RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (7) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: The Global Warming Thread, Featuring Rep. Sheila Butt (R-TN)< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 30 2011,11:01   

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ July 30 2011,10:07)
Joseph being an IDiot:


11:23 am

In typical fashion the alarmists are taking shots at Roy Spencer and not caring about the data.

Spencer's paper is about a simple 1-D model.  A boneheaded one that used unphysical parameters and overfitting.

What's actually funny is that several prominent climate researchers found parts of Spencer's 1-d model interesting, useful, and raised some interesting questions.  They suggested revisions to the paper which is why it was published (after over a year of revisions).

Which explains why research showing Spencer is wrong came out BEFORE Spencer's own paper was published.

Of course, people are looking at the data.  But if you read the stuff that Spencer has written, his 'model' takes four variables and adjusts them to fit the data collected by satellite.

Unfortunately, if you use his calculated numbers, the temperature a million years ago was something like 1 trillion degrees below zero.

Further, he uses unrealistic numbers.  He calculated the mixing depth of the ocean at 700 meters.  Of course, that completely ignores the simple fact that much of the ocean DOESN'T mix at that depth.  Both Joe and Spencer need to look up 'thermocline' and explain why a layer where the water temperature rapidly changes by several degrees exists at between 50-100 meters... when the ocean should be perfectly mixed all the way to 700 meters.

There are many, many problems with Spencer's work and it has been cataloged quite effectively by the scientists who do such things.  

Heck, several other people recreated his work and then tried to make it better.  It just doesn't work.  If you fit the curves now, then the historical curves do not match what actually happened in history.  If you fit larger sections of the curve with your four variables, then you get obviously wrong results (like the temperature in 75 years will be -300 degree C.)

But Joe and Spencer are too busy looking for ideologies that support them instead of looking for data and results that are actually correct.

Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

  203 replies since April 15 2011,16:21 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (7) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]