Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 11001 - 11020 of total 20048 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Reilly

Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
Dec 20, 2013 - 07:52pm PT
Chiloe, what's a nice guy like you doin' in a place like this?
Should't you be cleaning yer garage?
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Dec 20, 2013 - 08:52pm PT
Speaking of drinking the Kool-Aid
Climate Denier propaganda machine.
Conservative groups have spent $1bn a year on the effort to deny science and oppose action on climate change, according to the first extensive study into the anatomy of the anti-climate effort.

The anti-climate effort has been largely underwritten by conservative billionaires, often working through secretive funding networks. They have displaced corporations as the prime supporters of 91 think tanks, advocacy groups and industry associations which have worked to block action on climate change. Such financial support has hardened conservative opposition to climate policy, ultimately dooming any chances of action from Congress to cut greenhouse gas emissions that are warming the planet, the study found.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/20/conservative-groups-1bn-against-climate-change

Oh, but watch out. This article comes from that pinko socialist almost communist Guardian news group.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Dec 20, 2013 - 09:13pm PT
Here's one from the industry that keeps the lights turned on and the wheels turning on your vehicle High Traverse. This little dose of reality is behind the times (from 2006 ) so the 4.4 billion dollars coming from the Feds alone has likely increased. This doesn't even count the monies extorted from private enterprise or the many billionaires funding CAGW research with the expectation of financial gain just down the road.

http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/climate-change/climate-change-overview/
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Dec 20, 2013 - 09:19pm PT
Oh, but watch out. This article comes from that pinko socialist almost communist Guardian news group.

Hah, good catch on the new Brulle paper HT. I haven't read it yet but the abstract is here, from the journal Climatic Change.

Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations

Robert J. Brulle

Abstract

This paper conducts an analysis of the financial resource mobilization of the organizations that make up the climate change counter-movement (CCCM) in the United States. Utilizing IRS data, total annual income is compiled for a sample of CCCM organizations (including advocacy organizations, think tanks, and trade associations). These data are coupled with IRS data on philanthropic foundation funding of these CCCM organizations contained in the Foundation Centerís data base. This results in a data sample that contains financial information for the time period 2003 to 2010 on the annual income of 91 CCCM organizations funded by 140 different foundations. An examination of these data shows that these 91 CCCM organizations have an annual income of just over 900 million, with an annual average of 64 million in identifiable foundation support. The overwhelming majority of the philanthropic support comes from conservative foundations. Additionally, there is evidence of a trend toward concealing the sources of CCCM funding through the use of donor directed philanthropies.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Dec 20, 2013 - 09:23pm PT
rick, you're obviously a fan of conspiracy theories. So why is it you deny the documented "conspiracy" to deny global warming?
I see you live some of the year in Wasilla. Right there on the coast. You'd be interested in knowing that the Arctic sea ice pack has shrunk significantly in the past 30 years. I hope your house is up on a hill.

Chiloe
It's unfortunate that some of the most timely US news comes from the BBC and Guardian.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Dec 20, 2013 - 09:24pm PT
Chiloe, what's a nice guy like you doin' in a place like this?

This week, mainly grading exams and papers. Dog kept me company at the office today, that place empties out.

Should't you be cleaning yer garage?

Lotsa chores on the list for tomorrow, it's finally the holidays.
raw

Mountain climber
Malibu
Dec 20, 2013 - 09:38pm PT
SO I am not one to deny the climate is warming--trends suggest it would be warming whether or not there were humans--nor will I deny that humans accelerate the warming. My question is: what are we to make of it?

A couple suggestions, from a glass-is-half-full kind of guy....
--Fewer people will die from extreme cold. (Five times more die from cold than from heat.)
--Agricultural yields will increase, due to increased CO2.
--If you want to visit the Seychelles, book your trip sooner rather than later.

"Climate change"? No news there--the climate has always been changing....
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Dec 20, 2013 - 09:52pm PT
trends suggest it would be warming whether or not there were humans
trends over at least 100 years as measured by numerous attributes (sea level, glacier retreat, arctic ice retreat, highest yearly temperatures, mean yearly temperatures........) are all increasing exponentially since the massive industrialization the started about 1900. Right along with the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.
Plus the scientific modeling by physicists, chemists and atmospheric scientists explain the mechanisms.

Fewer people will die from extreme cold.
well that's an odd benefit. Try telling that to the millions who will be displaced by the ocean rise, or the hundreds of thousands who live on low lying islands that are already submerging.

Agricultural yields will increase, due to increased CO2
Not true. For several reasons.
Many of our most important agricultural crops require a cold/freeze period in spring to set their blossoms.
Rainfall will significantly decrease in the bread basket of the US. Which by the way, also tracks atmospheric CO2.
Snowfall in the Northern Hemisphere is also decreasing.
Not to mention the flooding of farmlands by significant weather events and floods.

If you want to visit the Seychelles, book your trip sooner rather than later.
Cute, but the Seychelles will be around MUCH longer than the Andamans, Maldives, Micronesia, Tuamoto Archipelago.......
So you'll have to fight to get onto a flight to the Seychelles.....or at least your children will.

"Climate change"? No news there--the climate has always been changing....
And that of course, is the most illogical conclusion.
I don't want it to happen so it won't.
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Dec 20, 2013 - 09:55pm PT
Chief
where do you get your Kool Aid?
raw

Mountain climber
Malibu
Dec 20, 2013 - 10:28pm PT
Rainfall will significantly decrease in the bread basket of the US. Which by the way, also tracks atmospheric CO2.
Snowfall in the Northern Hemisphere is also decreasing.
Not to mention the flooding of farmlands by significant weather events and floods.

How do you know these things?
raw

Mountain climber
Malibu
Dec 20, 2013 - 10:35pm PT
Many of our most important agricultural crops require a cold/freeze period in spring to set their blossoms.
So agriculture moves north. So what?
Snowfall in the Northern Hemisphere is also decreasing.
What about rainfall?
Not to mention the flooding of farmlands by significant weather events and floods.
What!? There have not been floods before?
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Dec 20, 2013 - 10:37pm PT
raw
the PAST 100 years of climate data show all these correlations.

Summary:
    100 years of climate data of many types, not just air temperature, track CO2 in the atmosphere. And all the effects are increasing exponentially in the past 80 years or so.

    Modern scientific models explain how and why CO2 in the atmosphere is causing these changes.

    CO2 released from the burning of hydrocarbons is several times greater than from all natural sources. Sure, every now and then there's a volcanic event that throws out a lot of CO2 but averaged over the last 100 years it is insignificant compared to anything else.

Good luck to your children, not to mention your grandchildren. Let the Hunger Games begin.
raw

Mountain climber
Malibu
Dec 20, 2013 - 10:38pm PT
trends over at least 100 years as measured by numerous attributes (sea level, glacier retreat, arctic ice retreat, highest yearly temperatures, mean yearly temperatures........) are all increasing exponentially
Your point being?
Plus the scientific modeling by physicists, chemists and atmospheric scientists explain the mechanisms.

So we have an explanation...SO WHAT?

And that of course, is the most illogical conclusion.
I don't want it to happen so it won't.
Huh? It is illogical to observe--not conclude--that the climate has always been changing? Fill me in here...something I'm missing....
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Dec 20, 2013 - 10:45pm PT
What!? There have not been floods before?
Again, the number and intensity of floods is increasing and tracks the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

But go on disbelieving the scientists. Scientists from every technologically advanced country.
They're all cranks anyway. And we never put a man on the moon and brought him back. Your iPhone doesn't work. The next time you get in a jet airplane it will fall out of the sky IF it gets off the ground. Polio and smallpox vaccinations are a conspiracy too. Your computer is a mirage. Electricity is magic.
Either climate change is all a conspiracy or they're all ignoramuses.

Wait, I just got it! Al Gore, Barack and the UN are getting us all riled up so they can take over the world!!!!
raw

Mountain climber
Malibu
Dec 20, 2013 - 10:52pm PT
But go on disbelieving the scientists.
Hey, I've agreed CO2 is increasing! What do you want!?
I do not see how the future can in this way accurately be predicted.
In 1945 the greatest minds in the world did not know if the bomb would work.
What's changed? (These aren't the greatest minds in the world....)
raw

Mountain climber
Malibu
Dec 20, 2013 - 11:00pm PT
Mr Hartouni:
previously he was arguing that the warming didn't exist

