Breaking news

[michael adams]

...

Because you're the one who's prepared to accept that global warming may exist in the "apocolyptic" sense." Not me. I never mentioned apocalypses. That was you.

And so its incumbent on you to explain exactly what you mean by apocalyptic in this context.

...

Oh yes we are.

You appear to be confusing two things.

Getting a sequence of 10 heads out of ten in ten tosses has a probability of 1 in

1024.

And as you say, the probability of getting a sequence which is not 10 heads out of ten, has a much higher probability 1023 out of 1024 in fact.

However, the probability of getting any other particular sequence say HTHHTTHTHT is again 1 in 1024.

The fact that ten heads in a row is memorable, and thus can assume an undue significance in the minds of the unthinking, unlike say HTHHTTHTHT, in no way affects its probability as against any other sequence, contrary to what Keen, your quoted authority, appears to believe

a) "Intuitively, getting heads 10 out of 10 times is very implausible"

Basically this stuff is "Roulette for Dummies" page 1.

michael adams

...

.

[Tim Streater]

No, dummy, don't ask me. Ask those who make the apocalyptic pronouncements.

1024 1024

And so it is, intuitively. Getting 512 of one and 512 of the other is much more plausible.

[Chris Hogg]

As I said further back in this thread, I don't pretend to understand the statistics, but if Keenan's analysis is so basically flawed, I'm surprised the statisticians at the Met Office didn't point it out, as they don't seem to have done.

[michael adams]

But you're the one who just now agreed that global warming

"*may* exist, in the apocalyptic sense that the warmists warn about"

Now you seem to be saying, that you don't actually know what you were agreeing to.

Whereas in reality, its no more implausible than is any other sequence of ten coin tosses. They're all equally "implausible" in fact.

So that in this instance one's first intuition, is clearly mistaken in the sense that no conclusions can be drawn from any particular series of throws. All of which are equally implausible.

The fact that both your chosen authority, and yourself apparently, still set so much store by this discredited notion of "intuition", doesn't say much for the rest of his/your argument I'm afraid.

michael adams

...

[michael adams]

I'm not competent to judge on the specifics either. Only that Keenan doesn't seem to have much grasp of basic probability.

Otherwise there's the general point which may or may not be relevant here, which I made earlier. That the popular literature on pseudo science, everything from Ben Goldacre to Michael Shermer is replete with examples of how cranks and conspiracy theorists use a refusal by those in authority to answer their detailed "questions" as a tacit admission on their part, of a conspiracy and a cover up.

The problem is that answering questions posed by potential cranks and conspiracy theorists only tends to lend them credibility; more especially when most impartial observers are unable to distinguish genuine matters of dispute from deliberate attemps at obfuscation by cranks.

michael adams

...

[Chris Hogg]

I'm getting out of my depth in this discussion (and I don't live in Carlisle!), but I remain unconvinced that recent GW is AGW.

What I am doing is having a detailed look for my own satisfaction at temperature vs. date data. You say "Even fairly simple techniques based on linear regression show that the data post 1998 is well within the range of variability around the same sort of continued trend", so that's what I'm going to look at.

After several fruitless attempts in the recent past to find suitable data in a format I can understand, I've just now managed to find the HadCRUT4 data in a form I can cope with, here

and the column descriptions are here . I've put it into EXCEL and am now playing with it in my simple fashion.

Don't hold you breath.

[Tim Streater]

Stop trying to be a smartarse. You're playing some kind of rhetorical trick here which I don't have time to bother with. If you want to know what sort of apocalypse the warmists propose, you can ask them.

You're still nodding off, I see. No one gathering stats by tossing coins looks at the sequence. They look at how many of each they get and that is what is being discussed.

[Bob]

It's true that there was some debate but only a minority of researchers, even in the early 70s, were predicting cooling. By the end of the decade, there was pretty much a consensus on warming. Spencer Weart's "History of Global Warming" is quite a good read on this. I think it's available in an online version.

[harry]

How about the recent floods in the NW? Three "one a hundred year" events in ten years?

[Tim Streater]

And I already asked what is meant by a "hundred year event" and whose definition it is. Any fool can come up with the phrase "hundred year event" and any fool can label a flood as one and then say "Ooh look Ma, three of them, just like busses, must be climate change"

From today's Times:

Ministers wrong to blame climate change =======================================

Scientists have contradicted a claim by a minister that the Cumbria flooding was unprecedented and linked to climate change. They say that there have been 34 extreme floods in the last 300 years ...

(the scientist) said that analysis of deposits left by floods in the

17th, 18th, and 19th centuries showed they were the "biggest events". These events happened long before the rise in man-made emissions, undermining the claim that the floods were linked to climate change. He said that the government relied too heavily on records dating back only 40 years.

(end of quote)

So how about you stop wetting yourself?

[dennis]

And how often have these one hundred year events happened in the past?

[dennis]

He is an alarmist. Everything bad is due to climate change.

[charles]

when the news report says ".... within living memory" it usually means the reporter is only about 20.

[The Natural Philosopher]

If the likelihood of a given town being flooded is once every hundred years, and you have a hundred similar towns, then one will most likely be flooded every year.

I remember several 'one in a hundred year events' back in the 50s - East Anglia flooded, and so did Lynmouth. IN the 60s' I couldn't attend school because of 'once in a hundred year' floods in Surrey.

I think they blamed the last one on global cooling which was fashionable just then.

after the winter of 62/63..'coldest winter on record' etc etc etc.

Bleagh. Its always some record being broken. Always some 'once in a hundred year' event that stops the trains.

[michael adams]

What's apocalyptic about a bit of flooding ?

Where's that stiff upper lip ?

If there'd been a volcanic eruption with lava flowing everywhere, along with an earthquake, which cause a total meltdown of Sellafield, along with a tsunami then that admittedly might be reasonably described as bordering on apocalyptic.

However after a nice cup of tea from the WVS mobile canteen things will soon be looking up again.

Chin up !

michael adams

...

[michael adams]

But you're the one who agrees that they may be right. Not me.

I merely pointed out that whether a person regards something as "apocalyptic" or not, is highly subjective and may largely depend on their own outlook on life and experiences. So that people who've survived bombing, earthquakes or similar natural calamities will have a different view on the matter compared to others who haven't

I can't really see any reason for you to be throwing your toys out of the pram over this.

Eh ? Why would anyone need to gather stats about tossing coins ?

The probablility of tossing any particular sequence of ten tosses, is 2 to the power of 10, 1024

michael adams

...

[Tim Streater]

Ah, glad to see you've taken my advice and asked the warmists what they mean by "apocalyptic". Well done.

[tony sayer]

That big Thames freeze over back whenever it was?, do so with sunspots and the Maunder minimum was it?....

[michael adams]

So that unlike me, it seems you do in fact agree with Harry then ?

And that these latest local difficulties are in fact evidence of global warming.

michael adams

...

I'm prepared to accept that it *may* exist, in the apocalyptic sense that the warmists warn about. Tim Streater Dec 11th 2015

[The Natural Philosopher]

Well so they say, so they say. These days I am sceptical of every 'explanation'