* presuming (as I do) that GW is real, but not solely attributable to AGW, no one is willing to give a percentage breakdown on cause
OT, but I'll have a go. Generally what we have over the last century or so is a secular warming trend (from greenhouse gasses) with fluctuations from various other factors including volcanoes, aerosols, solar output, internal variability, etc. That secular warming trend is strong enough now that studies find most, (or possibly more than all)) of the warming over the last 50 years can be attributed to greenhouse gasses. See for example Tett et al. 2000, Meehl et al. 2004, Stone et al. 2007, Lean and Rind 2008, Huber and Knutti 2011, Gillett et al. 2012, Wigley and Santer 2012, and Jones et al. 2013.
Very poor summary. I'm not sure you quite understood the paper. Even still 2016 will be a clear winner without ambiguity because it is so far ahead of other years (as noted previously) - this is even in spite of the fact that 2015 was already so hot that it was given at an astounding 94% certainty!
The bottom line here is that flat claims of "hottest year ever" without specifying uncertainty, across the entire scale of comparison, is fake news.
As already mentioned at the top of this thread, 2016 is so much hotter than previous years that it exceeds the uncertainty by several orders of magnitude.
That article is from 2008. Guess what? "The Ontario Human Rights Commission ruled that it did not have the jurisdiction to hear the complaint. The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal dismissed the complaint 10 October 2008.[14] The Canadian Human Rights Commission dismissed the complaint on 26 June 2008."
Section 318 of the Canadian hate speech laws prohibit people from promoting genocide. Sounds reasonable.
Under section 319 you are allowed to incite hatred against a group as long as what you are saying is true, or even if it's not true as long as it's a religious belief, or even if it's false, and not part of your religion but on reasonable grounds you believed it to be true.
The KKK would probably fall afoul of this law but not many others.
Fails the laugh test. Nobody can possibly assert we measured 1880 global temperatures +/- 0.08,
Maybe read the page and see if says that. Then read my post and see if I claimed that it says that. Then come back if you have anything interesting to add.
There is some basis to your assertion that this is primarily consumed by the right wing. Jansen says "this isn't just a Trump-supporter problem. This is a right-wing issue. Sarah Palin's famous blasting of the lamestream media is kind of record and testament to the rise of these kinds of people. The post-fact era is what I would refer to it as. This isn't something that started with Trump. This is something that's been in the works for a while. His whole campaign was this thing of discrediting mainstream media sources, which is one of those dog whistles to his supporters. When we were coming up with headlines it's always kind of about the red meat. Trump really got into the red meat. He knew who his base was. He knew how to feed them a constant diet of this red meat." And it appears they devoured it greedily.
He also says "We've tried to do similar things to liberals. It just has never worked, it never takes off. You'll get debunked within the first two comments and then the whole thing just kind of fizzles out."
You can try to make this about something else, even try to dismiss it by calling it a meme, but the fact of the matter is that fake news was generated out of whole cloth and the right wing consumers ate it up.
Sorry. NOAA shows global temperatures with uncertainty of ± 0.08. This is confirmed by several scientific studies. Conspiracy blogs don't trump science.
Sorry. That is not even remotely comparable to the main stream media, regardless of the fact that they have a diversity of opinions or that some of them may be (gasp) feminists.
Er... the parent was trying to use a dataset that ends in 2014 to prove that 2016 is not the hottest year. I think you mean facts don't matter because denial? Here are the facts (Including 2016 YTD)
2016 is the hottest year on record" is fake news if you don't include the error bars in your measurements.
2016 is so far ahead of previous records that it is well beyond the margin of uncertainty. Nevermind 1/100 of a degree. This year is over 1/4 of a degree warmer than the previous peak.
Actually, America's interests would be served by doing a recount of some portion of the ballots to verify accuracy. Quite apart from who won, it's valuable to check, check, and check again to verify if there is an error or tampering.
How is it possible that this is not done as a matter of course?
Slashdot Mirror
Here's how actual temps compare to the CMIP3 model output used in the IPCC AR4:
* presuming (as I do) that GW is real, but not solely attributable to AGW, no one is willing to give a percentage breakdown on cause
OT, but I'll have a go. Generally what we have over the last century or so is a secular warming trend (from greenhouse gasses) with fluctuations from various other factors including volcanoes, aerosols, solar output, internal variability, etc. That secular warming trend is strong enough now that studies find most, (or possibly more than all)) of the warming over the last 50 years can be attributed to greenhouse gasses. See for example Tett et al. 2000, Meehl et al. 2004, Stone et al. 2007, Lean and Rind 2008, Huber and Knutti 2011, Gillett et al. 2012, Wigley and Santer 2012, and Jones et al. 2013.
Very poor summary. I'm not sure you quite understood the paper. Even still 2016 will be a clear winner without ambiguity because it is so far ahead of other years (as noted previously) - this is even in spite of the fact that 2015 was already so hot that it was given at an astounding 94% certainty!
Doesn't change a thing though. 2016 is so far ahead of previous years that there is no question and no ambiguity.
The bottom line here is that flat claims of "hottest year ever" without specifying uncertainty, across the entire scale of comparison, is fake news.
As already mentioned at the top of this thread, 2016 is so much hotter than previous years that it exceeds the uncertainty by several orders of magnitude.
Sounds like the law is working.
This is your brain on religion.
The KKK is a christian organization. Very much so. Everything they say, all the hate they spew, are their genuine religious beliefs.
Good point. Very weak law where even the KKK is protected.
Section 318 of the Canadian hate speech laws prohibit people from promoting genocide. Sounds reasonable.
Under section 319 you are allowed to incite hatred against a group as long as what you are saying is true, or even if it's not true as long as it's a religious belief, or even if it's false, and not part of your religion but on reasonable grounds you believed it to be true.
The KKK would probably fall afoul of this law but not many others.
Fails the laugh test. Nobody can possibly assert we measured 1880 global temperatures +/- 0.08,
Maybe read the page and see if says that. Then read my post and see if I claimed that it says that. Then come back if you have anything interesting to add.
BuzzFeed started this "fake news" meme. They are defining "fake news" as "false or misleading news"
Jansen created a fake news empire quite apart from BuzzFeed and well before it was named by BuzzFeed or any other mainstream media source. He says (and I quote) "Everything about it was fictional. The town, the people, the sheriff, the FBI guy." That's not misleading. That's fake.
There is some basis to your assertion that this is primarily consumed by the right wing. Jansen says "this isn't just a Trump-supporter problem. This is a right-wing issue. Sarah Palin's famous blasting of the lamestream media is kind of record and testament to the rise of these kinds of people. The post-fact era is what I would refer to it as. This isn't something that started with Trump. This is something that's been in the works for a while. His whole campaign was this thing of discrediting mainstream media sources, which is one of those dog whistles to his supporters. When we were coming up with headlines it's always kind of about the red meat. Trump really got into the red meat. He knew who his base was. He knew how to feed them a constant diet of this red meat." And it appears they devoured it greedily.
He also says "We've tried to do similar things to liberals. It just has never worked, it never takes off. You'll get debunked within the first two comments and then the whole thing just kind of fizzles out."
You can try to make this about something else, even try to dismiss it by calling it a meme, but the fact of the matter is that fake news was generated out of whole cloth and the right wing consumers ate it up.
Sorry. NOAA shows global temperatures with uncertainty of ± 0.08. This is confirmed by several scientific studies. Conspiracy blogs don't trump science.
"The people wanted to hear this. So all it took was to write that story. Everything about it was fictional. The town, the people, the sheriff, the FBI guy. Then, we had our social media guys kind of go out and do a little dropping it throughout Trump groups and Trump forums and boy it spread like wildfire."
Sorry. That is not even remotely comparable to the main stream media, regardless of the fact that they have a diversity of opinions or that some of them may be (gasp) feminists.
It is laughable to compare mainstream media reporting from angles you'd rather ignore with fake news sites making up stories out of whole cloth.
a left-wing agitator
He tried selling the same BS to the left but they weren't buying. "Coler says they've tried to write fake news for liberals, but they never take the bait." He went where the money was and ended up earning tens of thousands of dollars a month. He's not so much an agitator as an opportunist.
Er... the parent was trying to use a dataset that ends in 2014 to prove that 2016 is not the hottest year. I think you mean facts don't matter because denial? Here are the facts (Including 2016 YTD)
You're using a data set that ends in 2014. Surprised that it doesn't show 2016 as the hottest year?
2016 is the hottest year on record" is fake news if you don't include the error bars in your measurements.
2016 is so far ahead of previous records that it is well beyond the margin of uncertainty. Nevermind 1/100 of a degree. This year is over 1/4 of a degree warmer than the previous peak.
I frequent those forums
You frequent fake news forums? But why?
The Enquirer is a gossip tabloid sold in supermarkets. People know it's not real,
Well, not everyone.
You mean all was going well until 1896 when Svante Arrhenius showed the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground
Actually, America's interests would be served by doing a recount of some portion of the ballots to verify accuracy. Quite apart from who won, it's valuable to check, check, and check again to verify if there is an error or tampering.
How is it possible that this is not done as a matter of course?
So the polls are great and show that the educated supported Donald, except that they don't and therefore the polls are worthless.
True enough. Scientists have been fighting fake news for decades. Peter Sinclare documents the birth of a climate denial meme here: https://youtu.be/khikoh3sJg8 . The meme was picked up and echoed by the supposedly legitimate media despite the fact a cursory review of the source material would quickly dispel the myth.
It's no wonder there is such a disparity between the public perception of the scientific consensus and the actual scientific consensus.. How could the general public be expected to understand the basic science when the media isn't even bothered to perform a quick source check.
Wrong. White women without college degrees chose Trump . In fact, educated folks generally voted for Clinton, regardless of race or gender.