Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 1701 - 1720 of total 26380 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Feb 17, 2011 - 11:06pm PT
Are we still saying that CO2 is causing all this drastic weather??? Are we still having it both ways?

Has anybody given creedance to solar activity yet as a more major player?

EDIT: FWIW, there has been mucho snow in San Francisco before the advent of the Earth Crushing Automobile arrived.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/parenting/detail?entry_id=83256

idiots....
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Feb 18, 2011 - 12:43am PT
Dr. F, quick question--what is the wettest year on record?


corniss chopper

climber
breaking the speed of gravity
Mar 1, 2011 - 05:04pm PT
attn: Dr F - your new home cooking stove has arrived.

Saving the Planet one pie at a time.

Poop: An eco-friendly alternative to firewood.

An Indian village woman arranges cow dung cakes to be dried in Allahabad, India, Wednesday, Dec. 22 2010.

http://photoblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/12/22/5695650-poop-an-eco-friendly-alternative-to-firewood
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 1, 2011 - 05:20pm PT
Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft (which in its heyday was referred to as the Evil Empire) is the protagonist in an interesting article in Rolling Stone.

"America's most successful entrepreneur" states "The right goal is not to cut our carbon emissions in half. The right goal is zero".

But certainly CC, Bluey, Booky, and the list of other non-comprehending zealots, what could Gates know that you don't.

If you care to educate yourselves (beyond the most excellent posts by the scientists present in this thread), then pick up and read the article in RS #1117, it is possible (but not likely) that your mind could be opened.
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Mar 1, 2011 - 05:46pm PT
Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft (which in its heyday was referred to as the Evil Empire) is the protagonist in an interesting article in Rolling Stone.

"America's most successful entrepreneur" states "The right goal is not to cut our carbon emissions in half. The right goal is zero".

How about calling him America's most successful court-certified illegal monopolist, a more accurate and enlightening description.

How much carbon does your hero use to maintain his ginormous mansion (66,000 sq ft) for his small family? More than a bit of hypocrisy, no? At least it's an energy efficient palace.

If you want to learn something interesting about global warming, you can read the following article in the Christmas edition of the The Economist, which explains how GW and human intervention has turned formerly barren Ascension Island into an earthly paradise due to increased temps and precipitation (at least that's a leading theory).

http://www.economist.com/node/17722704?story_id=17722704&CFID=157609201&CFTOKEN=42876164
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 1, 2011 - 06:38pm PT
blahblah, attacking Gates without reading the article is perfect for your brand of folks.

And what brand is that??


Also, nice article on a new paradise. The trouble is, how many folks will be able to move to these more moderate climates when the warming makes their current cities uninhabitable?


Why should I be impressed at the lack of intelligence some folks gladly display.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 1, 2011 - 06:44pm PT
Hufpo has the answer!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/26/nuclear-war-global-warming_n_828496.html
corniss chopper

climber
breaking the speed of gravity
Mar 1, 2011 - 08:55pm PT
-Thank God that Liberals have chosen to be so sensitive to climate change and will die off quickly and allow the rest of us to go on with our lives as normal.

That's what I call altruism ! Hip hip Horah!

k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 1, 2011 - 09:12pm PT
Hufpo has the answer!

Actually, the article says that scientists from NASA are modeling the scenario.
corniss chopper

climber
breaking the speed of gravity
Mar 22, 2011 - 06:44pm PT
Association Of Irritated Residents Defeats California Air Resources Board’s Global Warming Plan

They insist on max regulation of emissions by CARB rather than what is in the works and the judge agreed.

Hilarious if you don't think of how much prices will go up on everything.

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=3650

stich

Trad climber
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Apr 12, 2011 - 10:09pm PT
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Full documentary film)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov0WwtPcALE

The film, made by British television producer Martin Durkin, presents scientists, economists, politicians, writers, and others who dispute the scientific consensus regarding anthropogenic global warming.

The film's basic premise is that the current scientific opinion on the anthropogenic causes of global warming has numerous scientific flaws, and that vested monetary interests in the scientific establishment and the media discourage the public and the scientific community from acknowledging or even debating this. The film asserts that the publicised scientific consensus is the product of a "global warming activist industry" driven by a desire for research funding. Other culprits, according to the film, are Western environmentalists promoting expensive solar and wind power over cheap fossil fuels in Africa, resulting in African countries being held back from industrialising.

The film won best documentary at the 2007 Io Isabella International Film Week.

A number of academics, environmentalists, think-tank consultants and writers are interviewed in the film in support of its various assertions. They include the Canadian environmentalist Patrick Moore, former member of Greenpeace but for the past 21 years a critic of the organisation; Richard Lindzen, professor of meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Patrick Michaels, Research Professor of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia; Nigel Calder, editor of New Scientist from 1962 to 1966; John Christy, professor and director of the Earth System Science Center at University of Alabama; Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute; former British Chancellor of the Exchequer Nigel Lawson; and Piers Corbyn, a British weather forecaster.

Carl Wunsch, professor of oceanography at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was also interviewed but has since said that he strongly disagrees with the film's conclusions and the way his interview material was used.

Oh goodness, they actually honored Wunsch's wishes.
bluering

Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
Apr 13, 2011 - 12:41am PT
The film's basic premise is that the current scientific opinion on the anthropogenic causes of global warming has numerous scientific flaws, and that vested monetary interests in the scientific establishment and the media discourage the public and the scientific community from acknowledging or even debating this. The film asserts that the publicised scientific consensus is the product of a "global warming activist industry" driven by a desire for research funding. Other culprits, according to the film, are Western environmentalists promoting expensive solar and wind power over cheap fossil fuels in Africa, resulting in African countries being held back from industrialising.

More research, Ed? More current? How long will this charade go on??? It may even be true, but the data isn't there. Or it is there if you choose to look at weather cycles from history.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Apr 13, 2011 - 11:19pm PT
It's all the potheads fault!

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2011/04/12/marijuana-causes-global-warming.html?ana=e_pft


In California, some 400,000 authorized growers use about 3 percent of the state’s electricity for their business.

“This corresponds to the electricity use of 1 million average California homes, greenhouse-gas emissions equal to those from 1 million average cars, and energy expenditures of $3 billion a year,” Mills says. However, since California is such a green state, it only generates 20 percent of national carbon dioxide emissions from pot growing, while using 70 percent of nationwide energy for this industry.

Read more: Marijuana causes global warming, uses 1% of U.S. electricity | San Francisco Business Times
corniss chopper

climber
breaking the speed of gravity
Apr 20, 2011 - 11:51pm PT
This is the Coldest Spring on Record in Washington State


http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1454103/pg1


Glaciers growing on Mt. Shasta – Record snowfall to spur even more growth

Crater Glacier on Mt. Saint Helens is now larger than it was before the 1980 eruption.

http://westernfrontamerica.com/2011/04/01/glaciers-growing-on-mt-shasta/
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
May 13, 2011 - 02:12pm PT
Ed,

The NRC study is important because it included economists as well as scientists. It is one of the better studies attempting to integrate scientific findings with economic analysis. For that reason alone, it is worth reading, even if it was commissioned by a highly partisan Congressional request.

I think economists will have some trouble with its conclusions, because they make, sub silencio several assumptions about costs, benefits and risk aversion that greatly influence their conclusions, but I think it's an excellent start.

John
graniteclimber

Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
May 13, 2011 - 02:36pm PT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiYZxOlCN10&feature=player_embedded
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 13, 2011 - 02:38pm PT
always throw a little doubt of skepticism in by finding something about the "source"
JEleazarian

Trad climber
Fresno CA
May 14, 2011 - 01:50am PT
Bruce,

Ten years ago, the climate science was well under way, but the economics wsa non-existent. Unfortunately, we still aren't that far along. A recent AEA paper deals with trying to determine a workable framework for analyzing the economics of climate change. The obvious problem is trying to measure marginal costs, where we have only the crudest of proxies.

Most of the papers I've read either ignore the economics, or admit that there's almost no credible measurement of the parameters. This paper at least has a cogent discussion of the issue.

In general, my experience as an economist and as an attorney has been that the scientific community's work doesn't make it far enough into the economic decision-making, in part because the two disciplines have interst in different things. The interested parties usually provide lots of useless data. The environmentalists will tell us the total cost of pollution, but not its marginal cost. The anti-environmentalists will tell us the economic disruption in total elimination of pollution, but not the marginal cost.

Ideas like cap and trade, that make economic sense, are still not well understood by people who should know better. For example, the editorial pages of The Wall Street Journal -- a publication that should know better -- calls cap and trade a mere tax increase. If, in fact, carbon emissions have a cost (and I know of no scientific literature that says otherwise), cap and trade simply places more of that cost on the emitters. Sure, we don't know the precise amount of the marginal costs, but trial and error should be able to get us pretty close.

The reason I find this study important is that it helps span the rhetorical gap between scientists, politicians, lawyers and economists. Put another way, it helps focus people in one discipline to provide analysis and data useful to interrelated disciplines. As I've said ad nauseum, what to do about carbon emission is, ultimately, a decision about resource allocation. That makes it an economic one.

John

P.S. Do you think anyone in Canada would mind if I start a CARCA chapter in Fresno? I could call it the California Avalanche Rescue Cat Association.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
May 14, 2011 - 01:51pm PT
More stuff to look at:
Do Climate Skeptics Change Their Minds
Confessions of a Climate Change Convert

photo not found
Missing photo ID#202221
The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism and the pdf


Earth's Energy Imbalance and Implications Hansen, Sato, Kharechia & Schuckmann

And with temperatures climbing because of global warming, mining in the Arctic has become logistically possible as well, because sea lanes stay open longer due to thinner ice and railways can operate year round.
Globe & Mail
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
May 14, 2011 - 04:36pm PT
New Rule - science is made by scientists not idiots
Even scarier is why people have stopped thinking global warming is real. One major reason pollsters say is we had a very cold, snowy winter. Which is like saying the sun might not be real because last night it got dark. And my car’s not real because I can’t find my keys. That’s the problem with our obsession with always seeing two sides of every issue equally — especially when one side has a lot of money. It means we have to pretend there are always two truths, and the side that doesn’t know anything has something to say. On this side of the debate: Every scientist in the world. On the other: Mr. Potato Head. There is no debate here — just scientists vs. non-scientists, and since the topic is science, the non-scientists don’t get a vote. We shouldn’t decide everything by polling the masses. Just because most people believe something doesn’t make it true. This is the fallacy called argumentum ad numeram: the idea that something is true because great numbers believe it. As in: Eat sh#t, 20 trillion flies can’t be wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06R-qTXfVYE
Messages 1701 - 1720 of total 26380 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews