Australian Politics Forum - IPCC 95% sure about AGW

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137969
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #30 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:36pm

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:31pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

...
Seems like all this CO2 is going to your head.

Still trolling, young simpleton.

au contraire

You are the one making false accusations, and then running away when confronted.

"You want to gamble that there's no risk."

" ... your denial of the opinion of the best qualified scientists ... "

Really? Source? Links?

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #31 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:37pm

muso wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 10:38am:

The IPCC Report is extremely conservative. It understates the risk. Virtually any climatologist will echo that sentiment.

so the real figure is actual 145% certain? and the 2degree figure is actually 7 degrees?

cmon muso. you can do better than that. the IPCC isn't conservative at all. it is merely INCOMPETENT. or how do you account for them being wrong 100% of the time?

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137969
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #32 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:39pm

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:33pm:

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:26pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 3:52pm:

I'm 95% sure that 100% of the alarmists will ignore the fact that 95% is not 100%.

I see what you did there.

Demanding 100% certainty? Is that honest?

I'm certainly not demanding 100%.

Who is?

You seem to make all these accusations, and then run for the hills when asked to explain.

The irony is, you have the audacity to call other people trolls.

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #33 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:54pm

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:37pm:

muso wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 10:38am:

The IPCC Report is extremely conservative. It understates the risk. Virtually any climatologist will echo that sentiment.

so the real figure is actual 145% certain? and the 2degree figure is actually 7 degrees?

cmon muso. you can do better than that. the IPCC isn't conservative at all. it is merely INCOMPETENT. or how do you account for them being wrong 100% of the time?

The IPCC has erred on the conservative side. A great many papers that predicted a higher temperature increase were not included. Many that predicted lower increases were included, including some that are generally regarded as having little credibility. There is political pressure by countries such as China to understate the findings.

Some climate scientists suggest that the IPCC has outlived its
usefulness.

That said, the confidence that if you drop a stone it will hit the ground is pretty close to 95%. Usually we talk about a 95% confidence interval. It's a kind of "gold standard".

How many samples would be expected to fall outside predicted ranges for a 95% confidence limit? Give me an answer in percent.

Now please back up that assertion that the IPCC have been wrong 100% of the time.

Doesn't that show that the figure of 100% at least, is incorrect?

Back to top

« Last Edit: Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:00pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #34 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:57pm

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:35pm:

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:33pm:

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:26pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 3:52pm:

I'm 95% sure that 100% of the alarmists will ignore the fact that 95% is not 100%.

I see what you did there.

Demanding 100% certainty? Is that honest?

... highlighting the fact that if they aren't 100% certain they could be wrong.

All things are possible. The question comes down to probabilities.

You're gambling against a 95% probability. Is that a rational bet?

Back to top

IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #35 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:01pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:39pm:

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:33pm:

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:26pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 3:52pm:

I'm 95% sure that 100% of the alarmists will ignore the fact that 95% is not 100%.

I see what you did there.

Demanding 100% certainty? Is that honest?

I'm certainly not demanding 100%.
...

You said Quote:

... the fact that 95% is not 100%.

If you were not demanding 100%, then what were you saying?

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137969
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #36 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:02pm

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:39pm:

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:33pm:

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:26pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 3:52pm:

I'm 95% sure that 100% of the alarmists will ignore the fact that 95% is not 100%.

I see what you did there.

Demanding 100% certainty? Is that honest?

I'm certainly not demanding 100%.
...

You said Quote:

... the fact that 95% is not 100%.

If you were not demanding 100%, then what were you saying?

I was saying 95% is not 100%

Not sure how you missed that.

Back to top

IP Logged

longweekend58

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #37 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:03pm

I would like to know where this 95% comes from. Given that temperature has stalled for 17 years, every model has failed comprehensively and every other prediction has fallen over, surely the degree of confidence should have FALLEN and fallen dramatically. if they hade even gone from 90% back to 85% it would have looked at least a little credible, but INCREASED confidence in the face of such massive failure shows it to be what we all know it is. WANK.

Back to top

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."

IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #38 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:03pm

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:57pm:

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:35pm:

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:33pm:

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:26pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 3:52pm:

I'm 95% sure that 100% of the alarmists will ignore the fact that 95% is not 100%.

I see what you did there.

Demanding 100% certainty? Is that honest?

... highlighting the fact that if they aren't 100% certain they could be wrong.

All things are possible. The question comes down to probabilities.

You're gambling against a 95% probability. Is that a rational bet?

But we aren't dealing in absolute and specific probabilities.
We are dealing with vague definitions, with increased error bands that's all.
The people giving us the 95% probability have almost no reliability. Especially when they have graduates helping author they're papers and claiming to be the world top experts. I especially don't like the cherry picking of data, as seen in Burt Rutan's analysis. No matter which way you play it they twist things for specific point of view. No matter how much you hate them the NIPCC was created specifically to keep their BS in check.

(Please don't if you were going to, get us started on funding bias)

Back to top

IP Logged

# Gold Member Offline A fool is certain: an ignorant fool, absolutely so Posts: 2603	Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW Reply #39 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:05pm greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:36pm: ... Really? Source? Links? History. You've had a lot of experience trolling, haven't you young simpleton?
Back to top	IP Logged

Vuk11

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 1797
QLD
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #40 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:06pm

muso wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:54pm:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/SLR_models_obs.gif

Doesn't that show that the figure of 100% at least, is incorrect?

Can we be certain that the ocean rising is not natural at all? Besides if the IPCC says it isn't?

I would love to see an argument for and against the ocean rise being man made.

Back to top

IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #41 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:06pm

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:02pm:

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:39pm:

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:33pm:

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:26pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 3:52pm:

I'm 95% sure that 100% of the alarmists will ignore the fact that 95% is not 100%.

I see what you did there.

Demanding 100% certainty? Is that honest?

I'm certainly not demanding 100%.
...

You said Quote:

... the fact that 95% is not 100%.

If you were not demanding 100%, then what were you saying?

I was saying 95% is not 100%
...

To what end?

Back to top

IP Logged

greggerypeccary Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 137969 Gender:	Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW Reply #42 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:07pm # wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:05pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:36pm: ... Really? Source? Links? History. You've had a lot of experience trolling, haven't you young simpleton? Not one single link, huh? You searched and searched, but came up with nothing. I trust you've learned a lesson.
Back to top	IP Logged

greggerypeccary

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 137969
Gender: male

Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW
Reply #43 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:09pm

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:06pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:02pm:

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:39pm:

# wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:33pm:

Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 4:26pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 3:52pm:

I'm 95% sure that 100% of the alarmists will ignore the fact that 95% is not 100%.

I see what you did there.

Demanding 100% certainty? Is that honest?

I'm certainly not demanding 100%.
...

You said Quote:

... the fact that 95% is not 100%.

If you were not demanding 100%, then what were you saying?

I was saying 95% is not 100%
...

To what end?

My comment was quite clear.

Take the time to read it again.

I'll type it slowly this time, so you can keep up:

"I'm 95% sure that 100% of the alarmists will ignore the fact that 95% is not 100%."

Back to top

IP Logged

# Gold Member Offline A fool is certain: an ignorant fool, absolutely so Posts: 2603	Re: IPCC 95% sure about AGW Reply #44 - Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:09pm Vuk11 wrote on Sep 28^th, 2013 at 5:06pm: ... Can we be certain ... Can we be certain of anything? Is a demand for certainty sane? Is it honest?
Back to top	IP Logged