Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
41 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Explaining the IPCC report for layman and deniers rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

This video summarizes the latest IPCC report and addresses the common criticisms.

EDIT:
Thanks for the technical help!
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Hefferan
United States
Saint Paul
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Explaing the IPCC report for layman and deniers
whac3 wrote:

This video summarizes the latest IPCC report and addresses the common criticisms.


FTFY
2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Germany
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Re: Explaing the IPCC report for layman and deniers
bjlillo wrote:
There's no video there.

Denier!
31 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Germany
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Re: Explaing the IPCC report for layman and deniers
Koldfoot wrote:
I gotta tell ya, when I finally got around to it, that video took an effort to get through.

Not only that, I had read the 30 some odd page summary from the ipcc website and it was not even close to what this guy presented. I went back to double check before posting this.

The official document hedges every proclamation they make. Every statement is qualified with likely, probable, more than likely, high degree of probability and so forth.

It certainly looked as if there was very little consensus from the participants on any of the myriad of topics included. Certainly the certainty this guy tries to portray is not there.

The video appears to be mostly based on the report's Summary For Policymakers, particularly the highlighted blurbs in it. Some of the comments in the video are direct quotes, like: "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal" and "Human influence on the climate system is clear". So this summary certainly displays consensus on all of the emphasised statements.

I have not read the full report since it is over two thousand pages long; the summary links to certain chapters though. And the Technical Summary at the beginning of the report also has this to say (direct quote): "It is extremely likely that human activities caused more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010." (TS4.2) Do take a look at Table 1.2 in the Introduction as it lists percentages for each qualifier: "likely" means 66-100% probability, "very likely" is 90-100% and "extemely likely" 95-100%. Which is a bit different from common parlance.

However, I found the demeanor of the guy in the video quite arrogant to be honest, which is a shame really since this is apparently the "Sci Show". What does he have against Breaking Bad?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Those involved in the science of describing climate change come from most if not all branches of the sciences, and so here is a link to what physicists have to say. That link is hosted on the official site of the American Institute of Physics, one of the premier physics publishing organizations in the world and particularly in North America.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Snowball
Belgium
n/a
flag msg tools
badge
Gender: pot*ato. My opinion is an opinion.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
... of the American Institute of Physics, one of the premier physics publishing organizations in the world and particularly in North America.

Yes. But physics is part of the eco-facist conspiracy.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Snowball
Belgium
n/a
flag msg tools
badge
Gender: pot*ato. My opinion is an opinion.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Exactly. And it's not only science, it's reality and science merely acknoledges that.
Take something as apparently obvious as Pythagore theorem and actually measure triangles. If you measure with a good enough precision, you won't find a single triangle verifying the theorem. It's a model, an approximation that is true *on average*.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
HavocIsHere wrote:

Exactly. And it's not only science, it's reality and science merely acknoledges that.
Take something as apparently obvious as Pythagore theorem and actually measure triangles. If you measure with a good enough precision, you won't find a single triangle verifying the theorem. It's a model, an approximation that is true *on average*.

Oh, that does work precisely within the physical limitations of measurement.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Snowball
Belgium
n/a
flag msg tools
badge
Gender: pot*ato. My opinion is an opinion.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:

Oh, that does work precisely within the physical limitations of measurement.


Says the physicist!!!!!devil
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Webb Space Telescope in 2018!
United States
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
HavocIsHere wrote:

Exactly. And it's not only science, it's reality and science merely acknoledges that.
Take something as apparently obvious as Pythagore theorem and actually measure triangles. If you measure with a good enough precision, you won't find a single triangle verifying the theorem. It's a model, an approximation that is true *on average*.

I hesitate to ever say we need more marketing in this world. But we need more marketing when it comes to climate change education. Scientists are apparently terrible at marketing - and thank heavens for that.

When scientists say "we're 95% sure" that translates in marketing terms to "This is happening. You're an idiot if you don't think this is true."

The media is apparently not savvy enough to get this distinction.

And iF they ever do a story about the sunrise, for example, they must find a counter-view. They will find some guy to explain why the sun won't come up tomorrow. Why would they even do a story about the sun? Well because the light bulb manufacturers will have done too good a job at their own marketing - "Scientists are actually not 100% sure the sun will come up tomorrow."
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ed Bradley
United Kingdom
Haverhill
Suffolk
flag msg tools
badge
The best things in life aren't things.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
HavocIsHere wrote:
whac3 wrote:

Oh, that does work precisely within the physical limitations of measurement.


Says the physicist!!!!!devil


It's worse, man. He's a measureist!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Schaeffer
United States
Unspecified
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DCAnderson wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:

The official document hedges every proclamation they make. Every statement is qualified with likely, probable, more than likely, high degree of probability and so forth.


This is a really weird criticism. Why would you expect scientists not to phrase things that way considering that you can't really know anything in science with 100% certainty?

Scientists are totally anal like that. If there is even the slightest chance (no matter how tiny) that they could be wrong, then they're not going to phrase things as an absolute.


Well, you know, if they can't say something with 100% certainty, then it's just not true.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
This Guy
United States
Durham
North Carolina
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
I remember when teachers taught us how to take a test: "If a statement contains the words always or never, it's probably false." We know that at a gut level as adults.

When it comes to climate change, it's very easy to say, "Every scientist agrees," or "Every respectable scientist's research shows," or something equally certain. But somehow deniers want to have it both ways: you can't say with 100% or they say there's not consensus, but if anyone does say it with 100% certainty, they call bullshit because nobody can be 100% certain.

We need Father Guido Sarducci to deliver the news on climate change: "It might not be such a bad idea to do something about this climate change. I don't want to be an alarmist, but if it gets too much hotter, you'll be seeing a lot more priest legs, and that's not good."

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
Golux13 wrote:
DCAnderson wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:

The official document hedges every proclamation they make. Every statement is qualified with likely, probable, more than likely, high degree of probability and so forth.


This is a really weird criticism. Why would you expect scientists not to phrase things that way considering that you can't really know anything in science with 100% certainty?

Scientists are totally anal like that. If there is even the slightest chance (no matter how tiny) that they could be wrong, then they're not going to phrase things as an absolute.


Well, you know, if they can't say something with 100% certainty, then it's just not true.
I reiterate, the guy in the video portrays it as 100% certainty. That is all I wanted to point out.

Read the summary which he claims to explain. The ipcc does not present itself with the same certainty as this narrator.

Yes, because the report states it as close to 100% certainty as science ever gets.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Germany
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
I reiterate, the guy in the video portrays it as 100% certainty. That is all I wanted to point out.

Read the summary which he claims to explain. The ipcc does not present itself with the same certainty as this narrator.

Well, if you want to hang yourself up on that 95%, we can put that to the test right here. You're wrong unless this d20 rolls a 1:

1d20 = (18) = 18
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
  • [+]
  • 452133. Simon Mueller
  • 1d20 =
  • (18) =
  • 18
  • Thu Oct 24, 2013 11:27 pm
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
whac3 wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:
Golux13 wrote:
DCAnderson wrote:
Koldfoot wrote:

The official document hedges every proclamation they make. Every statement is qualified with likely, probable, more than likely, high degree of probability and so forth.


This is a really weird criticism. Why would you expect scientists not to phrase things that way considering that you can't really know anything in science with 100% certainty?

Scientists are totally anal like that. If there is even the slightest chance (no matter how tiny) that they could be wrong, then they're not going to phrase things as an absolute.


Well, you know, if they can't say something with 100% certainty, then it's just not true.
I reiterate, the guy in the video portrays it as 100% certainty. That is all I wanted to point out.

Read the summary which he claims to explain. The ipcc does not present itself with the same certainty as this narrator.

Yes, because the report states it as close to 100% certainty as science ever gets.
Moshe, likely + probably+ more than likely+ very probable = as close to certainty as is humanly possible?

No. It equals some amount less than that. Probably in the range of certainly - X(7+Y). Where X=politics.

Koldie, I'm sorry but you're just not scientifically literate. The only time we don't qualify a statement of a result is when it's a mathematical proof.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
Koldie, I'm sorry but you're just not scientifically literate. The only time we don't qualify a statement of a result is when it's a mathematical proof.


Prove it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Crypt Keeper
United States
California
flag msg tools
None shall pass!
badge
'Tis but a scratch.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yet when you show the libs a mathematical certainty like this...

They suddenly become very skeptical that there's a problem.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
whac3 wrote:
Koldie, I'm sorry but you're just not scientifically literate. The only time we don't qualify a statement of a result is when it's a mathematical proof.


Prove it.

RSP is not a paper I intend to list on my CV.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Gialmere wrote:
They suddenly become very skeptical that there's a problem.


No, we look at it and go "Wow, that's based on a straight-line linear progression of debt growth based on the 2009 fiscal year. Which is a really stupid year to pick because it's the single highest debt growth in peace time and doesn't reflect that the actual growth of the debt is already down to 50% of that level. And if we could get Congress to do stupid stuff like raise taxes a bit while continuing to cut spending, the structural deficit would be zero around 2020 and we would start running a structural surplus that would be even better soon thereafter."

I know it's not as good a sound-bite, but it's a hell of a lot smarter than that idiotic graph.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
perfalbion wrote:
whac3 wrote:
Koldie, I'm sorry but you're just not scientifically literate. The only time we don't qualify a statement of a result is when it's a mathematical proof.


Prove it.

RSP is not a paper I intend to list on my CV.


It was intended to be humor. I should use the emoticons more.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Gialmere wrote:
Yet when you show the libs a mathematical certainty like this...
[big scary graph]
They suddenly become very skeptical that there's a problem.

Of course US debt is a problem. Tat's been said loudly since at least the time of Reagan. What divides people is what to do about it. Personally, I'm glad I don't live in the US anymore and effectively it's not my problem. Sadly, I think eventually inevitably the US will default and that the economic consequences will be catastrophic. For the sake of the people who would suffer, I dearly hope I am mistaken.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
whac3 wrote:
perfalbion wrote:
whac3 wrote:
Koldie, I'm sorry but you're just not scientifically literate. The only time we don't qualify a statement of a result is when it's a mathematical proof.


Prove it.

RSP is not a paper I intend to list on my CV.


It was intended to be humor. I should use the emoticons more.

I know; so was my response.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
フィル
Australia
Ashfield
NSW
flag msg tools
designer
badge
I've got an 808 and a 303 and a record collection like the ABC
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Drew1365 wrote:
Here's an explanation for laymen and deniers:


• “Current datasets indicate no significant observed trends in global tropical cyclone frequency over the past century … No robust trends in annual numbers of tropical storms, hurricanes and major hurricanes counts have been identified over the past 100 years in the North Atlantic basin.”

• “In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale.”

• “In summary, there is low confidence in observed trends in small-scale severe weather phenomena such as hail and thunderstorms because of historical data inhomogeneities and inadequacies in monitoring systems.”

• “Based on updated studies, AR4 [the IPCC 2007 report] conclusions regarding global increasing trends in drought since the 1970s were probably overstated.”

• “In summary, confidence in large scale changes in the intensity of extreme extra-tropical cyclones since 1900 is low.”

That's a pretty interesting walk-back of the 2007 report.

Drew, how does this fit in with the conspiracy?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Crypt Keeper
United States
California
flag msg tools
None shall pass!
badge
'Tis but a scratch.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
No, we look at it and go "Wow, that's based on a...

[Blah blah skepticism, blah blah skepticism, blah blah skepticism]

...but it's a hell of a lot smarter than that idiotic graph.

I rest my case.

whac3 wrote:
I dearly hope I am mistaken.

You're not.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.