Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 11101 - 11120 of total 28427 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:11pm PT
>Then why make false claims about what they contain?

Specifically, what false claims? Bad is getting worse. Please show me globally consistent diesel flux.

Yes, I know people hate peer review. The drum I'm beating is that the data quality relative to the global energy balance has some question marks. Why can't people publicly admit how little is known about the composite energy balance calculation accuracy?

And again, why are we spending so much on the development of the technology if we already know the answers? Because the funding proposals justify the search for better measurement science? Post up some of your proposals that have passed your desk over the last few years and let's see why people want to spend more money.

What's so funny to me is that my premises stated have been: 1) Ocean temps are giving us the best look at the global temperature increase. Glacier recession is hard to interpret IMO but is basically consistent with ocean data. Etc. 2) I believe that part of the cause is FFC. 3) We need better estimates of all components of the global thermal balance.

So I've been calling for more work all along and lolling at all the knee jerks. Thanks for the laughs.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:14pm PT
More on Jeff McCoy as Mad Dog.

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=365474&tn=20
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:20pm PT
Facts might get posted here from time to time but you guys are missing the boat in a big way. Have fun googling, boys. LOL !

"I swear I saw those pics and I was like "if I squint just right and Mad Dog's been staying on the honed-climber program" maybe that is him... he assures me it ain't. "
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:23pm PT
We know you are a formidable internet forum foe learned from all those pissing contests on rec.climbing. Congratulations!

Can you convince scientists about global warming? Unlikely considering your easily checked falsehoods so far.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:26pm PT
The drum I'm beating is that the data quality relative to the global energy balance has some question marks.

This is a quantitative statement, and as such could be supported by numbers.
Let's see them.

So far, this is all you've given us:

That heat balance is wrong.
My numbers say so.
Sorry, my numbers are a secret.
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:29pm PT
There was no expectation of convince-I-zation. Peer review is always a bitter pill to pulpit-bashers. Keep chewing, dude.

After I retire from my current #1 source of income, I'll come see if ST is still alive and if this thread is available. Then I'll post up my resume. He who laughs last and all that.

Mute, you should know that just because I've reviewed a peer's data doesn't mean that I can publish it.

"easily checked falsehoods"

Desperate you are.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:35pm PT
And yet, in 2006, atmospheric SO2 measurement doubled the previous high point.

Mad69dog,Maddog,Jeff McCoy, 2013.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:37pm PT
Mute, you should know that just because I've reviewed a peer's data doesn't mean that I can publish it.
So tell us when & where it will be published.
Or is that a secret too?

How about the abstract? Is that a secret?


That heat balance is wrong.
Another guy's numbers say so.
Sorry, his numbers are a secret.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:42pm PT
We know you are a formidable internet forum foe learned from all those pissing contests on rec.climbing.


A fellow Roadracer WITH credentials joining in.

You all AGWists r fked! Cus the Almighty told me so.

monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:43pm PT
The Chief: Hey look at me. I can post pics. See how deep and clever I am.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:43pm PT
>Then why make false claims about what they contain?
Specifically, what false claims?


Specifically, these false claims:
I'm saying that the newer pubs don't really bring anything additional to the big picture. They continue to demonstrate a trend.

Less blatant, but fudging the truth:
What's so funny to me is that my premises stated have been: 1) Ocean temps are giving us the best look at the global temperature increase.

Actually, you repeatedly specified ocean surface temperatures until I pointed out two recent papers that address why sea surface temperatures are not the best look at global temperature increase. Rather than say "Oh!" or anything else about the new information, you fuzzed past with nothing-new-here declarations and dropped the "surface" from your claims.

Thanks for the laughs.

Yep, maddog/Jeff McCoy.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:45pm PT
MONO:

Hey look at me. I can consistently post the brown liquid melt turds streaming outta my ass! That is all I have to substantiate my bullshet.
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:56pm PT
The trend I'm talking about is that the ocean has been on a noisy upward temperature trend over the last 100 years.

"Actually, you repeatedly specified ocean surface temperatures"

Right, because it's easy and cheap. Having automated depth profiling is also great to have but I'm just not convinced it's worth spending much money on. Surface data is extensive and dirt cheep.

"It is possible that we will have to create policy with incomplete knowledge"

Good luck with that. How many of us thought that we'd see some positive change in the last decade?

"The obvious importance of identifying anthropogenic activities that are drivers comes from the possibility that we have some control over those drivers."

Honestly, you believe we have control over those drivers? I'm just not seeing the evidence...

"However, if you insist that the uncertainty be nil before any policy can be made"

Policy has been lagging since the 60s. I supported political change regarding FF well before global warming was a buzz phrase. But, you know, there is money to be made and the money man is driving the coal train.

No - not 'nil' uncertainty... We want to not just estimate the components, but also estimate what is known about the uncertainty for each. At least all the major contributors. That's expensive and this field has seen research dollars become more difficult to come by.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Aug 30, 2013 - 02:13pm PT
Every time I click on this thread, folks like maddog and the chuff remind me of this poster:

Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Aug 30, 2013 - 02:16pm PT
The trend I'm talking about is that the ocean has been on a noisy up upward temperature trend over the last 100 years.

Your comment I quoted was in response to the papers. You say you looked at those papers, and they bring nothing new. Is the noisy 100-year trend in surface temperatures what those papers are about, or did they bring something new?

Having automated depth profiling is also great to have but I'm just not convinced it's worth spending much money on.

Most of the active researchers seem to think otherwise. Both papers explain why. Can you explain why you think they are wrong?
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 02:17pm PT
Isaac's typewriter seems to be adding to global warming.

"Can you explain why you think they are wrong"

It's just personal priorities in the face of shrinking research budgets. I think we are spending too much for people to go play on their submarines and sail around on ships. Yes, I'm laughing at the oceanographers across the hall.

To simplify, I support placement of in-situ T probes and I like to see funding for upgrading devices on commercial vessels. But it's not like we're seeing 5C increase a year - moving forward we don't need to worry about increasing data density in the ocean as much as in the atmosphere and above - again IMO.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Aug 30, 2013 - 02:55pm PT
http://www.peruviantimes.com/28/peru-declares-state-of-emergency-in-puno-as-temperatures-drop/20080/
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 03:35pm PT
Mono: "Aerosols are well understood by climate scientists and anyone who looks below the surface."

Really?

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1674200112002040

and from some layman media:

"The scientists noted that while clouds may block solar radiation from entering the atmosphere, the conditions under which they form, and the extent to which they actually cool the planet by reflecting that radiation away, is very poorly understood. Further complicating matters, a warmer Earth holds more moisture, which could increase the total volume of clouds.

To reduce the uncertainty in climate projections, Cziczo and his research group at MIT are studying subjects such as aerosols, or airborne particles, which act as “seeds” that help clouds form. As particles like dust float up into the atmosphere, they provide a surface on which water vapor may condense or freeze, forming a fine mist that from a distance can appear puffy, layered, or wispy, depending on a region’s temperature and relative humidity."

The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 03:56pm PT
Each time Science Nazi's as yourself CHRISTPhDBOY, I think of this very common sense quote:


Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 30, 2013 - 04:03pm PT
Good advice, Chief.

They broke the mold with George.
Messages 11101 - 11120 of total 28427 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 Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews