Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 11861 - 11880 of total 29447 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Mad69Dog

Ice climber
Sep 11, 2013 - 10:57pm PT
The global heat budget is a layman's term. Surely you can google it. But when the "community" attempts to dumb it down for their dumbass layman public, they claim that FFC is responsible for global warming / climate change / impending doom. They say we need to take drastic economic measures, impose taxes, etc. surely you will not claim to know nothing of the ongoing political processes.

So, as a scientist, I ask for the believers to show me the entire mathematical process that results in the bolded conclusion above. In order to come to that conclusion, it is imperative to know the uncertainty in the contributing data. Who here has audited the data and knows the results?
wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Sep 11, 2013 - 11:00pm PT
You collect atmospheric data,well what about IT.
I am sorry you have been called a ped,but get some skin .

Hell,im a neo marxist ,socialist ,stupid, commie,liberal ,utopian.And then some.

Hows about your knowledge of the atmosphere?

Share,discuss.

But do not start a statement knocking someones bias and immeadiately exhibit your own and expect no one here to hurt your feeling.

Because everyone here is biased.
Mad69Dog

Ice climber
Sep 11, 2013 - 11:29pm PT
Nah, hurt feelings aren't the point. It's the depth people descend to in order to discredit what they don't know. It shows desperate adherence to the royal order of the sheep herder and all that. Opposing opinion must be squashed, never considered. If you really can't see it in this thread, nothing I say will convince you. And that's fine. I never expected to.

Would you like a donut?

wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Sep 11, 2013 - 11:47pm PT
About the heat budget ,what current data disproves cc?

It seems im not in the private club that may view it.
Mad69Dog

Ice climber
Sep 11, 2013 - 11:58pm PT
There is much missing from that diagram. Remember, the key is to tie FFC to the picture.

How would you do that? What would you add to the spread sheet and where would you get that data?

How have the models varied for predicting and interpreting ocean temp data over the last 30 years and why do the curve fitters stress so hard to rationalize their models?

Dr.Sprock

Boulder climber
I'm James Brown, Bi-atch!
Sep 12, 2013 - 05:27am PT
lots of observations,


not many solutions being explored,
wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Sep 12, 2013 - 07:07am PT
http://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth103/node/671

Would like to consider what part of this [data] disproves CC.

Not going to "squash" anything.

And yes MD,I will concede there has been alot of that from both sides on this thread.


Fort Mental,I do not know where you live,but where I do,plenty of people care.

There is a sustainability festival here this weekend that will draw 50k of folks looking to implement solutions.

It will have small impact,but ,it is impact.
raymond phule

climber
Sep 12, 2013 - 08:37am PT

There is much missing from that diagram. Remember, the key is to tie FFC to the picture.

How would you do that? What would you add to the spread sheet and where would you get that data?

I don't know what you are trying to get at but why is the exact data on the fossil fuels consumption important? Isn't enough to use the atmospheric CO2 level in the scientific discussion? I believe that there are very strong evidence that the rise in CO2 level is due to the use of fossil fuels.

The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Sep 12, 2013 - 09:07am PT
Plenty of solutions.

Most are in no way a realistic nor viable application for the majority of humans. They can not afford to implement them let alone apply them.

That includes you. Cus I know you ain't implementing nor applying any of them to your daily life. As is the case with most here suggesting we do as you say we do.

Just coming on here, sucking up to your ideological croanie buddies and talking appeasing "it is the politicians in Washington's job to take care of it" shet.

Fact!

I've built my life professionally and personally on the basis of "caring". Made massive sacrifices, and put in huge effort to improve things.

As is the case with many if not most of us "skeptics" and approving individuals alike. BFD. It is called life dude. Get over yourself.

I got ten bucks that says you are still sucking off the grid, buying city water and flushing your shet into the main sewer system. That is not sacrificing shet. Why? Most assuredly cus you can not afford to do any different.

You are a whining hypocrite at best that constantly demands that it is the gov'ts responsibility to solve this issue. Not yours on a personal level.


I have implemented and am applying more than most here. I do give a shet. But not for the reasons you and the others deem we should.

I do it for myself. Cus I do NOT trust the gov't nor people such as yourself that demand we should in order to take care of us.

Fuked up part about all that, you all demean me and discredit me for why I am doing so. Yet I am doing more than most including your whinney ass.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Sep 12, 2013 - 09:34am PT
(taxes, votes, good behavior, protests and leading by example) ...expect "civilization" in return.

Society owes you NOTHING. Not a god damn thing.

What a spoiled tard you really are.

