Tamino attacked me, then censored my comment pointing out why his analysis was fatally flawed. Typical alarmist scum.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Recent Comments
gelcarrion0t on Australia Permanent Drought Up… gelcarrion0t on “New computer modeling… Morgan Wright on Climate Destroying Shrimp Christopher Simpson on 1896 : Japan Hit By Earthquake… energywise on What’s At Stake? Robert Cherba on Too Hot To Live gelcarrion0t on Too Hot To Live Nicholas McGinley on “The world began to end… Nicholas McGinley on “The world began to end… Nicholas McGinley on “The world began to end…
Tamino should heed the words of Epictetus (circa 120 AD):
I think I know now what I never knew before—the meaning of the common saying, A fool you can neither bend nor break. Pray heaven I may never have a wise fool for my friend! There is nothing more intractable.—“My resolve is fixed!”—Why, so madmen say too; but the more firmly they believe in their delusions, the more they stand in need of treatment.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
Thats a great quotation.
Human stupidity is at least 2000 years old and still strong.
I like Pliny’s take. Describes many things including climate.
“In these matters, the only certainty is that nothing is certain.”
I expect it’s just inadvertently ended up in his spam folder Steve. A bit like 3 of my comments on here in fact!
Yours are spam. Repeating yourself is spam. try posting original comments for once in your life.
The 20th century in NM was significantly higher rain and snow than any historic time period. Warm cycles were good for NM vegetation. But the sun has become less warm and we are trending on a down cycle of cooler temperatures similar to the 19th century. NM should expect less snow. Dry in NM is evidence of NATURAL CYCLIC COOLING. I posted this on that web site but its been deleted.
“Open Mind” in propagandist parlance means “No Dissenting Facts Tolerated”.
“….am I wringing as much bias out of myself as I can?” — Obama
“I don’t have much patience for people who deny climate change…” — Obama
There is a surfeit of tomfoolery.
http://greatwhitecon.info/2014/03/shock-news-real-science-censorship/
A chord has been struck.
Sorry that you can’t distinguish between spam and censorship.
True, i am not that familure with the game they play but I am trying to catch on. So they spam a bunch of collective blogs so as to make it seem like they are minions with facts to try and shout down OR censor those who diagree with thier talking points?
Exactly. I never censor ideas, but I have blocked several people who keep spamming the same nonsense over and over again, and ignore my responses and explanations. On the other hand, I can’t get a single comment in at Tamino’s blog, even after he attacked me.
There is no comparison between the two.
Whatever you post to SW as argument or answer to his posts is never read (unless it agrees with his points).
He only says that it’s not important (without saying why) and points to his website again, and again.
Typical spam.
Has Vladamir Puttin has slain the eviro wackos darling climate scam?
“We think that we have to balance climate policy, but also cost competitiveness and security of supply. And of course, recently, the issue of security of supply has been added an extra element of external dependence.”
Gordon Moffat, director general of steel industry group Eurofer told Reuters:
“Given the absolute necessity for Europe to diversify its sources of supply of gas and to find solutions to the huge energy price differential with its main competitors, we see no alternative but to proceed as rapidly as possible with shale gas exploitation as part of the energy mix in Europe.”
In other words, Vladimir Putin has achieved something that economists, industrialists, analysts and conservative politicians have found quite impossible: he has finally persuaded the EU that when push comes to shove, survival is a much more attractive option than meaningless obeisance to some imaginary green sky fairy.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/14/Vladimir-Putin-Hero-of-the-European-Union
Lies cannot tolerate an actual peer review.
So nice to see that Progressives can still believe in make believe global warming theories, still believe that computer model outputs trump actual data and that they still have that a lot of faith in all that Hopey Changey stuff.
Good omen for a business revival at Disneyland.
Not really, a bankrupt populus doesn’t spend money on anything but food and other necessities. Restaurants are some of the first businesses to go belly-up during a recession as well as any other frill type expenditures.
Piltdown Man was a scientific fraud perpetrated by a corrupt scientist bent on big grant money and fame.
Lysenkoism was a scientific fraud perpetrated by a corrupt government bent on taxation and power.
I see a combination of both of these frauds in the current AGW scandal.
Good science eventually won the day in both cases. Carry on, Steve.
I went to the enemy’s site and said “Free the Goddard” lets see if he deletes it. Never mind lets don’t, just keep him a little busy censoring.
