Australian Politics Forum - Action on AGW, is it enough?

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21592
Gender: male

Re: Action on AGW, is it enough?
Reply #240 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 6:53pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 6:27pm:

But the null hypothesis to test if temperatures are increasing because of AGW is that temperatures are stable.

Nope. When were the temperatures stable?

I think you understand how wrong you are. But as normal just can't admit it. Everyone is wrong bar you.

So you just -

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Action on AGW, is it enough? Reply #241 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 7:12pm Dropped on your head and more than once. The null hypothesis is the relationship that applies if the theory is wrong. Poor Loser Lees, dropped on his head several times as a baby.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21592
Gender: male

Re: Action on AGW, is it enough?
Reply #242 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 7:15pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 7:12pm:

Dropped on your head and more than once.

The null hypothesis is the relationship that applies if the theory is wrong.

Poor Loser Lees, dropped on his head several times as a baby.

Oh dear. JM has cracked a sad.

All you have to do to prove me wrong is back up your assertion of the null hypothesis. You should be able to provide one reference. Curious that you can't do that. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk

Gold Member

Offline

Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male

Re: Action on AGW, is it enough?
Reply #243 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 7:23pm

Poor dropped on his head Loser Lees.

I have posted THREE definitions of the null hypothesis. All three are congruent.

I am right in what I state.

Loser Lees has not even made the faintest attempt at theory-mechanism-h1-h0-test for his silly natural variation thingy.

Loser Lees—accepts AGW because he has nothing to oppose it with.

PARENTS—do NOT drop your baby on its head, not even once, I give you—Loser lees as a horrible example!

Back to top

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Action on AGW, is it enough? Reply #244 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 7:44pm Action on AGW, is it enough. Probably not, I have to say. This is the next big glacier to let go and collapse: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-doomsday-glacier-w481260[url][/url]
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21592 Gender:	Re: Action on AGW, is it enough? Reply #245 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 8:37pm Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 7:44pm: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-doomsday-glacier-w481260[url][/url] "OOPS! We can't find what you're looking for" And from that bastion of science Rolling Stone. From the person who doesn't quote MSM. Still Rolling Stone isn't really mainstream.
Back to top	« Last Edit: Jul 18^th, 2017 at 8:45pm by lee » IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21592
Gender: male

Re: Action on AGW, is it enough?
Reply #246 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 8:44pm

Perhaps you meant Rolling Stone and the Thwaites Glacier?

From a scientific publication -

"The melt rate of West Antarctica's Thwaites Glacier is an important concern, because this glacier alone is currently responsible for about 1 percent of global sea level rise. A new NASA study finds that Thwaites' ice loss will continue, but not quite as rapidly as previous studies have estimated."

"The glacier has the potential to add several inches to global sea levels."

https://phys.org/news/2017-06-thwaites-glacier-ice-loss-quickly.html#jCp

OHH, only inches. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Action on AGW, is it enough? Reply #247 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 9:23pm Depends how fast it collapses.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21592
Gender: male

Re: Action on AGW, is it enough?
Reply #248 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 9:36pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 9:23pm:

Depends how fast it collapses.

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 8:44pm:

"The glacier has the potential to add several inches to global sea levels."

https://phys.org/news/2017-06-thwaites-glacier-ice-loss-quickly.html#jCp

The potential for melt is the entire glacier. Once it has melted it ain't gunna melt any more.

So rate of melt has nothing to do with it. Geez you are trying hard though. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Action on AGW, is it enough? Reply #249 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 9:43pm Potential to add 1 metre to sea level. Nor is it the only glacier starting to retreat rapidly in that part of West Antarctica.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21592
Gender: male

Re: Action on AGW, is it enough?
Reply #250 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 9:57pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 9:43pm:

Potential to add 1 metre to sea level.

Even though the scientific article says inches.

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 9:43pm:

Nor is it the only glacier starting to retreat rapidly in that part of West Antarctica.

But you have been jamming on about the Thwaites Glacier; now you want to include them all.

The article does say it is not as rapid as supposed. Wink

But stick to Rolling Stone; they may get something right eventually. Wink

Jovial Monk - the citation free zone. Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21592 Gender:	Re: Action on AGW, is it enough? Reply #251 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 10:03pm Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 15^th, 2017 at 2:06pm: Or are you going to wait until the 90Km wide Thwaites glacier fails and we get a 1m rise in sea levels? Just bringing it to the front again.
Back to top	IP Logged

Jovial Monk

Gold Member

Offline

Dogs not cats!

Posts: 51474
Gender: male

Re: Action on AGW, is it enough?
Reply #252 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 10:06pm

Quote:

The study honed in on the Thwaites glacier – a broad glacier that is part of the Amundsen Sea. Scientists have known for years that the Thwaites glacier is the soft underbelly of the Antarctic ice sheet, and first found that it was unstable decades ago.

The University of Washington researchers said that the fast-moving Thwaites glacier could be lost in a matter of centuries. The loss of that glacier alone would raise global sea level by nearly 2ft.

Thwaites also acts as a dam that holds back the rest of the ice sheet. Once Thwaites goes, researchers said, the remaining ice in the sheet could cause another 10 to 13ft (3-4m) of global sea-level rise.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/may/12/western-antarctic-ice-sheet-...

More than inches. And more than just the Thwaites Glacier.

Back to top

OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now!
OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now!

Topics in the right MRB!

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21592
Gender: male

Re: Action on AGW, is it enough?
Reply #253 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 10:26pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 10:06pm:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/may/12/western-antarctic-ice-sheet-...

Oh. 2014? And lost in a matter of centuries. That sounds imminent. Wink

lee wrote on Jul 18^th, 2017 at 9:36pm:

https://phys.org/news/2017-06-thwaites-glacier-ice-loss-quickly.
html#jCp

As against June 2017. You have heard that science never stands still? Wink

And then of course your customary exaggeration about 2feet to 1metre.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Jul 18^th, 2017 at 10:33pm by lee »

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Gold Member Offline Dogs not cats! Posts: 51474 Gender:	Re: Action on AGW, is it enough? Reply #254 - Jul 18^th, 2017 at 10:34pm Larsen C collapsed more quickly than thought. 28 people have visited the Thwaites glacier. And it will take concerted action over decades to reverse AGW.
Back to top	OzPolitic needs a >real< Environment MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Food MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Health MRB now! OzPolitic needs a >real< Economics MRB now! Topics in the right MRB! IP Logged