|
|||||
|
|
|
|         
|
|
|||||
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QBv2CFTSWU
Do you know why somebody paid for this article?
What is 2+2?
4, right.
What do you call 2+2=5?
that's 2+2 with 25% error.
Now, what's 2+2=7?
75% error.
That 75% error shows up in the 2012 IPCC report in the difference between the model-predicted temperature and the actual measured temperature.
How important is that 75% error when we expect 0.00001% error?
Pretty important. This was the sle thing holding up the AGW hypothesis.
And now it's gone. It's math, not a democracy.
So, those with vested interest in this now have a problem. Their response is to ignore the fact there's zero proof it's true (which meets the technical criteria for "pseudoscience") and instead call people who understand university math "deniers" and ridicule groups of people that don't exists that believe the earth is flat or the eclipse is a hoax. Let's differentiate these people that believe global warming is true (43%) with the number of people who believe in angels (46%) or are the reason newspapers have astrology columns or hotels don't have thirteenth floors.
That's rhetoric. It' what you do when you have no facts.
If this is satire, who is it satirizing? People that don't understand science?
People that won't believe "What science tells us", or "what science believes".
Well, we can talk all day about belief and scince (more properlythe scitnrifi cmetd) but I can tell when the math is wrong. That's why we keep track of the amount of error. We expect near zero. We have 75%. When you disagree with nature, you're wrong to quote Feynman.
Here's two more stats that address the idea of ignoring error:
The medical system is the third-leading cause of death in the United States. Starfield B (July 2000). "Is US health really the best in the world?". JAMA 284 (4): 483–5. doi:10.1001/jama.284.4.483. PMID 10904513.
What is medicine's 5 sigma? - Richard Hortonemail - DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60696-1 http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)60696-1/fulltext
The reason for this article is there's no five sigma proof of warming, the threshold we use in physics to differentiate "fantasy" from "reality".
The inability to tell the apart is the disease we call "schizophrenia".
"Thus those individuals with schizoid genes (who tended to form the ruling classes) ..."
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2001/apr/28/scienceandnature.medicalscience
The seas are presently falling not rising:
http://rs79.vrx.palo-alto.ca.us/opinions/ideas/climate/.images/sea-fall.png
Man made CO2 flat-lined years ago:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603884/carbon-dioxide-emissions-are-flat-for-a-third-year-running-but-the-economy-continues-to/
CO2 is still rising, so what? That's not us. That just makes plants grow faster and we get more food. What do you care? Or do you want less food? Explain that.
The amount of sea ice has never actually changed, slight arctic loss is equaled by antarctic gain.
http://rs79.vrx.palo-alto.ca.us/opinions/ideas/climate/.images/nsidcglobalseaiceareasince1999.png
http://rs79.vrx.palo-alto.ca.us/opinions/ideas/climate/.images/current.area.south.ice.jpg
Although Canada had to add ice to the marine navigation maps of the Arctic. It recall has shrunk a lot less than they say.
The Anthropomorphic Global Warming hypothesis was supported soley by the math, which had failed irreparably by 2012. The signs from earth are all the opposite now of what they would be if the horrifically flawed AGW hypothesis were actually true. But it's not and no proof exists it is. Science writers conveniently leave this part out.
