Satellites

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Satellites > Page 5

Page 5 of 7

13-06-2020 12:44
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tmiddles, your post is pure projection. You went down the list of every dishonest tactic you leverage and accuse me of doing it. I wonder who your target audience is that you think you are successfully fooling. tmiddles wrote: You say 10 things, 9 of which I understand well and agree with and 1 that is bat shit crazy. Right, you seem to get a good general gist in one part of something that I explained to you but you invariably screw up any part that would lead any rational person to dismiss Global Warming as a WACKY religion based on hatred and intolerance, so you render some batshit crazy conclusion involving a n egregious violation of physics. If I explain why you are violating physics you feel your profound religious faith being put in jeopardy, you become irrational, you claim I'm "making shit up" and you double down on stupid. Did I miss anything? tmiddles wrote: YOU are the one belaboring the point that every text book on statistics got it wrong, not me. Nope. You are the one who cites error after error because you are convinced that if it is on the internet then it must be true. You take pride in your belief that Google search results are your "final word" on matters of reality. I simply tell you that your reference is wrong and that things are NOT necessarily true just because you find them on the internet. This does not sit well with you and you then drift into total cognnitive dissonance in which you convince yourself that you speak for every book ever written. Either that or you convince yourself that you speak for every historical figure who ever lived. tmiddles wrote: How is that? The "data" from an instrument with a narrower margin of error, one that is more accurate, is not the same as that from a less accurate one. Right. That is a completely different topic. You conflate the data with the analysis performed on the data. They are two separate things and you still don't get it. tmiddles wrote:[boring stuff on measurements deleted] So, measuring devices are used to measure. The measurements become data. Are you with me so far? The data is analyzed in a process called "analytics." Conclusions are drawn. [drum roll please]: The conclusions are not the original data. I don't know why you are incapable of grasping this but alas, this is why we can't move forward. You are stuck conflating things that are totally separate and distinct. tmiddles wrote:...Why haven't you quoted Into the Night when he wrote that two calipers from different manufacturers always have the same tolerance? Why do I need to quote Into the Night? Are you under the impression that I can't speak for myself? Do I stutter when I type? Into the Night is correct. Look, I tried to explain to you that the terms you listed are all semantically distinct. You had a choice to either take note and to learn the various semantics or to double down on stupid as usual. Guess which one you chose. So now you know that two calipers from the same manufacturer will have different accuracies but the same tolerance. Your tmiddles brain can't handle it all, can it? You don't get it, do you? You have only one option at this point, i.e. you need to redouble down on stupid, right? I am standing by with my beverage. tmiddles wrote: I was clear in my response You muddied the discussion by specifying digital calipers which have their differences and cause greater risk of miscommunication over terms. tmiddles wrote: he was confusing "resolution" with "accuracy". I don't think you know what those terms mean and their differences. tmiddles wrote: Two caliper makers can have the best print shop in the world to print the finest, prettiest lines ever, and one can still be far more accurate than the other. Yes ... keep going ... tmiddles wrote: As has been demonstrated numerous times you and ITN ... Nope ... we're talking about how you are an ignorant dumbass who doesn't know the meaning of the words he uses. I am merely suggesting that you check your epistemophobia with the valet and learn a thing or two, that's all. tmiddles wrote: You can speak for yourself. I have not interest in trying to imagine what you meant. Thank you for confirming that the correct answer to my question is that you don't know the meanings of the words about which you are complaining. You are whining just to get in your daily quota. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
13-06-2020 13:25
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: YOU are the one belaboring the point that every text book on statistics got it wrong, not me. Nope. You are the one who cites error after error because you are convinced that if it is on the internet then it must be true. I was citing basic statistics textbooks. That they could contain egregious errors as you claim should really be making big news. IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: How is that? The "data" from an instrument with a narrower margin of error, one that is more accurate, is not the same as that from a less accurate one. Right. That is a completely different topic. Maybe for you because you don't know what the accuracy of a measuring device is. But it's entirely on topic for my explanation. Accuracy is performance based and instruments which are seemingly identical otherwise can perform differently. IBdaMann wrote:You conflate the data with the analysis performed on the data. I already responded to this and you're just repeating yourself without clarification or rebuttal. IBdaMann wrote:The measurements become data. A....The conclusions are not the original data. You have not addressed at all that two data entries could come from instruments with differing accuracies. You seem to be pretending that no one will care and it doesn't matter. IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote:...Why haven't you quoted Into the Night ... Why do I need to quote Into the Night? Drinking heavily tonight IBD? You just misattributed a quote from yourself to me, and then argued with yourself. I didn't write that you did. IBdaMann wrote:...different accuracies but the same tolerance. You are just making sh#t up! Define "tolerance". That is an absurd statement. IBdaMann wrote: I am standing by with my beverage. it shows.
