Global warming is real

[SixFoot]

@thinkingman

looks like the idiot dems in senate arent even as stupid as AOC is. all dems voted “present” on this ditz’s “new green deal” procedural vote except for a couple who dared to oppose the speaker (actual speaker. not official joke speaker in name only pelosi) manchin and sinema, who dared to show a sliver of a spark of sense vs partisanship

prob will cost them

Senate rejects Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal in 57-0 vote blasted as a ‘sham’ by Dems

Awww, they’re pissed that they might have to stand behind their own actual words. lol

[westaussie]

It would appear that you didn’t understand what I posted. What you have posted misrepresents what I said.

[WildRose]

You’ve said nothing of substance nor have you remotely refuted the fact that Arson has been credited by your own gov’t as the cause of many of the fires.

[noSpaces]

And you’ve added nothing to quantify the impact of arson.

[WildRose]

Of course I have, I provided links to several stories with the numbers of arrests made for starting them.

[westaussie]

None of which are reputable. The allegations contained therein have been completely repudiated by the appropriate authorities. Just continuing to repeat a false assertion, which is what you continue to do, will not make them true.

[Borgia_dude]

I confess I haven’t been following the arson portion of this discussion closely but I have a question.

Does it matter much what the ignition source if a fire is? Seems to me that ignitions happen, natural or man caused. What transpires from that ignition and resultant magnitude seems more the role of global warming and forest management.

[WildRose]

You just keep fabricating BS and making authoritative claims you cannot possibly support.

Your own officials stated plainly that many of the fires were due to Arson.

You can’t provide anything to the contrary and we all know it.

24 Charged with Deliberately Starting Bushfires in Australia | The Weather...

A volunteer firefighter has been charged after allegedly starting fires in...

[WildRose]

Ask your local police, fire, or insurance company if it makes a difference.

[gooddad409]

@WildRose

You just keep fabricating BS and making authoritative claims you cannot possibly support.

Your own officials stated plainly that many of the fires were due to Arson.

You can’t provide anything to the contrary and we all know it.

That settles it in my book.

[Borgia_dude]

@WildRose

Ask your local police, fire, or insurance company if it makes a difference.

Are they knowledgeable about global warming?

[westaussie]

I have provided the link that contains the quotes from the appropriate authorities repudiating that the driver for our bushfire crises in Australia was arson. If you have chosen to ignore what the appropriate authorities have said that debunks your assertion, that is entirely your prerogative. But it won’t make your debunked assertion true no matter how many times you choose to assert it. It is not true now and it will continue to not be true with respect to the bushfires we have had in 2019/2020.

Let me point out the appropriate authorities have repudiated the assertion that the driver for our bushfire crises in 2019/20 is arson.

[noSpaces]

Number of arrests for what? How many acres burned versus other progenitors?

[Samm]

@westaussie

Another completely disreputable source.

You are too hard on yourself.

[Samm]

@Borgia_dude

@Samm

@Borgia_dude

@Samm

The graph that was presented hid nothing. It is clearly from one ice core. It clearly stated that is indicates temperature in years before 1950. It clearly shows the last date is at 95 years before 1950. And the annotations on the graph naming a couple of the warm spells are historically accurate. And anyone who knows anything about ice core proxy temperatures knows that there is a temperature lag in ice from air temperatures. That is why the presented data stops at 95 years before present. Those upper proxy temperatures are not reliable. What is the problem?

And you still have not addressed the fact that ALL ancient temperature estimates are based on proxy data taken at a mere handful of locations around the world. ALL of those data sites have the same limitation as this one core presented in the graph. You act as though the limitations of the graph proves that the world was never warmer than it is today or something.

What don’t you understand about significance? I can go through it for you if you like or just google it and write back here what you find about one data point representing the world.

Go ahead and demonstrate correlation between this one data point and global temps. Calculate the R^2 value. We are waiting. I can help you with R^2 calculations if you are new to it.

ETA: quit strawmanning. Nobody said the earth was never warmer than today.

Talk about being condescending.

I am perfectly aware of the significance of the single ice core data set in the graph as to relates to the estimate of global temperature, but you seem to be totally oblivious to the meaning of correlation. I repeat, ALL estimates of ancient global temperatures are based on the correlation of the proxy data from a handful of locations around the world that are correlated with actual modern data taken globally. You are arguing with an argument that I am not making.

So you can’t show correlation. Ok. You made the claim that this single ice core data from Greenland correlates with global temps. Yet, you cannot show this to be the case.

I’m getting tired of explaining it to you. The one core correlates to other cores taken in the Greenland ice field which correlate to ice cores taken in Antarctica, which correlate to contemporary scientifically recorded temperatures taken in those locations, which are then correlated to global temperature, which can then be used to extrapolate an estimate of global temperature dating back to the age of the deepest ice core. Got it now?

[Samm]

@westaussie

It would appear that you didn’t understand what I posted. What you have posted misrepresents what I said.

No. What you said was perfectly clear. You found one completely irrelevant error in the report, which you identified, and then you announced that the report was full of errors, none of which you identified. There has been no misrepresentation by me or anyone else of what you have posted.

[Samm]

@westaussie

None of which are reputable. The allegations contained therein have been completely repudiated by the appropriate authorities. Just continuing to repeat a false assertion, which is what you continue to do, will not make them true.

So you keep saying. Which of course, as you so aptly point out, does not make it true.

[Borgia_dude]

@Samm

@Borgia_dude

@Samm

@Borgia_dude

@Samm

The graph that was presented hid nothing. It is clearly from one ice core. It clearly stated that is indicates temperature in years before 1950. It clearly shows the last date is at 95 years before 1950. And the annotations on the graph naming a couple of the warm spells are historically accurate. And anyone who knows anything about ice core proxy temperatures knows that there is a temperature lag in ice from air temperatures. That is why the presented data stops at 95 years before present. Those upper proxy temperatures are not reliable. What is the problem?

And you still have not addressed the fact that ALL ancient temperature estimates are based on proxy data taken at a mere handful of locations around the world. ALL of those data sites have the same limitation as this one core presented in the graph. You act as though the limitations of the graph proves that the world was never warmer than it is today or something.

What don’t you understand about significance? I can go through it for you if you like or just google it and write back here what you find about one data point representing the world.

Go ahead and demonstrate correlation between this one data point and global temps. Calculate the R^2 value. We are waiting. I can help you with R^2 calculations if you are new to it.

ETA: quit strawmanning. Nobody said the earth was never warmer than today.

Talk about being condescending.

I am perfectly aware of the significance of the single ice core data set in the graph as to relates to the estimate of global temperature, but you seem to be totally oblivious to the meaning of correlation. I repeat, ALL estimates of ancient global temperatures are based on the correlation of the proxy data from a handful of locations around the world that are correlated with actual modern data taken globally. You are arguing with an argument that I am not making.

So you can’t show correlation. Ok. You made the claim that this single ice core data from Greenland correlates with global temps. Yet, you cannot show this to be the case.

I’m getting tired of explaining it to you. The one core correlates to other cores taken in the Greenland ice field which correlate to ice cores taken n Antarctica, which correlate to contemporary scientifically recorded temperatures taken in those locations, which are then correlated to global temperature, which can then be used to extrapolate an estimate of global temperature dating back to the age of the deepest ice core. Got it now?

I get what you are ASSERTING but you haven’t demonstrated that to be the case.

[Samm]

@Borgia_dude

@WildRose

Ask your local police, fire, or insurance company if it makes a difference.

Are they knowledgeable about global warming?

Australia is a hot, dry (multi-year droughts are common) Continent a significant portion of which is cover with highly flammable vegetation, and has been for thousands of years. Natural fires have always been common; arson adds to them. Arson fires are also generally started close to civilization, which means they are more likely to burn structures.

[Borgia_dude]

@Samm

@Borgia_dude

@WildRose

Ask your local police, fire, or insurance company if it makes a difference.

Are they knowledgeable about global warming?

Australia is a hot, dry (multi-year droughts are common) Continent a significant portion of which is cover with highly flammable vegetation, and has been for thousands of years. Natural fires have always been common; arson adds to them. Arson fires are also generally started close to civilization, which means they are more likely to burn structures.

Ok. My query was whether global warming exacerbated the problem.