Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 12241 - 12260 of total 25079 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
FörtMental

Social climber
Albuquerque
Aug 28, 2013 - 01:39pm PT
The leaked assessment has moved that up to 95%.

Not important. We need more sensors.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 28, 2013 - 01:42pm PT
Yep, Mad69dog, you are going to have to dig into the reports to understand the confidence level.

No one here will bother, considering your misrepresentation of what the 'leading' climate scientists claim.
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 28, 2013 - 02:13pm PT
Monolith, do you work in the field of climate change?
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 28, 2013 - 02:18pm PT
MADDOG, you are aware that Brutus, Nurse Ratchet and I spent some time together and put up some Sierra backcountry routes. DMT spent more time with them two than I as well.

Brutus and I used to discuss this very subject on a regular basis. Laughing our asses off at how each side of the coin proliferates their obscene propaganda. He being on the PRO and I being on the QUESTIONING side as he called it.

Just saw Nurse Ratchet yesterday as a matter of fact. She came by the office to say hey and let me know about the Potluck for Matt's Memorial.

With that said, welcome to this discussion and as I already see, the prolific bombardment of shet for standing your ground.
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 28, 2013 - 02:23pm PT
Hi Chief,

You are a blessed man for spending real time with Brutus and the Nurse. Awesome folks.

Yes, I tend to take alot of flack for my environmental stances. I've been in research for a bit over 30 years now and am used to it. But what do I know, all I've done is decades of research in these fields...

Peace!
FörtMental

Social climber
Albuquerque
Aug 28, 2013 - 02:25pm PT
Chief! Good God, Man! Get off the computer! Go look for Matthew Greene!
FörtMental

Social climber
Albuquerque
Aug 28, 2013 - 02:31pm PT
BD said:
But there is no proof because the global heat budget is a gross approximation. There is no proof. Yet. So feel free to believe what you will, just don't pretend that there is proof.

Science does not actually aspire to provide proof in its purest form.

Well done... now I don't understand where you stand. Was that the point?
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 28, 2013 - 02:39pm PT
FRONTAL.

"GOD!!!!"

Did you say god??? Blasphemy.

Get off the computer and go look for your ass.








***I can't go look for Matt. I have two crews in the field. More going out tomorrow through the weekend. Then more next week etc etc etc.
FörtMental

Social climber
Albuquerque
Aug 28, 2013 - 02:54pm PT
Academies of science

Since 2001 34 national science academies, three regional academies, and both the international InterAcademy Council and International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences have made formal declarations confirming human induced global warming and urging nations to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

American Association for the Advancement of Science as the world's largest general scientific society, adopted an official statement on climate change in 2006:

The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society....The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now.

United States National Research Council

through its Committee on the Science of Climate Change in 2001, published Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions.[36] This report explicitly endorses the IPCC view of attribution of recent climate change as representing the view of the scientific community

The Royal Society of the United Kingdom

There is strong evidence that the warming of the Earth over the last half-century has been caused largely by human activity, such as the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use, including agriculture and deforestation.

European Science Foundation states:

There is now convincing evidence that since the industrial revolution, human activities, resulting in increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases have become a major agent of climate change... On-going and increased efforts to mitigate climate change through reduction in greenhouse gases are therefore crucial.

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement,

“Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia.

European Federation of Geologists

In 2008, the European Federation of Geologists[57] (EFG) issued the position paper Carbon Capture and geological Storage :
The EFG recognizes the work of the IPCC and other organizations, and subscribes to the major findings that climate change is happening, is predominantly caused by anthropogenic emissions of CO2, and poses a significant threat to human civilization.
It is clear that major efforts are necessary to quickly and strongly reduce CO2 emissions.

European Geosciences Union

In 2005, the Divisions of Atmospheric and Climate Sciences of the European Geosciences Union (EGU) issued a position statement in support of the joint science academies’ statement on global response to climate change. The statement refers to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as "the main representative of the global scientific community", and asserts that the IPCC represents the state-of-the-art of climate science supported by the major science academies around the world and by the vast majority of science researchers and investigators as documented by the peer-reviewed scientific literature.

Geological Society of America

In 2006, the Geological Society of America adopted a position statement on global climate change. It amended this position on April 20, 2010 with more explicit comments on need for CO2 reduction.
Decades of scientific research have shown that climate can change from both natural and anthropogenic causes. The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s.

Geological Society of London

In November 2010, the Geological Society of London issued the position statement Climate change: evidence from the geological record:
The last century has seen a rapidly growing global population and much more intensive use of resources, leading to greatly increased emissions of gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, from the burning of fossil fuels (oil, gas and coal), and from agriculture, cement production and deforestation. Evidence from the geological record is consistent with the physics that shows that adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere warms the world and may lead to: higher sea levels and flooding of low-lying coasts; greatly changed patterns of rainfall; increased acidity of the oceans; and decreased oxygen levels in seawater

American Meteorological Society

statement adopted by their council in 2012 concluded:
There is unequivocal evidence that Earth’s lower atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; sea level is rising; and snow cover, mountain glaciers, and Arctic sea ice are shrinking. The dominant cause of the warming since the 1950s is human activities. This scientific finding is based on a large and persuasive body of research.





I know that, according to Maddog, this doesn't constitute proof that 97% of scientists that study climate dynamics in some form, believe in AGW as I did not personally interview every single one of those scientists.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 28, 2013 - 02:59pm PT
Why would it matter, Maddog? Ed Hartouni doesn't work in climate change. Are you going to question his credentials too?

Anyone who believes, as you do, that most of the leading climate scientists are uncertain about combustion of fossil fuels causing global warming is clueless, regardless of their credentials.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 28, 2013 - 04:28pm PT
The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement

“Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia.


That of course is the same AGU that Judith Curry just busted in an open letter, catching them stifling and ordering the refusal of ANY OPPOSING AGW PAPER to be published in and under their name.

That is the same AGU that Roger Pielke SR, one of the longest standing members of that club, called out two months ago, for basically doing the same thing that Curry just busted them for, to him.

Got it.

AMS stated that??? Please post where you found that cus it is no where on their site. No where.

This is there statement that looks nothing like the one you posted.



02/02/2007


New AMS Statement on Climate Change: Climate is Changing; Humans Play a Role

Despite uncertainties, there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond, according to a new information statement on climate change issued by the American Meteorological Society today.
http://www.ametsoc.org/amsnews/newsreleases.html PDF Version

BTW: The above statement was not agreed upon by the majority of the AMS Members. I will find the open letter that was submitted and signed by a large percentage of the members voicing their full disagreement.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 28, 2013 - 05:17pm PT
Guy Martin on Fracking.


Precisely.

TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Aug 28, 2013 - 08:03pm PT
http://www.thepiratescove.us/2013/08/27/if-all-you-see-873/
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 28, 2013 - 08:32pm PT
Chief: Are you trying to insinuate that there are other processes transporting greenhouse gasses into the environment? Are any of them natural?
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 28, 2013 - 08:39pm PT
>Why would it matter, Maddog?

Because some spectate and others get down in the trench and do the work full time and beyond. I've been the guy on a ladder tweaking the instrument that sticks through the hull of the plane.

>Ed Hartouni doesn't work in climate change. Are you going to
>question his credentials too?

Peer review respects opinion but challenges the scientific basis, data integrity, etc. If all you are doing is looking at someone else's data that was dumbed down to the layman scope, are you sure you can ramp it back up to the research level if you don't actually work in the field?

>Anyone who believes, as you do, that most of the leading
>climate scientists are uncertain about combustion of fossil
>fuels causing global warming is clueless, regardless of
>their credentials.

The good thing is that leading researchers listened to Clint Eastwood and learned what the limitations were of the methods they use. At least they are trying day in and day out to get better, improve models, improve data interpretation, etc.

If we really understood what was happening, why would we be working so hard to improve our methods, instrumentation, project design, etc. ?
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Aug 28, 2013 - 09:01pm PT
Somehow i think Mad69Dog knows that 94-97% of the greenhouse gases released into the environment are natural and independent of human causation. Good to see you here MadDog!

Bruce says; " but also the natural influences are understood well enough to only account for minor variation in change over the given time, thus known to be inconsequential relative to the rate of change". That's where you are very wrong Bruce. You only know what the fascist globalists want you to know . By your own admission you don't delve into the science much since you feel unqualified to interpret such a complex subject. Instead, you made the mistake of trusting the "experts", and unfortunately only the supposed experts on the pro CAGW side.Listen to Mad69Dog, when he says the overwhelming majority of scientists he has been in contact with don't support The Gore opinion and consider that the understanding of the climate system is poor and CO2 doesn't correlate well with the fluctuations.

Somebody else said the Chief is mean spirited and therefore not likely to keep or have friends. Well, i can proudly say i am honored to call him my freind and it never ceases to amaze me the patience and humor he exhibits in trying to retrieve your lost mush brained souls.

I've been collecting papers, both pro and con on this subject since last spring. When i get back to AK i'm going to start peppering you guys with a stream of science contrary to the alarmist position. I'll probably start with reconstructions of past climates like the little ice age and Medieval warm period- the pro CAGW side bogusly spent billions of dollars trying to deconstruct these periods as the magnitude of these climate swings make the the warming of the immediate past seem to be within the range of normalacy. Then we'll get into the signs of the cooling period we are entering.

rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Aug 28, 2013 - 09:05pm PT
Oh great...! A Mister Rodgers science lecture....
Mad69Dog

Mountain climber
Superior, CO
Aug 28, 2013 - 09:14pm PT
BS
BS
Credit: Mad69Dog

You know it's political when people pretend that opinion equates with scientific results.'

Thanks for the welcome, Rick!
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 28, 2013 - 10:29pm PT
Oh great...! A Mister Rodgers science lecture....

Well YABADADOOOJOHNNY, that should just about meet your level of .... you know.

Hey, was that you the other day I passed heading north on "6" about a mile north of LAWS??? I was doing around 140ish and that Honda I zipped by looked awfully like to yours. Couldn't catch the face cus of my speed but the dude was using his feet to YABADADOOOO his ass forward.

At least you are one of the few "Believers" that is actually doing something to cut back on his FF usage. Unlike all these other hypocrites talking shet and then doing the nasty putzing around and spewing FF C02 all up and down on a regular basis. Day in and day out.

RICK S:

Right back attya.
FörtMental

Social climber
Albuquerque
Aug 28, 2013 - 11:50pm PT
Maddog's the lawyer defending a guy holding a shovel and a chainsaw and covered in the victim's blood:

"Members of the jury......There is no murder simply because there is no body!"
Messages 12241 - 12260 of total 25079 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