Climate Change: Why aren't more people concerned about it?

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 801 - 820 of total 2200 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 12, 2017 - 11:54am PT
"This period of climate change is unmatched in the history of Earth's climate ".

My, my Ed. You are delusional. Put down the koolaid jug amigo.

"Policies to execute". To hell with executing policies. Why not just execute the charlatans pushing this scam. How many deaths are they already responsible for ?
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jan 12, 2017 - 07:19pm PT
pud writes:

The best thing these climbing forum superior intellects can do to oppose their own argument is to keep telling everyone how smart they are and how dumb those that disagree with them are.


since he seems to categorize me as "a forum intellect" I would challenge him to produce posts where I told everyone how smart I was and how dumb they are to disagree with me...

should be easy, no?
7SacredPools

Trad climber
Ontario, Canada
Jan 12, 2017 - 07:56pm PT
Why not just execute the charlatans pushing this scam. How many deaths are they already responsible for ?

Care to elaborate?
EdBannister

Mountain climber
13,000 feet
Jan 12, 2017 - 08:02pm PT
it's ok,

some can't acknowledge 23.7 was an inaccurate prediction when the physical and measured result, no disputation and just 100 hours later, was 12.8.

The fact that the number was reset later, based on new data, did not make the older prediction accurate, but acknowledged it's inaccuracy, or there would have been no need to change the number. If the original prediction were 12.8, then you could say it was correct.

NOAH predicted 23.7 feet, the real number was 12.8

Shed your pride, or your NOAH worship, and just simplify your life by telling the truth.
They erred.

so of there is a crack in the Holy Grail of NOAH accuracy, is it possible to have a question about other models they have generated?

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 12, 2017 - 08:49pm PT
Ed B, you're posting to the wrong thread and it's NOAA not NOAH.

Yeah 7. All the head honchos of the CAGW/Big Green industry should be rounded up and face trial for crimes against humanity at the Hague. How many elderly, poor or disabled in developed countries have already had to choose between food and "neccessarily skyrocketing" utility bills; then having chosen the former ultimately died from direct effects of suffering in the cold. How many of the third world poor have died from lung disease's due to the efforts of the CAGW/Big Green industry to deny them access to modern FF power?
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jan 12, 2017 - 08:50pm PT
maybe you intended this for the other topic,

but given the data, the model projection to the date that this would happen was accurate... and the data the model had at the time forecast a large flow.

yet that very same model, with refined data, predicted something very different, and much more "accurate." With the additional information of the probability we could interpret what the level of accuracy was for the forecast, and compare that against the actual value.

no one thought to look at the probability information at the time, though it was a web click away.

Without this more nuanced information (and for those who might be wondering what this about, go look at the yosemite to flood??? thread) you cannot judge whether or not the disagreement of the forecast made 100 hours before the event was to occur is within the precision of the forecast.

It is not wrong to provide a forecast and the uncertainty of that forecast, as was done in this case. Unfortunately, no one was paying attention to that probability information... so we don't know what it was (but perhaps with some more digging it can be found).

But go ahead and make your claims regarding NOAA, you might take the time to read about what they do, and in particular, what this forecast model is... all the information is linked off of the pages I provided on that other thread.

And there is a discussion of the analysis of comparing their forecasts with what actually happened. You'd think that might be relevant to someone making the claim that the models are "wrong," wouldn't you?
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
Sands Motel , Las Vegas
Jan 12, 2017 - 08:53pm PT
FF power isn't a right...It's a privaledge...Spiro T. Agnew is rolling over with all the elite psuedo intellectuals posting on this thread..
EdBannister

Mountain climber
13,000 feet
Jan 12, 2017 - 10:13pm PT
the prediction was different than the result...


if you cannot acknowledge error, the discussion has no further purpose.

amazed

Rick, a little humor goes a long way... so thanks.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jan 13, 2017 - 12:13am PT
I'm neither amazed nor surprised that that you do not have any concept of how to quantify uncertainty in a forecast.

Also amazed that you do not understand what that particular forecast was for, or how it was made, and apparently have no interest in the details.

You seem only to be interested in insisting that because they didn't predict the exact number, they are wrong.

I do agree that it is unlikely that the discussion can move beyond that.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 13, 2017 - 06:02am PT
Not really following this battle of the Ed's to closely, but the published prognostications are conclusive. Ed B is the winner and Ed H the loser again. In his refusal to ever admit fault with the foundational ideology of his new age religion (the scientism scriptures of transnational progressivism) he reveals himself again as a steadfast irrationalist. I can't predict the future any better than one of his preferred prophets, Noah, but I'd be willing to bet that he eventually begins to sing a different hymn when the manna from heaven (Government funding through tax payer receipts) is reduced and the priests of Scientism wither in starvation.
Perhaps then we can expect accountability and the prognostications achieve an acceptable level of accuracy.
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Jan 13, 2017 - 11:19am PT
There are many similarities between trump supporters and climate deniers.
They see themselves as truthseekers who are victims of "mainstream" media, and they have found their saviors in the alt-right. It is so easy now to get caught up in alt-right fake news sources popping off non-stop.

This article is about the trumpeters, but easily applies to deniers as well.
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/theres-one-simple-reason-pointless-try-reason-trump-supporter/

"I’m sure everyone reading this has experienced the painful task of trying to debate and/or reason with a supporter of Donald Trump at some point or another. It’s an experience that often leaves me feeling as if I’ve just spoken with someone who’s either been brainwashed by a cult or is legitimately crazy. In all my years debating politics with my Republican counterparts, I’ve never experienced anything quite like dealing with people who can literally watch a video of Trump saying or doing something
...
If he lies, they’ll reject any source that debunks him. If he contradicts himself, they’ll make excuses for his contradiction. If he sells them something completely ridiculous (such as asking the taxpayers to pay for his wall, claiming Mexico will “pay for it later”), they’ll blindly believe that ridiculous scam without thinking twice.

If he lies, they’ll reject any source that debunks him. If he contradicts himself, they’ll make excuses for his contradiction. If he sells them something completely ridiculous (such as asking the taxpayers to pay for his wall, claiming Mexico will “pay for it later”), they’ll blindly believe that ridiculous scam without thinking twice.
They. Simply. Don’t. Care. 

These people have been indoctrinated by Fox News and right-wing blogs replete with conspiracy theorists and propaganda that most of them would really rather elect a puppet of Putin than a Democrat. Many of them honestly believe that people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are worse than someone like Vladimir Putin.
They don’t care if Trump had to lie, cheat, or even get help from the Russian government to win — which is the only reason why he barely won — just as long as he won.
It’s a sad time in this country. We’re dealing with millions of people who, instead of being supporters of a political party, are really nothing more than brainwashed members of the largest cult in human history. People who reject facts, science and indisputable reality because none of those things tell them what they’ve been indoctrinated to believe.
That’s why it’s impossible to reason with them — because you’re not dealing with people who possess the ability to be reasonable.

tuolumne_tradster

Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
Jan 13, 2017 - 01:47pm PT
Two perspectives on how/why trump was elected, one from Liberal Redneck Trae Crowder...
[Click to View YouTube Video]

and the other from Slovenian Marxist Philosopher Slavoj Zizek...
[Click to View YouTube Video]
August West

Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
Jan 13, 2017 - 02:18pm PT
the prediction was different than the result...


if you cannot acknowledge error, the discussion has no further purpose.

amazed

The annoying thing about phrasing it this way is calling it an "error".

If I predict that the most likely outcome of flipping a coin four times in a row is that there will be at least one "heads", I'm not in "error" if you get tails all four times. The prediction didn't come true, but I didn't make a mistake.

If somebody typed the wrong data into their model, that would be an "error". That their best prediction, at the time, with the available data was off by a factor of two, is not in itself an error.

Should they do a better job of showing confidence levels and all that? Perhaps.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jan 13, 2017 - 05:23pm PT
Should they do a better job of showing confidence levels and all that? Perhaps.

they do... you just have to go to the right webpage and use the information...



monolith

climber
state of being
Jan 13, 2017 - 10:05pm PT
Trump meets with physicist who says global warming is mostly natural and will be good for us.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/01/13/trump-meets-with-princeton-physicist-who-says-global-warming-is-good-for-us/?postshare=5581484341731458&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.1f2152e9610f

Maybe he'll be the next presidential science adviser. What a hoot!
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 14, 2017 - 08:22am PT
Happer is a rationalist with extensive and impressive credentials. Dr. Roy and Lubos Motl vouch for him. It would be good to get a non CO2 religion scientist advising the president.
Ed, can you offer up any slander of your fellow physicist?
monolith

climber
state of being
Jan 14, 2017 - 08:27am PT
Maybe RFK Jr, can advise Trump on vaccines as well.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jan 14, 2017 - 09:59am PT
Ed, can you offer up any slander of your fellow physicist?

I think Will Happer is his own best enemy in matters of politics...
...he should stick to physics.

He's already been in science-management positions and proven to be ill suited for that role. As long as I have known him he has cultivated a puckish iconoclastic personality. Sometimes it works, most times it seems rather petty.

Though given this incoming administration's desire to "shake things up" he is an understandable candidate for a position (who knows which one). And he does have a very high opinion of himself, something of a prerequisite for consideration it seems...

It will have little affect on the course of science, though it may signal the end of US preeminence, especially when coupled with a restrictive immigration policy, the demise of the educational system, and a withdrawal from international engagement.

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 14, 2017 - 10:30am PT
^^^^The gift that keeps on giving.
But, does he support nuclear energy like you apparently do? Was he on board with defusing the hysteria over Fukushima contamination? He can't be all bad, what with a chair in Physics at Princeton and over 200 publications. Can't you see beyond your big Green bias/religion enough to offer up anything in his defense?
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jan 14, 2017 - 10:41am PT
Can't you see beyond your big Green bias/religion enough to offer up anything in his defense?

I'd have to think about some specifics a bit, but there are worse choices. Once again, what's the position, science advisor? The president is free to choose who would advice him.

Can you name the current science advisor, and what specific piece of policy, or administration action can be tied to him (and it is a him).

Messages 801 - 820 of total 2200 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta