Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 14201 - 14220 of total 21618 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
dirtbag

climber
Feb 17, 2014 - 02:47pm PT
Nice deflection chief, pointing me to bait I didn't even bite.

dirtbag

climber
Feb 17, 2014 - 02:50pm PT
Why should anyone bother to show you anything anymore?

You don't listen.

And when you are asked to support a point, or when someone suggests it's BS, you scream louder.

But I'm sure we'll see quite a few more hotlinks to reservoir photos before the day is finished.


And btw, you keep baiting me about some point I never made. Another deflection tactic?
dirtbag

climber
Feb 17, 2014 - 02:55pm PT
The problem isn't whether I have sh#t to prove you wrong.

The problem is that you haven't shown anything to prove yourself right.

dirtbag

climber
Feb 17, 2014 - 02:56pm PT
Fact is, they, the current DEMO government, IGNORED all them supposed CC Models. They did not BELIEVE them. More like just plain incompetent and complete bullshet.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Feb 17, 2014 - 03:01pm PT
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
LOSER!
Start sucking that water from your shetter.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
LOSER!
Start sucking that water from your shetter.HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
LOSER!
Start sucking that water from your shetter.HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
LOSER!
Start sucking that water from your shetter.
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
nice. got it. right.

Total fking FAIL.
dirtbag

climber
Feb 17, 2014 - 03:04pm PT
Okay Chief, you win. The loudest azzhole in the room might not be right, but they often win anyway. Good day.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Feb 17, 2014 - 03:22pm PT
Already done. Up thread.
Here's the paper, the one you wink-wink nudge-nudged about. Show where you proved you understood it.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/6/4/044022
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Feb 17, 2014 - 03:30pm PT
Yeah, I dropped that. And you're hiding behind one-liners, is that all you can do?
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Feb 17, 2014 - 04:12pm PT
sketch I'm curious about something, if you care to indulge me...

Is your mind made up that warming is not happening?

If not... please entertain a second question?

Is your mind made up that humans aren't causing the warming (with C02 emissions)?

Just curious and perhaps others might like to read your answers as well.

Cheers
DMT
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Feb 17, 2014 - 04:28pm PT
If they planned for this drought per the predicting models, there would be no emergency.


yes, if only "they" had just planned for this drought better they could have simply ordered the Sierras and Rockies to have more snowfall to then melt and fill the rivers and reservoirs

complex problems are easily solved with simple solutions

just takes the right person to reason his way through it
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Feb 17, 2014 - 06:06pm PT
Impressive how you can complain about insincere dialogue while serving up your own.
No, I did not complain about insincere dialogue, just your brainless one-liners. To rewind a bit, you wink-wink nudge-nudged about a paper I don't believe you could read or understand. You objected that you could so I asked for some evidence. You've shown nothing so far, so it still seems I was right.

Want to try one more time to get beyond one-liners or wink-wink and nudge-nudge? The paper in question is Foster & Rahmstorf 2011. And you're the guy who posted this pyramid.
dirtbag

climber
Feb 17, 2014 - 06:34pm PT
Just go away...
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Feb 17, 2014 - 06:51pm PT
this is a great thread

thanks for participating
dirtbag

climber
Feb 17, 2014 - 06:55pm PT
Indeed. I appreciate his honesty and ability to listen.
dirtbag

climber
Feb 17, 2014 - 07:04pm PT
Boo-hoo
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Feb 17, 2014 - 07:18pm PT
That of course NORTON was directed towards FUKEDMENTAL and DIRTBAGASS and all their wonderful pathetic demeaning GIF's and PHOTOSHOPPED images they consistently share on here.

And the other AGW gangbanging that goes on towards anyone that comes on here that does not agree with the AGW agenda.

Right NORTON?

well Chief, I will give you my honest answer to your question

I am just a retired guy living in Albuquerque and I don't have a dog in this hunt, no one is paying me or telling how to think or reason through this Climate Change stuff

I do know that the term Climate Change does not just mean it's getting warmer, it also means the earth's overall climate is more and more subject to extreme events

I cannot refute or deny for any good reason that human activity has contributed to the weakening of the earth's ozone layer by means of carbon dioxide emissions, nor can I deny the fact that our earth has been getting warmer with more and more heat records broken in the past couple of years

I have not read any serious refutation of these above facts, but I do read weak efforts that don't hold water, such as trying to attack education itself, trying to paint all scientists as being "paid off" to outright lie about their climate findings, posting irrelevant pictures of cows, and just seemingly desperate attempts to get out of manning up and directly refuting the science, the data, the consensus itself.

What should we DO about this global warming anyway, or should we do nothing?

I don't know. But it seems important to first recognize that there are and will be in the future serious consequences of this climate change to mankind, and maybe we should be taking steps to lessen, to mitigate those consequences sooner rather than later.

So there you go Chief, my honest reply to your question.
HermitMaster

Social climber
my abode
Feb 17, 2014 - 07:20pm PT
The Chief +1
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Feb 17, 2014 - 07:42pm PT
The Irony Chef's sketchiest hits

Is this irony?

Look at you... being a d!ck... again.

Just your continued purgatory loser regurgitated horseshet.

Impressive how you can complain about insincere dialogue while serving up your own.

Is this irony?

Look at you... being a d!ck... again.

You're a smart guy. Your grasp of the science is way over my head. And still, you resort to low-brow tactics.

Is this irony?

You all contribute to it all by buying your climbing/ski gear that is manu'd by BD (and other manu's) and computers and everything else that comes from CHINA etc.

Is this irony?

Just your continued purgatory loser regurgitated horseshet.

Is this irony?

You're a smart guy. Your grasp of the science is way over my head. And still, you resort to low-brow tactics.

Look at you... being a d!ck... again.

I had forgotten about some of the stupid, disingenuous points you posted.
Is this irony?

Thanks. Definitely an interesting perspective.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Feb 17, 2014 - 07:43pm PT
My take on Foster & Rahmstorf 2011 is they used bits and pieces from various sources to manufacture an "adjusted data" chart, that showed a nice steady rise in global temps.
Short-term climate variations have "various" causes, that is well known. Such as the sun, volcanoes and other aerosol sources, and how circulation phenonmena such as ENSO are moving heat into or out of the oceans. Since these things are all monitored by different scientists from different disciplines with different methods, no one has any choice but to access "various sources" to bring them together.

FF11 did not manufacture an adjusted chart, they calculated how much these various indexes are affecting global temperatures. Then they subtracted the solar, ENSO and volcanic effects out to see what remained. That's the adjusted data chart you wink-wink nudge-nudged about. And yes, it rises pretty steadily because that's what it does. As Ed has said many times, anyone who's actually skeptical can do the math and see for themselves. I'm skeptical, so I tried it, for instance. FR11 are that clear about how they worked.

With no constraints, they'd be hard-pressed to create a more uniform (yet believable) chart.
Lost me there, I don't get what you're saying. The chart is exactly what they say it is.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Feb 17, 2014 - 08:01pm PT
For a much simpler route that, it turns out, leads back to approximately the same conclusion as FR11, John Nielsen-Gammon (Texas State Climatologist) simply split years into El Nino, La Nina or neutral categories.



His results are strikingly parallel to FR11 (because both are real). But without any of that confusing math stuff. For example, you can see the most recent year (2011 in his data) is the warmest La Nina year ever.

Or put another way, if you visually follow El Nino years only, or neutral years only, or La Nina years only, you'll see they each trend steadily upward, and at much the same rate -- like that of the FR11 graph.
We see the latter half of the mid-century flat period, followed by the warming since 1970 and the relatively flat recent few years. We also see a few years that were exceptionally cold and whose timing fits with the known injection of aerosols into the stratosphere by the mighty volcanic eruptions of Agung and Pinatubo. It’s easy to see that both of these eruptions caused global temperatures to drop by about 0.3 C temporarily before recovering as the aerosols settled out of the stratosphere over the following 2-3 years. Finally, we see that, as is well known, La Niña years tend to be globally cold years and El Niño years tend to be globally warm, with a global lag of three months as mentioned earlier. And, we see that in a head-to-head match between El Niño and Pinatubo, Pinatubo wins.
Messages 14201 - 14220 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