Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 4

[LongQ]

Mention of Enron's political and fiscal manipulation got me thinking about the John Law effect 300 years ago in France.

Wondering what Wiki had on him I checked and saw this in the side bar,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Law_(economist)...

It struck be as being slightly pertinent and vaguely amusing according to the translation (from Dutch) provided.

[wc98]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

I've not posted anything here for sometime despite scan reading (groaning) regularly, simply because you've all learnt to stay away from a subject(s) you are called on for talking out of your aholes on.


Carry on.

i was hoping you had been away looking for a wide angle lens to re take that turbineless photograph you posted the other day. if it was where i thought it was it needs a narrow angle and careful selection not to find at least a small one to be fair it depends on what the individual would call a wide angle.

there are certainly few hill tops outside the north west highlands where you could take a picture without having it ruined with a turbine or ten.never mind ,modern computerised picture editing technology is great.

[wc98]

durbster said:

I'm not that interested in opinions to be honest. This thread has enough of those and look how accurate they are

i did notice you tend to avoid the actual facts some people post as well. like the fact there are serious issues with the basic metric of the global temperature record due to processing methods.

did you ever comment on that little gem from zeke hausfather at berkeley earth i posted recently ?

[wc98]

LongQ said:

Mention of Enron's political and fiscal manipulation got me thinking about the John Law effect 300 years ago in France.

Wondering what Wiki had on him I checked and saw this in the side bar,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Law_(economist)...

It struck be as being slightly pertinent and vaguely amusing according to the translation (from Dutch) provided.

ha ha, very good .

[turbobloke]

Over at the political blog Climate Depot there's a report that non-manmade climate change and weather within normal variation is causing child marriages in Bangladesh to increase, even though the rate of child marriages is decreasing.

There's more priceless irony in this story - campaigner Sen Gupta isn't confident in the data. Not climate data diddled to damnation, but child marriages. Awesome. Next time, Gupta should remember on cue that the data don't matter.

[turbobloke]

The GWPF people have reported that Prof Roger Pielke Jr gave a talk in London recently with the title “Climate politics as Manichean Paranoia”.

https://www.thegwpf.org/roger-pielke-jr-climate-po...

https://cliscep.com/2017/07/21/pielke-on-manichean...

[turbobloke]

Lincoln Star 1934:



Answer: No.

[wc98]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

ETA - the One with the Pylons?
That was the Edge of the North Yorkshire Moors.

yes ,that one. wasn't where i thought it was

[turbobloke]

At least the muppets are pushing their calamity cock-ups out beyond their own lifetime. They'll be long dead as the egg heads for their faces. Bonus point = DM reference, yay!



Learning from every single failed 'omigawd' prediction ever ever takes time, but even climate alamist density gets there eventually.

[mybrainhurts]

turbobloke said:

At least the muppets are pushing their calamity cock-ups out beyond their own lifetime. They'll be long dead as the egg heads for their faces. Bonus point = DM reference, yay!



Learning from every single failed 'omigawd' prediction ever ever takes time, but even climate alamist density gets there eventually.

"Several meters"....are they talking gas meters or electricity meters? We need to know, there is a significant difference in height.

[dickymint]

mybrainhurts said:

"Several meters"....are they talking gas meters or electricity meters? We need to know, there is a significant difference in height.

And how 'smart' they are

[durbster]

mybrainhurts said:

You seem to be under the impression that I find durby worthy of rational jousting or making the effort to take seriously.

Makes you wonder why you spend so much time trying to get me to reply to you then, doesn't it.

Unfortunately you haven't had any opportunity to "joust" with me because I ignore you.

If you ever decide to post something worth responding to perhaps somebody can point it out. In the meantime, just stick to the passive aggressive bullying and I'll continue to scroll past it.

wc98 said:

i did notice you tend to avoid the actual facts some people post as well. like the fact there are serious issues with the basic metric of the global temperature record due to processing methods.

Which facts have I avoided?

wc98 said:

did you ever comment on that little gem from zeke hausfather at berkeley earth i posted recently ?

I'm too busy to keep up with this silliness at the moment so might have missed it.

[wc98]

durbster said:

I'm too busy to keep up with this silliness at the moment so might have missed it.

the issue surrounding how the best (berkeley earth surface temperature project) team create the time series break points in the historical data .the problem is it creates a saw tooth effect in the data and no one, including zeke ,knows if the algorithm picks the change up on the drop or climb part of the data,i think due to how some pairs are dropped out of the final analysis,so in effect a spurious underlying trend could be baked in right at the start of the analysis.
below is the reply from zeke to willis eschenbach regarding this issue.

Zeke Hausfather (@hausfath) | February 11, 2016 at 10:51 am |
Hi Willis,

I agree that sawtooth patterns are a particularly interesting case. As for CRS darkening, the only empirical studies I’ve seen (e.g. Doesken’s work) suggest that the effect is rather small (on order of ~0.06 C) but still important. I’ll check with the ISTI group creating homogenization benchmarks to see if they are including sawtooth patterns in their synthetically perturbed data, as it would be interesting to see how the different homogenization algorithms perform in practice in the presence of gradual trend biases followed by sharp corrections.

willis then asks again later in the thread. note zekes replies.
Zeke and Mosh, despite being asked repeatedly, you have NEVER answered David’s question. He’s asked it. I’ve asked it. Don’t know a bout him, but I’ll continue to do so. Are you ready?

The “scalpel” algorithm has been demonstrated to convert a sawtooth wave (such as is caused by occasional maintenance of the CRS shelters that David describes) into a totally bogus trend. So I have two questions:

1. How much does this affect the Berkeley Earth results, and

2. Why is it like pulling teeth to get you to answer this simple question? You’ve been dodging it for over a year now.

Zeke Hausfather (@hausfath) | February 11, 2016 at 12:45 pm |
Well, the first challenge is figuring out how sawtooth waves are dealt with by homogenization. The best way to do this would be through testing on synthetic data with sawtooth patterns added, which is why I suggested the ISTI effort (since they are the only group I know of actively working on testing the effectiveness of homogenization approaches under different types of inhomogenities).

An alternative is to go through Berkeley stations and try to identify cases where bogus trends have been added, to get a qualitative sense of the potential impact. However, in most stations I’ve found with sawtooth patterns the Berkeley approach seems to pick out both the gradual rise and the quick drop, e.g. in the Bakersfield case: http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/auto/Stations/TAVG/Fi...

Let me know if you can find any cases where it looks like the sawtooth was not picked up and a spurious trend was added.

Zeke Hausfather (@hausfath) | February 11, 2016 at 12:50 pm |
Looking at a few more, here is one with a sawtooth-like pattern early in the record that might only be partially caught: http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/auto/Stations/TAVG/Fi...


https://judithcurry.com/2016/02/09/assessing-u-s-t...


the other big issue for me highlighted by angech is the claim surrounding raw "data" in the analysis. it is not actually raw due to the processing method. the "raw" record is still using hundreds of stations that no longer exist. the "raw data" for them is synthetically created by infilling ,that is why if you check what the temperature was on a particular day in say august was 20 years ago it will be different to what it was last month, yesterday and today. how can the temperature for a given day decades ago physically change on a daily basis ?

i do not doubt that people like zeke are doing the best they can with what they have. the simple fact is you cannot make a silk purse from a sows ear and when discussing tenths of a degree the notion of any sort of accuracy in the historic global temperature is a nonsense .politicising of the entire climate debate has led to the work of climate scientists being used way beyond the scope it was ever intended for. in any other field most of the work would never have seen the light of day beyond the small groups involved.

nb, it really is worth reading the entire comment thread ,some great information from both sides and only the very odd post straying from the topic. if i am reading anything incorrectly you might be able to pick up on it as well.


this is the reply i posted to kerplunk when he questioned my initial post on the topic. i am hoping he comes back with something as it is an unresolved issue that has been floating around for a long time now, and no one on either side of the debate seems to be addressing it . from what i gather the best team are pretty open with their data ,so i would have expected someone to have had a second look .very strange.

[kerplunk]

wc98 said:

this is the reply i posted to kerplunk when he questioned my initial post on the topic. i am hoping he comes back with something as it is an unresolved issue that has been floating around for a long time now, and no one on either side of the debate seems to be addressing it . from what i gather the best team are pretty open with their data ,so i would have expected someone to have had a second look .very strange.

Blimey why would you hope little old me is gonna 'come back with something' about such an arcane data bias issue in the land temperature record? Do you think PH is some kind of hotbed of scientific enquirey or something? Get a grip.

Edited by kerplunk on Sunday 23 July 23:57

[turbobloke]

The truest of true believers have a tough time. Take Johnny Depp, shoulder to shoulder with Di Caprio fighting global warming for all he's worth - which happens to be 14 homes, a chain of islands in the Bahamas, a 156 foot yacht and regular use of a private jet. Tough times in the struggle.

[wc98]

kerplunk said:

Blimey why would you hope little old me is gonna 'come back with something' about such an arcane data bias issue in the land temperature record? Do you think PH is some kind of hotbed of scientific enquirey or something? Get a grip.

Edited by kerplunk on Sunday 23 July 23:57

from this i thought it had peaked your interest , obviously not .
kerplunk said:
I don't think I've heard that one before, is it a recognised thing or something he's come up with himself? Any work been done on it to quantify it or anything like that? I guess if there's an effect it would show up in Tmax not Tmin and mostly on sunny days.

if you are not interested in the very data set that the supposed warming is measured against , well it says a lot about belief vs reality on the warmist side. which part of your anatomy would you like me to take a grip of

[wc98]

turbobloke said:

The truest of true believers have a tough time. Take Johnny Depp, shoulder to shoulder with Di Caprio fighting global warming for all he's worth - which happens to be 14 homes, a chain of islands in the Bahamas, a 156 foot yacht and regular use of a private jet. Tough times in the struggle.

must be all run on fairy dust or something. i mean, if they ran that lot on fossil fuels it would make them some of the biggest hypocritical wkers in history , warranting a good shoeing at the soonest opportunity .

[turbobloke]

wc98 said:

turbobloke said:

The truest of true believers have a tough time. Take Johnny Depp, shoulder to shoulder with Di Caprio fighting global warming for all he's worth - which happens to be 14 homes, a chain of islands in the Bahamas, a 156 foot yacht and regular use of a private jet. Tough times in the struggle.

must be all run on fairy dust or something. i mean, if they ran that lot on fossil fuels it would make them some of the biggest hypocritical wkers in history , warranting a good shoeing at the soonest opportunity .

Depp has alluded to Trump being assassinated by an actor (a piece of American history rewritten). Nice chap.

The information about Depp's carbon excesses were revealed recently in law suits and counter-suits issues by attorneys representing Depp and his former business managers, Depp's lawyer couldn't understand the relevance of some of the stuff - clearly he/she failed to spot the puncturing of a particularly sanctimonious ecobubble.

[turbobloke]

I've been reading about the relative honesty of American scientists in the 1930s, unfortunately a subscription is needed for access although a free trial may be available.

https://www.newspapers.com/image/128271093/?terms=...

Back on 24 July 1936, temperatures reached 121F in Kansas, and 118F in Nebraska. Almost the entire US was over 90F.

Two years previously, on July 24, 1934, it was even hotter. July 24, 1940 was almost as hot, as was July 24, 1901.

The last really hot July 24 occurred in 1940, when CO2 was below 320 PPM.

Naturally you won't spot this in recently diddled data which involves erasing the 1930s heatwaves.

The hyperbolic and unsubstantiated information pollution of today's believer 'scientists' contrasts with scientists' emissions back In the 1930s, when the heat at that time and of the previous 20+ years wasn’t put down as due to human activity and wasn’t misrepresented as manmade global warming. Today they have more CO2 and cooler summers, what a turn up for the cooked books.

[amusingduck]

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

turbobloke said:

The truest of true believers have a tough time. Take Johnny Depp, shoulder to shoulder with Di Caprio fighting global warming for all he's worth - which happens to be 14 homes, a chain of islands in the Bahamas, a 156 foot yacht and regular use of a private jet. Tough times in the struggle.

Your post screams of the politics of envy - rather than anything remotely climate change.

Really, you can't see how it's remotely climate change related?

Having 14 homes, a chain of islands, a yacht, and regular use of a private jet doesn't increase your carbon footprint?