Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 15181 - 15200 of total 17219 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Nov 4, 2014 - 05:03pm PT
So did any deniers look at the code?
Or is it beyond your comprehension?

Rhetorical questions both.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Nov 4, 2014 - 05:21pm PT
What FORTRAN skills I learned in school mostly atrophied a long time ago. Nowadays I mostly use Stata, which has an internal language. The graphs I post here, for example, are each a small program.

To keep up with the Malemutes ... here's an ultra simple OLS routine (just calculates the b vector) I wrote as an example for one of my books:

*! 21jun2012
*! L. Hamilton, Statistics with Stata (2013)
program ols0
version 12.1
syntax varlist(min=1 numeric) [in] [if]
marksample touse
gen cons_ = 1
tokenize `varlist'
local lhs "`1'"
mac shift
local rhs "`*'"
mata: st_view(y=., ., "`lhs'", "`touse'")
mata: st_view(X=., ., (tokens("`rhs'"), "cons_"), "`touse'")
mata: b = invsym(X'X)*X'y
mata: b
drop cons_
end

Or a slightly nicer one that calculates coefficients along with their standard errors, t statistics and p values:

*! 21jun2012
*! L. Hamilton, Statistics with Stata (2013)
program ols2
version 12.1
syntax varlist(min=1 numeric) [in] [if]
marksample touse
gen cons_ = 1
tokenize `varlist'
local lhs "`1'"
mac shift
local rhs "`*'"
mata: st_view(y=., ., "`lhs'", "`touse'")
mata: st_view(X=., ., (tokens("`rhs'"), "cons_"), "`touse'")
mata: b = invsym(X'X)*X'y
mata: e = y - X*b
mata: n = rows(X)
mata: k = cols(X)
mata: s2 = (e'e)/(n-k)
mata: V = s2*invsym(X'X)
mata: se = sqrt(diagonal(V))
mata: t = b:/se
mata: Prt = 2*ttail(n-k, abs(b:/se))
mata: vnames_ = "Yvar: `lhs'", tokens("`rhs'"), "_cons"
mata: vnames_', ("Coef." \ strofreal(b)), /*
*/ ("Std. Err." \ strofreal(se)), /*
*/ ("t" \ strofreal(t)), ("P>|t|" \ strofreal(Prt))
drop cons_
end

Beyond OLS the programming gets harder. Wrote and tested a routine once to calculate robust regression via iteratively reweighted least squares, which eventually became part of Stata (now much cleaned up). That was the height of my programming ambitions, though.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Nov 4, 2014 - 05:25pm PT
http://www.thepiratescove.us/2014/11/04/if-all-you-see-1303/
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Nov 4, 2014 - 05:56pm PT
It's been a while since the Sea Level Research Group in Boulder updated their satellite-based time series, so those of us in the dark might have been wondering What's up with that? Well they finally did update just now and it seems the sea level is still rising, which is broadly consistent with independent estimates of ocean heat content (thermal expansion) and land ice attrition (more water).

wilbeer

Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
Nov 4, 2014 - 06:00pm PT
Yes,but ,look at that pause up in there.

Sorry .......LTFOL
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Nov 4, 2014 - 06:00pm PT
Here's a good example of a "scientist"'s hysteria over the expected ass-whuppin of the Democrats in today's election (although many of the elections will be close, so no rejoicing for at least a few hours).

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/11/04/republicans_and_the_midterms_global_warming_deniers_could_have_their_dreams.html
The scientist starts off weakly:
Today is the midterm election for the United States, where many seats in the House and Senate will be determined
In point of fact, every seat in the House will be determined. I suppose the "scientist"'s statement is technically true, but certainly misleading. Typical.

He then goes on something like a stream of consciousness rant--here's an example of his "logic":
Their [Republicans] lack of scientific qualifications hasn’t stopped them from trying to create medical legislation to control women’s bodies, or to try to make laws about agriculture, health care, and so many other science-based topics

How dare those Republican, non-scientist lawmakers make laws! (And they don't just "try to make laws," as the author writes--they actually do make laws.)
What an injustice! While he doesn't quite say it, the clear implication is that democracy itself is rather unscientific.
If things work out well, the "scientist" will have a good two years to ponder the error of his ways (when "many seats in the House" will again be determined), although I don't expect much meaningful introspection from this guy and his ilk.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 4, 2014 - 06:43pm PT
How dare those Republican, non-scientist lawmakers make laws!

He's talking about making laws about things of which they know nothing about.
But you knew that.


(And they don't just "try to make laws," as the author writes--they actually do make laws.)

Often they "try," and fail.
But you also knew that.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 4, 2014 - 08:20pm PT
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 4, 2014 - 11:50pm PT
"...general perfidy of Mann."

even if this statement were true it is irrelevant to the scientific results... which could have been and have been verified by many other studies, including Mann's own continued research.

If he had been wrong, it would have been apparent a while ago.

And yet it is still an issue in the popular press. Scientists in general don't trust themselves, and they don't trust any other scientists either... trust and belief are not what science is about... what being "trustworthy" has to do with science is a mystery to me.

If you publish sh#t, everyone notices it very quickly.

It would seem that many people who bring up this topic time and again, long after it has been settled, just don't want to accept the research support for the result.

Claiming that scientists haven't checked it is laughable. Not only that, but anyone here could too, in principle (and have). You don't need to be told by the OpEd page editor, or your favorite rabid blogs...
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Nov 5, 2014 - 09:03am PT
I think there was a little petition from Oregon Ed; something like 31, 000 + scientists that noticed and called bullshet on the CAGW industry.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Nov 5, 2014 - 09:16am PT
And The Chief ,maybe I shouldn't also mention that Senator Inhofe will now be in charge of overseeing climate/enviromental (including EPA) policy and funding in the U.S. senate. Was' nt this body the primary funder (billions and billions a year) of the CAGW INDUSTRY?
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Nov 5, 2014 - 10:08am PT
care to post a bit more about that "petition" rick

you really should book a flight back from Fantasy Island, dealing with reality isn't a horrifying as you imagine.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Nov 5, 2014 - 11:15am PT
And you Ed should book a flight to the northland cause your guy Begich is urgently in need of "missing" manufactured votes.

The Oregon petition has been posted many times, as you well know. Always, you folks reject the reality of the world of man and nature around you. One more time wont help.

I think there just might be a higher ratio of studies of natural climate change processes going forward. But, of course that's from a shrinking pie.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 5, 2014 - 11:59am PT
Yesterday's election results make this discussion that much more irrelevant.


I didn't realize physical laws were created by the US Congress. They must be smarter (and more powerful) than anybody gives them credit for.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Nov 5, 2014 - 12:11pm PT
The Oregon petition has been posted many times, as you well know.

Is there one actual skeptic in the house, or just fake ones? Who has looked into what the Oregon petition really was, and wasn't? That's been posted many times here too.
Gnome Ofthe Diabase

climber
Out Of Bed
Nov 5, 2014 - 12:11pm PT
Temperature & climate control
Over Population & global warming
School shootings & armed population
Is this Civilization??
Is this positive growth??
And
Where do we go from here?
Still looking for that blue jeaned’ Dancin’ queen,
Prettiest girl you’ve ever seen, see her shape on
The movie screen,
Jimmy dean
James Dean.
ROCK ON
wilbeer

Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
Nov 5, 2014 - 02:48pm PT
You have 2 years ,and,It will be held against you.

Let us see what you will do.
wilbeer

Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
Nov 5, 2014 - 03:12pm PT
If Temps remain flat and Arctic Sea Ice Volume continues on the upswing for that period, your People will have to start dancing to a completely different tune.


Big "IF".

When they do not,you will still DENY.
wilbeer

Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
Nov 5, 2014 - 03:34pm PT
Denier.
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Nov 5, 2014 - 04:40pm PT
97%

http://skepticalscience.com/97-percent-consensus-robust.htm

http://dels.nas.edu/resources/static-assets/exec-office-other/climate-change-full.pdf

Messages 15181 - 15200 of total 17219 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta