Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 11001 - 11020 of total 29705 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Aug 30, 2013 - 12:39am PT
The Chief ...yeah that was me the other day...I recognized you by your plumbers crack when you whizzed by...Did you see my Climate Deniers Suck bumper sticker....? RJ
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 12:46am PT
RJ:
Impossible on the claim of plumbers crack and my possibly seeing your deniers sticker. Had you ever been at 140-150 mph, you'd certainly understand.

Here is my peer rev'd ref.



In order to debunk my point and ref, what does my license say?

The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 12:56am PT
Right- wing f*#ktards by another name ...

Completely verifies my claim on how this has absolutely NOTHING to do with science nor saving the planet.

All just an ideological politically based agenda.

Thanks Riley.


RICK S:
Looks like you doomists have been taking a bit of a beating lately from somebody actually in the research field of atmospheric science. Can't say i feel sorry for you guys.

Yup. MD appears to be doing a good job at shooting em in the face and taking no prisoners.

Love the way most of these supposed/wanna-be GW scientist have flown the coupe for the day. Not one viably challenging MD on his inputs today.

That verifies my standing claim how this AGW is just a bunch of politically based bullshet rhetoric.
dirtbag

climber
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:31am PT
^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^



rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:36am PT
The Chief, Bruce, Mad69Dog, and even Ed will surely love this peice from Richard Lindzen, just published in the journal of american physicians and surgeons. It touches on many of the things The Chief and i have had to say, new observations from MD, and may answer some of Bruce's disingenuous questioning.

http://www.jpands.org/vol18no3/lindzen.pdf
mountainlion

Trad climber
California
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:39am PT
I will paraphrase quote from you MADDOG69 "to me it is a moot point until we are all getting our energy from WIND, SOLAR, GEOTHERMAL...etc"

How can you be posting in the Chief's defense???

take a stand man...I mean the Chief at least let's everyone know:

1)he's on a fixed income and can't afford to pay the full cost of the energy he uses...

2)he is a TROLL...........

3)he doesn't care about the future of the people on this planet as long as the people in the current time frame are allowed to live within his VIEWPOINT...

4)he "thinks" he is racing in the isle of man on a plethora of bikes when in reality he is pulling wheelies while testing the breaking point of a tire under a "CHIEFS GIRTH" while at an unsafe speed...at least for someone of his girth it is an unsafe speed...for the rest of us who climb...we pedal faster than that...
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 07:52am PT
"How exactly does science fail?"

In numerous ways. The most common failing involves the corruption of the process by bias. Science was once thought to be a philosophical search for truth but the bulk of modern science has become a greedy search for wealth.

"I was so puzzled at your statement that I googled " failures of science"

Many laypeople attempt to Google their way towards some level of expertise but in science, one actually has to join the practice in order to become an expert. Supertopo is a climbing forum, not a bastion of science so if you really want to understand climate change, you are hanging out in the wrong place.

"You make some strange statements which make me start to doubt for credentials or marbles. What are your credentials and experience anyway?"

It's awesome that you feel you can assess my marbles in an anonymous climbing forum. And my intent is to remain anonymous here, so no, I will not lay my CV out in front of you. I do that when I publish at my day job, when I review submissions for environmental journals, etc., but here I'm simply speaking up in a climbing forum where a GW thread has generated over 13000 replies and my gut instinct is that most of them were made by people that have had zero involvement in the actual science itself.

I will be honest and say that I received a PhD in analytical organic chemistry over 30 years ago. My career has been diverse, ranging from research in environmental analysis, surface analysis, forensic analysis and molecular spectroscopy. The reason I was hired into the NASA programs at MIRAGE and Intex-B had to do with four research teams that were not satisfied with the analytical performance they achieved in field studies. They simply wanted to improve the accuracy and precision of their measurements. Thus I was involved in modification of the inlet systems - meaning the ports that extended through the hull of the aircraft that are designed to sample the atmospheric air column in order to deliver a subsample of the air into analytical instrumentation. I was also tasked with design and implementation of improved standardization techniques for these same 4 team's studies.

While on these missions, I actually sat at the instruments and collected data. Back on the ground, our teams evaluated and interpreted the data and then wrote publications after the studies were complete. So those are the facts - I design and modify measurement instrumentation to achieve data with minimal bias. Because those four teams saw improvement in the quality of their data, broader discussions followed amongst the scientists aboard these missions - mostly about data quality and the uncertainty associated with the measurements. As an undergrad, I'd learned how to evaluate measurement uncertainty through proper experimental design and in the years since, my contribution to science has been involved with evaluating, understanding and attempting to control the factors that add to measurement uncertainty. Many scientists are content to publish their data as tables of numbers and make no attempt to discuss what their actual in-matrix variability picture looks like. I prefer to clearly present how data quality varies across the measured concentration range and show what effects result from changes in the matrix - in this case: temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, particulate size and concentration, etc.

But step back a minute and tell me why the hell you feel that you can evaluate my credentials as a scientist on a climbing forum. Really?
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 08:11am PT
>I will paraphrase quote from you MADDOG69 "to me it is a moot point
>until we are all getting our energy from WIND, SOLAR, GEOTHERMAL...etc"

I see you failed your Paraphrasing 069 class. Maybe you can Google up an online class or for a faster solution, just learn to cut and paste... Let's work with the actual quote, OK? And, by the way, the handle is "Mad69Dog", so get it right. Here is the actual quote:

"Until the majority of the people on the planet are getting their energy from solar, tide, wind, etc., we're going the wrong direction."

>How can you be posting in the Chief's defense???

Simple, he goes against the popular grain. He is an independent thinker. When we all stand and salute popular misconception, progress halts and innovation is starved. The only way science can work is if we look for alternative points of view. The process has a critical element where one is forced to consider that our opinion is flawed. If the researcher refuses to consider alternate outcomes, then he or she will only see what he or she wants to see.

>take a stand man...

My stand was clearly stated when I entered this lay-opinion cesspool: The global heat budget estimates have too much uncertainty to predict that fossil fuel combustion is the dominant contributor to global temperature rise.
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 08:45am PT
"Had you ever been at 140-150 mph, you'd certainly understand."

I haven't raced motorcycles since I was an undergrad, and the tech has come so far, you can't compare it to modern racing. I have been over 160 on a friend's tricked out Kawasaki, so I do know that thrill.

Most of my scar tissue was caused by crashing in my racing days so I get a bit queasy seeing crash footage. I had a high speed tank slapper on a big downhill once that still gets replayed in the brain video.

Awesome Youtube clip there, Chief!
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 09:37am PT
MD:
Most of my scar tissue was caused by crashing in my racing days so I get a bit queasy seeing crash footage. I had a high speed tank slapper on a big downhill once that still gets replayed in the brain video.

Know exactly what ya mean DOC.


ARRA Lic#1544 here. 79-83' Box Stock and Modified Class. 82-84' GPZ550's and 81-85' Katana 750/1000/1100's

Worst crash in my books was on my Katana 750, coming outta turn 6 at Willow, May 21, 83. Front Dunlop blew. BAM! Off I went airborne. Finally landed on my ass and slid for over 500 feet off into the dirt at turn 7 before tumbling to a stop. As I did, the bike was end over ending and flew right over me as I turned to look back to see where it was.

Walked away with bumps and bruises. My Arai and Bates Customs were toast but they did their job.



Gotta love it. Oh how I do. Climbing was always for fun. Riding My BIKES was and is my life time love.

Like John Fischer told me two weeks before he passed on his...

"Nothing like seeing that circle at 120 plus!"

Anyone that really knew John knows he loved riding his rig more than anything.



MD:

Keep up the good inputs. Interesting to say the least in seeing how the wanna-be patting one another on the back consensus fanatical Utopiaism sheep here are interacting with your real experiential science responses. Like old John Britten showing up at Daytona with his back yard garage hand made marvel and then literally kicking the fields ass!



Or these dedicated "thinking outta the consensus/proverbial box" dudes doing the same some 17 years later. Not only did they kick the "Consensus's" fields ass. They WON!:

http://www.cycleworld.com/2008/09/29/the-irving-vincent-a-modern-high-performance-black-lightning-first-look/
The Irving Vincent Wins Battle of the Twins at Daytona, USA

Bob Williams

Congratulations to Ken Horner, rider Craig McMartin, and the Irving Vincent team for the spectacular success of the Daytona Project. On 4th March 2008, at the Daytona International Raceway, the final heat in the ‘Battle of the Twins’ was won by the Australian developed Irving Vincent. It was a crowning achievement and a tribute to Ken Horner’s vision, in which he pondered the question, "Where would Phil Irving have taken his original Vincent engine design in the light of current engine technology?"
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:03am PT
"As I did, the bike was end over ending and flew right over me as I turned to look back to see where it was."

Anyone that's raced knows how cruel it is to hit the deck then have the bike deliver the ultimate insult. I took a footpeg to the ribs after bottoming the suspension and going over the bars at the bottom of a steep hill. I got permanent damage to C3 out of that, and a nasty burn to boot.

"Like old John Britten showing up at Daytona with his back yard garage hand made marvel and then literally kicking the fields ass!"

I remember it well. 1991 I think. The team I rode for went to Daytona pretty much every year. I only got that brand of humble pie one time and that was '77. It was a thrill seeing the top dogs on their big dollar rides.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:20am PT
The global heat budget estimates have too much uncertainty to predict that fossil fuel combustion is the dominant contributor to global temperature rise.
Care to show us numbers & references?
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:23am PT
DOC:

I know you will enjoy this very low keyed but so important tid bit of American Motorcycle History.

http://www.odd-bike.com/2012/12/harley-davidson-vr1000-thundering.html

This is the other rig I will purchase when I win the Lotto. #26 of 32 made is sitting in the Glendale CA Harley Show Room. Only has 139 hours on her. $45K will take her home.

I love this story/history of real innovation.


Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:30am PT
>Care to show us numbers & references?

I'll think about it. I mean, you'd need a few dozen big papers just to understand the foundation and hint: the Wikipedia article is not an easy shortcut. Are you willing to put 2000 to 3000 hours into reading the pubs and a few thousand more into checking the balance sheet? If you aren't willing to dig that deep, you are wasting your time. Also, depending on your education and ability, you might need a few years in grad school and a few practicing the craft to be able to understand the pubs.



Hey Chief, I do know some Harley racing history and have respect for it. The first time I saw total domination by a Harley was at a hill climb event. Good God, the power...
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:30am PT
I must evaluate your credentials because I have to establish some level of trust. Look, it is all boiled down to this. most everyone here has at best a greatly limited capability of following the science let alone critiquing it, yet we through our democratic process are asked to judge it. As chuff points out it is highly political and to tell you the truth that is what interests me most.

There are a few ways available to establish trust in your opinions. One most certainly is credentials and professional experience. That would certainly factor into my hiring of a engineer or any other pro so it's a no brainier. I understand the need for anonymity so no sweat there. Fact is, credentials or not you must provide persuasive evidence that corruption or bias exists to a significant degree. Anyone wether its Rick Sumner or Fred Singer can assert all they want but it don't mean jackshit unless they can provide compelling evidence. We're all just members of the jury, house wives, carpenters and garbage men expected to cast judgement so if you don't want us to send the guy to the hang man on gut instinct then show us the money. Presumably you have witnessed and chronicled some of it so lets hear it.

If it checks out maybe you'll gain some credibility which on top of your credentials might mean something.

Then we can move on to the really fascinating stuff. You're not by any chance a Christian evangelist of the dominionist persuasion are you?
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:33am PT
Balmaseda1 and Trenberth's 2013 paper.

Credit: monolith

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50382/abstract
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:38am PT
>If it checks out maybe you'll gain some credibility which on top
>of your credentials might mean something.

When I want scientific credibility, I publish in a peer-reviewed journal. Experts assess my credibility in science, not a climbing forum. I'm totally comfortable having armchair scientists call me a hack, so proceed and wreak your havoc on my fragile reputation. I fear not.

I have done my best here to give some free clues about the truth (we need more and better quality data). I've stated my beliefs and biases (ocean surface temperature data base suggests earth's temperature is rising; my opinion is that FF combustion is a contributor; not enough data of adequate quality exists yet to make a *scientifically-based* call)

>Then we can move on to the really fascinating stuff. You're not by any
>chance a Christian evangelist of the dominionist persuasion are you?

Uggh, no but don't let that interrupt your fantasy.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:43am PT
No need for an expert to assess your ridiculous statements, like:

Most leading researchers in the field are not convinced that fossil fuel combustion has led to warming of Earth's surface.

And yet, in 2006, atmospheric SO2 measurement doubled the previous high point.

Bruce, there is no need whatsoever to evaluate his credentials. His statements are all you need.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:44am PT
The following statement implies numbers:
The global heat budget estimates have too much uncertainty to predict that fossil fuel combustion is the dominant contributor to global temperature rise.
Have you actually done the calculation?
Or is it just a gut feeling?
If you have a scientific justification for your opinion, let's see it.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Aug 30, 2013 - 11:00am PT
When I want scientific credibility, I publish in a peer-reviewed journal. Experts assess my credibility in science, not a climbing forum.

Well said. Can you point us toward some of your most recent peer-reviewed articles on climate? From these sweeping declarations I can't guess where you're coming from.
Messages 11001 - 11020 of total 29705 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