That's CMIP3, idiot. The IPCC's current projections were based on CMIP5.
Learn to read.
★ Have you made up your mind on climate change, yet?
- Thread starter Ceiling Cat
- Start date
Learn to read.
That's hilarious coming from a guy who posts a graph of HadCRUT4 data that showed a 0.71ºC anomaly at the end of November (https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-HottestYear&p=5410384&viewfull=1#post5410384), and a NASA graph that showed a 0.84ºC anomaly for the end of November (https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=5429576&viewfull=1#post5429576).
And he now says he wants me to "prove" that 0.71ºC and 0.84ºC are two different numbers.
Unbelievable. :biggrin1:
Only a denier would quote wattsupwiththat and then claim that they are upset with the 'bastardization of science' by people with a political agenda.
That is really idiotic.
You can't tell bullshit from legit.
You keep claiming that the IPCC projections aren't accurate.
I show you an earlier IPCC projection, from 2003, that is very accurate and now you are trying to claim it doesn't count.
You've been shown wrong, show some class and admit it.
The IPCC is accurate, you not so much.
You posted two charts that proved you wrong, and you didn't even notice, instead you think they prove you correct.
Only a denier of reality and science could look at this chart and claim that the models aren't following reality very well.
So, which was it Franky? Was the anomaly at the end of November 0.71ºC or 0.84ºC?
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-HottestYear&p=5410384&viewfull=1#post5410384
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=5429576&viewfull=1#post5429576
We've been using NASA numbers for the bet you lost.
Those had the 2015 anomaly at 0.84ºC after November's numbers, with the final number 0.87ºC.
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/t
That's why you lost the bet, weasel.
Coward. I didn't ask you about the bet.
I asked you about your claim that HadCRUT4 and NASA use the same baselines.
Are you saying the Hotwhopper graph you posted was completely wrong? And, for that matter, that the Met Office's own graphs are completely wrong?
Or are you saying that NASA's graphs are completely wrong?
Was the anomaly at the end of November 0.72ºC or 0.84ºC?
(I updated the HadCRUT number for you, since HadCRUT reports a month late).
Answer the question.
No you didn't, this is what you asked.
As you know from the bet you lost and are acting like a weasel about, NASA stated the anomaly was 0.84ºC with November's data and 0.87ºC for 2015 as the final, bet losing, number.
You are just being a weasel again.
As for the charts that show you are 'spectacularly wrong' and the IPCC's projections really quite good, lets look at those again.
Here is the most up to date chart.
Its from this study.
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep19831
You lost the bet, can't tell bullshit from legit science and are generally a weasel who is worse then fuji for never admitting he's ever wrong.
The final HadCRUT4 anomaly for 2015 was reported as 0.745ºC.
https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4.pdf
The Earth only has one temperature. Since you insist that NASA and the Met Office use the same baselines, are you saying the Met Office has it completely wrong?
Answer the question.
You are an idiot.
That chart from hotwhopper that you posted included adjusted baselines for HadCRUT4 and CIMT5.
NASA's numbers are incredibly close to the MET, as well as incredibly close to NOAA's numbers, when you adjust for the different baselines.
For proof, go to this site:
http://www.moyhu.blogspot.com.au/p/climate-plotter.html
There anybody with half a brain (sorry fast) could compare the different numbers with different baselines.
And once again, we have been using NASA's numbers as our baseline, for yours and simplicities sake.
They show that the 2015 anomaly was 0.87ºC and that you lost the bet.
Actually, I'll make this easier for you, Crybaby Frankfooter.
Yes or no: Are 0.87 and 0.745 different numbers?
All we need is a yes or no answer.
Yes or no: Are 0.87 and 0.745 different numbers?
All we need is a yes or no answer.
Moviefan 'whoops' #3:
We found high levels of expert consensus on human-caused climate change.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...ing-Point%92&p=5254725&viewfull=1#post5254725
Just as he claims the same thing then states studies backing the consensus claim on NASA and AAAS are 'propaganda'.
Which is based entirely on his not being able to read, as he claimed a study backed him up on this point despite the findings of the authors saying:
We found high levels of expert consensus on human-caused climate change.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...ing-Point%92&p=5254725&viewfull=1#post5254725
Just as he claims the same thing then states studies backing the consensus claim on NASA and AAAS are 'propaganda'.
LMFAO! Look at the little coward trying to change the subject because he got caught not knowing how to read graphs.
I have a better idea. Let's stay on subject.
Yes or no.
I have a better idea. Let's stay on subject.
When NASA's data is adjusted so that it has a similar baseline to the Met Office, does its anomaly for 2015 come close to the HadCRUT4 anomaly of 0.745ºC?
Yes or no.
Proving that you have no idea what baseline is used before you made any accusations.
As usual, you don't know what you are talking about.
Just as you call these results 'spectacularly inaccurate'.
You can't tell legit science from bullshit.
What baseline is used for NASA?
What baseline is used for the MET?
Answer those questions before you try to compare data.
You don't understand the basic point of baselines, which is why you keep making these really stupid mistakes.
Lets remember, that moviefan can't keep his lies straight.
Moviefan accuses himself of lying:
Moviefan accuses himself of lying:
You disputed it, as did I:
Little coward, don't try to change the subject or get me to do your homework for you.
Don't you have "half a brain"?
Yes or no.
Don't you have "half a brain"?
When NASA's data is adjusted so that it has a similar baseline to the Met Office, does its anomaly for 2015 come close to the HadCRUT4 anomaly of 0.745ºC?
Yes or no.
You are really, really stupid.
You can't answer the questions I asked, which you need to know before you can answer your question, and you can't answer this one either:
What temperature does the MET show when you adjust it to the same baseline as NASA?
And you still can't answer these questions:
What baseline is used for NASA?
What baseline is used for the MET?
Little coward, don't try to get me to do your homework for you.
Don't you have "half a brain"?
Yes or no.
Don't you have "half a brain"?
When NASA's data is adjusted so that it has a similar baseline to the Met Office, does its anomaly for 2015 come close to the HadCRUT4 anomaly of 0.745ºC?
Yes or no.
