Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 11861 - 11880 of total 17219 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Mar 5, 2014 - 04:50pm PT
So Sketch, I'm failing to see the relevance of "Abstracts" in your graphic. Are you telling me that your source for the claims in that graphic basically did a word search of the free abstracts on a site similar to PubMed?

The mendacity in that graphic is outright screaming "look at me . . .

Could be a little "Captain Obvious" moment here, but I think Sketch's graph is simply meant as a spoof of Wade's similar graph, which seems to suffer from the same type of flaws that you note.

Maybe it's safest to say something like "AGW is a theory that has some support and possibly some empirical corroboration, but there are still many unanswered questions and its premature to draw an firm conclusions."
TomCochrane

Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
Mar 5, 2014 - 06:02pm PT
i see no evidence that anyone posting here has actually looked at those two videos which are loaded with actual data and photos of operating equipment and interviews with the responsible professionals


Mar 5, 2014 - 12:51am PT

Unless you are getting paid to provide misinformation and misdirect the discussion, it's pretty much a waste of your time to peruse this thread if you haven't already watched the two presentations posted above and referenced here again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c34U0Pwz4_c#t=1032

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qM1PXon31U

Really? We should look at 2 hours of youtube videos to get the information? I looked 12 minutes at the second one before I got bored.

yes, you should...i watched them several times and looked into some of their references before bothering you folks with it


a short attention span is a great way to limit knowledge and understanding



weather has traditionally been a favored topic for casual conversation when meeting an acquaintance


is anyone curious as to why weather topics now seem more hazardous than either politics or religion


some seem to think it is really important to control this conversation with rude comments and limited data
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 5, 2014 - 06:23pm PT
... The bottom line, in my opinion, is it doesn't matter which whackos are getting airtime. They're just a petty distraction.

Instead of getting all worked up about these whackos supposedly getting so much airtime, why not focus on raising awareness? AGW is a non-issue in this country. We occasionally get a little lip service from Washington. But it's mostly irrelevant.
    Sketch


For a brief minute, Sketch more or less admitted that AWG is real and that it is not getting the attention it deserves.


Seems he backtracked on his moment of truth. Let's now have a moment of silence for the death of reasonable discourse.


Bring on the Clown Car !!!
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Mar 5, 2014 - 06:30pm PT
Maybe it's safest to say something like "AGW is a theory that has some support and possibly some empirical corroboration, but there are still many unanswered questions and its premature to draw an firm conclusions."

I suppose you could say that

you could also say that gravity is just a theory that needs more support and has some unanswered questions

you could say that cigarette smoking has not really been proven to be harmful
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 5, 2014 - 06:34pm PT
Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone
President, National Academy of Sciences
Sir Paul Nurse
President, Royal Society



Right Ed.



Bring on the Clown Car !!!
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
Mar 5, 2014 - 07:15pm PT
Snopes is pretty much liberal BS.
Take a look at their entry re: infamous claim to the effect that "Al Gore said he invented the Internet," which Snopes categorically claims as "false."
As proof, Snopes cites the quote where Al used the verb "create" instead of "invent," and goes on a long discursive about the differences between "create" and "invent."
Whatever you think of Snopes' analysis (and it's bullshit to me--"create" and "invent" are nearly, if not completely, synonymous in the context of the quote), it sure isn't black-and-white that any reputable "fact checker" could simply label as true or false.

If the latest site is as objective as Snopes, I'll look elsewhere, thanks.
Ed's link may be OK, I don't know yet.


k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 5, 2014 - 08:36pm PT
If the latest site is as objective as Snopes, I'll look elsewhere, thanks.


That's right blahblah. Keep on researching! You've proven to have a real talent in that department, daftly knowing when to separate truth from fiction!


You can bet your life on what you believe and take it to the bank.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 5, 2014 - 08:39pm PT
More like all you AGW coneheads consistently posting your BS ...


Yes The Chief. Like the BS from the National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society.


You, like blahblah, certainly know BS when you see it!





Bring on the Clown Car !!!
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 5, 2014 - 08:44pm PT
Awww facts. Why bother?



Each and every one, just another liberal lie!




Bring on the Clown Car !!!
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 5, 2014 - 08:51pm PT
Dave, you didn't build that.
Dal Maxvill

Social climber
Illinois
Mar 5, 2014 - 10:14pm PT
Snopes is pretty much liberal BS.
Take a look at their entry re: infamous claim to the effect that "Al Gore said he invented the Internet," which Snopes categorically claims as "false."
As proof, Snopes cites the quote where Al used the verb "create" instead of "invent," and goes on a long discursive about the differences between "create" and "invent."
Whatever you think of Snopes' analysis (and it's bullshit to me--"create" and "invent" are nearly, if not completely, synonymous in the context of the quote), it sure isn't black-and-white that any reputable "fact checker" could simply label as true or false.

Vint Cerf, who was around from the very beginning of the Internet:
Al Gore had seen what happened with the National Interstate and Defense Highways Act of 1956, which his father introduced as a military bill. It was very powerful. Housing went up, suburban boom happened, everybody became mobile. Al was attuned to the power of networking much more than any of his elective colleagues. His initiatives led directly to the commercialization of the Internet. So he really does deserve credit.

Of Gore's involvement in the then-developing Internet while in Congress, Internet pioneers Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn have also noted that,

As far back as the 1970s Congressman Gore promoted the idea of high-speed telecommunications as an engine for both economic growth and the improvement of our educational system. He was the first elected official to grasp the potential of computer communications to have a broader impact than just improving the conduct of science and scholarship [...] the Internet, as we know it today, was not deployed until 1993. When the Internet was still in the early stages of its deployment, Congressman Gore provided intellectual leadership by helping create the vision of the potential benefits of high speed computing and communication. As an example, he sponsored hearings on how advanced technologies might be put to use in areas like coordinating the response of government agencies to natural disasters and other crises.

24 Jun 1986: Albert Gore introduced S 2594 Supercomputer Network Study Act of 1986

As a Senator, Gore began to craft the High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991 (commonly referred to as "The Gore Bill") after hearing the 1988 report Toward a National Research Network submitted to Congress by a group chaired by UCLA professor of computer science, Leonard Kleinrock, one of the central creators of the ARPANET (the ARPANET, first deployed by Kleinrock and others in 1969, is the predecessor of the Internet).

Indeed, Kleinrock would later credit both Gore and the Gore Bill as a critical moment in Internet history:

A second development occurred around this time, namely, then-Senator Al Gore, a strong and knowledgeable proponent of the Internet, promoted legislation that resulted in President George H.W Bush signing the High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991. This Act allocated $600 million for high performance computing and for the creation of the National Research and Education Network. The NREN brought together industry, academia and government in a joint effort to accelerate the development and deployment of gigabit/sec networking.
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Mar 6, 2014 - 12:36am PT
Moosedrool writes:

"I've just heard that avocado will no grow well in the too hot California.
We are so fuked!"




Keep calm. Party on.

Avocado trees love the heat. What they don't handle is cold weather, like two or three nights in a row below 28*.

I read that article too, in at least two different sources, and I don't see their ( Chipotle's ) angle, unless it's to set everyone up for a spike in the price of their guacamole.
TomCochrane

Trad climber
Santa Cruz Mountains and Monterey Bay
Mar 6, 2014 - 03:15am PT
Thank you Ed,I appreciate your devoting some attention to this.

There is a lot of intriguing material over several decades regarding weather modification, geoengineering, and HAARP effects, but I don't claim to be a meteorologist, physicist or radio/electromagnetism engineer. I do know that the NASA Supercomputer Division where I worked has been doing a lot of global climate modelling over the years.

As you know, the ionosphere reflects radio waves, providing a critical aspect of long range communication. HAARP reportedly utilizes these effects to an extreme.

From what I understand, it's not that beaming energy into the ionosphere is directly affecting weather. It is about using the ionosphere to reflect radio frequency energy on the order of a billion watts into targeted portions of the lower denser atmosphere. The effects are reportedly augmented by metallic particles distributed in the upper atmosphere by aerial spraying. The video includes many images of equipment used to do this.

The 1985 Bernard Eastlund patents indicate heating the ionosphere with a high energy phased-array antenna to raise a portion of the ionosphere, forming a bubble or lensing effect. This can then reportedly be used as a radio frequency lens to focus or direct large amounts of energy to designated points at some substantial distance from the antenna, thus affecting weather patterns and/or providing a path for lightning strikes. Supposedly HAARP can act as a triggering effect on energy already present in the ionosphere. I was first told in the early 1990s about this being actively used as a weapon.

Using this method to continuously heat an area of the denser atmosphere can then reportedly create a meteorological high pressure area which can thus influence weather patterns. Note that the high pressure area sitting off the coast of California for the past several months seems very unusual, as normally such weather patterns are naturally continually on the move across the globe.
raymond phule

climber
Mar 6, 2014 - 04:09am PT

Note that the high pressure area sitting off the coast of California for the past several months seems very unusual, as normally such weather patterns are naturally continually on the move across the globe.

I don't know how unusual that high pressure area is but high pressure system often sit still over an area for sometimes a long time. Low pressure systems usually moves but high pressure systems don't.

There are also many long lasting high pressure systems that determine the weather in many areas of the world like the azores high http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azores_High

raymond phule

climber
Mar 6, 2014 - 04:17am PT

yes, you should...i watched them several times and looked into some of their references before bothering you folks with it


a short attention span is a great way to limit knowledge and understanding

It really isn't about a short attention span but rather that long youtube videos is in my opinion often very bad sources. One reason is that it is hard to skim through them to find out if they are interesting.

It is the klimmer argument. Write a post and back it up with many hours of videos.

But also. I read the article you posted that said that all the weather we see today is human causes by geo-engineering and he didn't show any evidence for his claim at all. I believe more in the ark on the moon than that claim...
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Mar 6, 2014 - 09:44am PT
Some of these claims that "The Government" has been engaged in a massive geo-engineering project is way out there. Similar to Area 51 housing alien bodies and spaceships.

This is the internet. You can say anything on the internet. My favorite of all time is Nancy, who is in contact with an alien race called the "Zetas."

She used to invade the sci.astro news group back when everything was on listserve. Over the past ten to fifteen years, she has created a massive website with a whole bunch of wild claims about Planet X hiding in the tail of comet Hale Bopp, and other things.

It is a fantastic website to look at from a sociology viewpoint. There are lots of crazy websites, but hers might be the best.

Check it out for ten minutes. It will blow your mind. It is a great example of how you can say anything at all on the internet, and you will stumble onto nigh every possible opinion with a google search. The question is which site has the best data. If you don't really care too much about that, you can create a universe of your own, ground up

http://zetatalk.com/

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 6, 2014 - 09:46am PT
Note that the high pressure area sitting off the coast of California for the past several months seems very unusual, as normally such weather patterns are naturally continually on the move across the globe.

Most winters the same high pressure system sits farther east. Seasonally stable high pressure areas like that are a common feature. The only thing unusual this year was the relative position.
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Mar 6, 2014 - 09:54am PT
There was no HARP in 1860 so it must have been those Damn aliens!

monolith

climber
SF bay area
Mar 6, 2014 - 11:10am PT
And in more bad news, one of the researchers cited by the GWPF report has told me that even if Lawson's think tank is right, then we're heading for 3C of global warming by the end of the century (which is actually very bad news).

Even if we were to accept lower estimates for climate sensitivity, Meinshausen writes, this "only results in a delay of less than a decade in the timing of when the 2C threshold would be crossed" if no firm action were taken to cut emissions.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2014/mar/06/lord-lawson-climate-sceptic-thinktank?CMP=twt_gu
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Mar 6, 2014 - 11:14am PT
Come on Mono, we all know the "pal review" process allows for no dissent.

Haarp- i know a guy who was seriously injured there during maintenance of one of the units when confusion resulted in the unit he was on being inadvertently powered up. The claims of capabilities of this installation are almost in the realm of the CAGW folk. However Tom's " unless your getting paid to provide misinformation" was spot on.

Messages 11861 - 11880 of total 17219 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta