Zeke and Mosher say that my analysis of their method is wrong, because I don’t use their method to analyze the output of their method.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2014
- Debt-Free US Treasury Forecast
- Analyzing Big City Crime (Part 2)
- Analyzing Big City Crime
- UK Migration Caused By Global Warming
- Climate Attribution In Greece
- “Brown: ’50 days to save world'”
- The Catastrophic Influence of Bovine Methane Emissions on Extraterrestrial Climate Patterns
- Posting On X
- Seventeen Years Of Fun
- The Importance Of Good Tools
- Temperature Shifts At Blue Hill, MA
- CO2²
- Time Of Observation Bias
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Climate Scamming For Profit
- Back To The Future
- “records going back to 1961”
- Analyzing Rainfall At Asheville
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Robertvd on “Why Do You Resist?”
- arn on “Why Do You Resist?”
- Gamecock on “Why Do You Resist?”
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- Gordon Vigurs on Climate Attribution Model
- Bob G on Climate Attribution Model
- John Francis on “Why Do You Resist?”
- Gordon Vigurs on Climate Attribution Model
I’m thinking those guys are in need of a 12-step program or intervention; despite repeated, near-constant repetition, I still don’t ‘get their point’. I can read their words, but, their point or the gist of it what they are attempting to convey doesn’t stick … it’s as if it is too, ‘vaporous’, maybe with too many voices and no lead singer or concept to look to.
Simplified: “Where’s then beef”. Some hints, perhaps, for those guys.
o Bullet-point the major concepts
o Run through an example or two
o SLOW DOWN and come down to a practical level
o STOP showing graphs; at this point they are meaningless (to getting ppl to understand their concept and methodology and what their differences in methodology are compared to others.)
I say this as a technical observer.
.
I second.
Am on vacation and have time to read. Where do I find context?
BTW.
Will get to Wyoming tomorrow – where I will resume calling you ft Collin folks “Greenies”
I’m Maryland folk now.
If another method does not reach ones conclusion, you would think Zeke-Mosher might conclude something might be wrong? I am left to assume they were either day dreaming or sleeping in elementary school when there teacher told one way to prove you work is to use a different method to check to see it their original answer is truly correct. Then again maybe they are young enough that that lesson was not taught to them because it might hurt their self esteem.
What the heck would Mosher know about climate ?
I think you should require Zesher-Moke to analyze your process and theirs and show why you are wrong. of course, Mosher won’t, but, Zeke might. The results should be interesting as Zeke explains his assumptions if he takes it on.
You might find the real background of Mr. Mosher interesting:
http://www.populartechnology.net/2014/06/who-is-steven-mosher.html