Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Scientist Makes $20,000 Bet With algore.... Gore and CLM Silent.

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,258
    Post Thanks / Like

    Scientist Makes $20,000 Bet With algore.... Gore and CLM Silent.

    [url]http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/3533/[/url]

    [url]http://theclimatebet.com/[/url]

    The silence from Gore and the criminal liberal media is deafening.........

  2. #2
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=DeanPatsFan][url]http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/3533/[/url]

    [url]http://theclimatebet.com/[/url]

    The silence from Gore and the criminal liberal media is deafening.........[/QUOTE]

    Like this guy said, cheap publicity stunt:

    [url]http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/[/url]


    [Quote=]Following on from this post, I emailed J Scott Armstrong, he pointed me to this web site/blog and the bet is outlined in more detail in this post.

    At a glance, he is using the most obvious and trivial trick, that he appeared to have ruled out with his talk of forecasting climate change on this page. In fact, the terms of his challenge refer to forecasting annual mean temperatures at a handful of points, using raw model output. The trivial trick here is that of course the models do not directly represent local temperature (typical resolution is ~300km horizontally) and they also have significant regional biases, so meaningfully relating their output to local temperature requires at a minimum some sort of bias correction and/or downscaling. Such bias adjustment is an entirely routine procedure in many branches of forecasting, it is inconceivable that Armstrong does not realise this.

    The other big problem is the time scale: the bet is for 1-10 year forecasts. While there are probably some people who can produce usable forecasts over at least the seasonal to annual time scale (and maybe further in some cases), on the whole these aren't the same people as those doing 100 year projections. The GCMs used in the IPCC report don't have any proper initialisation scheme that would enable them to make meaningful annual forecasts, and no-one has ever claimed that they do. From their point of view, whether one year is warmer than the last is basically a matter of chance, and a "persistence" forecast is a pretty reasonable reasonable choice.

    A much fairer test of the models would be to look at something like a 20 year trend for global mean temperature (and possibly at a more regional scale: I haven't looked in detail at this). Armstrong claims to be amenable to altering his terms: I've emailed him with these points and will report on his response. Based on what I have read, I'm not optimistic. It reads like a cheap publicity stunt rather than serious challenge.[/Quote]

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    Expecting the mainstream media to cover this is moronic.

  4. #4
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    137
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]Expecting the mainstream media to cover this is moronic.[/QUOTE]


    Ironically, Paris hilton is all over the news.

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    2,651
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    142
    This paper is very telling:

    [url]http://www.forecastingprinciples.com/Public_Policy/WarmAudit31.pdf[/url]

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Annoying Chowd

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    6,258
    Post Thanks / Like
    The point is algore won't debate ANYONE over global warming.

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    WHO CARES?

    Al Gore isn't a public official anymore, nor will he be in the future.

    maybe you should spend time caring about the current VP, a.k.a. Dick Pure Evil Cheney.

  8. #8
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]WHO CARES?

    Al Gore isn't a public official anymore, nor will he be in the future.

    maybe you should spend time caring about the current VP, a.k.a. Dick Pure Evil Cheney.[/QUOTE]


    :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry:

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]:bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry:[/QUOTE]

    another quality contribution from CBNY :zzz:

  10. #10
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]another quality contribution from CBNY :zzz:[/QUOTE]


    Yes, not nearly as substantive as calling the VP "pure evil."

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=jets5ever]Yes, not nearly as substantive as calling the VP "pure evil."[/QUOTE]

    actually 5ever words are more substantive than emoticons.

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Montville, NJ
    Posts
    5,473
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Neil Diamond]Ironically, Paris hilton is all over the news.[/QUOTE]

    that's just so they don't tell you what is really going on in the world

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    20,155
    Post Thanks / Like
    What does this guy Armstrong know? One guy against the thousands who are right? Science is overrated anyways. :mad:

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,407
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]actually 5ever words are more substantive than emoticons.[/QUOTE]


    'cause as they say- a word is worth 1000 pictures.... :zzz:

  15. #15
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    by the way this thread title is bunk

    a bet has to be agreed upon by all parties

  16. #16
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Providence, RI
    Posts
    2,045
    Post Thanks / Like
    I dont know if he is right or wrong but, I totally agree with:

    "The aim of the bet is really to promote the proper use of science, rather than the opinion-led science we have seen lately"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us