Fun Stuff > CHATTER
Weather Channel founder wants to sue Al Gore
jhocking:
--- Quote from: Anyways on 17 Aug 2008, 09:27 ---The episode where they get people to sign a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide is particularily great.
--- End quote ---
oo which episode is that? Back in chem lab we used to have a poster warning about the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide.
--- Quote from: ephemere on 17 Aug 2008, 16:05 ---it is a pretty silly and inaccurate show intended to be humorous
--- End quote ---
All the sequences of Penn and Teller manhandling nude models gave it away.
Chesire Cat:
Lets talk about the environment!
dennis:
--- Quote from: Leonidas on 14 Aug 2008, 08:15 ---
But Jimmy, that's the point. We're not!
If anything the raise (and cooling) of global temperatures have more to do with solar cycles.
--- End quote ---
These graphs are all misleading, using cherrypicked data for anti-global-warming propaganda.
The first graph compares a second order trend to a first order trend, which has problems in itself, since the data sets aren't exactly compatible.
This link shows the data compared with a common x-axis.
They are comparing the length of a sunspot cyle (which is on the order of 12 years) to changes in land temperature (which is called a "temperature anomaly" in the graph). Land temperature readings are not "global average temperature". They pretend that the two are equivalent, but they're not. The source paper for the graph doesn't get any more specific about how the "temperature anomaly" was recorded. The source paper also states that they didn't compare to air temp."to avoid the lag by several years of air temperatures over the oceans, due to their large heat capacity". Indeed. It's a simple matter to lag the data several years to show a correlation. Considering how butchered the axes are in the graph already, their excuse does not ring true. A trend is a trend.
The second graph is the same data as the first graph. It doesn't show any new information. They did further rejigger the x-intercepts to make the plots line up how they like. If you had actually studied the graphs, instead of uncritically accepting what these propaganda sites are feeding you, you'd have noticed this.
The third graph commits the same error as the first graph. It measures surface temperature against solar activity, rather than global average temperature. In this case, instead of the land, it's the ocean.
Know your propaganda, kids!
[edited to remove some speculation on my part]
Oerdin:
--- Quote from: RedLion on 10 Aug 2008, 09:53 ---I love how he says "We've been trying to get a debate going."
There's already been a debate. You've been proven wrong, and consequently lost.
--- End quote ---
It's the exact same tactic creationists use.
Vendetagainst:
--- Quote from: jhocking on 17 Aug 2008, 17:21 ---
--- Quote from: Anyways on 17 Aug 2008, 09:27 ---The episode where they get people to sign a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide is particularily great.
--- End quote ---
oo which episode is that? Back in chem lab we used to have a poster warning about the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide.
--- End quote ---
That was such a great joke when it first started, but God has it overstayed its welcome. [Jeph's meme shirt comes to mind here]
@Oerdin
Comparing somebody with a potentially rational argument to a creationist is just wrong. My stance is that I don't give a shit how legitimate global warming is, take every goddamn precaution because they will do the world nothing but good, but come on, mr.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version