
OnTheRoad
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #227 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:16pm

And the crux of the 97% is the following two questions contained in this 'high level' AGW consensus are...

1 When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
2 Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

May as well have been a survey of which shoe lace do you tie first...this is an example of the climate science I have every reason under the sun to question, and dare i say it...be skeptical of the whole AGW discussion.

How scientific is 'do you think......??' FFS this isn't even high school, its worse, its an Arts Degree Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #228 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:18pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 5:57pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 5:51pm:

But but 3146 gives it the credibility it needs. You cant just throw that out. Cant we just forget the 97% comes from only 75 of those.

Yes, that's exactly what Bunny and MOTR would like.

The truth is, however, whenever you hear someone say : "but 97% of climate scientists agree", what they're actually talking about is 75 people.

Just 75 people.

Not 10,256, not 3,146, and not even 3,051. Just 75.

But 75 doesn't sound anywhere near as good as 97%, does it?

Roll Eyes

one of the disturbing aspects of this survey is that the level of statistical fraud employed in it is not remarkable in the field of paleo-climatology. in fact it is a bit better than most. the hockey-stick was a completely fabricated bit of rubbish that hysterics still claim is perfect. The lack of integrity employed by some in their supposed research is breath-taking.

this survey is nothing unusual. They probably claim a confidence level of 99% as well

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #229 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 7:09pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:03pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on 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...

ah... quoting a climate hysteric to support the statistically invalid claims of another hysteric? How quaint!!!

Huh?!?!

Murry Goot is a "climate hysteric"?!?!?

Why?!?!?

Professor Murray Goot holds a personal chair in the Department of Politics and International Relations at Macquarie University. He specialises in public opinion, Australian politics (especially political parties, voting behaviour and electoral systems), and the mass media. He is currently working on an ARC-funded study of Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party and editing a special issue of the "InternationalJournal of Public Opinion Research" on the war in Iraq.
http://www.assa.edu.au/fellows/profile.php?id=436

What has he done for you to label him a "climate hysteric"?!?!?

Anything?

Or just something else you made up , like when you lied about glaciers?

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #230 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 7:13pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:18pm:

the hockey-stick was a completely fabricated bit of rubbish that hysterics still claim is perfect.
this survey is nothing unusual. They probably claim a confidence level of 99% as well

Let me guess - we are just going to have to take your word on this too.

No evidence to support this opinion of yours of course.

Just another silly statement from a known liar.

BTW - you told us that glaciers had stopped receding. Will you provide us evidence to support this? Or will you be apologising for lying to the forum?

And how about that undersea volcano melting the arctic? Evidence? Or an apology for another lie?

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #231 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 7:14pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:18pm:

one of the disturbing aspects of this survey is that the level of statistical fraud employed in it is not remarkable in the field of paleo-climatology.

Could you please point out what the "statistical fraud " was?

All of the methodology was clearly outlined in the report.

What was fraudelent?

The only fraud I have seen here so far is from the liar that wrote:

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

Why did you tell such a blatant lie?

Did you think no one would notice?

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #232 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 7:18pm

Rider wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:16pm:

And the crux of the 97% is the following two questions contained in this 'high level' AGW consensus are...

1 When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
2 Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

May as well have been a survey of which shoe lace do you tie first...this is an example of the climate science I have every reason under the sun to question, and dare i say it...be skeptical of the whole AGW discussion.

How scientific is 'do you think......??' FFS this isn't even high school, its worse, its an Arts Degree Grin

errr...it isn't science. It is a survey. Do you know the difference?

Back to top

IP Logged

gold_medal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #233 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 8:00pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 7:13pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:18pm:

the hockey-stick was a completely fabricated bit of rubbish that hysterics still claim is perfect.
this survey is nothing unusual. They probably claim a confidence level of 99% as well

Let me guess - we are just going to have to take your word on this too.

No evidence to support this opinion of yours of course.

Just another silly statement from a known liar.

BTW - you told us that glaciers had stopped receding. Will you provide us evidence to support this? Or will you be apologising for lying to the forum?

And how about that undersea volcano melting the arctic? Evidence? Or an apology for another lie?

there is a MASSIVE body of evidence that the hockey stick is crap. even the NAS said the methodology was nonsense. it has been debunked many times over. If you are unaware of that then you really are woefully uninformed. but please... tell me that the hockey stick is great science... there are formal rebukes, multiple papers and opinions experssed about it and several enquiries including an ethics complaint about the author himself.

please... make a fool of yourself and say how fabulous the hockey stick is!!!

Back to top

IP Logged

Rider

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2669
OnTheRoad
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #234 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 8:02pm

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 7:18pm:

Rider wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 6:16pm:

And the crux of the 97% is the following two questions contained in this 'high level' AGW consensus are...

1 When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
2 Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

May as well have been a survey of which shoe lace do you tie first...this is an example of the climate science I have every reason under the sun to question, and dare i say it...be skeptical of the whole AGW discussion.

How scientific is 'do you think......??' FFS this isn't even high school, its worse, its an Arts Degree Grin

errr...it isn't science. It is a survey. Do you know the difference?

err no, its the steaming pile of dog sh1t called consensus Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #235 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 8:03pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 8:00pm:

there is a MASSIVE body of evidence that the hockey stick is crap.

Let me guess - we are just going to have to take your word on this too.

No evidence to support this opinion of yours of course.

Just another silly statement from a known liar.

BTW - you told us that glaciers had stopped receding. Will you provide us evidence to support this? Or will you be apologising for lying to the forum?

And how about that undersea volcano melting the arctic? Evidence? Or an apology for another lie?

Back to top

IP Logged

rabbitoh07

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 2783
Gender: male

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #236 - Jan 8^th, 2013 at 8:08pm

gold_medal wrote on Jan 8^th, 2013 at 8:00pm:

please... make a fool of yourself and say how fabulous the hockey stick is!!!

You are obviously not going to show us any evidence to support you opinion - you never do. But do you even understand what the "hockey stick" is?

Could you explain to us why you think Mann's paleoclimate reconstructions are in any way relevant to the observed impact of CO2 emissions on global climate today?

Let us throw all common sense away and believe your nonsense for a minute - and say there was some fatal flaw with Mann's reconstruction? (we still await your evidence that there is)

So?!?!?!

Why do you think this is in any way relevant.

Could you explain please

And why did you describe Murry Goot as a "climate hysteric"?!?!?
It is really getting hard to keep up with your crap.

Back to top

IP Logged

progressiveslol

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17029

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #237 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 2:20am

Looks like the IPCC is becoming more transparent as promised. Only problem for them, it is forced and shows everything.

More IPCC AR5: THE SECRET SANTA LEAK (gigabyte of data)

Massive amounts of information is now available. Too soon to get the nuggets out yet, but there will be plenty about green activists having a say in this report.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/08/more-ipcc-ar5-the-secret-santa-leak/#more-...

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26508
Australia

Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #238 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 5:15am

gold_medal wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 6:34pm:

I can do better than that.

here is one of your 'stars' James Hansen who is worshipped by you non-critical thinkers while so reviled by his collegaues that they sent out an open letter pleading for someone to shut this freak up.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/12/13/james-hansen-mathematical-mental-midget/

he is so statistically incompetent that he would be on SOB's level
he lies so completely and with such a stright face that adlecrow would call him a friend

and of course his classic warming that we would all be frying by 2006

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/12/05/hansen-1986-two-degrees-warming-by-2006-hottest-in-100000-years/

and you believe these weirdos???

where is your much-vaunted and self-proclaiimed 'critical reasoning'?

Wow you must really hate ppl that disagree with you

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg Gold Member Offline WE ARE BORG Posts: 26508 Australia	Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings. Reply #239 - Jan 9^th, 2013 at 5:16am Maqqa wrote on Dec 30^th, 2012 at 7:53pm: The title says "Deniers nailed...." Does anyone know what we are supposed to be "denying" Hahahaha And yet you consider yourself a denier? SOB
Back to top	Whaaaaaah! I'm a Moron! - edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope IP Logged