Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have you studied the philosophy of science? The goal of science is to prove hypotheses. If a hypothesis states, "All swans are white", only one scientist finding one single black swan proves that the statement that all swans are white is false. Consensus doesn't equal scientific truth.
No, but the strongest theories tend to be the most popular.
How could all of these publications with long histories of reporting science be so easily duped, while blogs that have been around for less than a decade and right wing news/opinion columns are always accurate and the only ones able to rise above the muck?
And the NYT and Wash. Post and L.A. Times, etc., are a major sourcees of disinformation, yet, YOU probably believe every word they write because it fits YOUR beliefs.
I put THEM in MY junk pile.
I rely on science, not the news media, especially in the US where they are allowed to lie.
I couldn't find the OP's statement anywhere, here is the Jan 16 statement. I'm sure it's not possible that the Daily Mail could be misleading. Once again a thread that lacks a link to NASA, now why do you suppose that is the case, they are a well respected news source.
"Nasa climate scientists: We said 2014 was the warmest year on record... but we're only 38% sure we were right"
Nasa admited it is now far from certain that 2014 set a record at all.
Nasa failed to mention the fact that the alleged ‘record’ amounted to an increase over 2010, the previous ‘warmest year’, of just two-hundredths of a degree – or 0.02C. The margin of error is said by scientists to be approximately 0.1C – several times as much.
As a result, GISS’s director Gavin Schmidt has now admitted Nasa thinks the likelihood that 2014 was the warmest year since 1880 is just 38 per cent. However, when asked by this newspaper whether he regretted that the news release did not mention this, he did not respond.
The daily mail seems to be a major source of AGW denier's mis-information, so I think I will put this post in my junk file.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
And the NYT and Wash. Post and L.A. Times, etc., are a major sourcees of disinformation, yet, YOU probably believe every word they write because it fits YOUR beliefs.
I put THEM in MY junk pile.
You've clearly never read the Daily Mail.
They ARE the junk pile.
2014 seemed cold to me because of the polar vortex in January and December. But could that have actually made it warmer? Was all that cold air in my face taken from the north pole and leaving it warmer than it otherwise would have been? From my point of view, -40F at the north pole seems better than -41F there. But it could add to global warming, by being slightly less cold than it otherwise would have been.
It's better to fix a broken freezer when it fails to keep things at -41F than when it continues to deteriorate till the ice cream melts.
Gavin Schmidt didn't say the DailyMail article's assertions were a lie or incorrect, did he? He didn't say they were wrong, either.
He insulted the newspaper instead.
He chose not to respond to the hack David Rose.
Look through his tweets, that kind of snub is standard fare.
As for that margin of error begin heralded as a reputable concern, you'll surely agree with Gavin's other assertions.
Quote:
GAVIN SCHMIDT: So, there is — there — each year makes a record. It’s like people running a marathon. They only beat the record by a few seconds each time, but times are getting faster. The globe is warming up.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And am I right? I believe I read today that the 10 hottest years on record have all occurred since 1997?
GAVIN SCHMIDT: Yes, that’s right.
Nine of those have occurred in the last 10 years. 1998 was a real standout year, and so that’s still in the top five. But we have warmed about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the beginning of the 20th century — beginning of the 20th century. And we attribute those changes mainly to the increase in greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, that we have been putting into the atmosphere.
Quote:
GAVIN SCHMIDT: Well, so, year to year, there’s a lot of noise, a lot of chaos and dynamism in the climate system.But the underlying trend, the trends that we have seen since the 1970s particularly, that’s being driven, that’s being pushed. And it’s being pushed mainly by carbon dioxide increases in the atmosphere, which are adding to the greenhouse effect, which is making the planet warmer.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Carbon dioxide, meaning manmade emissions?
GAVIN SCHMIDT: Yes, carbon dioxide mainly comes from the burning of fossil fuels, coal, oil, natural gas, and from deforestation, mainly in the tropics.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, to the skeptics who are out there vocally when a report like this comes out, saying, wait a minute, there’s no proof that there is connection to what humans do, you say what?
GAVIN SCHMIDT: So, you know, science works by putting all the bits of evidence together.
We have looked for all sorts of different fingerprints of change. We have looked to see whether the warming is caused by oscillations in the ocean, whether it’s caused by changes in the sun or volcanoes or all sorts of different things. But what we find is that the picture that you get when you think about what’s happening with greenhouse gases fits the data, not just at the surface, but in the — higher up in the atmosphere, in the ocean, in the Arctic, all around.
And so we have a fingerprint of change that is associated with human activities, and that fingerprint fits the evidence that we’re seeing in the data.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
