Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How modern global warming science took form
Pravda ^ | March 16, 2014 | By Gary Novak

Posted on 03/16/2014 6:33:06 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

The foundation publications for modern global warming science meet no criteria for valid science. Methodologies are not given, measurements are not made and evidence is not described. Instead, preposterous fantasies on atmospheric studies are glibly mentioned with self-contradictory blather. The studies consist of nothing but a desired end point with fictitious methods of deriving the result. --SNIP--

There is nothing but modeling in global warming analysis, the simple reason being that the complexities and randomness of the atmosphere are totally out of reach of the science that can be applied. Only modeling is obscure enough to evade accountability to outsiders and provide any desired result without criticism.

The problem is, such a standard is not science. Science has a purpose, which is to put an end to error and falsehood through verifiable procedures. Muddled procedures only promote the charlatanism which science attempts to correct.

(Excerpt) Read more at english.pravda.ru ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Russia
KEYWORDS: climategate; communism; globalwarming; hoax; socialism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last
Modern democrats in the USA are more communist than former USSR communists.
1 posted on 03/16/2014 6:33:06 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

No communist ever blew up a dam or shut down a major agricultural region for the sake of a lizard or a fish...


2 posted on 03/16/2014 6:41:29 AM PDT by varmintman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I’ve studied fluid mechanics, basic physics, statistical mechanics and meterology.

I wanted to see the equations and assumptions that go into a global warming model.

I can’t find them.

Can someone help me with this ?

I am open minded on the subject.

But I am suspicious when I can’t find equations.


3 posted on 03/16/2014 6:42:09 AM PDT by staytrue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: staytrue

But I am suspicious when I can’t find equations.


Mostly it is statistics, And statistics is NOT applicable in complex systems like weather and people. When they build a model it has very few variables in the model, that is why they get such extreme results.


4 posted on 03/16/2014 6:44:58 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
I am suspicious when I can’t find equations.

Tweaks don't need equations.

5 posted on 03/16/2014 6:48:38 AM PDT by Dan(9698)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

There is another post here today about the privatizing of American science. I am all for it.

Global warming only exists because of government funding. Period!

Tis a sad day when our media and officialdom have to be schooled by Pravda.


6 posted on 03/16/2014 6:50:54 AM PDT by A'elian' nation ("Political Correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes hatred." Jacques Barzun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A'elian' nation; All

Look closely at Agenda 21 and you may discover the real reason behind “climate change”.


7 posted on 03/16/2014 6:54:07 AM PDT by Halgr (Once a Marine, always a Marine - Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
Bring up and apply Planck's laws to a discussion with a warming advocate sometime. I haven't found one yet that even recognized the name.
8 posted on 03/16/2014 6:55:25 AM PDT by CrazyIvan (Obama phones= Bread and circuits.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Beginning with LBJ, the D’rats made a hard turn left and began adopting the Communist Goals as entered in the 1963 Congressional Record.

Today, most of those goals are formal planks of the D’rat Party.

2008: D’rats nominated Comrade Obamatollah
2008: CPUSA endorsed Comrade Obamatollah

2012: D’rats nominated Comrade Obamatollah
2012: CPUSA endorsed Comrade Obamatollah

Even an intellectual imbecile could connect those dots. Yet, at best, the “superior intellectuals” of the D’rats simply cannot grasp the reality they are communists.


9 posted on 03/16/2014 6:58:51 AM PDT by newfreep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Bump for later printing for my liberal art teacher neighbor.


10 posted on 03/16/2014 7:06:42 AM PDT by Senator_Blutarski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
We truly live in Bizarro times when Pravda tells the truth & the Western MSM spouts bold faced nonsense.

Is it any wonder Putin has such a low opinion of the West? I imagine that opinion is shared by China, Iran, NK, al-Qaeda, & all the rest.

The inept Obama/Clinton/Kerry foreign policy is getting increasingly dangerous for the ENTIRE world.

11 posted on 03/16/2014 7:13:18 AM PDT by Mister Da (The mark of a wise man is not what he knows, but what he knows he doesn't know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PeterPrinciple; staytrue

When they build a model it has very few variables in the model, that is why they get such extreme results.


No, they start with their desired result and work backwards. THAT’S why they get such extreme results.


12 posted on 03/16/2014 7:13:47 AM PDT by Rides_A_Red_Horse (Why do you need a fire extinguisher when you can call the fire department?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
The terms used are nothing but word salad.

Amen, brother.

13 posted on 03/16/2014 7:21:25 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (In the long run, we are all dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
When the met guys can forecast a month's worth of weather within +/- 1° and +/- .1" precip every hour, every day, every month, for a couple years running and nail it, then maybe we can talk long term.
14 posted on 03/16/2014 7:21:49 AM PDT by tomkat (3%+1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Senator_Blutarski

Liberal Arts teachers back charlatans out of a sense of professional courtesy.


15 posted on 03/16/2014 7:22:28 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (In the long run, we are all dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

These F’ers in Congress look at the 100 million plus that Gore skimmed using this false premise,and they want some for themselves.


16 posted on 03/16/2014 7:27:25 AM PDT by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: staytrue

You can find tampered data and biased procedures though. Global warming is a tampered thesis which gave Al Gore $100 the first 8 years out of office.


17 posted on 03/16/2014 7:28:21 AM PDT by mountainlion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

Buzzards don’t eat lawyers for the same reason.


18 posted on 03/16/2014 7:29:01 AM PDT by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Rides_A_Red_Horse

No, they start with their desired result and work backward
s. THAT’S why they get such extreme results.


No, I think even they are surprised when their simple model says the ocean level will rise 21 feet. But they have a number and it must be right, because their model is right which has maybe 5 variables accounted for in a system that has millions of variable.

Statistics is a useful tool, but they are not using it for the right purpose. At best, statistics gives you another question, it NEVER gives you an answer.

But yes, I understand what you are saying.


19 posted on 03/16/2014 7:29:30 AM PDT by PeterPrinciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: staytrue

As I seem to recall, the entire basis of the global warming hypothesis rests on the fact that CO2 has an unusually broad fluorescence absorption/emission band within the infrared portion of the spectrum. Where most fluorophores only absorb and emit within narrow 20 or 30 nm bands, CO2 has a very broad band of over 100 nm.

So there you go, something else to plug into the equations.


20 posted on 03/16/2014 7:29:59 AM PDT by exDemMom (Current visual of the hole the US continues to dig itself into: http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson