Poll - who has won the global warming bet

[Moviefan-2]

No, you keep trying to claim the bet needs to be 'adjusted' from the number we bet on, 0.83ºC.

Nonsense.

When we made the bet in May, NASA's reported anomaly for 2014 was 0.68ºC. We bet on whether it would finish at 0.83ºC by the end of 2015 -- a minimum increase of 0.15ºC.

That 0.15ºC has not been "adjusted." It's the same number from the original bet, and it needs no adjusting, as NASA's "updated" anomalies for the current years have all been "updated" in the same way.

The 0.15ºC increase saves everyone the trouble of looking at the graphs and trying to understand the adjustments. It is a clean, 100% legitimate number -- and clearly greater than NASA's reported increase of 0.13ºC.

The only reason Frankfooter doesn't like it is that it explicitly shows -- even to those who aren't strong in math (such as Frankfooter) -- that Frankfooter lost the bet.

--

To expand on my post from this morning, let's examine the results from all the various angles.

-- Using the pre-adjusted graph and the 1995 anomaly as the starting point: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=5429544&viewfull=1#post5429544
The result: Frankfooter lost.

-- Using the pre-adjusted graph and the 2014 anomaly as the starting point: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=5429544&viewfull=1#post5429544
The result: Frankfooter lost.

- Using the adjusted graph and the 1995 anomaly as the starting point: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5456581&viewfull=1#post5456581
The result: Frankfooter lost.

- Using the adjusted graph and the 2014 anomaly as the starting point: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5455248&viewfull=1#post5455248
The result: Frankfooter lost.

- Using the year-over-year increase from the original bet and comparing it with the reported increase in NASA's news release: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5456182&viewfull=1#post5456182
The result: Frankfooter lost.

Every analysis produces the same result.

Frankfooter lost.

The matter is settled.

:closed_2:

 

[Frankfooter]

Nonsense.

When we made the bet in May, NASA's reported anomaly for 2014 was 0.68ºC. We bet on whether it would finish at 0.83ºC by the end of 2015 -- a minimum increase of 0.15ºC.

Irrelevant.
As you stated, it was 'an example', it wasn't the bet.

For example, your NASA chart that shows 1995 at 0.43 degrees Celsius put 2014 at 0.68 degrees in 2014: http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

If that's the chart you're saying will hit 0.83 at the end of 2015, we definitely have a bet.

That 0.15ºC has not been "adjusted." It's the same number from the original bet, and it needs no adjusting, as NASA's "updated" anomalies for the current years have all been "updated" in the same way.

Irrelevant.
The bet was made on a decadal projection based on the period 1995-2015.
Your claim it was a year over year bet on 0.15ºC is both wrong and directly contradicted by this statement:

The bet was based on the IPCC's predictions of temperature increases of 0.2ºC per decade

The 0.15ºC increase saves everyone the trouble of looking at the graphs and trying to understand the adjustments. It is a clean, 100% legitimate number -- and clearly greater than NASA's reported increase of 0.13ºC.

Clean?
Bullshit, if you want clean read the bet and look at the chart you chose for the bet.
Adding in your 'denier math' figure of 0.15ºC is totally irrelevant to this bet and anything but 'clean'.

The bet was on whether the global temperature anomaly, as published by NASA, would hit 0.83ºC, as published on the chart available at this address:
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

To expand on my post from this morning, let's examine the results from all the various angles.

-- Using the pre-adjusted graph and the 1995 anomaly as the starting point: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=5429544&viewfull=1#post5429544
The result: Frankfooter lost.

As noted, trying to claim the bet needs 'adjusting' or 'pre-adjusting' means you are trying to weasel out of keeping your word.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5458647&viewfull=1#post5458647

-- Using the pre-adjusted graph and the 2014 anomaly as the starting point: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...obal-warming&p=5429544&viewfull=1#post5429544
The result: Frankfooter lost.

As noted, trying to claim the bet needs 'adjusting' or 'pre-adjusting' means you are trying to weasel out of keeping your word.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5458647&viewfull=1#post5458647

- Using the adjusted graph and the 1995 anomaly as the starting point: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5456581&viewfull=1#post5456581
The result: Frankfooter lost.

As noted, trying to claim the bet needs 'adjusting' or 'pre-adjusting' means you are trying to weasel out of keeping your word.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5458647&viewfull=1#post5458647

- Using the adjusted graph and the 2014 anomaly as the starting point: https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5455248&viewfull=1#post5455248
The result: Frankfooter lost.

As noted, trying to claim the bet needs 'adjusting' or 'pre-adjusting' means you are trying to weasel out of keeping your word.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5458647&viewfull=1#post5458647

Every analysis produces the same result.

Every attempt you make is based off the same weaselling.
Each one requires you to 'adjust' a bet you stated that was continuing on its original terms after the changes at NASA.

You said you would continue the bet on its original terms.
Keep your word, weasel.

