50 years of failed eco predictions

[AProudLefty]

“Millennials and Gen Z told me the world's gonna end in 12 years."
is not the same quote as
“ Millennials and Gen Z and all these folks that come after us are looking up, and we're like”

I want a link. I demand one in fact. Or else.

LOL. Okay. You're fooling around. Good one.

 

[anonymoose]

LOL. Okay. You're fooling around. Good one.

LINK!

 

[AProudLefty]

LINK!

You already linked to it. LOL.

 

[anonymoose]

You already linked to it. LOL.

I know. Different quote, different meaning, similar words.
I need a link to this quote:” Millennials and Gen Z told me the world's gonna end in 12 years."

 

[AProudLefty]

I know. Different quote, different meaning, similar words.
I need a link to this quote:” Millennials and Gen Z told me the world's gonna end in 12 years."

You quoted it.

 

[anonymoose]

You quoted it.

Perhaps but no link. I don’t think anyone said it. LINK!

 

[AProudLefty]

Perhaps but no link. I don’t think anyone said it. LINK!

Link to an EXACT quote? I don't think I quoted it. LOL.

Unless you were talking about my post with a series of conversations.

 

[Old Trapper]

you're the totalitarian here, despite your assminded sophistry. so go eat infected ass butter.

Typical response from the low IQ right winger when losing an argument intellectually, and morally.

 

[tsuke]

First off, I am not sure what "ice age" you are referring to.

Second, the islands are not sinking, just as Miami is not sinking,. The water is rising as more glaciers melt thus causing flooding. Here in Oregon we have lost over half of our glaciers.

Third, perhaps you really need to look at what is happening globally. Floods, and fires, along with diseases, and then there is the loss of animal life.

Science cannot do it all, and has never claimed it could. Some people do learn, others just follow.

https://theconversation.com/as-the-world-changes-science-does-too-and-thats-a-good-thing-152688

did you not see the article i linked?

 

[Monad Portal]

Typical response from the low IQ right winger when losing an argument intellectually, and morally.

yeah. it's called the truth. you're the totalitarian here, despite your idiotic sophistry.

 

[gemini104104]

https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions/

Just wanted to share this with everyone

It honestly feels like one of those rapture cults which gather together every few years because they are convinced the rapture is going to happen right then and there.

Actually it appears with the possible passage of the infrastructure bill that has already been approve in the Senate, President Biden and VP Harris and their team have great plans to improve the eco system, in particular the EPA that tRump and his sewer goons tried to destroy with other benefits that would serve the well being of society and its environment:


THE BIDEN PLAN TO BUILD A MODERN, SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE AND AN EQUITABLE CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE

At this moment of profound crisis, we have the opportunity to build a more resilient, sustainable economy – one that will put the United States on an irreversible path to achieve net-zero emissions, economy-wide, by no later than 2050. Joe Biden will seize that opportunity and, in the process, create millions of good-paying jobs that provide workers with the choice to join a union and bargain collectively with their employers.

President Trump has a devastating pattern of denying science and leaving our country unprepared and vulnerable. Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, he ignored public health experts, praised the Chinese government, and failed to take the actions needed to protect the American people. And as the crisis accelerated, Trump rolled back environmental standards that protect public health — adding to the 100 similar environmental and public health protections he has rolled back since taking office — even though early data suggests a link between exposure to pollution and serious negative health impacts from the virus."

https://joebiden.com/clean-energy/

 

[Into the Night]

Nope it isn't like that, silly moose.

It is exactly like that. Keep track of the conversation. Trolling.

 

[Into the Night]

I said I knew what she said.

Lie. Trolling.

 

[Into the Night]

How the fuck does one predict without data, dumbass?

I'm not trying to predict anything. Follow the conversation. Trolling.

 

[Into the Night]

Not at all. I was pointing out that the subset of numbers you could select depends on the larger set of numbers in the possible range. If these are equal, then it makes no difference. If there is a great disparity then it could make significant difference.

Math error: Boundary shift. There is no dependency.

 

[Into the Night]

The emissivity constant doesn't change the fact that radiation is watts per meter squared and can only occur on the surface of any mass.

You are talking about surface temperatures, dumbass. You are also ignoring heat by conductivity and convection.

Since I didn't compare two systems your claim of a fallacy is itself a fallacy fallacy.

You did. You are a liar. False equivalence fallacy. Mockery.

A fallacy fallacy occurs when someone simply claims a fallacy in order to avoid addressing the statement.

I did address your statement. Liar. Mockery.

I am merely pointing out that S-B can only apply to the surface of the mass being referenced.
If you break that mass up into parts then S-B can only be applied to surface of each of the parts.

False equivalence fallacy. You cannot compare two systems as the same system.

To fail to understand that is to fail to understand the most basic principle of the Stefan-Boltzmann law. Radiation can only occur at the surface of the object.
Of course I am arguing the temperature at the surface, dumbass.

Paradox. You are being irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.

The temperature at the surface can increase if the radiation it receives increases. The radiation the earth's surface receives increases if the atmosphere radiates more IR.

WRONG. It takes energy to emit light. Conversion of thermal energy to electromagnetic energy COOLS the radiating surface.

The atmosphere radiates more IR if it absorbs more IR.

Then it will also emit more light. You are attempting to heat the warmer surface using a colder gas. You are ignoring the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

It is a branch of mathematics that is taught.

So? Usually it's taught wrong, like many things in schools these days. Sorry dude, schools do not define statistical math. You can't use them as an authoritative reference.

Since most people conduct statistical calculations based on how they were taught,

Sucks to be them. They are often functionally illiterate, thanks to the lousy schools.

it is reasonable to request you to show us when anyone taught that the calculations require published numbers before they can be performed.

You can't show your work unless you also show the data.

Your failure to support your claim would show it is bullshit.

Already did. RQAA.

ROFLMAO. You deserve mockery for your ignorance.

Nah. You just like to mock people.

My only prediction is that you will make more ignorant comments. Other than that, feel free to point out where I predicted anything. (You will notice, you deserve mockery again.)

RQAA. You are attempting to use statistical math improperly to predict future global temperature.

Your failure to look at the data doesn't make it biased or insufficient.

It is insufficient. RQAA. Pivot fallacy.

It only points to you being unable to perform any of the work you attempt to ridicule.

There is no work involved. Pivot fallacy.

Your failure to read the method which clearly lists the margin of error

I have read the method of data collection. It is a biased method. Margin of error has nothing to do with data.

doesn't make me illiterate.

Your own statements indicate you illiteracy in mathematics, particularly statistical math and probability math.

It might make you illiterate if the reason you don't read the literature is because you can't read. Have you read Hansen et al's paper from 1987? Would you care to claim there is no listed margin of error anywhere in the paper?

Margin of error is not a paper and has nothing to do with being in a paper. Math errors: Failure to declare and justify variance. Failure to calculate margin of error.

Clearly you haven't or you wouldn't claim there is no margin of error listed.

Margin of error is not a list. Redefinition fallacy (list<->margin of error).

Fallacy fallacy.
Contradictory statement that shows you don't know what you are talking about. If one is collecting the high temperature for the day only an idiot would restrict their temperature reading to a specific time during the day.

RQAA. Time is a significant biasing factor. It must be removed. All temperatures must be read at the same time by the same authority.

fallacy fallacy. Denial of facts.

Buzzword fallacy. Mockery. A fact is not a proof nor a Universal Truth. Learn English.

fallacy fallacy.
No evidence of you actually performing said work since you make claims that are clearly contradicted by published papers.

Biased data collection methods. RQAA.

Please provide supporting evidence.

Already did. RQAA.

Temperature readings are not random numbers.

They are when you make them up. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. Argument from randU fallacy.

Any claim they are random shows you are simply throwing out bullshit hoping you won't be called on it.

Math errors: failure to publish unbiased raw data. Failure to select by randN. Failure to normalize by paired randR. Failure to declare and justify variance. Failure to calculate margin of error value.

Repeated fallacy fallacy on your part throughout all your posts.
You have failed to address the fact that your argument is complete nonsense and flies in the face of the math.

Attempt to force negative proof fallacy. I don't have to prove anything. YOU have to show you are using unbiased raw data, publish that data, and show your work.

 

[Into the Night]

I wonder why casino's don't allow card counters if there is way to predict with probability math.

They do. It is perfectly legal to count cards in a casino. You are not allowed to use any aiding device (though most folks that count cards move chips around to mark the count, again perfectly legal).

Indeed, many casinos WELCOME card counters. They believe they have a system to beat the casino. They are bullheaded enough to keep playing even when they are losing. Casinos LOVE system players.

 

[Into the Night]

You really needed to say such bull sh*t since it is your kind that are causing others to die, and covid is not the only way you are doing so. One can only hope Karma will catch up to you.

Covid19 doesn't kill.
The pneumonia it can induce certainly can. Watch for it and get it treated early if it shows.

 

[Into the Night]

what it shows is that they don't believe their own bullshit.

Lefty can't keep track of the context of any conversation. He often throws random stuff out like this to troll.

 

[Into the Night]

So, 121 F degrees in Canada is normal!?

It has never been 121 deg F anywhere in Canada (other than in a furnace).