Why do so many people deny climate change

[bripat9643]

Only true for positions that have no science or scientific resources.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? If they have the data, then you should be able to produce it.

Trenberth's paper took existing data from many data bases from many sources and analyzed them, using climate science, to impute the increasing energy going into the deep ocean for the last decades.

You have no science, no data, no resources, no theories, no applicable education, no computing capability, no statistics, but claim that what you want to be true is more likely than what he calculated.

WTF????

Show us the data. Trenberth has very scanty data on deep ocean temperatures prior to 2007 - almost none, actually. He obviously just made it up. How many ships in how many locations, do you suppose, measured the temperature of the deep ocean prior to 2007? Commercial vessels certain don't take such measurements, so how much data is there? I'm dying to see it.

 

[PMZ]

What the hell is that supposed to mean? If they have the data, then you should be able to produce it.

Trenberth's paper took existing data from many data bases from many sources and analyzed them, using climate science, to impute the increasing energy going into the deep ocean for the last decades.

You have no science, no data, no resources, no theories, no applicable education, no computing capability, no statistics, but claim that what you want to be true is more likely than what he calculated.

WTF????

Show us the data. Trenberth has very scanty data on deep ocean temperatures prior to 2007 - almost none, actually. He obviously just made it up. How many ships in how many locations, do you suppose, measured the temperature of the deep ocean prior to 2007? Commercial vessels certain don't take such measurements, so how much data is there? I'm dying to see it.

Show me your contrary data.

 

[PMZ]

What the hell is that supposed to mean? If they have the data, then you should be able to produce it.

Trenberth's paper took existing data from many data bases from many sources and analyzed them, using climate science, to impute the increasing energy going into the deep ocean for the last decades.

You have no science, no data, no resources, no theories, no applicable education, no computing capability, no statistics, but claim that what you want to be true is more likely than what he calculated.

WTF????

Show us the data. Trenberth has very scanty data on deep ocean temperatures prior to 2007 - almost none, actually. He obviously just made it up. How many ships in how many locations, do you suppose, measured the temperature of the deep ocean prior to 2007? Commercial vessels certain don't take such measurements, so how much data is there? I'm dying to see it.

BTW, I did post his paper including his data. I personally doubt if you can understand a word of it. Of course, I also doubt if you read any of it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Trenberth's paper took existing data from many data bases from many sources and analyzed them, using climate science, to impute the increasing energy going into the deep ocean for the last decades.

You have no science, no data, no resources, no theories, no applicable education, no computing capability, no statistics, but claim that what you want to be true is more likely than what he calculated.

WTF????

Show us the data. Trenberth has very scanty data on deep ocean temperatures prior to 2007 - almost none, actually. He obviously just made it up. How many ships in how many locations, do you suppose, measured the temperature of the deep ocean prior to 2007? Commercial vessels certain don't take such measurements, so how much data is there? I'm dying to see it.

BTW, I did post his paper including his data. I personally doubt if you can understand a word of it. Of course, I also doubt if you read any of it.

So post his "imputed temperatures" already.

 

[bripat9643]

Here's Trenberth's analysis. If you have alternative scientific evidence that improves on his, be specific about what basis for his analysis you can improve on, and why you believe so.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?embe...s-moved/Balmaseda_Trenberth_Kallen_grl_13.pdf

The only section that refers to the data used is this:

2. The Ocean Reanalysis[6] ORAS4 has been produced by combining, every 10 days, the output of an ocean model forced by atmospheric reanalysis fluxes and quality controlled ocean observations. These consist of temperature and salinity (T/S) profiles from the Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection [Ingleby and Huddleston, 2007], which include expendable bathythermographs (T only, with depth corrections from Table 1 of Wijffels et al. [2008]), conductivity-temperature-depth sensors (T/S), TAO/TRITON/PIRATA/RAMA moorings (T/S), Argo profilers (T/S), and autonomous pinniped bathythermograph (or elephant seals, T/S). Altimeter-derived along track sea level anomalies from AVISO are also assimilated. Gridded

Note: The three sources of data are:

1. ARGO, which only goes back to the year 2000.
2. Elephant seals (we have no idea what the dates are for this data, nor do we know the coverage of this data. The range of elephant seals is not that large.
3. Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection. We have no idea of the dates or the coverage of this data. Furthermore, Hadley has already been caught doctoring its land based data.

Note also that it mentions the use of a "model." That means the data has been massaged by a computer program. What do you suppose are the odds that the program wasn't tweaked to produce the desired results?

 

[PMZ]

Show us the data. Trenberth has very scanty data on deep ocean temperatures prior to 2007 - almost none, actually. He obviously just made it up. How many ships in how many locations, do you suppose, measured the temperature of the deep ocean prior to 2007? Commercial vessels certain don't take such measurements, so how much data is there? I'm dying to see it.

BTW, I did post his paper including his data. I personally doubt if you can understand a word of it. Of course, I also doubt if you read any of it.

So post his "imputed temperatures" already.

After you post yours and the basis for them.

 

[PMZ]

Here's Trenberth's analysis. If you have alternative scientific evidence that improves on his, be specific about what basis for his analysis you can improve on, and why you believe so.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?embe...s-moved/Balmaseda_Trenberth_Kallen_grl_13.pdf

The only section that refers to the data used is this:

2. The Ocean Reanalysis[6] ORAS4 has been produced by combining, every 10 days, the output of an ocean model forced by atmospheric reanalysis fluxes and quality controlled ocean observations. These consist of temperature and salinity (T/S) profiles from the Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection [Ingleby and Huddleston, 2007], which include expendable bathythermographs (T only, with depth corrections from Table 1 of Wijffels et al. [2008]), conductivity-temperature-depth sensors (T/S), TAO/TRITON/PIRATA/RAMA moorings (T/S), Argo profilers (T/S), and autonomous pinniped bathythermograph (or elephant seals, T/S). Altimeter-derived along track sea level anomalies from AVISO are also assimilated. Gridded

Note: The three sources of data are:

1. ARGO, which only goes back to the year 2000.
2. Elephant seals (we have no idea what the dates are for this data, nor do we know the coverage of this data. The range of elephant seals is not that large.
3. Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection. We have no idea of the dates or the coverage of this data. Furthermore, Hadley has already been caught doctoring its land based data.

Note also that it mentions the use of a "model." That means the data has been massaged by a computer program. What do you suppose are the odds that the program wasn't tweaked to produce the desired results?

What is the basis for your estimates that are contrary to his?

 

[PMZ]

Here's Trenberth's analysis. If you have alternative scientific evidence that improves on his, be specific about what basis for his analysis you can improve on, and why you believe so.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?embe...s-moved/Balmaseda_Trenberth_Kallen_grl_13.pdf

The only section that refers to the data used is this:

2. The Ocean Reanalysis[6] ORAS4 has been produced by combining, every 10 days, the output of an ocean model forced by atmospheric reanalysis fluxes and quality controlled ocean observations. These consist of temperature and salinity (T/S) profiles from the Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection [Ingleby and Huddleston, 2007], which include expendable bathythermographs (T only, with depth corrections from Table 1 of Wijffels et al. [2008]), conductivity-temperature-depth sensors (T/S), TAO/TRITON/PIRATA/RAMA moorings (T/S), Argo profilers (T/S), and autonomous pinniped bathythermograph (or elephant seals, T/S). Altimeter-derived along track sea level anomalies from AVISO are also assimilated. Gridded

Note: The three sources of data are:

1. ARGO, which only goes back to the year 2000.
2. Elephant seals (we have no idea what the dates are for this data, nor do we know the coverage of this data. The range of elephant seals is not that large.
3. Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection. We have no idea of the dates or the coverage of this data. Furthermore, Hadley has already been caught doctoring its land based data.

Note also that it mentions the use of a "model." That means the data has been massaged by a computer program. What do you suppose are the odds that the program wasn't tweaked to produce the desired results?

I told you that you wouldn't understand a word of it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

BTW, I did post his paper including his data. I personally doubt if you can understand a word of it. Of course, I also doubt if you read any of it.

So post his "imputed temperatures" already.

After you post yours and the basis for them.

I never claimed to have deep ocean temps, you claimed Trenberth had them.

Were you lying again? Or just plain wrong?

 

[PMZ]

The Toddbot is apparently under the impression that the ocean is all one temperature.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Toddbot is apparently under the impression that the ocean is all one temperature.

I'm under the impression you lied, again.

 

[Abraham3]

Pardon me, but have you folks forgotten the expendable bathythermograph? The Sippican T-5 XBT takes data to 6,000 feet. They have been in widespread use by every major navy on the planet since the late 60s. Vessels with sonar systems drop them at least twice a day. Vessels without sonar systems drop them less often. Oceanographic research vessels drop them as often as hourly. The Navy's Met office has an enormous library of these data and it has all been computerized.

 

[PMZ]

Obviously Abbott and Costello here are trying hard to avoid the point that has been true from the beginning of the conservative AGW obfuscation movement that there is absolutely no scientific basis behind their claims. It is 100 percent a dirty politics character assassination effort as they're famous for.

Hoping that dirty politics will trump science in the minds of those who don't know science.

What the electorate has figured out though, whether or not they understand science, is the big picture.

Conservative politics has been an immense failure in practice in the US. Even now Republicans are campaigning by demonstrating that they are completely unable to govern and the best that they can do is shut down Congress. I think that even Boehner may change parties soon.

 

[Abraham3]

What the hell is that supposed to mean? If they have the data, then you should be able to produce it.

Trenberth's paper took existing data from many data bases from many sources and analyzed them, using climate science, to impute the increasing energy going into the deep ocean for the last decades.

You have no science, no data, no resources, no theories, no applicable education, no computing capability, no statistics, but claim that what you want to be true is more likely than what he calculated.

WTF????

Show us the data. Trenberth has very scanty data on deep ocean temperatures prior to 2007 - almost none, actually. He obviously just made it up. How many ships in how many locations, do you suppose, measured the temperature of the deep ocean prior to 2007? Commercial vessels certain don't take such measurements, so how much data is there? I'm dying to see it.

Hundreds of naval vessels have taken hundreds of thousands of XBT drops on a more than daily basis, worldwide, since the late 60s. The standard probe is the Sippican T-5 which takes data to 6,000 feet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Obviously Abbott and Costello here are trying hard to avoid the point that has been true from the beginning of the conservative AGW obfuscation movement that there is absolutely no scientific basis behind their claims. It is 100 percent a dirty politics character assassination effort as they're famous for.

Hoping that dirty politics will trump science in the minds of those who don't know science.

What the electorate has figured out though, whether or not they understand science, is the big picture.

Conservative politics has been an immense failure in practice in the US. Even now Republicans are campaigning by demonstrating that they are completely unable to govern and the best that they can do is shut down Congress. I think that even Boehner may change parties soon.

My claim is you're a liar.

Prove me wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

Here's Trenberth's analysis. If you have alternative scientific evidence that improves on his, be specific about what basis for his analysis you can improve on, and why you believe so.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?embe...s-moved/Balmaseda_Trenberth_Kallen_grl_13.pdf

The only section that refers to the data used is this:

2. The Ocean Reanalysis[6] ORAS4 has been produced by combining, every 10 days, the output of an ocean model forced by atmospheric reanalysis fluxes and quality controlled ocean observations. These consist of temperature and salinity (T/S) profiles from the Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection [Ingleby and Huddleston, 2007], which include expendable bathythermographs (T only, with depth corrections from Table 1 of Wijffels et al. [2008]), conductivity-temperature-depth sensors (T/S), TAO/TRITON/PIRATA/RAMA moorings (T/S), Argo profilers (T/S), and autonomous pinniped bathythermograph (or elephant seals, T/S). Altimeter-derived along track sea level anomalies from AVISO are also assimilated. Gridded

Note: The three sources of data are:

1. ARGO, which only goes back to the year 2000.
2. Elephant seals (we have no idea what the dates are for this data, nor do we know the coverage of this data. The range of elephant seals is not that large.
3. Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection. We have no idea of the dates or the coverage of this data. Furthermore, Hadley has already been caught doctoring its land based data.

Note also that it mentions the use of a "model." That means the data has been massaged by a computer program. What do you suppose are the odds that the program wasn't tweaked to produce the desired results?

I told you that you wouldn't understand a word of it.

Here ya go, bonehead:

Below is a map show the range of elephant seals. That's a great coverage area for drawing conclusions about the entire ocean, don't ya thing?

 

[PMZ]

Conservatives believe, because they've been told to, that AGW is a myth. They have zero basis for that belief, except that they'd like it to be true because it might grant them some political relevance.

Climate scientists know that AGW is a natural and unavoidable consequence of increasing atmospheric GHG concentrations which are a natural and unavoidable and largely permanent consequence of burning fossil fuels.

Under those circumstances, conservatives are acting in a completely predictable way.

Denying truth.

 

[bripat9643]

Trenberth's paper took existing data from many data bases from many sources and analyzed them, using climate science, to impute the increasing energy going into the deep ocean for the last decades.

You have no science, no data, no resources, no theories, no applicable education, no computing capability, no statistics, but claim that what you want to be true is more likely than what he calculated.

WTF????

Show us the data. Trenberth has very scanty data on deep ocean temperatures prior to 2007 - almost none, actually. He obviously just made it up. How many ships in how many locations, do you suppose, measured the temperature of the deep ocean prior to 2007? Commercial vessels certain don't take such measurements, so how much data is there? I'm dying to see it.

Hundreds of naval vessels have taken hundreds of thousands of XBT drops on a more than daily basis, worldwide, since the late 60s. The standard probe is the Sippican T-5 which takes data to 6,000 feet.

Based on the webpage at the NOAA website, it appears the bulk of the XBT data only goes back to the year 2000. There is one data set covering the Gulf Stream that goes back to the mid 60s.

Physical Oceanography Division - XBT Network - Global XBT Deployments

 

[itfitzme]

The only section that refers to the data used is this:



Note: The three sources of data are:

1. ARGO, which only goes back to the year 2000.
2. Elephant seals (we have no idea what the dates are for this data, nor do we know the coverage of this data. The range of elephant seals is not that large.
3. Hadley Centre’s EN3 data collection. We have no idea of the dates or the coverage of this data. Furthermore, Hadley has already been caught doctoring its land based data.

Note also that it mentions the use of a "model." That means the data has been massaged by a computer program. What do you suppose are the odds that the program wasn't tweaked to produce the desired results?

I told you that you wouldn't understand a word of it.

Here ya go, bonehead:

Below is a map show the range of elephant seals. That's a great coverage area for drawing conclusions about the entire ocean, don't ya thing?

Obviously, you are wrong here. It is the range of SOME, not all.

This may be a good example that highlights your cognitive issues.

 

[bripat9643]

I told you that you wouldn't understand a word of it.

Here ya go, bonehead:

Below is a map show the range of elephant seals. That's a great coverage area for drawing conclusions about the entire ocean, don't ya thing?

Obviously, you are wrong here. It is the range of SOME, not all.

This may be a good example that highlights your cognitive issues.

Show the range of the others. Furthermore, it's obvious that elephant seals don't get far from land, and there is no record of them diving deeper than 900 meters. The ocean goes down to 5000 meters for much of its extent.

What numskulls like you prove is that cult members are obviously willing to accept whatever their AGW magicians dish out to them without question.