|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 6, 2011 23:02:48 GMT
astromet, Your own common sense is leading you in the wrong direction. If you do not have the "sense" to detect your faulty prognostications, as I have regularly highlighted, then you will not develop a useful "common sense". A mathematics education is a matter of fact, not opinion. I have one as can be proven by a couple of bits of paper in my desk drawer. Whether it is worth anything is another question! You do not have one so shouldn't pretend you do. I do not know if you have a *mathematics education* or not Steve, but your many comments clearly show that you do not, or, you would not troll with your ideology and opinion, and surely would be able to know that AGW is mathematically impossible on Earth. Sure, sitting in your desk drawer you could prove on a piece of paper that a elephant can be held suspended over a cliff with his tail tied to a daisy, but in the real world we all know that the laws of physics would not allow that. You didn't even believe that ENSO was coming, though I forecasted it years prior, and you continue to push anthropogenic global warming despite the fact that it has been disproven many times over to be mathematically impossible. So how does that prove you have a "mathematics background" as you continue to push something which does not exist? Certainly, you are not a forecaster, but a wannabe. You spend more time on this forecast thread claiming to be something you are not while poo pooing that which you are not qualified to poo poo. You have far too much time on your hands Steve, which also proves that you are not working to forecast but simply want others to believe something - AGW - that is a manufactured lie and does not exist. You are stuck on your probabilistic gerbil track, running round and round and round but learning nothing, while you regurgitate the same AGW ideology and mantra while criticizing others who work for a living doing real forecasting in the real world. It is all too outdated and all too tired. Do you realize you are a dinosaur in this manner? You've got a lot to learn, but have shown you are incapable of doing so, and frankly, no, I do not believe you have a background in mathematics Steve. You may be an amateur, but your nickel-and-dime fuzzy math just does not cut it in the real world of physics. |
|
|
|
Post by glc on Feb 7, 2011 9:52:58 GMT
I do not know if you have a *mathematics education* or not Steve, but your many comments clearly show that you do not, or, you would not troll with your ideology and opinion, and surely would be able to know that AGW is mathematically impossible on Earth.
AGW is not impossible on earth - mathematically or otherwise. There is an atmospheric 'greenhouse' effect. Adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will, in theory at least, enhance that effect. Mathematics and Physics support that fact.
You are clearly not qualified to contribute in any discussion on this issue.
You didn't even believe that ENSO was coming,
What do you mean by this ridiculous statement.
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on Feb 7, 2011 12:01:52 GMT
My gerbil track seems to involve pointing out your inconsistencies and getting ignored. I'm good with that.
Here, you have had a go at me for discussing probabilistic forecasts only a day or so after *making* a probabilistic forecast:
This isn't the first time you've made a probabilistic forecast, of course.
You just have no consistency whatsoever. Are you still ignoring the fact that you said the other day that:
But in 2006, you said:
The best astrologers obfuscate more, make vaguer predictions and only post to their own websites so they can delete the evidence when it turns out wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 7, 2011 21:47:53 GMT
My gerbil track seems to involve pointing out your inconsistencies and getting ignored. I'm good with that. Here, you have had a go at me for discussing probabilistic forecasts only a day or so after *making* a probabilistic forecast: This isn't the first time you've made a probabilistic forecast, of course. You just have no consistency whatsoever. Are you still ignoring the fact that you said the other day that: But in 2006, you said: The best astrologers obfuscate more, make vaguer predictions and only post to their own websites so they can delete the evidence when it turns out wrong. I wouldn't know about the "best" astrologers. I do my own work, from my own skill set. However, since you're not exactly an *expert* on astrology or astronomic forecasting Steve, you're not exactly qualified to make such assertions. As for the minimum phase - Yes, I expect it to change soon. The astrological year goes from March to March. The Sun is waking up. There are more sunspots showing up and according to my estimates, I expect the Sun to emerge out of minimum state. As for the rest of your *comments* - Listen, I don't know what this hard-on you've got coming around with your silly opinion and comments, but you ought to start by checking your own engine pal, since you've been pushing man-made global warming with your *probabilistic math* that just doesn't add up. Why don't you go back and correct your issues with the silliness of man-made global warming rather than wasting your time on an "astrologer" who practices nothing but a pseudo-science according to you? Obviously I am not worth any attention at all so I fail to see how what I do is all b.s., but yet you keep coming around day in and day out. Isn't saying what I do is "crap" once enough for you? That way, you can go on your way, satisfied you have put a centuries-old science in its place and then continue on your quest to have the people of the world believe that they are the cause of climate change. Can we go now? |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 8, 2011 2:42:07 GMT
I do not know if you have a *mathematics education* or not Steve, but your many comments clearly show that you do not, or, you would not troll with your ideology and opinion, and surely would be able to know that AGW is mathematically impossible on Earth.AGW is not impossible on earth - mathematically or otherwise. There is an atmospheric 'greenhouse' effect. Adding more CO2 to the atmosphere will, in theory at least, enhance that effect. Mathematics and Physics support that fact. You are clearly not qualified to contribute in any discussion on this issue. You didn't even believe that ENSO was coming, What do you mean by this ridiculous statement. Listen Glc - We've been through this before. You can go back a few pages on this thread to clearly discover why AGW is mathematically impossible. It has been proven. Just because you ignore it does not change the laws of physics. What an ego you have pal. I've contributed ten times more than you ever have with this crap of AGW and frankly, it is much too old. Get with it and learn about the laws of physics - which you not only ignore, but then go about with your nickel-and-dime fuzzy math, both you and Steve. You have a very bad habit of regurgitating the same tired arguments when the issue has been long settled. So quit with the silliness. It is just too tired and is the mark of an immature person who just likes to fight for the sake of fighting. That is what spoiled children do and it's what has been coming from your comments. Rather than whining on and on and pushing the crap of man-made global warming you ought to be learning about the world's true climate and weather than wasting your time on AGW which has always been total bullshit. Get real. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 8, 2011 3:33:16 GMT