If you are doing all these wonderful things you say you are doing with the intent of getting pay back, then you in fact are not sacrificing shet. Not one thing.

You have missed the mark on that since the get go. Fact.

Fking selfish hypocrite.



And DO NOT EVEN try to tell me I am sucking off the teat of the govt. The pay back I and so many of my Brothers and Sisters are getting is NO WHERE near enough for what we sacrificed and for the wounds we carry daily. Not even close.
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Sep 12, 2013 - 09:44am PT
pond scum is the more appropriate term


is maddog ignorant of the FF isotope ratios?
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/how-do-we-know-that-recent-cosub2sub-increases-are-due-to-human-activities-updated/
bobinc

Trad climber
Portland, Or
Sep 12, 2013 - 09:50am PT
Send the VA checks back, Chief. That's all that's left to do in your absolutist fantasy.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Sep 12, 2013 - 09:52am PT
^^^^^^^^^^What part of ....And DO NOT EVEN try to tell me I am sucking off the teat of the govt. The pay back I and so many of my Brothers and Sisters are getting is NO WHERE near enough for what we sacrificed and for the wounds we carry daily. Not even close. Did you NOT GET!



You're not even a neanderthal, or human. You're bacteria. You live in a world of bacteria where it's every cell for itself. You're an amoeba with moobs. An amooba.

I do not know what planet you live on, but that in fact is the rule of nature and the Universe. Has been and always will be.

Your science will never change that. Never.

Fking Utopian fantasy hypocrite.



As Werner has stated many times, there is far more to life than the physical presence concept. But your science now degrades and discredits that reality. Even Einstein stated that reality can never be disproved as a fact of the Universe.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Sep 12, 2013 - 09:58am PT
I think maddog accepts that the co2 increase is due to man. He challenges their effect.

Longwave radiation studies prove the connection between increased atmospheric co2 and increased temp.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Sep 12, 2013 - 10:00am PT
connection between atmospheric co2 increases and measured temp.

Then why are we in a complete temp "Stall" for the past 15 plus years yet the C02 levels continue to rise????
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Sep 12, 2013 - 10:53am PT
And DO NOT EVEN try to tell me I am sucking off the teat of the govt. The pay back I and so many of my Brothers and Sisters are getting is NO WHERE near enough for what we sacrificed and for the wounds we carry daily. Not even close. Did you NOT GET!

You ARE sucking off the teat of government. If government didn't exist you would have no teat to suck other than your own meager savings right? We know what you are getting at - your teat is a rightful contractual obligation from your society but so what? The same goes with all government employees. Teachers, school bus drivers, sewage treatment plant workers, cops..... they all do their contribution to society just like you and are justly rewarded as promised. Others are not so lucky but under the terms of the social contract, we try to also take care of our brothers and sisters who have no such back up and fumble the ball ..... right?


Which is a mighty fine christian sort of thing to do. My criticism of christianity is minimal. My Criticism of certain specific theologies is enormous, such as those arrogant ignorance embracing pricks at the Cornhole Alliance. The specific problem is that thier ideology is aggressively anti science so I point a accusing finger at Roy Spencer and demand an explanation. Whats the problem with that? You'd have to be an idiot to dissmiss the obvious conflict of interest. Are you an idiot or do you aknowledge the conflict?

Mad poodle keeps moaning about the uncivil discourse here as it it so beneath his dignity, yet he does not possess the dignity required to smooth his ruffled feathers and engage in a process of enquiry which is fully available here. I am asking questions. Loaded ones to be sure but if Roy Spencer or anyone else can defend his position I am willing to listen and consider as well as attempt answering your own. I can't provide scientific insight but I sure can provide political, cultural, social and psychological insight and so can everyone else.

As mad poodle knows pursuit of physical science needs to split the red sea of unavoidable squabbling assertion and focus on enquiry. Same goes for the social sciences which is our field.
All I'm doing is asking - Is Roy Spencer a raving nut case or not? Considering the evidence it is a reasonable question but who knows - maybe I'm wrong. Considering that his credibility is so important to Chuff and the other deniers case I would assume it is a question worth defending.

So lets hear it
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Sep 12, 2013 - 10:55am PT
What part of rising ocean temperatures are you NOT getting?

Yur kidding??

Now you are going to blame the rising SST's on C02 as well. When in fact the primary reason the "Stall" is occurring is due to the cooling of the Tropic SST's via natural forcing i.e. La Nina. That of course comes from your people.

monolith

climber
SF bay area
Sep 12, 2013 - 10:57am PT
Good boy, Chief, you are starting to get it. That's what we've been saying for quite some time.

