★ Have you made up your mind on climate change, yet?
- Thread starter Ceiling Cat
- Start date
Hmm. I wonder what books Crybaby Frankfooter read that led to these brilliant observations (updated):
- Nov. 10, 2015 -- He calculated that the "pre-industrial age" refers to the year 1990: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...armer-Planet&p=5394609&viewfull=1#post5394609. He repeated that claim on Nov. 21: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...ing-Point%92&p=5404144&viewfull=1#post5404144
- Nov. 21, 2015 -- He claimed it was "conspiracy thread business" to assert that NASA's pre-adjusted data (which ran to the end of May) showed there wasn't a single month in 2015 that was a record breaker: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-HottestYear&p=5403467&viewfull=1#post5403467. He spent an entire weekend making that argument until he was finally forced to concede that I was right.
- Nov. 27, 2015 -- This is still one of my favourites. He posted a graph that he said shows the "IPCC's projection" for 2015: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-HottestYear&p=5410384&viewfull=1#post5410384. Then, after it was explained to him that the graph shows the IPCC's predictions have been spectacularly wrong, he said it was "not an IPCC projection" and ran away from his own graph: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-HottestYear&p=5416739&viewfull=1#post5416739
- Nov. 29, 2015 -- He said NASA and NOAA don't use sea surface temperatures in their calculations of the global temperature anomalies: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...imate-Change&p=5411862&viewfull=1#post5411862. Actually, they do.
- Dec. 1, 2015 -- Another classic. He said the ninth month of the year is "March": https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-HottestYear&p=5414060&viewfull=1#post5414060
- Dec. 5, 2015 -- He posted what he said is a Met Office graph that shows updated HadCRUT4 data: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-HottestYear&p=5416886&viewfull=1#post5416886. In fact, the graph came from Columbia University and uses the entirely different NASA data.
- Jan. 8, 2016 -- He said NASA has "never altered any data, all they did was alter the weighting of ocean temperature readings....": https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5443355&viewfull=1#post5443355
- Jan. 10, 2016 -- He said I was "lying" when I said that a temperature change from 0.68ºC to 0.83ºC is an increase of 0.15ºC: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5445053&viewfull=1#post5445053
- Feb. 3, 2016 -- He said the calculation that the average of 0.75 + 0.82 + 0.84 + 0.71 + 0.71 is 0.766 is "denier math": https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?550100-The-End-is-Near&p=5466417&viewfull=1#post5466417
- Feb. 4, 2016 -- He called it "lying your face off" when I said the difference between 0.43 and 0.68 is 0.25: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?550100-The-End-is-Near&p=5466781&viewfull=1#post5466781
- Feb. 8, 2016 -- A new gem. He said the graphs on NASA's Vital Signs of the Planet page were "fake": https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...e-change-yet&p=5470561&viewfull=1#post5470561
- Feb. 11, 2016 -- He dismissed NASA GISS director Gavin Schmidt's graph of temperature anomalies as "dodgy": https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...e-change-yet&p=5472913&viewfull=1#post5472913
- Feb. 11, 2016 -- He said NASA GISS director Gavin Schmidt's Twitter account isn't "legit": https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...e-change-yet&p=5472991&viewfull=1#post5472991
Last edited:
Dodgy when it comes from you, of course, weasel.https://twitter.com/ClimateOfGavin/media
LMFAO! :biggrin1:
("Another dodgy denier site"? You just know this one's going to make it into the next update of Crybaby Frankfooter's greatest hits. :thumb
When you have a link showing it comes from Schmidt, then it passes as legit.
Some day you'll learn.
By the way, I note that chart also shows that present temperature are right on the money for the IPCC projections.
As we bet.
More stupid accusations, I'd deal with them all but its so boring.
So lets look at the first one and assume its just like everything else you post, nonsense.
That accusation, wrong as it was, was debunked two months ago.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...ing-Point%92&p=5404282&viewfull=1#post5404282
Its safe to assume that every other 'accusation' is the same nonsense.
But as usual, you just keep spouting the same crap even after its been shown wrong.
Last chance for this offer:
Admit you lost the bet and I'll let you off the hook for buying and reviewing the two books that you can't understand anyways.
You have until 9am tomorrow, otherwise I'm going to continue to hound your every post until you review books (not that you ever review SP's here....)
Admit you lost the bet and I'll let you off the hook for buying and reviewing the two books that you can't understand anyways.
You have until 9am tomorrow, otherwise I'm going to continue to hound your every post until you review books (not that you ever review SP's here....)
Both of you and the general topic itself make me sad for humanity.
Making up your mind means you don't change it when facts change - keep an open mind, folks.
Making up your mind means you don't change it when facts change - keep an open mind, folks.
Yes, that is a legit link and is acceptable.
This link which you used in the image posted above, where you downloaded a screenshot with the opportunity of 'adjusting' the image, is not.
That image is correctly identified as coming from a 'denier site', you, and therefore is suspect.
http://i567.photobucket.com/albums/ss115/dvdfan05/nasa-1_zpsjrylsgn8.png
The legit image shows that the IPCC projections we bet on are quite accurate, sadly.
Yet more proof you lost the bet.
I've been consistent here, I support the work and findings of the IPCC that we are in the midst of anthropogenic climate change.
Moviefan, the denier, continues to use misdirection, faked charts, quotes out of context and other weasel words to admit he is wrong.
Here's an example of the five types of dishonesty moviefan continues to use.
Five stages of denial
I’ve been reading a bit about denialism, in the context of the epic and ridiculous climate change bet threads that have taken way too much space on this board (yes, this is another one and yes, I am guilty of keeping it alive, but hopefully this one will be the end of it). Wiki, for instance has a good page on denialism where they talk about AIDS deniers, climate change deniers, Holocaust deniers and evolution deniers and the similar tactics they use to justify their denials in the face of reality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism#Climate_change
So its time to analyze the stages of denialism, as shown through the climate change bet threads.
First, the bet was a very simple bet, a bet on whether NASA’s global anomaly for 2015 would be 0.83ºC.
May 11, 2015
What could possibly go wrong?
Stage 1 - The Conspiracy Theory
June 17, 2015
Moviefan learns that the year is an El Nino year, starts worrying, then learns that NASA has updated their charts, something they do quite regularly, this time it works in my favour but as NASA notes in the FAQ, it happens and sometimes temps go up and sometimes down.
http://climate.nasa.gov/faq/
Moviefan then accuses NASA and NOAA of fraud, runs the numbers through the rigorous denier math model and tries to have the bet changed to 0.86ºC instead of the agreed upon 0.83ºC.
Stage 2 - temporary acceptance
June 17, 2015
Moviefan is accused of trying to weasel out of the agreed bet by changing the terms, finally agrees to continue the bet on its original terms.
Stage 3 - NASA’s numbers hit 0.84ºC, Moviefan breaks his word.
Dec 20, 2015
NASA’s published numbers hit 0.84ºC for year, movefan comes up with a super convoluted attempt to go back on his word that he would honour the bet as it stood.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=5429544&viewfull=1#post5429544
He tries to argue that instead of using the live and continually updated chart we bet on, we should use only the first 5 months of the year and only use old numbers he copied from some denier site. This is his first attempt to break his word. He tried to cherry pick only old data that only included half of the year.
Stage 4 - False Experts
Dec 22, 2015
Moviefan refers to a TERB poll to decide whether whether he won the bet. The bet was based off NASA’s published 2015 global anomaly, taking a poll is irrelevant as a final decision is irrelevant when you can just click on the link to the chart that Moviefan chose and read the number NASA published. This was his second attempt to break his word that he would honour the terms of the original bet.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5461425&viewfull=1#post5461425
Stage 5 - Moving the Goal Posts
Jan 23, 2016
NASA comes out with the final number for 2015, 0.87ºC. Moviefan runs the numbers through his denier math filter and comes out with a third different number, 0.89, since his old 'adjusted' numbers lose as well. This time he gets his new numbers by moving the goal posts. He took a bet on the change between 1995-2015 and argued that the final number should also include his interpretation of 2014’s numbers as well. This is moviefan’s third attempt to break his promise to honour the bet, and his third attempt at the math with his third different number.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=5455248#post5455248
Three different attempts at 'adjusting', 'moving the goal posts' or cheating the bet.
Each one a weasel move.
Last edited:
LMFAO! :biggrin1:
Once again, let me show you how easy the bet is, and why your denier math is irrelevant nonsense.
The bet is very easy, read the number you bet on, wait until the NASA chart is updated, click on the link and read the number.
Click on the link in the bet above to see who won the bet as the NASA chart now has 2015's numbers!
0.87ºC
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/t
You lost the bet.
Time to pay up.
Stop being a weasel.
You lost the bet.
As loser you must buy these two books, read them and review them here:
http://www.amazon.ca/The-Hockey-Stick-Climate-Wars/dp/0231152558
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/05...=as2&tag=grlasbl0a-20&linkId=F7NQQFQ4THAO2JDE
Lets look at your quotes:
A statement and most definitely not a bet.
A statement from NASA, also irrelevant to the bet.
Another screenshot from your photobucket account, also irrelevant to the bet.
Here's what you've been denying.
The only statements that actually declares it is the bet are these ones:
Those are all statements that clearly state what the bet was.
None of your quotes have anything to do with the bet, that's just your denialism showing.
Look terbites voted that you lost to moviefan! Give it up and honour your bet! The 97% consensus on terb say you lost! The debate is over!!!
Hey dude, I don't care that you think 0.83ºC is higher then 0.87ºC and voiced it in a vote.
The bet was made on NASA's numbers, not your poor math skills.
Are you going to take a vote on what you think the score was on the last Leafs game as well?
It would be just as useful.
Which numbers are you trying to pass this time?
:Eek:
Are you claiming the bet should be retroactively changed to 0.68, 0.74, 0.86 or 0.89?
Your moving goal posts are hard to keep track of, they change so often, weasel.
We could start with your description of the bet, which of course disagrees with your statement above:
Whoops, that makes you a liar in the post above.
How about this one?
Whoops, that again confirms the bet was made on 0.83ºC.
That post calls you a liar as well.
And this one?
Yup, there is no reason to 'move the goal posts' to 2014 on a decadal bet on the 1995-2015 period.
Another post that calls yourself a liar above.
And the big one, how about we look at the bet:
The bet just says read the NASA chart and if its higher then 0.83ºC you lose.
Another quote that's calling you a liar.
And how about this post, where you promised to hold the bet to those very same terms AFTER we discussed any NASA changes the first time?
Yup, trying to alter a bet that you agreed to continue 'as it stands' is yet another quote that calls your above post a lie.
You are such a weasel that you called yourself a liar multiple times.
Just give it up, admit you lost the bet, go and buy the books.