13-06-2020 21:41
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tmiddles wrote: I was citing basic statistics textbooks. ... completely outside the context we were discussing. You cited the same words under a different context. That gets your argument tossed. Learn what you are talking about and that won't happen. Dismissed. tmiddles wrote: That they could contain egregious errors as you claim should really be making big news. I never claimed there were any errors in any books. I specified your contextual error, that's all. Enjoy. IBdaMann wrote:Right. That is a completely different topic. tmiddles wrote:Maybe for you because you don't know what the accuracy of a measuring device is. Unfortunately for you, I do ... and I thus dismiss your gibberish, and will continue to do so until you start to make sense. In all of this, you still don't have a point. You're never going to gain acceptance of your point until you get one. If your point is merely that I am WRONG! then you are arguing with the wrong person. Too funny! tmiddles wrote: Accuracy is performance based Basis for accuracy is yet another separate topic into which you have wandered, apparently believing that sufficient topic changes equates to me being WRONG! tmiddles wrote: and instruments which are seemingly identical otherwise can perform differently. You have returned to citing trivia, apparently believing that there exists a sufficient quantity of trivia-citing that makes me WRONG! tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:You conflate the data with the analysis performed on the data. I already responded to this and you're just repeating yourself without clarification or rebuttal. Since you have not written anything coherent elucidating any understanding that data is not the analysis performed on the data, I must conclude that whatever you tried to write was either WRONG! or it was just incoherent babble. ... so, dismissed. tmiddles wrote: You have not addressed at all that two data entries could come from instruments with differing accuracies. I did, in fact, throroughly addres manufacturing tolerance. Instead of asking any questions that you might have had, you used your own confusion to declare me to be WRONG! Needless to say, you aren't very convincing ... and you're dismissed. tmiddles wrote: You seem to be pretending that no one will care and it doesn't matter. I'm not pretending that. In fact, had you paid attention to any of the myriad of times that I specified that tolerance becomes part of the data and is required to have a valid dataset (as also specified in the Data Mine which you have supposedly read), you would have gleaned that my main gist is that tolerance becomes part of the data and is required to have a valid dataset (as also specified in the Data Mine which you have supposedly read). By the way, I have to ask. How did you get that so wrong? It would appear that this whole topic isn't going to go well for you. You don't seem to be grasping the fundamentals, despite repeated clarification. tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...different accuracies but the same tolerance. You are just making sh#t up! Define "tolerance". That is an absurd statement. You are failing to grasp the fundamentals. You are apparently too stupid to be taught this material. Let's open the floor to others to see if they might have better luck at explaining it than I have had. You have to admit, you don't offer many tools with which to work. Anyone. Help for tmiddles? Might I suggest helping him get a point as well? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-06-2020 00:17
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: YOU are the one belaboring the point that every text book on statistics got it wrong, not me. Nope. You are the one who cites error after error because you are convinced that if it is on the internet then it must be true. I was citing basic statistics textbooks. Gesui. You have not been citing anything. You are making shit up. tmiddles wrote: That they could contain egregious errors as you claim should really be making big news. It is YOU making egregious errors. That is not news. tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: How is that? The "data" from an instrument with a narrower margin of error, one that is more accurate, is not the same as that from a less accurate one. Right. That is a completely different topic. Maybe for you because you don't know what the accuracy of a measuring device is. But it's entirely on topic for my explanation. Accuracy is performance based and instruments which are seemingly identical otherwise can perform differently. Accuracy is not margin of error. Tolerance is not margin of error. Performance is not margin of error. tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:You conflate the data with the analysis performed on the data. I already responded to this and you're just repeating yourself without clarification or rebuttal. Gesui. You are just repeating your own fallacies over and over. Argument by repetition fallacy. tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:The measurements become data. A....The conclusions are not the original data. You have not addressed at all that two data entries could come from instruments with differing accuracies. You seem to be pretending that no one will care and it doesn't matter. Redirection fallacy. Mantra 15. Stay on topic. tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote:...Why haven't you quoted Into the Night ... Why do I need to quote Into the Night? Drinking heavily tonight IBD? You just misattributed a quote from yourself to me, and then argued with yourself. I didn't write that you did. Misquoting me is a lie, dumbass. tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...different accuracies but the same tolerance. You are just making sh#t up! Define "tolerance". That is an absurd statement. RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 14-06-2020 00:18
14-06-2020 04:21
