Satellites

tgoebbles wrote: Yeah Al Gore put his chips on the wrong number there. If it's happening we know it's slow because we've got 50 years now of not much happening when compared to the 50 years before that is.

tgoebbles wrote: If a measurement differs from the true value what do you call that difference?

tgoebbles wrote: He didn't jot down a confidence level because there was no need to.

tgoebbles wrote: Still no answer to this. What would you like to know about standard deviation? I told you I have no problem with basic statistics. That has no bearing on your ability to answer that simple question.

tgoebbles wrote: Saying that a "tolerance" is "created" is like someone asking how a cake is made and you simply say that a baker makes one. That's not an answer to HOW that is an answer to WHO.

tgoebbles wrote: So IBD let's say a manufacturer is going to determine not what they wanted, hoped and set out to make the accuracy of their device, but what they actually have in their current manufacturing batch. THAT is what the accuracy actually is.

tgoebbles wrote: Your non-answer could be used for just about everything. "How is ______ done?": "Through hard work and determination".

gfm7175 wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:
I will rejoice the day BLM is listed as a terrorist organization and subject to drone strikes for their lynchings and looting and criminal trespass.

.

Rejoice (at least a very tiny bit) because the Mayor of Olympia, WA (Cheryl Selby) is now labeling BLM as "domestic terrorism", taking a drastic change from her former support for BLM.

What happened?!?!? Oh, wait, what's this??? Just in... BLM vandalized her home.

Hmmmmmmmmm.......... Apparently she's perfectly fine with BLM so long as BLM is not affecting her personally... Interesting........

Be violent, so long as your violence isn't aimed at me

IBdaMann wrote:

tgoebbles wrote: Yeah Al Gore put his chips on the wrong number there. If it's happening we know it's slow because we've got 50 years now of not much happening when compared to the 50 years before that is.

Any reasonable, rational adult can verify for himself that there hasn't been any perceptible sea level rise for the last eighty years. Nobody has any information about the sea level before that.

tgoebbles wrote: If a measurement differs from the true value what do you call that difference?

Very few people are able to ask omniscient tgoebbles what that true value is so no infinite-precision-total-accuracy-true-value is ever known for that computation to be performed.

So, until we are able to clone a sufficient number of omniscient tgoebbles to make this a thing, you don't have a point.

tgoebbles wrote: He didn't jot down a confidence level because there was no need to.

So you are admitting that you were WRONG! when you insisted that there is a "confidence level" associated with every measure that is specifically NOT the human emotion of confidence, yes?

tgoebbles wrote: Still no answer to this. What would you like to know about standard deviation? I told you I have no problem with basic statistics. That has no bearing on your ability to answer that simple question.

Great. I will walk you through the process and you can see how many you actually need.

We'll start wiith you selecting an example of an application that requires the earth's average temperature. It can be any one you wish.

tgoebbles wrote: Saying that a "tolerance" is "created" is like someone asking how a cake is made and you simply say that a baker makes one. That's not an answer to HOW that is an answer to WHO.

No. Your insistence that tolerance is not engineered into a system or device is as absurd as insisting that a baker didn't follow any recipe, but was genuinely surprised to have randomly generated a perfect 3-layer cake with "Happy Birthday" on it for you on your birthday.

... and those calipers just happened to meet the tolerance requirements. What a most fortunate coincidence for the manufacturer who randomly invested a lot of money on a gambit

Too funny.

tgoebbles wrote: So IBD let's say a manufacturer is going to determine not what they wanted, hoped and set out to make the accuracy of their device, but what they actually have in their current manufacturing batch. THAT is what the accuracy actually is.

If I understand you correctly, then "yes."

Any measuring device has its particular accuracy. It is not a "+/-" (as say a tolerance) but is an absolute value like "it measures about 0.3 mm too long" or "it indicates I have about a gallon less than I actually have." When you go to a shooting range you look at your target and notice that your shot was wide right by two inches and not +/- anything.

tgoebbles wrote: Your non-answer could be used for just about everything. "How is ______ done?": "Through hard work and determination".

What is clear is that you didn't understand what I wrote. I'm not sure how to explain it more clearly and I'm happy to give someone else a shot.


Would anyone like to give it a try?

.

gfm7175 wrote:
... he loves just about ANY fallacy he can get his hands on...

James___ wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:
... he loves just about ANY fallacy he can get his hands on...

Just queerious. ...
I do wonder about your obsession with male genitalia.

IBdaMann wrote:

James___ wrote:

gfm7175 wrote:
... he loves just about ANY fallacy he can get his hands on...

Just queerious. ...
I do wonder about your obsession with male genitalia.

So you're saying that "fallacy" has nothing to do with gravity and slipping at the rink? I was sure it was a Norway thing ... specifically a Norwegian Jet Stream thing.

James___ wrote:You shouldn't say no hating while hating, Are you a born again Christian?

James___ wrote: Another example is amore or amour or arrmor. When someone loves you, you are strengthened. You become stronger.

IBdaMann wrote:

James___ wrote:You shouldn't say no hating while hating, Are you a born again Christian?

Do you need me to be? What do you need?

James___ wrote: Another example is amore or amour or arrmor. When someone loves you, you are strengthened. You become stronger.

I thought it was "that which doesn't kill you."


.

tmiddles wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

tmiddles wrote:...the actual length he measured was uncertain.

..His emotional state

Ah ah, you skip the actual issue. Was the measurement uncertain or not? Was there a probability that it would fall within a range of the true value or not?...tolerance. ...how it is measured....
You've again ignored the answer:
Statistical Tolerance Limits

IBdaMann wrote:
Any measuring device has its particular accuracy. It is not a "+/-" (as say a tolerance)

Into the Night wrote:[tmiddles] just rejected the answer, conflating 'accuracy', 'precision', 'reliability', 'tolerance', and 'margin of error' again. He loves those semantics fallacies.

tmiddles wrote:
Again you completely ignored the only part of my post I viewed as central to my disagreement with you and ITN. So I will ONLY post it now and address your other points later:

tmiddles wrote:

IBdaMann wrote:

tmiddles wrote:...the actual length he measured was uncertain.

..His emotional state

Ah ah, you skip the actual issue. Was the measurement uncertain or not? Was there a probability that it would fall within a range of the true value or not?...tolerance. ...how it is measured....
You've again ignored the answer:
Statistical Tolerance Limits

You said:

IBdaMann wrote:
Any measuring device has its particular accuracy. It is not a "+/-" (as say a tolerance)

So again you are playing word games. Call it whatever you want but it is what appears in the image below: where it shows +/- 0.03mm

Into the Night wrote:[tmiddles] just rejected the answer, conflating 'accuracy', 'precision', 'reliability', 'tolerance', and 'margin of error' again. He loves those semantics fallacies.

ITN you never addressed the issue of if a measurement is uncertain within some range of the true value being measured.
Vocabulary aside you can still answer that question.

"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper
ITN/IBD Fraud exposed:  The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN

duncan61 wrote:...tell me ...how you measured it ...show your workings or ...accept it can not be measured ...

tmiddles wrote:...deleted lies...Mantras 30...29...29...10g...30...10g...29...

tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 10g...31...25c1..4a...4b...25g...29...

tmiddles wrote:

duncan61 wrote:...tell me ...how you measured it ...show your workings or ...accept it can not be measured ...

Duncan I believe you are saying that if we laymen cannot ourselves calculate the margin of error on measuring the Earth's temperature (I certainly cannot) that it cannot be done? Nope, pretty much nothing works that way. Thankfully humanity is not limited to the ability on this board.

I had recommend before you can check out Pat Franks he actually has a 45 minute video where he explains that we can measure the Earth temp but not to the margin needed for AGW evidence (so you'll like that!). There is always a margin of error by the way it's only "not enough" depending on what you wanted to find out.
Pat Fanks

duncan61 wrote:
...we can not know the Global average to be able to say it is getting warmer.If its not getting warmer the whole problem goes away.

duncan61 wrote: My client was actually a scientist and he had the same take as us deniers that a small amount of CO2 can not make a lot of difference.

Xadoman wrote:
What is the temperature of Uranus?

duncan61 wrote:
The last 2 days have been very cold in the mornings yet today with solid cloud cover it is quite balmy and I am going to my first appointment at 8.00 am in a tee shirt.go figure

tmiddles wrote:

duncan61 wrote:
...we can not know the Global average to be able to say it is getting warmer.If its not getting warmer the whole problem goes away.

I think you'll agree that doubt about measurement accuracy does not transform what is being measured. If it's getting warmer that is true whether or not we can measure it to 0.1C.

tmiddles wrote:
We are all able to determine temperature in our daily lives as animals.

tmiddles wrote:
To say temperature cannot be known is a hard sell.

tmiddles wrote:
So why not have an example of something we CAN measure the temperature of to compare/contrast with the lower atmosphere.

tmiddles wrote:
How about the temperature of your home, the human body, an engine, ect.