Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 13241 - 13260 of total 21618 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 17, 2014 - 08:00pm PT
TLP, it was the 1998 El Nino that had the huge century scale heat release.As for an answer to your question of why temps are just remaining flat-Heat is currently being released from some surface source in the pacific, the closest source being the western pacific warm pool of ENSO, otherwise Australia and other nearby oceanic island nations, wouldn't be in the second year of sharply above normal temps. As far as reduced TSI, it takes years if not decades to show up as meaningful decreases in SST. Other solar amplifiers are not well understood,although interest is on the uprise and 71 peer reviewed papers were published in 2013,but may well take similar lengths of time to show their effects. Give it a few years and we might well see a significant decline. Many solar scientists worldwide are calling for such.CO2 does have a role in the atmospheric IR retention but it appears that it's factor is well below prvious IPCC estimates and impeded by more negative feedbacks than positive feedbacks. Once again i must qualify this as just the opinion of a laymen after a good amount of reading on the subject.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Jan 17, 2014 - 08:02pm PT
Moose,, there have been little truths escaping now and then on this while AGW drive. Like when obama slipped and said "under my plan energy prices would sky rocket"... That at a time when inflation, is out of the graph, and economy is the worst its been in decades.
wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Jan 17, 2014 - 08:16pm PT
Credit: wilbeer
Mark Force

Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
Jan 17, 2014 - 10:21pm PT
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 17, 2014 - 11:19pm PT
Well Ed that was quite a commentary from the land of fruits and nuts. Again, amigo, the models are failing on all fronts, to suggest otherwise is delusional. Even the IPCC adjusted suggested projections downward by "expert judgement". Now what does that mean Ed? Perhaps even the lead authors and many others have come to the conclusion that the models have a long, long way to go. I still contend that perfect knowledge will never be attained. My simplistic suggestions are no better or worse than the dart throws of expert climate scientists so far.

Last spring you were suggesting the IPCC's goal would be reoriented towards a sort of a long range regional weather forecasting service. What happened between then, the AR5 release, and now?

EDIT: Mark, oy
Mark Force

Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
Jan 17, 2014 - 11:48pm PT
Rick,
Oy.

Consensus is present sufficient for the position that the phenomena we are observing is significant climate change (global warming is a soundbite and inadequately conveys the overall pattern of climate change). To argue against this consensus can only be defended by "cherry picking" the data/studies and it is intellectually dishonest.

To have a conversation about the underlying causes of the phenomena is legitimate, if it is done with enough intellectual rigor.

From the 2013 IPCC Summary Report:

"Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased (see Figures SPM.1, SPM.2, SPM.3 and SPM.4). {2.2, 2.4, 3.2, 3.7, 4.24.7, 5.2, 5.3, 5.55.6, 6.2, 13.2}"

This is the consensus. It is good science to consider outlier studies openly and, most importantly, critically. Outlier studies can be useful in modifying models toward greater accuracy. To use them in arguments against the fundamental model developed from the consensus of the science is lying.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Jan 18, 2014 - 12:01am PT
Nepotistic climate skeptic run journal gets canned. Sumner, better save your issues, you won't be getting any more.

http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.net/

Lol, the co-editor-in-chief believes in water dowsing.

http://tagteam.harvard.edu/hub_feeds/2007/feed_items/222605

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 18, 2014 - 12:26am PT
The consensus is a lie, the models inaccurate projections,the only projection of the models with any basis in observed reality was the arctic warming of the 80's to 00's. If you have anything, any predictions from the models for the next five years, then post them up. Sanctimonious scientific gibberish in defense of a failing theory is a cheap trick.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jan 18, 2014 - 12:37am PT
Credit: Cheesegraphs
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Jan 18, 2014 - 12:38am PT
photo not found
Missing photo ID#339886

Credit: monolith
new world order2

climber
Jan 18, 2014 - 12:56am PT
This is a re-post, only because no one has addressed it.

Would anyone care to comment on climate geo-engineering, please?


Sunshade" to fight climate change costed at $5 bln a year
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/30/climate-sunshade-idINDEE87T0K420120830

Planes or airships could carry sun-dimming materials high into the atmosphere for an affordable price tag of below $5 billion a year as a way to slow climate change, a study indicated on Friday.

Transporting a million tonnes of particles to at least 18 km (11 miles) above the Earth every year to form a sunshade is "both feasible and affordable", U.S. scientists concluded in the journal Environmental Research Letters.

Al Gore makes mention of spraying chemicals into the atmosphere to combat global warming here...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrrWXurroWw

Mark Force

Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
Jan 18, 2014 - 02:18am PT
The Chief,
You don't really know how science works, do you. The gentleman you refer to above is a classic case of using cherry-picked information of questionable value that had no real relavence to the issue at hand to make an argument for the outcome that you want. That has no relavence to science.

Colin Powell made the error of being a "good soldier" and doing what he thought was his duty for his comander-in-chief when he knew he was being told to lie and it stuck in his throat when it was coming out. Look at the old tapes and tell me it isn't so.
Randisi

Social climber
Dalian, Liaoning
Jan 18, 2014 - 04:23am PT
Our mistake is in thinking "if only they could be helped to understand....".

They are a write off. Its the only reasonable take on it.

So why do you continue to respond to them with such glee?

I can only think this is motivated by some of the less admirable aspects of your personality.
wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Jan 18, 2014 - 07:36am PT
"So why do you continue to respond to them with such glee?"


I believe it has less to do with character "flaws" than it does continued perseverance .[not to mention comedy,20k posts]

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/09/debunking-climate-change-deniers

Mother Jones,not Wood For Trees.
Randisi

Social climber
Dalian, Liaoning
Jan 18, 2014 - 07:45am PT
I believe it has less to do with character "flaws" than it does continued perseverance

Perseverance in what?

Trying to convince people who refuse to listen?

Which leads me to believe that it is more about enjoying insulting people and feeling superior.

But - hey - I could be wrong.
wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
Jan 18, 2014 - 08:42am PT
I could care less what people call me ,or otherwise .
It is perseverance in keeping the noise of the deniers countered by fact.
If that says something about me,Bruce,Chiloe etal ,Then so be it.
I for one ,respect that role.

Go ahead ,call me names!
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Jan 18, 2014 - 09:15am PT
dirtbag

climber
Jan 18, 2014 - 10:11am PT
So are you another of the individuals out there that dictates their entire existence SOLELY based on...

"Science"?


Another individual that agrees that "science" is the fundamental/unquestionable governing process of all things in the Universe?

He didn't say that you loud mouthed f*#ktard.

The fact you're a f*#ktard would be tolerable if you learned to STFU, listen once in awhile, and speak on topics about which you know something.



Mark Force

Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
Jan 18, 2014 - 10:54am PT
Science is the observation of what is as closely as we are able to discern it; mysticism is the direct experience of what is as closely as we are able to live and breath and be it.

The Tao Te Ching (Lao Tzu) is one of my most favorite books of all time (along with Meditations (Marcus Aurelius)). Have read many different translations of the Tao Te Ching, but my far and away favorite is by Ralph Alan Dale; it stands far above all the rest!

Anomalies and artifacts within the data are "bread and butter" in science. The trend lines you posted above are consistent with most climate change models.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jan 18, 2014 - 11:16am PT
The consensus is a lie, the models inaccurate projections,the only projection of the models with any basis in observed reality was the arctic warming of the 80's to 00's. If you have anything, any predictions from the models for the next five years, then post them up. Sanctimonious scientific gibberish in defense of a failing theory is a cheap trick.


Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Credit: cockroach in amber
Messages 13241 - 13260 of total 21618 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
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