Tamino? Ha, ha, ha, Censored by that unconscionable pissant?
Shucks Steve, you gotta be doin’ sumfin right!
Way to go man!
My first reaction was “wait – he actually has a web site”?
Then I remembered a site called Open Mind run by someone called Grant Foster.
Realized long ago that he doesn’t believe in the title of his site.
The alarmists only post their stuff on sites where THEY control the moderation.
He’s afraid to have an open discussion.
I guess I’m the exception that proves the rule?
Meditate on the implication that Tamino is taken seriously as a hockey stick team member since like Phil Jones, he willfully lies with statistics in the support of artificial energy rationing, in other words in support of genocide, here exposed in an infographic:
http://s1.postimg.org/9luuxrqm7/TAMINO_FINAL_FINAL_FINAL_FINAL.gif
The only thing you are exceptional at is avoiding questions and spamming.
Grant Foster, aka., Tamino is a big f-ing JOKE. I exposed his total strawman hatchet job of Goodrich a couple years back. Tamino censored it & my comment never saw the light of day. It just confirms he isn’t a real scientist and he doesn’t care a whit about science or truth. He’s a blind ideological religious cult zealot, merely spreading propaganda.
The fact that he is a publishing climate scientist tells it all. It’s a scam & hoax perpetrated by corrupt JUNK science frauds like him. Other than that and being a total a-hole, he’s probably not too bad a guy.
ROFLMAO
So this is what Snow White (David Appell in drag) is doing here, Steven.
He/she consider themself to be a “peer”! The public display of their double standards and the entertainment value of their insanity is not quite up there with Reggie and the Rowing Team!!
At least the Rowing Team did something outside and were entertaining. These guys still live in Mom’s basement.
From Tamino comments –
“Snow White | March 16, 2014 at 7:59 am | John – In an all too public display of insanity we’re currently peer reviewing Mr. Goddard’s more recent statements about Arctic sea ice. Thus far he has failed to answer 9 out of 10 questions in our brief examination of his basic scientific knowledge on the subject. His answer to the other one consisted of one image, but no words. Not even his trademark ROFL!”
Dmh/Andy – Steve (and virtually everyone else here) refuses to answer my questions here, they refuse to answer them there. If I keep repeating them it’s because I never get any answers from anyone!
Here are your answers Snow White (David):
Global Sea Ice Extent is normal.
UNIPCC says no warming since before 1998.
Sea Levels rise of less than 3 mm per year.
Hurricanes, Cyclones and Tornados are at record lows
ENSO cycle is operating normally, currently neutral.
Global Warming is an international taxation introduction scheme.
My prediction is you will become spam within 24 hours.
Enjoy yourself in the Tamino star chamber. After all, being surrounded by yes men is the ideal situation for robust debate (NOT).
Yet again you are not answering the questions I have repeatedly been asking. Here they all are, for the umpteenth time:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2014/03/some-sceptical-questions/
I wholeheartedly agree with your final sentence. Now we’ll just have to wait and see how good your projection turns out to be!
Yet again you are not answering the questions I have repeatedly been asking…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You have been answered but you do not like the answers so you completely ignore the answers.
If you have questions, ask them. Do not pimp your hysteria sites! That is another indication of a spam troll.
In addition, the “3mm” of sea level rise is skewed by the fact that UC adds 3mm per year due to what they call the land “rebounding”. In essence, the sea level is static.
Sorry, did you have any INTELLIGENT questions?
Thought not.
Gail – You are obviously very knowledgeable about these matters, so here is my first question for you. The answer is very simple. Click my link above should you need any helpful hints. For the nth time of asking:
1. Is the NSIDC daily Arctic sea ice extent number for March 8th 2014 the lowest on record for that day of the year? Yes or No?
I thought we were talking about global climate. True? Then you should be asking about global sea ice averaged annually. Your question is no different from me asking “Was Lake Ontario ice coverage last tuesday at 4 PM greater than ever before for a tuesday this close to St Patricks Day”
False. I’m talking about the “facts” of Arctic sea ice extent measurements. You talk about global climate if you so desire.
I’ve recently been reliably informed that people are only really interested in the summer minimum. YMMV of course.
I personally don’t give a crap about sea ice. The Arctic has had far less ice than present levels, and nobody died.
On the other hand, millions of innocent human beings are dying from lack of clean water, food, shelter, and proper medical attention. All of these real life and death matters could be solved with the money idiots spend on ‘climate change’.
How do you live with yourself? Go ahead and defend your position as another kid takes her last breath.
You are a cherry picking idiot. Arctic sea ice measurement means nothing. What matters is the validity of the CO2 induced climate change theory. The mentality of AGW touch holes like you is the same as that of Billy Mays snake oil salesmanship. You are a liar and a thief, using a wrong theory to extort tax money from power companies.
Of course not. Think the Holocene Optimum. {:>)
Abstract
…..We therefore conclude that for a period in the Early Holocene, probably for a millenium or more, the Arctic Ocean was free of sea ice at least for shorter periods in the summer……
adsabs(DOT)harvard.edu/abs/2007AGUFMPP11A0203F
Abstract
…..Arctic sea ice cover was strongly reduced during most of the early Holocene and there appear to have been periods of ice free summers in the central Arctic Ocean……
(wwwDOT)sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379110003185
……………..
The Sea Ice is within two standard deviations of the mean. After thirty years plotting control charts and running quality labs that is a big YAWN. I am not going to get upset about anything within 2 to 3 std dev or I would have had a heart attack decades ago.
(Considering the ice moves about thanks to the wind that is about all you can hope for.)
nsidc(DOT)org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_stddev_timeseries.png
For Febuary NSIDC shows 2014 not to be as low as other years, There are at least three and maybe four other years with lower extent for February.
nsidc(DOT)org/data/seaice_index/images/n_plot_hires.png
Unfortunately they do not have March data out yet.
….
The Japanese show the Ice extent to be similar to the last few years and not the lowest extent, although the last four years are dancing the tango. The most recent on the chart shows a sharp ‘Increase’ after a dip to lowest.
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/Sea_Ice_Extent_v2.png
The Danish show 2014 as “recovering” and not as low as 2012 for this time of year. They do not show the dip and recovery the Japanese do.
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/plots/icecover/icecover_current_new.png
The Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center (NERSC) also shows 2013 as “recovering and not below any of the other years. It is above three (maybe four) other years in the ‘Dip’ time period.
http://arctic-roos(DOT)org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/observation_images/ssmi1_ice_ext_small.png
The NERSC area also shows the dip and then a recovery to within 1 std dev of the mean.
arctic-roos(DOT)org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/observation_images/ssmi1_ice_area.png
So it depends on which data base you look at as to whether that one day had a low.
…..
Remember that the Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Broke the All-Time Record For Ice Growth in September 2013 — ‘Increasing to 19.512 million sq km, and beating last year’s record high of 19.477 million sq km.
Record low Arctic sea ice plus record high Antarctic sea Ice = the bipolar seesaw.
The fall 2012 paper Can we predict the duration of an interglacial? says this about the ‘Reactivation’ of the bipolar seesaw
per usual I deleted the H*T*T*P:// and the first period was replaced by (DOT) so I do not get kicked into the nearest snow bank. (Actually we are getting Ice Pellets here in mid NC… Going out to feed newborn kids every two hours is not nice in this weather. Mom is smart she dumped the kid raising on me. I want my Global Warming darn it!)
You’ve taken up an awful lot of paragraphs to avoiding giving a one word answer to one simple question. FYI NSIDC extent numbers go back as far as 1979. As you would know if you’d bothered to read my helpful hints, their recent daily data is available from
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/north/daily/data/NH_seaice_extent_nrt.csv
You’ve also taken up many more words than necessary to answer Q3 in the affirmative. Thanks for that at least.
Why should I trust NSIDC (National Snow and Ice Data Center ) when I just caught another US bureaucracy NOAA LYING about the six inches of snow in my area?
The day after the snowstorm NOAA was calling the snow RAIN so they could elevate the freezing temperature the usual 2 to 4 °F. My area (rural) ALWAYS has the temperature raised by 2 to 4°F by the next day so this ‘ADJUSTMENT’ turned the below freezing temp/snow to above freezing temp/rain and I caught them at the LIE. The adjusted data did not match reality but they went with the adjusted data anyway. (I am within walking distance of the weather station in question BTW.)