The bet was on whether the global temperature anomaly, as published by NASA, would hit 0.83ºC, as published on the chart available at this address:
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/
That chart reads 0.87ºC.

You lost the bet, weasel.

 

[Frankfooter]

Lets keep it simple.

The bet:

http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

If that's the chart you're saying will hit 0.83 at the end of 2015, we definitely have a bet.

Click on the link above.
It now reads 0.87ºC.

Moviefan lost the bet.

 

[Frankfooter]

Sorry to keep this thread going, folks.
But moviefan has run out of excuses, its time for him pay up as loser of the bet.

Everything he's been trying to argue lately falls under one massive fail:
Moviefan is trying to weasel out of the bet, just as he is trying to weasel out of keeping his word that he would continue the bet without any 'adjustments'.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5458647&viewfull=1#post5458647

Its time for moviefan to admit he lost and pay up.

As loser he 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

 

[PornAddict]

Sorry to keep this thread going, folks.
But moviefan has run out of excuses, its time for him pay up as loser of the bet.

Everything he's been trying to argue lately falls under one massive fail:
Moviefan is trying to weasel out of the bet, just as he is trying to weasel out of keeping his word that he would continue the bet without any 'adjustments'.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5458647&viewfull=1#post5458647

Its time for moviefan to admit he lost and pay up.

As loser he 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

Frankfooter you lost the bet! It time for you to pay up the bet to moviefan!!! Even the people who vote on this pol on this thread said you lost the bet to moviefan.

 

[rubbertugger]

No fucking way.

 

[K Douglas]

I kept my word.

In the original thread about the outcome of the bet, I fulfilled my obligations by providing the names of the two books that Frankfooter is to review as the loser of the bet. Here they are again:

- A Disgrace to the Profession, by Mark Steyn
- Climate Change: The Facts, edited by Alan Moran.

The reality is this:

-- You can use NASA's original pre-adjusted graph.

-- You can use NASA's "updated" graph with the new data.

-- You can use the calculations from 1995 as your starting point.

-- You can use 2014 as your starting point.

-- You can avoid all of the data on the graphs and simply compare NASA's reported year-over-year increase with the terms of the original bet.

It doesn't make any difference. No matter how you calculate it, you always get the exact same result:

Frankfooter lost.

I read Climate Change: The Facts. A bit too technical at some points but man it paints a really true picture of just how deep this fraud is. I've ordered Steyn's A Disgrace to the Profession just haven't had a chance to read it yet. Still finishing off one of his other books. He's my favorite author.

 

[Frankfooter]

Frankfooter you lost the bet! It time for you to pay up the bet to moviefan!!! Even the people who vote on this pol on this thread said you lost the bet to moviefan.

Another denier that can't face facts, look its really quite simple:

The bet:

So in order to win the bet, all the temperature has to do is hit 0.83ºC anomaly for the year of 2015, correct?

http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

If that's the chart you're saying will hit 0.83 at the end of 2015, we definitely have a bet.

Click on the link above.
It now reads 0.87ºC.

Moviefan lost the bet.
As loser he 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

 

[rubbertugger]

Is that link showing me that as the earth became more populated and more people and animals farted it got warmer?

 

[Frankfooter]

Is that link showing me that as the earth became more populated and more people and animals farted it got warmer?

Most of the hot air has been attributed to Trump, moviefan and his friends.

But I see that your theory holds about as much water as moviefan's claim that the warming is 'natural'.

Odds of moviefan being correct in his claim that all climate change we are experiencing is natural, as he likes to say.
0.01%
http://www.theguardian.com/environme...e-change-study

 

[basketcase]

Poll: Who has won the "who has won the global warming" thread?

 

[Frankfooter]

Poll: Who has won the "who has won the global warming" thread?

Great, shall we have a poll to see whether 0.87 is higher then 0.83?
Seems that's the way deniers like to do their math, or perhaps we need to get the debate posted on wattsupwiththat.com, they believe everything they read there and nothing from anywhere else.


But the one thing I know for sure, is that moviefan has deserted this debate since he's been exposed as trying to pull the same weasel tactics he tried to pull in June.
The man has no honour, he lost and its time for him to pay up.

 

[Frankfooter]

Moviefan is still trying to weasel out of the bet.
He is now too ashamed to post here, so is hiding in other threads posting the same attempts to weasel out of honouring his word.

https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?550100-The-End-is-Near&p=5461526&viewfull=1#post5461526

For the record:
Here's a post that explains, with links to the original posts, how moviefan tried to weasel out of the bet the first time.
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...-warming-bet&p=5458647&viewfull=1#post5458647

Moviefan tries to weasel out of the bet the second time:
https://terb.cc/vbulletin/showthrea...e-bet-on-global-warming&p=5429544#post5429544

 

[AK-47]

Give it up, you guys

Jeezus

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

I'm still on the fence whether GW is real or not, but if you think these Toronto temps are normal for November, you better think again:

https://www.theweathernetwork.com/ca/14-day-weather-trend/ontario/toronto