You've got a lot to learn, but have shown you are incapable of doing so, and frankly, no, I do not believe you have a background in mathematics Steve. You may be an amateur, but your nickel-and-dime fuzzy math just does not cut it in the real world of physics. I have seen exactly 0 equations from you Astromet. Your math is so fuzzy as to be non-existent. Well, if your field is important, then you should be sharing code, equations, and methods. Since you've shared one statement that atmospheric tides are involved, my guess is that's about all you got. You talk of others being critical when half of what you post is personal attack. Ironically, your personal attacks tend to describe yourself so well it's scary. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 8, 2011 4:14:59 GMT
You've got a lot to learn, but have shown you are incapable of doing so, and frankly, no, I do not believe you have a background in mathematics Steve. You may be an amateur, but your nickel-and-dime fuzzy math just does not cut it in the real world of physics. I have seen exactly 0 equations from you Astromet. Your math is so fuzzy as to be non-existent. Well, if your field is important, then you should be sharing code, equations, and methods. Since you've shared one statement that atmospheric tides are involved, my guess is that's about all you got. You talk of others being critical when half of what you post is personal attack. Ironically, your personal attacks tend to describe yourself so well it's scary. And you won't see any of my *equations* either Matt. They are my proprietary property and I do not share them with amateurs or wannabes either. Moreover, there's nothing "personal" in telling you AGW fanatics like it is - so you can cry and whine all you want, but the fact of the matter is that the only thing that is "scary" is the outright absurdity coming out of you AGW fellows who pontificate as if you've got the goods on what causes climate change when you cannot count straight much less "equate." Stop whining. Go back to the basics and unlearn the junk you've learned because you will never get an inch to the truth of what causes Earth's climate to change until you get off the potty and quit with the silliness. Grow up. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 8, 2011 4:32:40 GMT
I have seen exactly 0 equations from you Astromet. Your math is so fuzzy as to be non-existent. Well, if your field is important, then you should be sharing code, equations, and methods. Since you've shared one statement that atmospheric tides are involved, my guess is that's about all you got. You talk of others being critical when half of what you post is personal attack. Ironically, your personal attacks tend to describe yourself so well it's scary. And you won't see any of my *equations* either Matt. They are my proprietary property and I do not share them with amateurs or wannabes either. Moreover, there's nothing "personal" in telling you AGW fanatics like it is - so you can cry and whine all you want, but the fact of the matter is that the only thing that is "scary" is the outright absurdity coming out of you AGW fellows who pontificate as if you've got the goods on what causes climate change when you cannot count straight much less "equate." Stop whining. Go back to the basics and unlearn the junk you've learned because you will never get an inch to the truth of what causes Earth's climate to change until you get off the potty and quit with the silliness. Grow up. Yep, you got nada. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 8, 2011 4:55:03 GMT
And you won't see any of my *equations* either Matt. They are my proprietary property and I do not share them with amateurs or wannabes either. Moreover, there's nothing "personal" in telling you AGW fanatics like it is - so you can cry and whine all you want, but the fact of the matter is that the only thing that is "scary" is the outright absurdity coming out of you AGW fellows who pontificate as if you've got the goods on what causes climate change when you cannot count straight much less "equate." Stop whining. Go back to the basics and unlearn the junk you've learned because you will never get an inch to the truth of what causes Earth's climate to change until you get off the potty and quit with the silliness. Grow up. Yep, you got nada. Matt, you do a lot of this kind of crap and you know, it's plain stupid, like your comment on polls and how they are conducted on the other thread. This isn't a "chat" board for one-liners Matt. Magellan reminded you to think before you make ignorant comments, but you just love to jump the gun like you were born knowing it all, and you know what kid, you don't. Think for yourself. All last year, and the year before that you've been touting the AGW ideology without thinking - that much is clear from your own comments. Obviously, you lack experience and critical thinking to the point of simply passing off what you've read about the climate and man-made global warming as your own ideology. That was propaganda Matt and you bought into it. That means you are not thinking at all but taking on the opinions and ideologies of others. Get educated. Unlearn what you have learned and you will stop with the silly comments, one-liners and all of the other crap you write to conceal your lack of knowledge and experience. You are only doing yourself harm. Having a keyboard and access to the Internet does not mean that you are enlightened one bit, and frankly you should know better considering how you drank down all that "man-made global warming" kool-aid you keep trying to serve onto people who are educated. How's that for *nada*? |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Feb 8, 2011 10:43:38 GMT
Most of what I do is compare statements that you have made which in my view are deeply contradictory. I let you or others have their own opinion on whether what you are saying is "crap" or not.
You would be a better person if you were more self-critical. It is my mission in life to make you understand that.
It is clear that at least three of us are utterly convinced that your mathematics education ended very early. That's fine as we all have our specialities and gaps in our knowledge. It is just rather difficult to take comments about our own maths or physics abilities from someone who fails to "walk the walk".
Going back to what you said earlier, if you could redesign the world, what parameters would allow an elephant to be suspended from a cliff by a daisy. That's the sort of physics question my tutor might have asked.
|
|
|
|
Post by kernow on Feb 8, 2011 14:29:00 GMT
As a newcomer to this board, I looked here expecting a discussion on EL NINO/LA NINA FORECAST 2010-2011?
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 8, 2011 14:39:17 GMT
As a newcomer to this board, I looked here expecting a discussion on EL NINO/LA NINA FORECAST 2010-2011? There used to be that discussion here. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 8, 2011 15:42:47 GMT
Yep, that was a cut-and-paste-esque diatribe that you've given to various people. It had no point, no relevance, and no facts relating to the matter at hand. Nada. |
|
|
|
Post by steve on Feb 8, 2011 15:51:10 GMT
As a newcomer to this board, I looked here expecting a discussion on EL NINO/LA NINA FORECAST 2010-2011? Sorry kernow. This thread is for astromet's particular forecast and things kind of went downhill when we tried to validate it. I'm sure you will get some interest if you start a new thread on ENSO. |
|
|
|
Post by AstroMet on Feb 8, 2011 19:57:08 GMT
Most of what I do is compare statements that you have made which in my view are deeply contradictory. I let you or others have their own opinion on whether what you are saying is "crap" or not. You would be a better person if you were more self-critical. It is my mission in life to make you understand that. It is clear that at least three of us are utterly convinced that your mathematics education ended very early. That's fine as we all have our specialities and gaps in our knowledge. It is just rather difficult to take comments about our own maths or physics abilities from someone who fails to "walk the walk". Going back to what you said earlier, if you could redesign the world, what parameters would allow an elephant to be suspended from a cliff by a daisy. That's the sort of physics question my tutor might have asked. Then perhaps you need to find yourself another *tutor* Steve. Listen, why don't you find another place to whine? I could care less what you think about my education as it obvious that you cannot count, much less know that the laws of physics do not allow for anthropogenic global warming to be even possible on Earth. And, I don't care to *redesign* the world. What kind of foolishness is that? More of the same playing around with numbers and physics to suit your fantasy world which consists of fuzzy math and probabilistic chaos? The world has order. It follows thermodynamic laws which regulate the climate and the resultant weather. I forecast applying astronomic laws and walk the walk. I don't just talk, which is something you love to do with the fallacy of man-made global warming. Your opinion has no value. This is something you, Glc and certainly Matt do not get. You guys make things up as you go along, you ignore that which does not fit into your weird outlook on the climate, but the climate does not even notice you - it simply follows the laws of physics. If you care so much about validating your ideology Steve, then why is it that for all this time you've failed to prove AGW? If what you say is true then you should have been able to forecast the climate and weather using AGW as your basis - and you have not. To this day, you and those pushing this lie of man-made global warming still haven't been able to prove it other than issuing forth loads of bs you call "science" - which isn't science at all but a lot of pseudo-science ideology. And that dog just does not hunt. Go back and get yourself another *tutor* since it is clear to see where the problem of your fuzzy math got its start. "Redesign" that. |
|
