50 years of failed eco predictions

You are talking about surface temperatures, dumbass. You are also ignoring heat by conductivity and convection.
Show where I got my math wrong.. Oh, that's right. You are simply making up a straw man so you can pretend you know more than you do.

You did. You are a liar. False equivalence fallacy. Mockery.
Did not. Fallacy fallacy on your part.
I did address your statement. Liar. Mockery.
No, you didn't. You simply created a straw man. Mockery was a valid response to your sorry statement.
False equivalence fallacy. You cannot compare two systems as the same system.
fallacy fallacy.
Paradox. You are being irrational. You cannot argue both sides of a paradox.
Straw man fallacy

WRONG. It takes energy to emit light. Conversion of thermal energy to electromagnetic energy COOLS the radiating surface.
Your statement is a violation of the S-B law. All mass must radiate if it has a temperature above absolute zero. The only question is whether it's radiation is cancelled out by the energy it is receiving. See S-B law for calculating radiation between 2 objects.
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.
Not at all. I am simply applying S-B law. S-B law states that the radiation of an object is the difference between what it is receiving and what it is radiating. According to S-B law even though the surface is warmer the surface is not radiating as much energy since it is receiving more. This is some pretty simple stuff that you are getting wrong.

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.
So you have no evidence that statistics can only be used if the numbers are published. OK. Thanks for proving you are an idiot when you resort to claiming everyone uses statistics wrong but you.

Sucks to be them. They are often functionally illiterate, thanks to the lousy schools.
Math is not reading. It seems you are the one that is the result of a lousy school.
You can't show your work unless you also show the data.
OK. Show your data.

Already did. RQAA.
Ipse dixit. No evidence that you did what you now claim you did.

Nah. You just like to mock people.
Mockery seems to fit your level of intelligence.
RQAA. You are attempting to use statistical math improperly to predict future global temperature.
I have not attempted to predict anything. Strawman argument on your part.

It is insufficient. RQAA. Pivot fallacy.
fallacy fallacy

There is no work involved. Pivot fallacy.
fallacy fallacy

I have read the method of data collection. It is a biased method. Margin of error has nothing to do with data.
Quality of data has nothing to do with your claim that they didn't cite any margin of error. A margin of error was cited in the paper. You claimed there was no margin of error. Now you are simply trying to pretend you didn't say what you did.

Your own statements indicate you illiteracy in mathematics, particularly statistical math and probability math.
I think that statement speaks volumes about your level of education on most subjects. (I wonder if you will understand my mockery.)
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.
Now you are just being a complete moron. On one hand you demand you be shown the work and then you dismiss the work (without reading it) because it contains everything you asked for. The paper contains the math and includes the margin of error.

Margin of error is not a list. Redefinition fallacy (list<->margin of error).
I never said Margin of error was a list. Strawman argument. Fallacy fallacy.

RQAA. Time is a significant biasing factor. It must be removed. All temperatures must be read at the same time by the same authority.
Repeating your false claim doesn't make it true. It only proves you haven't read any of the work since you don't even know what data is being used or how it was obtained.

Buzzword fallacy. Mockery. A fact is not a proof nor a Universal Truth. Learn English.
fallacy fallacy. A feeble attempt at mockery.
Biased data collection methods. RQAA.
Repeating your ipse dixit still doesn't make it true. It only proves you have no idea of the data or math used in Hansen's paper.

Already did. RQAA.
Ipse dixit

They are when you make them up. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. Argument from randU fallacy.
Strawman fallacy. No attempt was made to measure the actual temperature of the earth in the paper. You are not aware of the data or the math used in Hansen's 1987 paper.

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.
Strawman fallacy. Denial of the data and the math published by Hansen in 1987.

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.
I already pointed you in the direction of the published data and work and you have simply denied it. Show where the work is wrong or admit you are simply talking out of your ass.
 
https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-pr

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.

I don't respond to ignorant threads like this. I will respond to a post from time to time depending on the ideology behind it, or how bored I am. In the OT it is predicted that the world will end, and certain signs were given to predict when that would happen. We are seeing many of those signs in the current news (wars, sickness, lack of morality, etc.) Reagan predicted that trickle down economics would benefit the country,. and the middle class. It did'nt. trump predicted his tax cuts for the wealthy would benefit the middle class. It didn't. Then too, he, and his toadies, last March predicted that the covid virus would end shortly, and it is still here. But you are not interested in the failed predictions of the right wing. Only those of opportunists like Gore. But the trump cult is not in your vision of what is happening.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/7/26/2042033/-Republican-Doomsday-Predictions-Are-Always-Wrong
 
Last edited:
Look fool, "everyone is free to wear a mask", yet asswipes like you will continue to say masks don't work,
They don't. Masks are completely ineffective against a virus.
spread your lies, and people die.
No lie. See the N95 specification. Also, no one gets out this life alive.
That is the end you seem to prefer. What you cannot seem to grasp, or even have the ability to do so, or the compassion for others, is if you want to kill yourself, go for it. When it comes to killing others because of your lack of concern, then it needs to be mandated.
The lack of compassion is YOURS. You only care about your agenda and religion. You don't care about people at all.
If those procedures had been followed last year, instead of pandering to fools like you, just think of how many lives could have been saved.
Zero. Covid19 does not kill.
If the school wants to protect their students, and staff, who are you to deny them that right? So, it is you that is forcing your f**ked up will on them.
I am not forcing anything on anyone. If staff or students want to wear a mask, they can do so, even though they are completely useless.
One of the good things about the recent surge is that 99% of the cases are among the unvaccinated. Stupid is as stupid does, and it will catch up to them.
Made up number. Argument from randU fallacy.

Apparently you feel that your own mask doesn't work, so you demand everyone else wear an equally useless mask to protect you. Paradox M.
IMO, since beds in hospitals are coming up short, I think they should be reserved for the vaccinated, and people needing surgery, and fools like you can set in the hallway.
Unconstitutional and unsanitary.
 
Last edited:
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.

Yet with a four year atrocity at Putin's, in particular, lawlessly hacked in tRump un American gutter insurgency that waged war on the EPA but the idiots failed to realize their gutter policies affected the global eco system, and including Russia:

Trump has declared war on the EPA: 5 chilling examples

Trump threatened to virtually eliminate the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, leaving only “little tidbits.”

Scott Pruitt, Trump’s EPA administrator, has been tasked with the job of tearing down the agency from within. This is the man who sued the EPA 14 times – with strong financial backing from companies seeking to weaken clean air and clean water standards – when serving as Oklahoma’s Attorney General.

The president has used deception to reassure the general public that critical environmental laws will continue to protect public health, and is now taking our country in a dangerous direction.

Here are five ways he and Pruitt will go about weakening the agency responsible for keeping our air clean, drinking water safe, and toxic chemicals from harming our families.

1. Gut the EPAs budget

Deep budget cuts at the EPA are being proposed under the guise of fixing budget issues.

In reality, the agency accounts for a mere two-tenths of 1 percent of federal spending. Any claim that major budget issues can be dealt with on the back of such a small sliver of the budget is false.

Instead, the proposed budget cuts are a clear signal to a narrow group of special interests and supporters who share Trump’s disdain for the EPA because environmental regulations don’t serve their agenda.

2. Relax enforcement against illegal pollution

Leaked budget documents show that Trump has already directed the EPA to curtail pollution-monitoring and get states “to assume more active enforcement roles.” But this isn’t about states’ rights; it’s merely a convenient cover for gutting federal enforcement responsibility without any assurance that states will pick up the slack.

In fact, Pruitt took Oklahoma in the opposite direction as attorney general by shutting down the state’s environmental enforcement unit.

Meanwhile, delegating enforcement to states puts everyone at the mercy of neighboring states’ enforcement. Almost every state has communities that are downwind or downstream from polluters across state boundaries.

3. Roll back pollution standards

“The future ain’t what it used to be at the EPA,” Pruitt explained in a fiery speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington shortly after his contentious and narrow confirmation by the Senate. He went on to pledge he would “roll back the regulatory state.”

President Trump has already issued an executive order seeking to weaken Clean Water Act protections for American rivers and streams. With Pruitt now at his side, he is expected to next take aim at rolling back standards that reduce toxic emissions from cars and power plants.

Trump says he is slashing federal clean air and water standards to ease what he calls “job-crushing regulations.” Of course, increasing pollution does not grow the economy.

4. Use misinformation to justify political agenda

During his confirmation hearing, Pruitt ran away from his anti-environmental record and assured senators that he was “concerned” about pollution contributing to climate change, that mercury “should be regulated” and that ground-level ozone is “a dangerous pollutant.”

Once he had been confirmed as EPA administrator, his tone has changed back to his roots. Pruitt is already a ready partner to Trump when it comes to spreading misinformation and denying climate change.

Political interference in science will come in many forms, but the most dangerous may be an effort to permanently meddle with the EPA’s scientific capacity under the guise of “reforming” the scientific process. Such meddling is a top Trump transition goal, according to Myron Ebell, the head of Trump’s EPA transition team.

Ebell makes no bones about it: The objective, he’s said, is to permanently cripple the agency’s capacity to bounce back under future presidents." What a curse as a result of violating U.S. Constitutional law and the will of the 2016 majority voter at corrupting the electoral college in Russia's favor, in particular, in order to hack a POS tRump in there as a criminal against humanity, etc.

https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/03/15/trump-has-declared-war-epa-5-chilling-examples
 
Last edited:
Show where I got my math wrong..
Already did. RQAA.
...deleted mockery...
Your statement is a violation of the S-B law. All mass must radiate if it has a temperature above absolute zero. The only question is whether it's radiation is cancelled out by the energy it is receiving.
Radiation is not canceled out. Denial of the S-B law.
See S-B law for calculating radiation between 2 objects.
The S-B law does not calculate radiation between 2 objects. Denial of the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
Not at all. I am simply applying S-B law. S-B law states that the radiation of an object is the difference between what it is receiving and what it is radiating.
No, it doesn't. Denial of the Stefan-Boltzmann law.
According to S-B law even though the surface is warmer the surface is not radiating as much energy since it is receiving more.
Not possible. Denial of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
This is some pretty simple stuff that you are getting wrong.
Inversion fallacy.
So you have no evidence that statistics can only be used if the numbers are published. OK. Thanks for proving you are an idiot when you resort to claiming everyone uses statistics wrong but you.
Assumption of victory fallacy. Statistical math is not about evidence.
Math is not reading. It seems you are the one that is the result of a lousy school.
Random statement. Loss of context.
OK. Show your data.
Attempted forced of negative proof fallacy.
Ipse dixit. No evidence that you did what you now claim you did.
Attempted force of negative proof fallacy.
I have not attempted to predict anything.
Lie.
Quality of data has nothing to do with your claim that they didn't cite any margin of error.
Margin of error isn't a citation.
On one hand you demand you be shown the work and then you dismiss the work
You haven't done any work. YOU must show your work.
(without reading it) because it contains everything you asked for.
Lie.
The paper contains the math and includes the margin of error.
The math is YOURS to show. Margin of error is not a citation.
I never said Margin of error was a list.
Lie.
It only proves you haven't read any of the work since you don't even know what data is being used or how it was obtained.
Repeating your ipse dixit still doesn't make it true. It only proves you have no idea of the data or math used in Hansen's paper.
Irrelevant.
No attempt was made to measure the actual temperature of the earth in the paper.
The attempt was made by YOU, dumbass.
You are not aware of the data or the math used in Hansen's 1987 paper.
Irrelevant.
I already pointed you in the direction of the published data and work and you have simply denied it. Show where the work is wrong or admit you are simply talking out of your ass.
Lie. RQAA.
 
I don't respond to ignorant threads like this.
Than what's this response of yours????
I will respond to a post from time to time depending on the ideology behind it, or how bored I am. In the OT it is predicted that the world will end, and certain signs were given to predict when that would happen. We are seeing many of those signs in the current news (wars, sickness, lack of morality, etc.)
Well, that's your religion.
Reagan predicted that trickle down economics would benefit the country,. and the middle class. It did'nt.
It did.
trump predicted his tax cuts for the wealthy would benefit the middle class. It didn't.
The tax cuts were across the board. It worked. Trump is a proper noun, the name is capitalized. Learn English.
Then too, he, and his toadies, last March predicted that the covid virus would end shortly, and it is still here.
So it's still here. Big deal. This virus does not kill. It can induce pneumonia, like any SARS/Covid virus. Watch for that and get it treated if it shows. Pneumonia is nothing to mess around with.
...deleted non-English portion...
...deleted Holy Link...
 
Yet with a four year atrocity at Putin's,
Putin had a four year atrocity???
in particular, lawlessly hacked in tRump un American gutter insurgency
What insurgency??
that waged war on the EPA
The EPA is unconstitutional.
but the idiots failed to realize their gutter policies affected the global eco system, and including Russia:
Irrelevant. The EPA is unconstitutional.
Trump has declared war on the EPA: 5 chilling examples
Good. The EPA is unconstitutional.
Trump threatened to virtually eliminate the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, leaving only “little tidbits.”
He should have. The EPA is unconstitutional.
Here are five ways he and Pruitt will go about weakening the agency responsible for keeping our air clean, drinking water safe, and toxic chemicals from harming our families.
The EPA has cleaned no waterway, has not cleaned any air, and has not kept any drinking water safe.
1. Gut the EPAs budget
Good. The EPA is unconstitutional.
2. Relax enforcement against illegal pollution
Define 'pollution'.
3. Roll back pollution standards
Define 'pollution'.
4. Use misinformation to justify political agenda
...deleted Holy Link...

The only misinformation is coming from YOU and other Democrats.

The EPA is unconstitutional.
 
Into the Night Soil
200w.webp

Masks are completely ineffective against a virus.
Covid19 does not kill.

You ought to be handed over to folks that have lost their loved ones, you mendacious, attention-seeking coward.
 
I don't respond to ignorant threads like this. I will respond to a post from time to time depending on the ideology behind it, or how bored I am. In the OT it is predicted that the world will end, and certain signs were given to predict when that would happen. We are seeing many of those signs in the current news (wars, sickness, lack of morality, etc.) Reagan predicted that trickle down economics would benefit the country,. and the middle class. It did'nt. trump predicted his tax cuts for the wealthy would benefit the middle class. It didn't. Then too, he, and his toadies, last March predicted that the covid virus would end shortly, and it is still here. But you are not interested in the failed predictions of the right wing. Only those of opportunists like Gore. But the trump cult is not in your vision of what is happening.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/7/26/2042033/-Republican-Doomsday-Predictions-Are-Always-Wrong

wut. Its not the right or the left wing predicting it. Its science! Science predicted we will have a new ice age, british siberia, and multiple pacific islands sinking. We all know science is never wrong. How can you be so anti science?
 
Into the Night Soil


You ought to be handed over to folks that have lost their loved ones, you mendacious, attention-seeking coward.

No one has died from covid19. This virus in and of itself does not kill. It can induce pneumonia, like any covid/SARS series virus. Watch for it and treat it if it shows.
 
wut. Its not the right or the left wing predicting it. Its science! Science predicted we will have a new ice age, british siberia, and multiple pacific islands sinking. We all know science is never wrong. How can you be so anti science?

Science does not predict. It describes. No theory of science can predict anything unless it has been transcribed into a closed system, such as mathematics. Only closed functional systems have the power of prediction. It comes with the power of the proof.

Probability math and statistical math cannot predict due to the importation and use of random numbers across domains.
 
Back
Top