Never "argued" that...simply referred to Dyson who said nobody knows what will happen. Point being that aside from warming accompanying CO2 increase, other consequences unforeseeable.../ (Where's the data?)
HighTraverse

Trad climber
Bay Area
Dec 20, 2013 - 11:01pm PT
Chief
Get a grip.
Sure there are nasty earthquakes. We improve our engineering and building codes so fewer people die next time.
Volcanoes. Some people die, many are left homeless. We know where the volcanoes are, people could be relocated in advance if we wanted.
Chief, don't you live near Mammoth? You can easily move before the lava dome blows sky high. You KNOW it will.
You have every right to say you don't give a fig about the Mammoth bulge, you'll take your chances.
But you KNOW there will be earthquakes and volcanic eruptions in your area that we cannot at present predict in advance or prevent.

Just as we know there is global warming caused by burning hydrocarbons. The difference is, it is global. One way or another it will significantly change the lives of all the world's children, all of them. At some point in the future, very slowly, catastrophically. Then our grandchildren will rely on the scientists, those damned fool scientists, to get them to the next habitable planet. The same scientists you disbelieve now.

You can't have it both ways. The majority of scientists can't be both useful and idiots.
Unlike stopping earthquakes and volcanoes, we KNOW how to reduce the rate of global warming.

And now I'll shut down my electricity consuming (15% renewable non-hydrocarbon energy) computer and monitor and have my Friday night beer.

Sayonara.
raw

Mountain climber
Malibu
Dec 20, 2013 - 11:03pm PT
One way or another it will significantly change the lives of all the world's children, all of them.
And how do you know it will not be for the better?
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Dec 21, 2013 - 01:30am PT
The Chief I think this proves your point rather niiiicely.

By analysing the statistical properties of hydrologic records, such as rainfall or river flow, hydrologists can estimate future hydrologic phenomena. When making assessments of how often relatively rare events will occur, analyses are made in terms of the return period of such events. Other quantities of interest include the average flow in a river, in a year or by season.
These estimates are important for engineers and economists so that proper risk analysis can be performed to influence investment decisions in future infrastructure and to determine the yield reliability characteristics of water supply systems. Statistical information is utilised to formulate operating rules for large dams forming part of systems which include agricultural, industrial and residential demands.
Modeling[edit]
Hydrological models are simplified, conceptual representations of a part of the hydrologic cycle. They are primarily used for hydrological prediction and for understanding hydrological processes. Two major types of hydrological models can be distinguished:[citation needed]
Models based on data. These models are black box systems, using mathematical and statistical concepts to link a certain input (for instance rainfall) to the model output (for instance runoff). Commonly used techniques are regression, transfer functions, and system identification. The simplest of these models may be linear models, but it is common to deploy non-linear components to represent some general aspects of a catchment's response without going deeply into the real physical processes involved. An example of such an aspect is the well-known behavior that a catchment will respond much more quickly and strongly when it is already wet than when it is dry..
Models based on process descriptions. These models try to represent the physical processes observed in the real world. Typically, such models contain representations of surface runoff, subsurface flow, evapotranspiration, and channel flow, but they can be far more complicated. These models are known as deterministic hydrology models. Deterministic hydrology models can be subdivided into single-event models and continuous simulation models.
Recent research in hydrological modeling tries to have a more global approach to the understanding of the behavior of hydrologic systems to make better predictions and to face the major challenges in water resources management.
Transport[edit]
Main article: Hydrologic transport model
Water movement is a significant means by which other material, such as soil or pollutants, are transported from place to place. Initial input to receiving waters may arise from a point source discharge or a line source or area source, such as surface runoff. Since the 1960s rather complex mathematical models have been developed, facilitated by the availability of high speed computers. The most common pollutant classes analyzed are nutrients, pesticides, total dissolved solids and sediment.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Dec 21, 2013 - 01:35am PT
Just got back from seeing a movie with my wife. American Hustle-that Christian Bale plays a wide range of characters very well, he'll never be type cast.

Anyway, Ed says his intuition says the thermosphere has very little to do with climate yet he believes Anthro CO2 is supreme as the current driver. Doesn't the thermosphere intercept a good proportion of incoming UV, would we be around to effect the climate without it, or would we all be crispy critters. I would say that Ed could intuit this as a possible positive feedback effect.
Messages 11001 - 11020 of total 20048 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews