Welcome Guest

Sign In | Register

RE: 2 of which are nor(nm)

Posted on: July 13, 2019 at 14:14:49 CT

Ace UNC

Posts:

28854

Member For:

5.90 yrs

Level:

User

M.O.B. Votes:

0

the first reference, which is not their own, is cited because it references one of the authors:

One of the authors (JK) worked as an expert reviewer of IPCC AR5 report. One of his comments concerned the missing experimental evidence for the very large sensitivity presented in the report [1].

The other is this paper:

[5] G. Myhre, E. J. Highwood, K. P. Shine, and F. Stordal. New estimates of radiative forcing
due to well mixed greenhouse gases. Geophysical Research Letters, 25(14):2715–2718, 1998.

Cited for this:

The first and second term are the contributions of CO2 [5] and the low clouds, respectively.

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

MESSAGE THREAD

Finnish study finds ‘practically no’ evidence for man-made - Spanky KU - 7/13 13:20:40

Climate Change Have Done A Miserable Job . . . - ScottsdaleTiger MU - 7/13 17:16:27

Self published study sinks ships at Pearl Harbor - JG A - 7/13 16:22:42

Corroborated by scientists in Japan - Spanky KU - 7/13 16:25:40

Did you read the Japanese study? It was about cosmic rays - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 16:53:48

not completely accurate. This study provides an opportunity - Spanky KU - 7/13 17:15:52

Not really. The Finnish study makes claims that the models - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 17:35:26

so that makes 3.01% of scientists that disagree now? - JG A - 7/13 16:28:41

and 97% with a financial interest in perpetuating the myth - Spanky KU - 7/13 16:54:57

and the other 3% have no financial interest? LOL(nm) - meatiger MU - 7/13 18:15:25

LOL Jesus you are stupid and dishonest Spanked - JG A - 7/13 18:11:38

Explain why anthropogenic climate change was theorized - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 16:56:44

They knew it would lead to Dem-Lib funding so the Libs could - Spanky KU - 7/13 17:17:27

You're pathetically naive about how science works.(nm) - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 17:36:24

I grew up when the global cooling scare was - Spanky KU - 7/13 21:25:36

Xplain why it was theorized by the Club of Rome and others - Uncle Fester USMC - 7/13 17:04:22

Whether right or not, that paper sure as hell didn't - GA Tiger MU - 7/13 15:51:31

low clouds mainly control the global temperature, not man - Spanky KU - 7/13 16:03:44

CO2 lowers cloud production.. now think about that for a - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 16:55:43

as do cosmic rays... - Spanky KU - 7/13 21:37:14

I learned something (nm) - DC Jayhawk KU - 7/13 20:46:52

GAT's mind is made up. - Alferd Packer MU

- 7/13 16:20:37

Self published, not peer reviewed.(nm) - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 13:26:44

i trust peer scientists about as much as trust gvmt (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 13:46:23

I would politely ask you to reconsider - DC Jayhawk KU - 7/13 20:34:08

Lol - meatiger MU - 7/13 14:49:11

what bias is that? I think the finish study is garbage. Now - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 15:13:33

So you have been arguing - meatiger MU - 7/13 15:42:06

Attack people? no. Argue their position? yes (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 17:03:44

Yep. They're as trustworthy as the folks funding them. - MIZ45 MU - 7/13 14:22:19

"but the scientific method!" ... is as sound as those - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:26:00

Which is why peer review is critical. (nm) - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 14:28:14

lol, yeah. and infallible (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:28:58

What I have issues with are 1) government latching on - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 14:46:02

ok? (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:49:53

No one claims it is infallible. You're reasoning like a - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 14:37:50

then what does "not peer reviewed" imply? It implies - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:45:39

Not peer reviewed is highly indicative of an attempt to hide - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 14:51:03

I agree with this. However, "not peer reviewed" with no oth - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:56:54

i did nothing of the sort, Matt. Your implication above is - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:43:00

Lol.....no - meatiger MU - 7/13 14:51:46

lol, follow the thread. Is it your point that peer review - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:57:22

he never implied that, Jeff (nm) - pickle MU

- 7/13 15:08:08

then what, exactly does this imply? - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 15:12:55

fairly simple - meatiger MU - 7/13 15:44:37

then why not just say that? what is the magic of peer - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 17:03:24

You really don’t understand the science community - meatiger MU - 7/13 18:12:43

The lack of peer review implies the authors do not want - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 17:38:24

yeah, you said that and nobody argued it. (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 18:15:54

That was never implied nor is it true - meatiger MU - 7/13 15:02:42

So what is the point of Matt's response above? (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 15:12:31

Science never implies fact.(nm) - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 15:00:56

Of course it doesn't. So what does peer reviewed imply, - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 15:11:52

RE: Of course it doesn't. So what does peer reviewed imply, - meatiger MU - 7/13 15:14:10

So it doesn't imply that it's fact. Does not being peer rev - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 15:17:00

It makes it highly suspect - meatiger MU - 7/13 15:28:09

No, the data and lack of rigor make it suspect. Peer - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 17:04:29

straw man (nm) - pickle MU

- 7/13 14:34:13

RE: straw man (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:42:12

it’s a straw man, 90 (nm) - pickle MU

- 7/13 14:49:30

i care less than little about your unarticulated positions - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:50:23

i don’t care. your post was a straw man (nm) - pickle MU

- 7/13 14:51:52

false. - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:58:06

lol ok, Jeff (nm) - pickle MU

- 7/13 15:07:45

lol, ok, meat (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 15:12:09

The model has worked pretty well for the past few hundred - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 13:49:25

the scientific community is a groupthink org. they rely on - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 13:51:12

It is actually the opposite. They are constantly testing - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 13:55:51

sometimes. largely yes, but not on the issue at hand. No. (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 13:56:45

"pretty well" isn't that great (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 13:50:04

Sure it is. Scientific advancement has been faster than - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 13:54:41

also, scientific advancement is on par with the acceleration - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 13:56:21

Technology is due to scientific advancement, not the other - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 13:58:40

you've lost your way here matt (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 13:59:26

This one blurb from the study is extremely questionable - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 14:26:49

i'm not supporting the study, Matt. You're not following - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:28:41

Yes, you are flailing around to criticize how science works - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 14:33:30

RE: Yes, you are flailing around to criticize how science works - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:44:29

talk about a straw man. all i did here is question th - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:42:02

advancement isn't what's in question, Matt, and you know - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 13:55:33

It's not my fault you don't understand the scientific model. - TigerMatt STL - 7/13 13:58:11

You sound like a bible thumper implying that the Word of - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 14:00:42

I understand the model. I'm talking about the human beings - 90Tiger STL - 7/13 13:59:48

“Japanese researchers at the University of Kobe arrived at - Spanky KU - 7/13 13:38:36

RE: “Japanese researchers at the University of Kobe arrived at - Ace AU - 7/13 13:41:15

RE: “Japanese researchers at the University of Kobe arrived at - Spanky KU - 7/13 15:06:14

RE: Self published, not peer reviewed.(nm) - Ace AU - 7/13 13:28:56

2 of which are nor(nm) - tman MU - 7/13 14:03:05

RE: 2 of which are nor(nm) - Ace AU - 7/13 14:14:49

©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy About Tigerboard