As I just showed above the data from NSIDC is not cast in stone and does not necessarily agree with other data sets. Your insistence in trying to trip up Steve over this particular dataset from a deceitful government indicate WHY the data sets have been ‘Adjusted’
Also history does not start in 1979 and the data set doesn’t even cover one weather cycle. Heck by 1979 I had already been married and divorced so it doesn’t even cover the weather I remember during my adult lifetime.
As far back as 1979? Golly Gee! I go back as far as the mid 50s!
You waste a lot of words avoiding the picture I linked to. Are you going to comment?
Question for you – how long is the record?
Question #2 – how long is recorded human history?
Question #3 – How old is the planet?
Question #4 – How old is the arctic?
Hey Phil! You forgot question #5. How old are you? 😆
As old as my hair and a little older than my teeth. 😉
Hum? recently I noticed that I am becoming a little taller then my hair.
I have found my nose longer, my ears smaller, and my eyes smaller. But so far, I am not taller than my hair. 😉
hey spambot, what is this picture of? http://www.navalhistory.org/2011/08/11/uss-skate-ssn-578-becomes-the-first-submarine-to-surface-at-the-north-pole
Hi Phil,
It would seem to be the USS Skate on 11 August 1958 when it became the first submarine to surface at the North Pole. What is this picture of?
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2013/09/santas-secret-summer-swim/#comment-12024
Frozen ice. What is my prize?
And basically yours is just a snipe hunt. Mine disproves your hysteria.
Don’t feed the troll.
Reblogged this on Climate Ponderings.
Gail – In what way exactly has the NSIDC dataset been “adjusted”?
Phil – I did comment. On March 18, 2014 at 12:23 pm precisely
Non sequitur. Try a substantial comment.
Snow White says:
March 18, 2014 at 3:18 pm
Gail – In what way exactly has the NSIDC dataset been “adjusted”?
Phil – No prize I’m afraid. The correct answer is vast areas of open water. Plenty of room for every submarine on the planet.
Gator – In what way is the NSIDC dataset merely “a model” of reality?
Sorry, there is no open water. Check your picture again. So you are reneging? Typical.
I have checked again, and I still see lots of open water underneath a thin veil of cloud. Perhaps you should arrange a hasty visit to an optician? Luckily microwaves can see through clouds, even if you cannot. Here’s another satellite image of the North Pole area from September 2nd 2013, this time a University of Hamburg visualisation of data from the AMSR2 sensor on board the Japanese SHIZUKU satellite:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2014/03/how-many-subs-in-santas-swimming-pool/#AMSR2
The circle [in the image I’m unable to post here] is 85 degrees North. How many subs do you suppose will fit into Santa’s secret summer swimming pool?
You have X-ray vision? I am sorry! I did not realize you were stuper girl! Want to try again? This time with normal vision.
BTW. for the SLOOOOOW learners. 85 North +/= North pole. The North Pole is WITHIN 85 North. But it is NOT 85 North.
The Skate is at 90 North. The NORTH POLE.
You may have x-ray vision, but you still cannot read a map. neither picture shows open water AT the north pole.
How many submarines are on the planet Snowy?
better recheck your figures. They are not tinker toys.
You’re a hard man to please Phil! Feast your eyes on this picture instead then:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2014/03/how-many-subs-in-santas-swimming-pool/#PoleAqua
I am easy to please. I am hard to fool – http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/08/22/open-water-at-the-north-pole-2/
Here’s a clue. Stop trying. You are only fooling yourself.
Snow White says:
March 19, 2014 at 9:29 am
Phil – No prize I’m afraid. The correct answer is vast areas of open water. Plenty of room for every submarine on the planet.
“Gator – In what way is the NSIDC dataset merely “a model” of reality?”
So you really do not know what you are talking about, quite literally. I thought you might be familiar with the modeling used by NSIDC to ‘create’ their numbers, but alas you are merely a parrot.
Wanna cracker? 😆
Thanks for your most generous offer Gator, but no thanks.
Please be so good as to provide us with a link that describes “the modeling used by NSIDC to ‘create’ these numbers”:
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/north/daily/data/NH_seaice_extent_nrt.csv
“Information about sea ice processes can come from field camps or aircraft and satellites (see Remote Sensing section). However, data from these sources are limited. Sensors cannot account for all characteristics of sea ice anytime and anywhere. Furthermore, the record of sea ice data has a limited history. Satellite observations date back only to the mid-1970s; other observations, such as ship records, may go back as far as the late 19th Century, but they are sparse. Moreover, these data cannot predict the future of sea ice extent.
To fill in the gaps in knowledge about sea ice, scientists use models to simulate sea ice processes. A model is a mathematical representation of a real-world physical process. These models allow scientists to reconstruct historical patterns of sea ice and predict future changes. Due to the complex nature of the models, they are run on computers.”
http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/seaice/study/modeling.html
See Polly, they ‘fill in the gaps’ with their confirmation biased models, whose parameters they can change at any time.
How about that cracker now?
Also you never answered my question as to why you consider sea ice more important than human life. Maybe you should stop reading the paper at the bottom of your cage, and start listening to humans who actually know what they are speaking of.
What has any of that got to do with the data I pointed you at? I suggest you read the “Remote sensing” section instead, as it says in the very first sentence of your link. To save you the bother of an extra click, here’s the direct link:
http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/seaice/study/remote_sensing.html
Where do you suggest I go look for some “humans who actually know what they are speaking of”?
😆 I have a Remote Sensing degree! 😆
Polly, I was even a climatology student, right after the ice age scare and right before the global warming scam. Before that I was a geology student. I have been studying climate and Earth history for nearly four decades now.
I still have a cracker for you! 😆
Gator,
Thanks for pointing out why I looked at several sources of the data in my comment @ March 17, 2014 at 7:13 pm
Like you I thought Snow White was aware the numbers were guesses.
In which case Gator, you can no doubt explain with great clarity precisely what sort of “computer modelling” goes into producing the data I linked to.
I guess you alarmists are used to moving goal posts, but we are not.
“Snow White says:
March 18, 2014 at 3:18 pm
Gail – In what way exactly has the NSIDC dataset been “adjusted”?”
This is where we started Polly, and just for that, I rescind my offer of a cracker.
Now how about you explain why you care more about ice than human lives.
Tell you what Gator. Why don’t you go over here and listen to at least the first track:
http://water-connects-us.org/
Then come back with credible evidence that you have contributed a significant sum of money to at least one of the three charities on display at the top left of the page.
Then tell me WHY?
P.S. You still haven’t provided an explanation of great clarity, or indeed any explanation at all.
I have money auto debited from my account monthly to support starving children, and help provide clean drinking water for them. But then I don’t hyperventilate over ice or continue yammering after being proven wrong, like you.
You are a parrot, who sings with the alarmist choir, and you have absolutely nothing of value to offer here.
You want an explanation? It’s called nature Polly.
Where have I been proven wrong?
Since you continue to refuse to answer what should be simple question for someone with your expertise I’ve added it to my ever growing list of unanswered “Real Science” questions:
http://GreatWhiteCon.info/2014/03/some-sceptical-questions/#Q12
You did not know that NSIDC used models to ‘create’ their numbers, stop hitting yourself. And as far as your list is concerned Polly, why not add the questions you have failed to answer.
And we are all shaking in our boots! 😆
Still hawking your web site. Do you get any regular readers, or are you just trying to leech some of the readers from here?
You are the only one refusing. Laughably so.
Gator – You haven’t proved anything. Even though it’s your specialist subject. Where’s your evidence? Forgive me, but simply asserting something is true does not make it so.
At the risk of repeating myself, what “computer models” are utilised by the NSIDC when “creating” their published Arctic sea ice extent data?
Auto Reply: Gator is busy, ponder this.
SIGHHhhhh
Can’t you do a simple web search?
SIGHHhhhh – Gator already posted that. Here’s the data again:
ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/DATASETS/NOAA/G02135/north/daily/data/NH_seaice_extent_nrt.csv
It has nothing to do with “reconstruct[ing] historical patterns of sea ice and predict[ing] future changes”
(see Remote Sensing section) http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/seaice/study/remote_sensing.html
From Polly’s NSIDC RS link…
“Satellites can easily measure sea ice in the visible, infrared, and microwave regions of the electromagnetic spectrum. However, there are advantages and disadvantages to each type of radiation. None of the spectral regions allow scientists to optimally view sea ice in all conditions.”
This is one reason why they use models to “fill in the gaps”. But Polly only reads what she thinks she sees, and really does not understand the rest. Polly thinks ice cubes are more important than people, and would rather send money to try and stop natural processes than save innocent humans. Talk about denying.
I can read, and I am well aware of the import of your first paragraph.
As for your second, please stop waving your hands. Instead provide a link that explains how the NSIDC “use models to ‘fill in the gaps'” in their published daily Arctic sea ice extent numbers.
They use models to ‘create’ data for areas that are marginal due to satellite resolution, areas not visible, and areas that need definition. And they can (and have) tweek these model parameters to get different results.
Now, if I really had to explain that to you, it means you have been quoting data that you do not understand. But then you have already admitted as much through your ignorant pursuit of this topic.
Maybe it is time for you to study the effects of starvation on the human condition instead of hyperventilating over modeled ice cubes.
Gator – So at long last we’re agreed that those sort of “models” are nothing whatsoever to do with the sort of models that “allow scientists to reconstruct historical patterns of sea ice and predict future changes” so beloved of the IPCC amongst others, that you and Gail were blathering on about?
Wrongway Polly strikes out again! 😆
I never discussed models being used for past past or future data, but now yhst you mention it, they do. If you would ever bother both reading and comprehending the actual science, you would know that.
“These models allow scientists to reconstruct historical patterns of sea ice and predict future changes. Due to the complex nature of the models, they are run on computers.”
http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/seaice/study/modeling.html
Ever tire of being wrong Polly? 😆
Nobody expects….
http://youtu.be/P1iBbBL1040
I’m rarely wrong Gator, and certainly not on this occasion! You were the one that introduced the “reconstruct historical patterns of sea ice and predict future changes” quote, not me.
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/as-expected-tamino-censored-my-comment/#comment-329026
I thought I’d made it perfectly clear that “I’m talking about the “facts” of Arctic sea ice extent measurements”
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/as-expected-tamino-censored-my-comment/#comment-328073
Polly, you have been consistently wrong, and a very busy goal post mover. You did not know about the NSIDC models, and are now trying to save face. Best to change your avatar and pretend to be someone who knows what they speak of. It might work for a little while.
Rarely wrong? 😆
Except when you are not right. Which is most of the time.
Phil – What do you reckon is the area of the “polynya” shown in the photo you link to?
Non Sequitur. Want to try an intelligent question?
Snow White says: “I thought I’d made it perfectly clear that “I’m talking about the “facts” of Arctic sea ice extent measurements””
How can it be “Facts” when your “Fact” does not agree with the “Fact” as shown by other groups?
You cherry picked the one day on the one chart that showed Arctic Ice was the lowest. AND you used a service from a government KNOWN for its
cheatingbias. A government intent on killing off the US economy and so crippling the country it is ripe for invasion. It certainly doesn’t hurt that the last Democratic president handed the weapon technology to China.I sure hope you are taking courses in Mandarin. That is if they don’t just wipe us all out. Blacks in the USA have no idea of what real racism is until they live (or rather die as slave labor) under the Chinese.
Gator – At the risk of repeating myself “simply asserting something is true does not make it so.”
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/as-expected-tamino-censored-my-comment/#comment-329281
Since you’re evidently confused about a few things, why don’t we start again at the beginning?
https://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/as-expected-tamino-censored-my-comment/#comment-328038
WTF are you talking about now? 😆
I didn’t know goal posts had wheels!
If you didn’t notice the goal post are on skateboards by now, you have not been paying attention.
Sort of reminds me of the Government – Corporate – Lobbyist Revolving Door here in the USA. Darn door moves so much now it is no wonder the east coast has been freezing this winter. It’s caused by the hefty breeze from that revolving door!
I wonder if Polly would have anything to talk about if she eliminated models and cherry picked dates? 😉
My apologies Gail. Starting at the beginning again reveals to me that I’ve been ignoring you!
I didn’t “cherry pick the one day on the one chart that showed Arctic Ice was the lowest”. At the time I originally made those comments three different metrics that I checked were at their lowest values ever for the date. There may well have been others. Undeterred by such “facts” Steve was merrily proclaiming at the time that there was an “Arctic Ice Recovery” on the basis of the output of a single computer model!
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/07/arctic-ice-recovery/
As far as I can ascertain from his skateboarding fantasies, Gator doesn’t believe the outputs of computer models.
The output of “computer models” is not data or facts. Perhaps you need to learn what it is.
Models are fantasy, just like Snow White, Santa Claus and man made global warming.
Polly, if we take away your models and cherry picked dates, do you have anything to discuss?
Snow White says: @ March 21, 2014 at 6:44 pm
…At the risk of repeating myself “simply asserting something is true does not make it so.”
…………….
Hey, Snow White, How about telling that to the IPCC and the “Consensus Crowd”?
Gator – You appear to miss my point completely. If “models are fantasy” why does Steve Goddard rely on a cherry picked one to “prove” that “there’s an Arctic Ice Recovery”?
Polly, you have no point. You and Steve both use modeled data. So what? At least Steven KNEW he was using modeled data. 😆
You, on the other hand, just parrot whatever the alarmists line your cage with.
Gator – I know modelled data when I see it. I have even been known to run sea ice models on my very own “super-computers”:
http://econnexus.org/projects/the-distributed-arctic-sea-ice-model/sea-ice-pie/
If Steven does in fact know when he’s using modelled data he keeps awfully quiet about it!
Cherry Picking again. First, there are an infinite number of models that are useless. They do nothing. There is only one model that is useful. And so far, it has not been found.
Second, Steve uses data from sources. YOu just do not understand the difference. Which proves you may not be wrong, but you are never right.
😆 – Steve is relying on DATA, not models. Can you ever get anything right?
Oh no he isn’t! See that:
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/07/arctic-ice-recovery/
That’s the output of a computer model. Of the sort Gator apparently disapproves of.
Non sequitur. let me help you:
This – http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/as-expected-tamino-censored-my-comment/
Is not this – http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/07/arctic-ice-recovery/
Are you capable of getting anything correct?
“Gator – I know modelled data when I see it.”
Bullshit! I had to drag you by the beak to NSIDC’s page on modeling, more than once! Lie some more Polly.
“I have even been known to run sea ice models on my very own “super-computers”
Good for you! I know lots of idiots who play computer games and lose sight if reality. See: IPCC.
Now F off, you are a waste of time.
Now, now Gator. That really is no way to address a lady.
I am not addressing a lady, I am addressing a parrot that thinks it is clever, and a wannabe scientist who hates humans.
And I am evidently not addressing a gentleman!
We are all still trying to figure out WHO you are addressing.
I might be insulted, if you were not a human hating parrot.
He was not addressing Gail.
😆
Snow I’ll bet you love football more than Rugby? Right?
I fear not D. Why do you ask?
These days I suffer from a gammy knee, and so find myself largely confined to cycling and bodyboarding.
Just a little psittacine scientific experiment:
Which failed miserably, so here’s a link instead:
http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/seaice/extent/Sea_Ice_Extent_v2.png
One of the main issues I have with frauds is that they have no shame. Observe the parrot still yapping even after it has been shown their is no there there. Just like Peter Gleick, who was shown to be a fraud and liar, they just keep yapping. They seem to think slinging shit against a wall is either art or somehow worthy of praise.
Without cherries and models, these frauds have nothing to say, and they never explain just why they hate poor people so much.
…they never explain just why they hate poor people so much.
People have only one use – to provide wealth for the Corporations, Bankers and the governments they run.
Poor people have only one use. To vote in politicians who under the guise of socialism put in place the laws that funnel control, power and wealth to the mega-corporations and banks. I explain that in my comment: http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/a-subtle-change-in-the-republican-party/#comment-330412
Fabian Co-founder George Bernard Shaw explains the method used to gain control:
“A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.”
The short term goal is to cripple the middle class to the point they are no threat to the elite who run the Corporations, Bank and the governments. At that point the poor are no longer of any use to the elite. The UK with their ‘Fuel Poverty are already killing off thousands of pensioners each winter.
The long term goal of the Fabians (elite) is a world government with them in control. Shaw told us how they will treat people once they have achieved this goal of world government. The UK, run by the Fabians, is shows evidence of this way of thinking.
Unfortunately people are unwilling to see this is the plan thanks to the propaganda and indoctrination.
Do not forget it was US bankers who funded the Russian revolution and financed Trotsky’s passage from New York to Russia to carry out THEIR plans. SEE: http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/mcfadden.html
Phil – Fred originally introduced the subject of “models” into this conversation, not me. I would have been quite content to stick to “censorship”!
YOu do seem quite content to introduce non sequiturs. Since no censorship has been practiced here, your pathetic bleatings on that subject are simply whining and a distraction.