Discussion > Something's Going On
Well, you certainly have shaken me out of one of my last delusions – I no longer have any faith in the integrity of science. You may be smug about that; I just find it very sad.
Radical Rodent
Radical Rodent
" I no longer have any faith in the integrity of science."
It makes me sad too. For you it is necessary, like Martin A's refusal to believe in statistics.
Your lack of faith gives you an excuse to reject the science, since the science contradicts your beliefs.
Entropic man
As I have said before, EM, it is really only yourself you are trying to convince. The “science” you so avidly cling to can be best described here.
Radical Rodent
Radical Rodent
Yes, it is a widespread meme among those sharing your belief system.
Entropic man
I do hope so – it is a very simple belief system: it does not matter how beautiful the theory, or how great the name of the person who made it, if it does not agree with the facts, the theory is wrong. Facts trump interpretation and opinion every time.
Radical Rodent
EM, you demonstrate why climate science is losing credibility with the general public.. Stick to your computer generated virtual reality climate, and ignore recorded history.
If you have time to waste, why don't you ask aTTP why he doesn't support Mann's Hockey Stick Record of climate? He is an expert in climate science apparently.
You could also ask him whether he worked it out before, or as a result of McIntyre.
If you have further time to waste, why are YOU so sure Mann's Hockey Stick is accurate? Is it your faith in climate science? It seems not even 97% of climate scientists are that gullible.
golf charlie
It makes me sad too. For you it is necessary, like Martin A's refusal to believe in statistics.
(...)
Jan 4, 2016 at 10:51 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
EM - I am not sure what you are trying to say. What do you mean by "statistics"?
If you mean climate data published by for example the CRU processed as described in Harry_Read_Me.txt or the original data lost by Phil Jones "in an office move" well, yes, it's hard to take it completely seriously.
If you mean statements by yourself about "95% confidence" yes, those are obviously not believable, since there is no reason to believe that the assumptions needed to calculate confidence limits on time series (eg stationarity, independence of samples*) are valid - in fact the contrary is pretty clearly true.
But the subject of mathematical statistics, as with any branch of applied maths, is not a matter of "belief" so, as I said, it is hard to make out what you are banging on about.
Yes, it is a widespread meme among those sharing your belief system.
Jan 4, 2016 at 11:41 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
Still expanding your vocabulary I see, EM.
Not being convinced of something either because of lack of evidence or because of the untrustworthy behaviour of its proponents is not a "belief system" to use a phrase that you seem to have recently become fond of. Any more than not believing in the Sky Fairy is a "belief system".
Please think a bit before your spout this sort of rubbish. I concede that sometimes you do come up with interesting or thought provoking comments but this sort of stuff is just pathetic.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
* Years ago, I was greatly impressed by the effect of finite, though very small, correlations when I was involved in calculating network survivabilities. Correlations as small as 0.001 between link failures would result in network failure probabilities millions of times greater than if zero correlation (independence) had been assumed. So yes, I simply do not "believe in" statistics whose calculation depends on the assumption of independence if there is no reason to think that the assumption is valid.
Martin A
Just listened to news on Radio 2. Hottest December since 1910, wettest on record. Scientists say it's caused by El Nino and can see no global warming signal. Some Joe whose name I didn't catch came on and said it warm winters were a sign of global warming, and that these would be more frequent in the future. Scientist's still quiet no the subject. The surprise is that this seems to be the first year I've not seen the Met Office spokesman at least hint that it was global warming causing the weather. Don't know who Joe was but he seems to have forgotten that the the Met Office, and here there is an element of truth, said that the bollock freezing snowy winters were caused by global warming.
V. strange.
geronimo
The MWP peaked around 1000AD and the warming trend for the present period started around 1700AD. (Ljiunquist 2010).
Mann's hockey stick for the year 1000AD showed the temperature to be 0.4C lower than Ljiunquist and in 1700 AD to be 0.4C higher removing the 0.8C drop in temperature between 1000 AD and 1700 AD shown in Ljiunquist (2010).Other than that there's no material difference and you're spot on.
geronimo
... I actually enjoy the mental exercise. Knowing that I can do it better than you also gives me some smug satisfaction.
Jan 4, 2016 at 9:24 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
A legend in his own mind.
Big Oil
Entropic Mental Exercise for you , the central heating system in your house in all the room the radiators are positioned under the windows..
Please explain why they always heat the coldest part of the room first. Is it because heat only travels from where it's hot to where it's cold, so how can solar radiation heat up CO2 and the rsst of the atmosphere if it's already hot
The concept of global warming doesn't follow the rules of Thermal Dynamics.
Jamspid
Martin A
May I recommend this tutorial on the analysis of time series data.
Look in Session 6, at the example analysis of the Mauna Loa CO2 data. The tutorial considers autocorrelation and separates out the three main components of the data; the white noise, the seasonal variation and the trend. It then goes on to discuss the comparison between data and models.
Entropic man
Geronimo
This is your thread. Could you please explain to Jamspid how the climate can warm without breaking the Laws of Thermodynamics.
He might believe you . He certainly would not believe me.
Entropic man
Big oil
A legend in my own lunchtime. ☺
Entropic man
EM. I'll leave you to explain the laws of thermodynamics and their practical realisations to Jampsid. I'd prefer it if people could explain to me why the activist scientific community (those eminent enough) have so far not jumped on the "floods are caused by climate change" meme. Is there perceived pushback from the British public/politicians?
geronimo
May I recommend this tutorial on the analysis of time series data.
Look in Session 6, at the example analysis of the Mauna Loa CO2 data. The tutorial considers autocorrelation and separates out the three main components of the data; the white noise, the seasonal variation and the trend. It then goes on to discuss the comparison between data and models.
Jan 5, 2016 at 7:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
R A Davis has presented a nice introductory tutoiral applied to real data of widespread interest. Years ago I visited Columbia University (RA Davis's affiliation) for some reason that now escapes me.
Note that the Mauna Loa residual is clearly *not* white noise; the "irregular part" plot on page 20 is obviously non-white, with low frequency components (slow variations) much larger in amplitude than its high frequency components (rapid variations). I assume the upper plot on p19 is its autocorrelation function (still 0.5 correlation at lag = 10), with a comparison to the acf of a sample of genuine white noise below.
I think I can see some periodicity in the acf of the residuals which would indicate a periodic component in the original data that was not extracted when the 'seasonal' component was removed. I don't know what are his time units of 'lag': years? months?
Martin A
geronimo
El Nino, the wobbly jetstream, the North Atlantic Glider Gun and climate change are all influencing this Winter's weather.
There has already been one study showing increased risk of flooding due to climate change, with particular reference to Storm Desmond, though it will nut be published for a while yet.
Various climate scientists have already commented and been quoted in the MSM. Even George Monbiot and David Rose agree in the Daily Mail that something unusual is going on.
I see no muzzling. Are you drifting into another conspiracy theory?
Entropic man
Martin A
There should be a weak 11 year sold cycle, and a more irregular oscillation from ENSO.
Entropic man
Martin A
CO2 levels over NH land reach a minimum at the end of the growing season when land biomass reaches its maximum. There will be some lag before this mixes fully with the air in the Southern Hemisphere and over the oceans. Couple of months?
Entropic man
EM is doing such a good job of demonstrating the miasma of the climate obsessed mind.
hunter
The Brits are famed the world over for talking about the weather. "something unusual is going on" could be our catchphrase. History is littered with accounts of such severe flooding that many people died. Flooding that merely resulted in damaged plaster and soggy possesions probably wouldn't make it to the records, not least because many of the places flooded are either habitual flood zones or new buildings. Modern living makes these events much more destructive in terms of property. We have records of massive snow falls in the past, can you argue that snow would have been more welcome, even with a slightly smaller load? Before you answer consider which is more important, possessions or lives. Snowfall can even be a double whammy, causing flooding when it melts, sometimes combining multiple snow falls and even new rainfall.
Evidence of intense droughts and rainfall demonstrate that weather patterns can persist even beyond decades. There has been a shortage of hurricanes but an increase in Pacific cyclones. Until recently the Atlantic showed nothing but warming, which was proof of AGW. Now it's cooling, which is proof of AGW. El Nino are a well known phenomena but now they're proof of AGW. There's a pattern alright. Everything bad is proof of AGW. Sorry, that push button has stopped working, even when it might be true.
Get back to us when there's a model that can recreate the ups and downs of the last 100 years of temperature. I want to see the El Nino spikes, the volcanoes, the ocean phases, the warming of the early part of the record, the cooling in the 50s, 60s and 70s, the warming and then some kind of rate change about 2000 (even if it doesn't stop warming it should slow down).
TinyCO2
TinyCO2
When I was a boy at primary school, the 1950s, I remember rockets into space was the cause of weather going haywire*.
*Haywire= not being as good as the person complaining's memory of their childhood.
The further you go back in time the greater percentage of floodplains which were abandoned for the winter and used for grazing in summer. Nothing much would have been built until the latter half of the 20th century. Any flood reported in these areas prior to the 20th century would have been pretty spectacular.
SandyS
…something unusual is going on.A phrase that appears every generation or so in the mainstream media, and more often in the various tea-breaks and general chatter. What unusual is it that is going on? That it is a wet winter? That it is a warm winter (so far)? That this is unusual in your personal memory does NOT mean that it is unusual in geological terms. Arguably, it could even be said that something unusual is always going on; what is unusual about that? As this year’s unusually warm, wet winter is the result of climate change, what will be the reason for next year, should it be “unusually” cold and dry?
You are right, EM. I, too, saw no muzzling in any of Geronimo’s posts; I suspect you interpret his phrase “perceived pushback” as “muzzling”. I, and, perhaps, many others on this site, interpreted that as the scaremongers have realised that people are getting wise to them, and are keeping their heads down for a while. Then you accuse others of being conspiracy theorists. Sheesh. (And remembering the Ruddles is no excuse.)
Radical Rodent
Martin A
There should be a weak 11 year sold cycle, and a more irregular oscillation from ENSO.
Jan 6, 2016 at 11:42 AM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
The wave in the acf looks to be about one cycle per 11 lag units. So if 1 lag unit = 1 year, that would be it. Pity he did not show the power spectrum (Fourier transform of the acf) so that the frequency of the cycle would be apparent.
ENSO always looks to me like the output of a mildly resonant system driven by random noise - not something with a precise periodicity.
Martin A
CO2 levels over NH land reach a minimum at the end of the growing season when land biomass reaches its maximum. There will be some lag before this mixes fully with the air in the Southern Hemisphere and over the oceans. Couple of months?
Jan 6, 2016 at 11:48 AM | Unregistered CommenterEntropic man
That would have the effect of a lowpass filter but with a -3dB point at 1 cycle per two months = 6 cycles per year. So it would not significantly affect the amplitude of the 1 cycle per year oscillation.
Martin A
Radical Rodent
A good question.
I have long since given up hope of shaking you and your fellows out of your delusional state.
I actually enjoy the mental exercise. Knowing that I can do it better than you also gives me some smug satisfaction.