It’s only a model
The trouble with global warming proponents is they reject reality in favor of their model:
If these researchers have any real arguments showing that the satellite data are wrong, the place to prove that is in the peer-reviewed scientific literature – not a propaganda video.
January 15th, 2016 at 8:32 pm
My heating bill has gone up. Global warming? Yeah, I’m going to put up an olive garden, so I don’t need to move to Italy in my retirement. I’ll just pick olives, asshole. Bullshit. And fuck you for thinking of such nonsense. And fuck you again, scumbag. And if I ever see you, I’ll stab your eyes out. 4 times, I’ll stab your stupid, communist eyes out. Scumbag. Go kill yourself! Die! Now! Scumbag!
Sorry, I was just thinking about Andrew Cuomo! He’s such a nice man! Really he is! A nice man! Ha! Ha! Ha! He is!
January 15th, 2016 at 9:36 pm
Markie Marxist sez: “Who needs a good model, when you have a good reality? Uh, or, the other way around? Whatever, we’re drunk, we’re in Europe, we’re communist, so the world loves us, so we’re okay, Barack says so, fuck the rest of you.”
January 15th, 2016 at 9:37 pm
BTW, eat shit and die, because you’re not us!
January 16th, 2016 at 2:57 pm
I, for one, am glad to see that fairly obscure Monty Python references are still usable in an appropriate manner. Well played, Sir Uncle, well played.
January 16th, 2016 at 2:58 pm
“It’s only a model”
“Shhh”
January 17th, 2016 at 12:40 am
All models are wrong
Some models are useful
January 17th, 2016 at 9:34 pm
They have come to think that running data through models is actual research on the real world.
January 18th, 2016 at 9:13 am
I didn’t read the link. If you’ve read one article that twists climate change to some social agenda, you’ve read them all, right? However there seems to be some skepticism about the core methods of researching climate change. I might be able to give a little insight into what it actually looks like.
I worked on the construction project to build the DOE lab that will be computing these models (specifically NERSC’s CRTF at LBNL if anyone knows or cares). The climate model is fed massive amounts of raw data, sourced from decades of research and onservations. Just transmitting all the data to the new computers will take months, and that is over a 400gbps network specially built just to connect to CRTF, running as close to 24/7 as possible. The model itself can take years to finish computing, depending on the level of surface resolution sought. The electrical service for this one building is up to 25MW.
I just want to be sure you all realize that the climate model we’re talking about is pretty significant as far as computing power, research, and fact-checking. That doesn’t mean the climate-Marxists and other fear-mongers are telling the true picture of climate change, but the evidence is strongly pointing toward accelerated climate change caused by human activity. Yes there are flaws, yes there are conflicts in the theory and data, but the sum of the evidence still points in the same direction. Heck, there are as many problems with the theories and science in the development of computer processors, and yet we all know that they work.
January 18th, 2016 at 9:45 am
Maybe just running the climate model is causing the “Climate Change” to occur.
January 18th, 2016 at 11:31 am
I am a skeptical (in the same sense that someone may be skeptical that there are aliens and UFOs in Area 51).
Massive amounts of historical raw (or ‘adjusted’) measurements and data is useful when trying to figure out HOW something happened, not usually useful for scientifically predicting what will happen IF x, y, or , THEN what? Unless the ‘science’ is little more than an overly complex version of some curve fitting (based on historic data) and extrapolating what will happen next. That will get you a hockey-stick curve, or just a straight line if one is more honest.
January 18th, 2016 at 7:56 pm
Chris, I’m thinking that the GIGO principle still applies – no matter how many times it gets massaged, adjusted, corrected, modelled or whatever, we SIMPLY DON’T HAVE ENOUGH ACTUAL INFORMATION recorded over a LONG ENOUGH TIME to accurately model a system anywhere near as complex as the earth’s climate.
I don’t care how many gigaflops or megawatts get pushed into that computing setup, all it’s going to output is the presumtions, assumptions and errors that get stuffed into it.
And no, “the sum of the evidence” shows no such thing.
January 18th, 2016 at 9:24 pm
Hey, if you have doubts about the intentions, ability, or objectiveness of the scientists then I have nothing I can say or show you to change that. I agree that the topic has been abused by various groups as a vehicle for their agendas, and the facts and legitimate debate are buried under a mountain of junk science and social “justice.”
I just hate seeing the entire field of work attacked in this way when I know good people who are just trying to do good science and stay out of the politics.
January 19th, 2016 at 3:00 am
“I just hate seeing the entire field of work attacked in this way when I know good people who are just trying to do good science and stay out of the politics.”
Then they damn well should have stomped all over their co-workers and fellow scientists about all the lying they have been doing for political reasons. Those who kept their head down and their mouth closed are going to reap the backlash from allowing their field of endeavor to be prostituted like it has been. At this point, I wouldn’t piss on a weather/climate science worker if they were on fire.
January 19th, 2016 at 3:38 am
@Will
“Then they damn well should have stomped all over their co-workers and fellow scientists about all the lying they have been doing for political reasons. Those who kept their head down and their mouth closed are going to reap the backlash from allowing their field of endeavor to be prostituted like it has been. At this point, I wouldn’t piss on a weather/climate science worker if they were on fire.”
It doesn’t work like that. It’s not like all of the scientists in the world live and work at the same place; and to make it worse it’s not as if the politician’s and SJW’s would let actual scientists get in the way of the agenda.
I also get the impression, maybe I’m wrong, that you would want someone to stand up and say that the Earth is not changing at an accelerated rate, and that if it were then man had nothing to do with it. The majority of researchers will not make that claim because they do not feel that it fits with the data.
For the record, I do not agree with claims that climate change is the end of the world or that we all have to become luddites. My opinion is that we will develop a technological solution, but we need to go full steam ahead. Cutting humanity off from our technology now would not reverse the coarse of climate change, and would result in far greater loss if life due to famine and disease.
January 19th, 2016 at 11:57 am
I long for the simpler days past when the models that led men astray looked good in a bikini.