Do you know what ENSO means?

The deeper ocean levels can gain heat and the surface can still have ENSO cycles.

Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Sep 12, 2013 - 11:09am PT
For your scholarly reference, here is the document that the good Dr Spencer signed his name to.

I think it is worth noting that it asserts a variety of certain absolutes that by their very faith based nature deny the possibility of being proven by empirical evidence otherwise. I can't help but conclude that such a position is in complete conflict with science. Considering this, I want to know how a scientist can sign it.


An Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming

Add your name—click here!
Click here for a partial list of prominent signers



PREAMBLE
As governments consider policies to fight alleged man-made global warming, evangelical leaders have a responsibility to be well informed, and then to speak out. A Renewed Call to Truth, Prudence, and Protection of the Poor: An Evangelical Examination of the Theology, Science, and Economics of Global Warming demonstrates that many of these proposed policies would destroy jobs and impose trillions of dollars in costs to achieve no net benefits. They could be implemented only by enormous and dangerous expansion of government control over private life. Worst of all, by raising energy prices and hindering economic development, they would slow or stop the rise of the world’s poor out of poverty and so condemn millions to premature death.



WHAT WE BELIEVE
We believe Earth and its ecosystems—created by God’s intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence —are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting, admirably suited for human flourishing, and displaying His glory. Earth’s climate system is no exception. Recent global warming is one of many natural cycles of warming and cooling in geologic history.
We believe abundant, affordable energy is indispensable to human flourishing, particularly to societies which are rising out of abject poverty and the high rates of disease and premature death that accompany it. With present technologies, fossil and nuclear fuels are indispensable if energy is to be abundant and affordable.
We believe mandatory reductions in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, achievable mainly by greatly reduced use of fossil fuels, will greatly increase the price of energy and harm economies.
We believe such policies will harm the poor more than others because the poor spend a higher percentage of their income on energy and desperately need economic growth to rise out of poverty and overcome its miseries.


WHAT WE DENY
We deny that Earth and its ecosystems are the fragile and unstable products of chance, and particularly that Earth’s climate system is vulnerable to dangerous alteration because of minuscule changes in atmospheric chemistry. Recent warming was neither abnormally large nor abnormally rapid. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human contribution to greenhouse gases is causing dangerous global warming.
We deny that alternative, renewable fuels can, with present or near-term technology, replace fossil and nuclear fuels, either wholly or in significant part, to provide the abundant, affordable energy necessary to sustain prosperous economies or overcome poverty.
We deny that carbon dioxide—essential to all plant growth—is a pollutant. Reducing greenhouse gases cannot achieve significant reductions in future global temperatures, and the costs of the policies would far exceed the benefits.
We deny that such policies, which amount to a regressive tax, comply with the Biblical requirement of protecting the poor from harm and oppression.


A CALL TO ACTION
In light of these facts,

We call on our fellow Christians to practice creation stewardship out of Biblical conviction, adoration for our Creator, and love for our fellow man—especially the poor.
We call on Christian leaders to understand the truth about climate change and embrace Biblical thinking, sound science, and careful economic analysis in creation stewardship.
We call on political leaders to adopt policies that protect human liberty, make energy more affordable, and free the poor to rise out of poverty, while abandoning fruitless, indeed harmful policies to control global temperature.


ENDORSEMENT
While our signatures express our endorsement only of this Declaration and do not imply agreement with every point in A Renewed Call to Truth, we believe that document provides ample justification for it. We call on scholars and experts to join us in signing this Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming.

Scholar (academician, policy expert, writer, etc.) Ministry leader (pastor, head of ministry or major ministry project, etc.) Layman List as an evangelical or a non-evangelical. Send me the Cornwall Alliance newsletter. (You can easily unsubscribe at any time.)

* Organization and title are listed for identification only, and do not imply organizational endorsement.


The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Sep 12, 2013 - 11:09am PT
But the correlation between Surface Temps rising due to the rise in C02 that you all been singing all this time is not happening.

Ah, the STALL or HIATUS in Surface Temps the last 15 plus years.

Therefore that theory is dead.

It also indicates that Natural Forcing plays a far bigger role in all this than you all considered. Fact.

That reality is why nations are now knocking hard on the IPCC's door wanting to know:

A. Why didn't all them models indicate the stall.

b. Why did it take the IPCC so long to acknowledge the Stall.

c. Why all of sudden there is a fast and furious reason for the stall.
Messages 11861 - 11880 of total 29447 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