only a total troll tries to pretend 19 years of no warming is within the model predictions. almost every model failed (not just the IPCC models) the walk forward test on the data sets upon which they were trained. the only ones which did not fail were ones that predicted no significant warming ever. and don't go showing us your data sets which include ocean warming. the oceans have been warming since the last ice age. there is no reason to presume man made co2 has anything to do with that.
"...Citing scientific consensus that we are witnessing a "disturbing warming" of the Earth, Francis embraced the view that humans are largely to blame for a dramatic change in the climate. Nothing short of a "bold cultural revolution" can halt humanity's spiral into self-destruction, the Pope warned... ...The Earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth," Francis said. "In many parts of the planet, the elderly lament that once beautiful landscapes are now covered with rubbish...." http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/world/pope-francis-climate-technology-encyclical/index.html"
nitro... how important is scientific consensus to you? micheal crichton... “I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had.“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.“There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”[Crichton gave a number of examples where the scientific consensus was completely wrong for many years.]“… Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E = mc². Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.”
All I am saying is that here is your lider maximo and you are disobeying him jem. You still have time to repent. Or, are you saying you only believe in religion when it suits you? When it is convenient? Seems like you are being religious about your religion, and not scientific about your religion. As long as you understand the contradiction in which we all live in, its ok. At least I know you are not a chat bot.
Lol, saw that. Let's see how long it takes the MSM to rebrand it. My guess is that part if his speech will never be heard on any news report.
Everyone that has ever encountered people that cannot be convinced by evidence know how futile it is to try to bring reason to the convincing. Have you ever tried to talk to a flat earth believer person? These debates are pointless. They don't further science because there is no advancement of science being done here. As much as we have to admit, we have to leave it to the scientists to do science, just like you can't play baseball in the major leagues. In fact, all this debating and mental masturbation is spinning the hard disks even harder at the colo site for Elitetrader, the CPU's are maxing out, the network connection is pumping data harder, in short, we are raising the temperature of the Earth in a wasteful manner. If the servers of elitetrader dissapeared tomorrow, I wonder, would climate deniers and climate affirmers look for backups of the debates here? If the answer is no, then you might as well be sitting on a couch watching reruns of Gilligans Island. At least when some energy giant is buring all those fossil fuels and destroying the planet, someone is getting something out of it. Hopefully some kid has turned on a light to read a book. I wonder if Elitetrader servers are at a site that gets some percentage of the electricity to power servers is from solar?
What a coincidence! You're not being scientific about your science! Are you only scientific about your science when it suits you? When it's convenient? LOL
One can tell it's a good scientific objective chart by the fact it says right up there on top " failed". That's always a good sign that the chart is good science. Where are the probability bands? Where is 2014? What temp data set is it? Jem, you are such a sheep. Like the Koch bros lap dog. When one uses a good temp data set and the recent temps the models are nearly exactly correct. 2014 is right on the center line.
No, I follow the science, the truth, even when it hurts. There is almost nothing convenient about science. It is in every instance I can think of the road less taken, as witnessed by the 5 BILLION+++ believers in some sort of deity. Explanations and logic are in short demand if anything. Does that mean I make mistakes and I am gullible? Sure it does. I can be fooled. There is a famous book called, "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics". I read it I think when I was like 12, and ever since I have been very careful with statistical arguments made to me. It is very easy to obfuscate with sleight of hand and using mathematics to fool people that are not trained in hard subjects. That is why I always leave room for healthy skepticism in anything that is of as deep of importance as this. There is no question that this is an important issue. Turn off coal and oil and other fossile fuels for no reason, and you hurt lots of people's living. Continue on this path and it turns out that HFGW is true and the costs are far far worse than the economic damage done in the other case. I already know we have not won this fight. All you have to do is look at SUV sales when gasoline prices take a dive. The only way to change it is to change people's behavior and move away from carbon fuels to renewable energy. Just like everything else, it will eventually happen by economic forces. Very few people are motivated by Philosophy over Religion or certainly not science over religion. Look at how every US President now says "God Bless America" after every speech. Look at the back of the Greenback for "In God We Trust." It should say, "In Reason we trust". The good sign is that I see the acceptance of renewable energy use accelerating all the time, so that is some consolation.