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: I was citing basic statistics textbooks. ... completely outside the context we were discussing. No not at all. This is the context: IBdaMann wrote:...when Into the Night says that there is no confidence interval in measurement, he is correct. This is just one of my many references: tmiddles wrote:Read up: METROLOGY AND CALIBRATION Certified Quality Engineer exam preparation material and information. Confidence Level: The probability that a measured value will be inside of the tolerance limits. The confidence level for standards is usually set at 95%. But this is simply being pointed out AGAIN. Do you have a rebuttal? Into the Night wrote:You have not been citing anything. You are making shit up. The link works ITN, they all do. Did you have some trouble with it?METROLOGY AND CALIBRATION Into the Night wrote:Accuracy is not margin of error. Tolerance is not margin of error. Performance is not margin of error. Yes they are. Well Accuracy is the margin of error, with a confidence level (a margin of error always has a confidence level, always). Tolerance is just a variation on describing accuracy, expressing it as a limit of what can be expected with the given confidence level. Performance in the act of measuring always has a margin of error, always. But I welcome your actually supporting what you've said. Did you actually have anything to say to support your claim? Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote:...Why haven't you quoted Into the Night ... Why do I need to quote Into the Night? Drinking heavily tonight IBD? You just misattributed a quote from yourself to me, and then argued with yourself. I didn't write that you did. Misquoting me is a lie, dumbass. Are you drunk too ITN or just this dense when sober? IBD misquoted me. I never said "Why haven't you quoted Into the Night...". He said that and messed up his post. Now you would seem confused about it. I did not misquote you to my knowledge. I hope you'll both make some effort to respect the board more. Edited on 14-06-2020 04:26

14-06-2020 05:43
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tmiddles wrote:METROLOGY AND CALIBRATION Certified Quality Engineer exam preparation material and information.[/url] Confidence Level: The probability that a measured value will be inside of the tolerance limits. The confidence level for standards is usually set at 95%. This is within the context of a quality engineer which is different, and if you would do yourself a favor and get so certified you will learn the context in which tolerance is established and you will become intimately familiar with how it differs from any specific device's accuracy. tmiddles wrote: Tolerance is just a variation on describing accuracy, expressing it as a limit of what can be expected with the given confidence level. I have a much better idea. How about we ignore you until you find two measuring devices of the same manufacturer, make and model that have different tolerances. That each one has its own specific (differing) accuracy is granted. Yes, I like this idea. You insist that accuracy and tolerance are the same thing and that any two devices will have differing manufacturing tolerances, so show us those two differing tolerances from the same manufacturer, make and model. [color=grey][remainder of your babble deleted][/color] I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-06-2020 11:44
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: Confidence Level: The probability that a measured value will be inside of the tolerance limits This is within the context of a quality engineer which is different,... You just made that up. It is a definition of tolerance limits with a confidence level in the context of a single measurement. IBdaMann wrote:...find two measuring devices ...differing) accuracy... I already gave an example of two calipers, identical in size and design, with wildly different accuracy due to performance. This is basic, fundamental statistics and metrology. That you and ITN have decided to take a stand here that all the statistics textbooks are wrong (after you already insisted all the physics textbooks are wrong) is pretty incredible. And also now well documented. Edited on 14-06-2020 12:35
14-06-2020 21:11
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tmiddles wrote: You just made that up. Nope. Hey Genius, what is a Quality Engineer? What is "tolerance"? You don't know. Go learn something instead of regretting your life as a loser. Where's that example of two measuring devices of the same manufacturer/make and model with differing tolerances? ,...[/quote] It is a definition of tolerance limits with a confidence level in the context of a single measurement. [/quote] You just made that up. Ask me how I know. [hint: because it's WRONG!] What a moron. tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...find two measuring devices ...differing) accuracy... I already gave an example of two calipers, identical in size and design, with wildly different accuracy due to performance. Yes, they have different accuracies as I have granted ... but they are of different manufacturers. The requirement is "of the same manufacturer" idiot. You busted Into the Night's chops and mocked him for being WRONG! when he wrote that two calipers of the same manufacturer, make and model have the same tolerance. So, show two that have different tolerances Mr. Genius. This is what happens when you tell art students that Wikipedia is the source of all knowledge. Moron. tmiddles wrote:This is basic, fundamental statistics and metrology. No, it's not. You are WRONG! You are a moron. I'm standing by for that example, Mr. Genius. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-06-2020 23:30
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: ...what is a Quality Engineer? What is "tolerance"?. What? Do you have an answer? I look forward to your explanation as to how my Metrology reference is off topic. Oh and on the subject of making up homework for me the answer is no thank you. You'll have to support your own arguments.
15-06-2020 02:35
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tgoebbles wrote:I look forward to your explanation as to how my Metrology reference is off topic. You're going to have a long wait. You would be better off getting someone else to explain it to you because I'm having too much fun jabbing at you. Hey! What's that I don't see? Aaaah, it's any example of two measuring devices from the same manufacturer, same make and model, with different tolerances! Did you double down on stupid AGAIN and claim that accuracy and tolerance are the same thing? Tell me you aren't THAT stupid. Wait, you did, didn't you? I hope you aren't going to use that oldest, lamest excuse for not supporting your stupid, asinine assertions, i.e. "I'm not going to do your homework for you!" tgoebbles wrote: Oh and on the subject of making up homework for me the answer is no thank you. Of course. Silly me. You did play the "homework" card. So we can end this discussion with "You are WRONG!" once again, except this time your exit is rather lame and disappointing. I hope you are better at art. . You'll have to support your own arguments.[/quote] I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
15-06-2020 10:32
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: tgoebbles wrote:I look forward to your explanation as to how my Metrology reference is off topic. You're going to have a long wait. Well I asked I can't really imagine a more damning presentation of willful ignorance of the basics so I guess we're done here. Edited on 15-06-2020 10:32
15-06-2020 18:10
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tgoebbles wrote:I can't really imagine a more damning presentation of willful ignorance of the basics so I guess we're done here. That's what I've been saying all along. I bet you feel much better now for admitting your problem and getting it off your chest. Your process of learning can only begin when you admit to yourself that you do not know. I commend you. Start with "standard deviation" and we'll work from there. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
15-06-2020 23:09
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: Start with "standard deviation" and we'll work from there. I've got your whole statistics report card in this thread. ITN too. Pretty much the drivers license for being about to work with any topic relevant to the board. But carry on, I know you will.
16-06-2020 00:09
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Have you learned what standard deviation is yet?
16-06-2020 00:31
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: Have you learned what standard deviation is yet? Lay it on me. I'm very interested to hear your explanation.

16-06-2020 00:46
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tgoebbles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Start with "standard deviation" and we'll work from there. I've got your whole statistics report card in this thread. ITN too. Pretty much the drivers license for being about to work with any topic relevant to the board. But carry on, I know you will. I'm appealing to the board. I'm a little bit embarrassed but I'm asking for help. I normally have excellent English reading comprehension ... but I can't figure out what is being expressed in the above by tgoebbles. Is there a thesis statement in there anywhere that you can see? Is it modern poetry? Is it an encrypted hash? I get the feeling that there is some message being attempted to be expressed, like a man who is choking and gesticulating that he needs help ... but I cannot discern the meaning. Any and all assistance is appreciated. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
16-06-2020 00:52
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	I have no idea what he was trying to express there either...
16-06-2020 00:55
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Have you learned what standard deviation is yet? Lay it on me. I'm very interested to hear your explanation. Pretty please
16-06-2020 01:03
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tmiddles wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Have you learned what standard deviation is yet? Lay it on me. I'm very interested to hear your explanation. Pretty please He should only explain it to you AFTER you explain why you are incapable of learning it on your own. That's just this one person's recommendation. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
16-06-2020 02:22
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: I was citing basic statistics textbooks. ... completely outside the context we were discussing. No not at all. This is the context: IBdaMann wrote:...when Into the Night says that there is no confidence interval in measurement, he is correct. This is just one of my many references: tmiddles wrote:Read up: METROLOGY AND CALIBRATION Certified Quality Engineer exam preparation material and information. Confidence Level: The probability that a measured value will be inside of the tolerance limits. The confidence level for standards is usually set at 95%. But this is simply being pointed out AGAIN. Do you have a rebuttal? tmiddles wrote:...deleted Holy Link... Into the Night wrote:Accuracy is not margin of error. Tolerance is not margin of error. Performance is not margin of error. Yes they are. No. Accuracy is not margin of error. Tolerance is not margin of error. Performance is not margin of error. tmiddles wrote: Well Accuracy is the margin of error, Accuracy is not margin of error. tmiddles wrote: with a confidence level (a margin of error always has a confidence level, always). There is no such thing as 'confidence level' in statistical math. tmiddles wrote: Tolerance is just a variation on describing accuracy, Tolerance is not accuracy. tmiddles wrote: expressing it as a limit of what can be expected with the given confidence level. Confidence level is not part of measurement. tmiddles wrote: Performance in the act of measuring always has a margin of error, always. Measurement does not have a margin of error. Measurement is not statistical math. tmiddles wrote: But I welcome your actually supporting what you've said. Lie. tmiddles wrote: Did you actually have anything to say to support your claim? RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 16-06-2020 02:35
16-06-2020 02:25
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: Confidence Level: The probability that a measured value will be inside of the tolerance limits This is within the context of a quality engineer which is different,... You just made that up. It is a definition of tolerance limits with a confidence level in the context of a single measurement. Word salad. tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...find two measuring devices ...differing) accuracy... I already gave an example of two calipers, identical in size and design, with wildly different accuracy due to performance. Accuracy is not performance and is not determined by performance. tmiddles wrote: This is basic, fundamental statistics and metrology. That you and ITN have decided to take a stand here that all the statistics textbooks are wrong (after you already insisted all the physics textbooks are wrong) is pretty incredible. False authority fallacy. Mantra 4d. tmiddles wrote: And also now well documented. Lie. Contrivances, misquotes, and void reference is not 'documentation'. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
16-06-2020 02:26
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tgoebbles wrote:I look forward to your explanation as to how my Metrology reference is off topic. You're going to have a long wait. Well I asked I can't really imagine a more damning presentation of willful ignorance of the basics so I guess we're done here. Assumption of victory fallacy. False (void) authority fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
16-06-2020 02:27
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Start with "standard deviation" and we'll work from there. I've got your whole statistics report card in this thread. ITN too. Pretty much the drivers license for being about to work with any topic relevant to the board. But carry on, I know you will. Assumption of victory fallacy. Denial of statistical math. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
16-06-2020 11:29
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: ...measuring always has a margin of error, always. Measurement does not have a margin of error. So ITN in an older thread you said this: link Into the Night wrote: Wake wrote: A large segment had errors of 5 degree C and higher. BS. NOAA weather stations have very accurate thermometers that are annually checked. So does every airport that reports weather conditions (although their thermometers are only accurate to within a degree). So how did you know the thermometers in question are accurate to within a degree? And would that be expressed +/- 1C so that if, for example, a thermometer from an airport indicated 10.45 C it could have been measuring air that was actually anywhere between 9.45 C and 11.45 C ? Edited on 16-06-2020 11:33
16-06-2020 14:44
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	Thats a bit of an ooops.Please explain and show some tolerance ITN
16-06-2020 16:44
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tgoebbles wrote: So how did you know the thermometers in question are accurate to within a degree? Stupid question. The answer is obvious. Instead of demanding answers like you are some sort of inquisitor, you should be asking nicely, politely admitting that you are asking from the perspective of someone who doesn't have a clue. Really stupid question. tmiddles wrote: And would that be expressed +/- 1C so that if, for example, a thermometer from an airport indicated 10.45 C it could have been measuring air that was actually anywhere between 9.45 C and 11.45 C ? Try rewording your question to "Am I still conflating accuracy and tolerance by expressing accuracy in this manner?" This way you can be told that you are WRONG! with just a "yes" or a "no"! It will be much easier. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
16-06-2020 17:04
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	duncan61 wrote: Thats a bit of an ooops.Please explain and show some tolerance ITN duncan, I was just a tad bit curious as to why you are suddenly rushing to stick your tongue up tgoebbles' azz? Why are you presuming that Into the Night is incorrect? Is it because tgoebbles is instructing you to? Are you not aware that tgoebbles insists that "tolerance" and "accuracy" are the exact same term and are not merely related? Are you aware that tgoebbles insists that since all measuring devices have their own individual accuracies that all devices therefore have differing manufacturing tolerances, including those of the same make and model of the same manufacturer? Are you aware that tgoebbles has been mocking Into the Night for merely pointing out that devices of the same make and model from the same manufacturer have the same tolerance? Are you aware that Into the Night is correct and that tgoebbles is WRONG! as usual, but that rather than learn anything and thank Into the Night for helping him out, tgoebbles would rather recruit you to stick your tongue up his azz and to mock Into the Night as his proxy? So ... why the rush to stick your tongue up tgoebbles' azz? I'm not saying you can't. You are always free to do so, of course, but why the sudden rush? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
16-06-2020 17:51
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Have you learned what standard deviation is yet? Lay it on me. I'm very interested to hear your explanation. Pretty please Until you can show that you are capable of learning SOMETHING, I'm not wasting my time explaining it to you.
16-06-2020 17:59
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	duncan61 wrote: Thats a bit of an ooops.Please explain and show some tolerance ITN See IBD's post in the middle of Page 3 of this thread (post made on 07-06-2020 at 00:47) Press CTRL+F and copy/paste "07-06-2020 00:47" into the search bar and his post, as well as others above and below it, will explain what tmiddles is failing to grasp here.
16-06-2020 23:21
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: ...measuring always has a margin of error, always. Measurement does not have a margin of error. So ITN in an older thread you said this: link Into the Night wrote: Wake wrote: A large segment had errors of 5 degree C and higher. BS. NOAA weather stations have very accurate thermometers that are annually checked. So does every airport that reports weather conditions (although their thermometers are only accurate to within a degree). So how did you know the thermometers in question are accurate to within a degree? And would that be expressed +/- 1C so that if, for example, a thermometer from an airport indicated 10.45 C it could have been measuring air that was actually anywhere between 9.45 C and 11.45 C ? RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

16-06-2020 23:29
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: ...measuring always has a margin of error, always. Measurement does not have a margin of error. So ITN in an older thread you said this: link Into the Night wrote: Wake wrote: A large segment had errors of 5 degree C and higher. BS. NOAA weather stations have very accurate thermometers that are annually checked. So does every airport that reports weather conditions (although their thermometers are only accurate to within a degree). So how did you know the thermometers in question are accurate to within a degree? And would that be expressed +/- 1C so that if, for example, a thermometer from an airport indicated 10.45 C it could have been measuring air that was actually anywhere between 9.45 C and 11.45 C ? RQAA. OK this is more definitive proof that "RQAA" is dishonest and a fraud on ITN's part. I asked a question about ITN's post from a 2017 topic, when I wasn't even on the board, about airport thermometers (something I have never even thought about much less asked about). ITN is presumably a pilot and makes his claims about them with some background knowledge which was not included in the 2017 topic. RQAA is supposed to mean: Repeated Question Already Answered Simply a dishonest excuse to hide from the debate. I get it. You've been exposed for being totally full of it. But I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and ask you about your own statements. Edited on 16-06-2020 23:49
16-06-2020 23:31
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: duncan61 wrote:...Please explain... See IBD's post in the middle of Page 3...Press CTRL+F ...search...it, will explain.... Duncan this is IBDs game that GFM seems to want to emulate. Create homework for your opponent as part of campaign to frustrate debate. GFM knows how to quote just as we all do. gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Have you learned what standard deviation is yet? Lay it on me. I'm very interested to hear your explanation. Pretty please Until you can show that you are capable of learning SOMETHING, I'm not wasting my time explaining it to you. Oh I didn't want you to teach me. I used to tutor statistics and feel very comfortable with the basics (only the basics). I was curious what your take on it was. You guys are rejecting the primary textbooks on Statistics in this thread. IBD has actually coined entirely novel terminology!link tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:The tolerance of any measuring device is determined by the change limits,... The "change limits"? IBD, I am simply amazed at your ability to make up things so absurd that google has ZERO results for them!!! So I really have no expectation on what your version of a standard deviation might be. Edited on 16-06-2020 23:36
17-06-2020 00:08
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: OK this is more definitive proof that "RQAA" is dishonest and a fraud on ITN's part. I asked a question about ITN's post from a 2017 topic, when I wasn't even on the board, about airport thermometers (something I have never even thought about much less asked about). ITN is presumably a pilot and makes his claims about them with some background knowledge which was not included in the 2017 topic. RQAA is supposed to mean: Repeated Question Already Answered Simply a dishonest excuse to hide from the debate. I get it. You've been exposed for being totally full of it. But I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and ask you about your own statements. He's already addressed it for you. It is indeed a RQAA.
17-06-2020 00:39
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: duncan61 wrote:...Please explain... See IBD's post in the middle of Page 3...Press CTRL+F ...search...it, will explain.... Duncan this is IBDs game that GFM seems to want to emulate. Create homework for your opponent as part of campaign to frustrate debate. Not a game, dumbass... I simply directed duncan as to where he could find a multitude of posts that explained what tolerance is, and how it is different than all the other words that you seem to think all mean the same thing, dumbass... tmiddles wrote: GFM knows how to quote just as we all do. Yes I do, but it doesn't make sense to quote a multitude of posts now does it, dumbass?? It makes much more sense to link him to a general area and then have him peruse through the posts made around that area doesn't it, dumbass?? tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Have you learned what standard deviation is yet? Lay it on me. I'm very interested to hear your explanation. Pretty please Until you can show that you are capable of learning SOMETHING, I'm not wasting my time explaining it to you. Oh I didn't want you to teach me. Believe me, I'm fully aware of that, dumbass... tmiddles wrote: I used to tutor statistics and feel very comfortable with the basics (only the basics). HAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! I don't believe you. tmiddles wrote: I was curious what your take on it was. I believe that IBD and ITN have adequately presented it already. I have nothing more to add that they haven't already said. tmiddles wrote: You guys are rejecting the primary textbooks on Statistics in this thread. IBD has actually coined entirely novel terminology!link tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:The tolerance of any measuring device is determined by the change limits,... The "change limits"? IBD, I am simply amazed at your ability to make up things so absurd that google has ZERO results for them!!! So I really have no expectation on what your version of a standard deviation might be. We are not rejecting the books. You simply do not understand the material contained therein, and refuse to learn it even when IBD and ITN simplify it for you.
17-06-2020 01:56
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: ...measuring always has a margin of error, always. Measurement does not have a margin of error. So ITN in an older thread you said this: link Into the Night wrote: Wake wrote: A large segment had errors of 5 degree C and higher. BS. NOAA weather stations have very accurate thermometers that are annually checked. So does every airport that reports weather conditions (although their thermometers are only accurate to within a degree). So how did you know the thermometers in question are accurate to within a degree? And would that be expressed +/- 1C so that if, for example, a thermometer from an airport indicated 10.45 C it could have been measuring air that was actually anywhere between 9.45 C and 11.45 C ? RQAA. OK this is more definitive proof that "RQAA" is dishonest and a fraud on ITN's part. Your asking the same questions over and over is not fraud on my part, dumbass. Mantra 7. tmiddles wrote: I asked a question about ITN's post from a 2017 topic, when I wasn't even on the board, about airport thermometers (something I have never even thought about much less asked about). You already asked the question. It was already answered. RQAA. tmiddles wrote: ITN is presumably a pilot and makes his claims about them with some background knowledge which was not included in the 2017 topic. Irrelevant. And I am a pilot as well as a mechanic. Mantra 15. tmiddles wrote: RQAA is supposed to mean: Repeated Question Already Answered It does. tmiddles wrote: Simply a dishonest excuse to hide from the debate. You are not debating. Mantra 7....10. tmiddles wrote: I get it. You get nothing. You keep asking the same questions over and over. tmiddles wrote: You've been exposed for being totally full of it. Lie. Mantra 7. tmiddles wrote: But I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt and ask you about your own statements. Lie. Mantra 2...7...29... No argument presented. RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
17-06-2020 02:01
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 30...10...30...38b...29...lie...4b...4a...4a...4a...6... No argument presented. RQAA. False authority fallacies. Denial of mathematics. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 17-06-2020 02:01
17-06-2020 02:02
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:...how did you know the thermometers in question are accurate to within a degree? Your asking the same questions over and over is not fraud on my part, I'm specifically asking you about an example from your personal experience. WHERE and HOW did the +/-1C figure for the tolerance of an airport thermometer become information you accepted? gfm7175 wrote: He's already addressed it for you. It is indeed a RQAA. Prove it. You're claiming it's on this board. Pretty easy to post the quote. gfm7175 wrote:...it doesn't make sense to quote a multitude of posts now does it,... You don't have to. Quote one with a link. Learn to communicate with respect for the reader. gfm7175 wrote:We are not rejecting the books. Watch and learn as I quote and link with respect for you as a reader. Here we have my post in which I cite THE textbook for measurement and statistics: link tmiddles wrote: The tolerance of the measuring equipment has a confidence level! Just because a manufacturer does the stats for you doesn't mean they don't exist. Read up: METROLOGY AND CALIBRATION Certified Quality Engineer exam preparation material and information. Confidence Level: The probability that a measured value will be inside of the tolerance limits. The confidence level for standards is usually set at 95%. And here is the gang rejecting that: IBdaMann wrote: If you measure a wall and find it to be of length 27 meters 13.443 cm +/- 0.09 cm ... your tolerance is the +/- 0.09 cm. Confidence level does not apply... Into the Night wrote: Measurements do not have a margin of error. There is no such thing as 'confidence level'. Into the Night wrote: Confidence level is not part of measurement. gfm7175 wrote:RQAA Most telling none of you have offered an alternative method for developing the tolerance value for a measuring tool. It's all there in the manual but aside from repeating "tolerance" and pretending it is something handed down from GOD you have all be mute on the subject. So I'll ask again: OPEN QUESTION TO ANY AND ALL Where does the number come from for a measuring device which is usually called "accuracy" but which ITN likes to call "tolerance". A good example is shown below: You can see the +/-0.03mm for the 530-122* model. ITN's ONLY response to this question was: Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote:...what do you call that ITN? Also where does that come from? Tolerance. RQAA. But, nope, there was no RQAA. A fraud as usual. Anyone consider this an answer?: Into the Night wrote:...the instrument tolerance must be declared and justified, ...
17-06-2020 02:24
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14403)	tmiddles wrote: Most telling none of you have offered an alternative method for developing the tolerance value for a measuring tool. Wow. You say that like you think we are the sum of all knowledge. tmiddles wrote:So I'll ask again: OPEN QUESTION TO ANY AND ALL Where does the number come from for a measuring device which is usually called "accuracy" but which ITN likes to call "tolerance". So, you are saying that you can't learn this information any other way; i.e. you need someone from this board to teach you? Then why do you immediately reject what you are taught? You're flailing. Go learn something. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
17-06-2020 02:45
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: So, you are saying that you can't learn this information any other way; Not at all. I accept this completely (on FAITH!!!): METROLOGY AND CALIBRATION Certified Quality Engineer exam preparation material and information. You, ITN and GFM have rejected it. You claim confidence level is not part of measurement yet the manual for professionals states it is. Edited on 17-06-2020 02:45
17-06-2020 03:29
Into the Night★★★★★ (21596)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: So, you are saying that you can't learn this information any other way; Not at all. I accept this completely (on FAITH!!!): METROLOGY AND CALIBRATION Certified Quality Engineer exam preparation material and information. You, ITN and GFM have rejected it. You claim confidence level is not part of measurement yet the manual for professionals states it is. False authority fallacy. Mantra 4c. No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

Page 5 of 7

Join the debate Satellites:

Threads	Replies	Last post
METHANE-TRACKING SATELLITES	1	30-05-2023 22:50
GRACE satellites to be shut down	1	16-09-2017 22:11