Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 12381 - 12400 of total 25079 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Aug 30, 2013 - 10:43am 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 - 10:43am 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 - 10:45am 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 - 10:56am 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 - 11:13am 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 - 11:16am 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 - 11:17am 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 - 11:55am 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 - 12:35pm 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 - 12:56pm 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 - 01:03pm PT
Good advice, Chief.

They broke the mold with George.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:03pm PT
Thank god. fuking idiot

Chuff's motto:

The reason I talk to myself is that I'm the only one whose answers I accept.
- George Carlin
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:08pm PT
MD, you don,t seem to appreciate our need to establish trust. Why do you even post here? Do you wish to persuade us or just pontificate? What are your motives in plain English? You clearly don't like my attitude but as far as I can tell you more importantly completely miss ( or possibly avoid) my point most of the time which is what makes your opinion any more credible than Chuff or Rick? If all you want to do is vent fine but considering your alleged capabilities I implore you to be more useful and provide the insight and evidence that is so far lacking. I mean why not?

You,ve already alluded to the significance of bias or corruption creating the the falsehood of the 97 percent consensus. We,ve already heard it add infinitum. It is the single factor that could justify popular opposition to AGW theory yet it lacks corroborating evidence. You are an insider and apparently an expert one. Can you substantiate these claims or not?

Lets put it this way - we know Chuff, Rick) and misc. other deniers are just guessing about thier claims that the institutional consensus is untrustworthy. Their opinion is worthless. What makes you any different?
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:09pm PT
This one from one of your very own Legends:

SHEEP SCIENTISM TARDS.

Take this great dudes advice and get your noses outta the ass of the "Institutional Consensus" sheep in front of you.






The reason I talk to myself is that I'm the only one whose answers I accept.

In other words you TARD PhD'd SHEEP, he refuses to tag along with the status quo.

You really are completely burned toast fking brain washed aren't you.
FörtMental

Social climber
Albuquerque
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:16pm PT
Chief, shut the fuk up. You can't even figure out the difference between Area and Volume.

maddog, you're full of shiht. Go back to washing test tubes, or whatever the fuk it is you do for the USGS. I've never read so much pompous bullshiht out of a tech...
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:16pm PT
fu king idiot
FörtMental

Social climber
Albuquerque
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:20pm PT
.... 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.

At three, I got more relavant publications than this fukwad. And I consider myself a damn noob. Guys in the mass spec labs I worked in would kick you in the balls for the crap that you've written on this thread:

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.

Do you get paid well for reviewing HS lab work?
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:22pm PT
Lets put it this way - we know Chuff, Rick) and misc. other deniers are just guessing about their claims that the institutional consensus is untrustworthy. Their opinion is worthless. What makes you any different?
well put
opinions without facts are for children
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:30pm PT
Chief, shut the fuk up. You can't even figure out the difference between Area and Volume.

Bullshet! I know for a fact the area that you Frontalobotme occupy daily, consumes far too much 02 volume than you are worth.

The ONLY difference between those two is the fact that yu sometimes move from one lounge chair to another.

Bottom line Frotalobotme, cease wasting the precious 02 around you that other more viable and important humans in your environment need to continue contributing something of worth, by breathing.


opinions without facts are for children

FRONTALOBOTME:
Guys in the mass spec labs I worked in would kick you in the balls for the crap that you've written on this thread

MD did not comment on your MASS METH SPEC LABS dickhead.

You Fatass tard that posts nothing but vile communist shet.

Then what the fk are you doing here MUTASS.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Aug 30, 2013 - 01:35pm PT
fu king idiot
Messages 12381 - 12400 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 Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews