Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 16101 - 16120 of total 25067 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Oct 14, 2013 - 07:59pm PT
To tell you the truth Ed, i didn't do much more than glance at the Cook paper. I don't trust much of anything purported to substantiate CAGW, especially the b.s. idea of a consensus on solely anthro causes. You, my friend should be looking a little at the astrophysicists papers. Things are turning around, the sixth straight severe Euopean winter start, hundreds dead from cold in S.A., hundreds of thousands of livestock frozen in S.A. and now South Dakota, the historically long mid to upper latitude winter of 2013, Antartic ice mass increasing, the Arctic ice in recovery. Hell , what will it take for you to see the light- the Thames and San Francisco Bay frozen solid? Give the Sun and it's myriad of known and unknown amplifiers a little credit, after all our efforts are a little feeble compared to it's natural variability, no?
Riley Wyna

Trad climber
A crack near you
Oct 14, 2013 - 09:13pm PT
Ed, I noticed that with the standard deviations on your 10 year data sets.
The variation is getting tighter.
Did I read it correctly ?

Yet the weather is getting more volatile.
I guess this can be accounted for with the large changes in the jet stream and the ratio of equator temps to arctic temps is decreasing so it does make sense but this wasn't intuitive to me prior to looking at the standard deviations.
Riley Wyna

Trad climber
A crack near you
Oct 14, 2013 - 09:31pm PT
Bahahaha

Rong I've climbed in thousands of places.
Your dog sh#t crags are embarrassing.
If I was you I would keep it quite.

That piece of sh#t guide book of yours is, with out a doubt, the worst guide book ever created for the worst climbing area I have ever been to in my life.
Lol
I couldn't make heads or tails of anything in your guide and I tried pretty hard.
So I just picked the obvious looking areas and lines and climbed them.
Nice 3 and 4 pitch lines covered in vertical kitty litter..
Obviously not climbed in 30 years or ever..

What did you do ?
Scribble something on toilet paper one night and call it a guide book?
Lol

That crack in the pic does look sweet though !!
5.6?
You grab a TR?


Ok Rong
One more chance
Here is a pic of one of the most classic crags in the world
Right outside your front door..
Clarify - this is a place climbers from all over the world travel to just to do a route or two.
If you're a climber you must have been there at least 100 times? Right ?
You can probably see it from your house on a clear day!!

Just post one pic..
And please no more pics of vertical dog sh#t..


Credit: Riley Wyna












Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Oct 14, 2013 - 09:33pm PT
riley i'm old and my eyes are fukt. where is the lower left praytell?
Riley Wyna

Trad climber
A crack near you
Oct 14, 2013 - 09:45pm PT
My Icey you are not old ..lol
It's all the same place ..

Spent three hours trying to find the middle pic by itself..
Lol
I wrote that post through my two final patients of the day, dinner at red lobster, an hour messing with my kids and three conversations on Facebook and walking the dog . Finally just used the collage pic from Kalen's TR..


Edit- all this sh#t taking with Ron has really got me fired up to climb ..
I'm dying here
Riley Wyna

Trad climber
A crack near you
Oct 14, 2013 - 10:30pm PT
Credit: Riley Wyna

Just got my final mark for the Statistics course I just finished.

Flat earthers..
You can eat it !

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Oct 14, 2013 - 10:52pm PT
Just tuned in again after chores.

My god Wyna, we bow at your feet. You are without a doubt the hottest climber , physician, and now climate warrior to ever grace the planet.Where can we give proper thanks to your resplendent presence here.

At one time there was such a thing as a hippocratic oath. How can such a superior being as yourself stoop to the level of treating common mortals? Sketch used an inappropriate word towards Ed, but to you it fits to the tee-TURD.

Ed, .9c might well be out of the range of typical yearly or decadal global temp variability , but in a 150 year period coming out of the pronounced dip of the LIA it is unremarkable. On a 4.5 billion year old Earth 30 years is perhaps way little of an interval to call "Climate" rather than short term trends. For a real idea of climate trends why don't we consider the whole Holocene from deglaciation,to Younger Dryas, to Holocene optimum, to roman warming, to the Dark ages, to the medieval Warm period, to the little ice age, and finally to the recent modest warming. I believe the other 50%, other than setting volcanism at zero, was either reduced climate sensitivity to co2 doubling or solar variability from maximum activity to greatly reduced. Don't quote me, just from thinking out loud from memory.
Riley Wyna

Trad climber
A crack near you
Oct 14, 2013 - 11:25pm PT
. Ed, .9c might well be out of the range of typical yearly or decadal global temp variability , but in a 150 year period coming out of the pronounced dip of the LIA it is unremarkable. On a 4.5 billion year old Earth 30 years is perhaps way little of an interval to call "Climate" rather than short term trends. For a real idea of climate trends why don't we consider the whole Holocene from deglaciation,to Younger Dryas, to Holocene optimum, to roman warming, to the Dark ages, to the medieval Warm period, to the little ice age, and finally to the recent modest warming. I believe the other 50%, other than setting volcanism at zero, was either reduced climate sensitivity to co2 doubling or solar variability from maximum activity to greatly reduced. Don't quote me, just from thinking out loud from memory. e

Tell me Rick, when did your delusions first start??
Or have you always considered yourself to be smarter than all the governments of the world, every University and just about every scientist?


Tell us again how you can't average a mean but understand astrophysics, climate science and phd level hypothesis testing?

Please tell us more !!!!
Riley Wyna

Trad climber
A crack near you
Oct 15, 2013 - 12:25am PT
. Grandiose delusions: an experimental investigation of the delusion as defense.

AuthorsSmith N, et al. Show all Journal
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2005 Jul;193(7):480-7.
Affiliation
Co-ordinated Psychological Treatments Service, Ladywell Unit, University Hospital Lewisham, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Two distinct roles for emotion in the development of delusions have been outlined. Some authors argue that delusions defend against low self-esteem and negative emotion (the delusion-as-defense account). Other authors hypothesize that delusions are not a defense but are a direct reflection of emotion and associated processes (the emotion-consistent account). An empirical investigation was conducted of the delusion-as-defense account with reference to grandiose delusions. Twenty individuals with grandiose delusions and 21 individuals without mental illness were compared on overt and covert measures of self-esteem. No evidence for a discrepancy between overt and covert self-esteem in individuals with grandiose delusions was found. One potential interpretation of the results is that the tasks were not able to penetrate defensive processes. However, we argue that in this group, the grandiose delusions do not currently defend against low self-esteem. Instead, grandiose delusions may in part be direct exaggerations of the emotional state of individuals.

I've noticed this to be incredibly prevalent amongst very good climbers .
Riley Wyna

Trad climber
A crack near you
Oct 15, 2013 - 12:30am PT

Rong, the guvment, Mexicans, and obummer



. Understanding attributional biases, emotions and self-esteem in 'poor me' paranoia: findings from an early psychosis sample.

AuthorsFornells-Ambrojo M, et al. Show all Journal
Br J Clin Psychol. 2009 Jun;48(Pt 2):141-62. doi: 10.1348/014466508X377135. Epub 2008 Dec 2.
Affiliation
Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, University of London, London, UK. M.Fornells-Ambrojo@iop.kcl.ac.uk
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Trower and Chadwick's (1995) theory of two types of paranoia ('poor me' and 'bad me') provides a framework for understanding the seemingly contradictory evidence on persecutory delusions. Paranoia has been argued to defend against low self-esteem, but people with persecutory delusions report high levels of emotional distress and, in some instances, low self-worth. The current study investigates attributions and emotions in a sample of people with early psychosis who have persecutory delusions. 'Poor me' paranoia has been found to be more frequent than 'bad me' paranoia in the early stages of psychosis. Anger and a tendency to blame other people are hypothesized to characterize 'poor me' paranoia.

DESIGN AND METHODS: The study had a cross-sectional design. Twenty individuals with early psychosis, 21 clinical controls with depression and 32 healthy volunteers completed a thorough assessment of emotions and attributions.

RESULTS: The 'poor me' paranoia group showed higher levels of anger, anxiety and depression than the non-clinical control group. Self-esteem and guilt were however preserved. A tendency to blame others but not themselves was characteristic of the 'poor me' paranoia group whereas people in the clinical control group tended to self-blame for failures. Anger, but not self-esteem, was associated with an attributional bias characterized by blaming other people instead of oneself.

CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, anger, a previously overlooked emotion in the study of persecutory delusions, warrants further attention. The other-directed nature of this emotion highlights the potential role of interpersonal schemas in understanding paranoia.

PMID 19054432 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Previous
Citation 2 of 585
Back to results Next
Related CitationsShow all
'Poor me' versus 'bad me' paranoia and the instability of persecutory ideation.
Bad me paranoia in early psychosis: a relatively rare phenomenon.
Clinical presentation and early care relationships in 'poor-me' and 'bad-me' paranoia.
Attributional style, defensive functioning and persecutory delusions: symptom-specific or general coping strategy?
Paranoid delusions in schizophrenia spectrum disorders and depression: the transdiagnostic role of expectations of negative events and negative self-esteem.
Riley Wyna

Trad climber
A crack near you
Oct 15, 2013 - 12:35am PT
. OPINION
Why losers have delusions of grandeur
By Staff
May 23, 2010 | 5:28am

Modal Trigger

Photo: Altrendo/Getty Images
Charles Darwin observed that “ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.” That was certainly true on the day in 1995 when a man named McArthur Wheeler boldly robbed two banks in Pittsburgh without using a disguise. Security camera footage of him was broadcast on the evening news the same day as the robberies, and he was arrested an hour later. Mr. Wheeler was surprised when the police explained how they had used the surveillance tapes to catch him. “But I wore the juice,” he mumbled incredulously. He seemed to believe that rubbing his face with lemon juice would blur his image and make him impossible to catch.
In movies, criminal masterminds often are geniuses, James Bond villains in volcano lairs. But the stereotype doesn’t apply to actual cons, at least not the ones who get caught.
Studies show those convicted of crimes are, on average, less intelligent than non-criminals. And they can be spectacularly foolish. One of us had a high school classmate who decided to vandalize the school — by spray painting his own initials on the wall. A Briton named Peter Addison went one step further and vandalized the side of a building by writing “Peter Addison was here.” Sixty-six-year-old Samuel Porter tried to pass a one-million-dollar bill at a supermarket in the United States and became irate when the cashier wouldn’t make change for him. All of these people seem to have been under what we call the “illusion of confidence,” which is the persistent belief that we are more skilled than we really are — in this case, that the criminals were so good they would not get caught.
The story of McArthur Wheeler was told by social psychologists Justin Kruger and David Dunning in a brilliant paper entitled “Unskilled and Unaware of It.” In a set of clever experiments, Kruger and Dunning showed that people with the least skill are the most likely to overestimate their abilities. For example, they measured people’s sense of humor (psychologists have learned that almost anything can be measured) and found that those who scored the lowest on their test still thought they had a better-than-average sense of what is funny.
These findings help to explain why shows like “American Idol” and “Last Comic Standing” attract so many aspiring contestants who have no hope of qualifying, let alone winning. Many are just seeking a few seconds of TV time and a shot at “Pants on the Ground” fame, but some seem genuinely shocked when the judges reject them.
It turns out that the illusion of confidence can survive even the measurement of skill.
Chess, for instance, has a mathematical rating system that provides up-to-date, accurate and precise numerical information about a player’s “strength” (chess jargon for ability) relative to other players. Ratings are public knowledge and are printed next to each player’s name on tournament scoreboards. Ratings are valued so highly that chess players often remember their opponents better by their ratings than by their names or faces. “I beat a 1600” or “I lost to a 2100” are not uncommon things to hear in the hallway outside the playing room.
Armed with knowledge of their own ratings, players ought to be exquisitely aware of how competent they are. But what do they actually think about their own abilities? Some years ago, in a study we conducted with our colleague Daniel Benjamin, we asked a group of chess players at major tournaments two simple questions: “What is your most recent official chess rating?” and “What do you think your rating should be to reflect your true current strength?”
As expected, all of the players knew their actual ratings. Yet 75% of them thought that their rating underestimated their true playing ability. The magnitude of their overconfidence was stunning: On average, these competitive chess players estimated that they would win a match against another player with the exact same rating as their own by a two-to-one margin — a crushing victory. Of course, the most likely outcome of such a match would be a tie.
This tendency for the least skilled among us to overestimate their abilities the most has more serious consequences than an inflated sense of humor or chess ability. Everyone has encountered obliviously incompetent managers who make life miserable for their underlings because they suffer from the illusion of confidence. And as the joke reminds us, the people who graduate last in their medical school class are still doctors; what is less funny is that they probably believe they are still the best ones.
Daniel Simons and Christopher Chabris are the authors of “The Invisible Gorilla, and Other Ways Our Intuitions Deceive Us” (Crown). Visit their website at theinvisiblegorilla.com.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Oct 15, 2013 - 07:17am PT
Look in the mirror Wyna. Pull yourself together. Try first to do no harm.

mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Oct 15, 2013 - 07:28am PT
hahahaaa... the hubris is strong in this one... first using his 3rd grade math and science skills and blogshit to argue science with those who have spent a good deal of their lives studying it... then a feeble attempt to remind the charitable Dr. Wyna of the Hippocratic Oath.

What a fuking idiot that Sumner guy is.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 15, 2013 - 07:46am PT
Its always quite amusing when a typical Chuffian Ayn Rand survival of the fittest type complains about blood lust when a limp wristed librul type executes a coupe de gras.

Don't get your panties all twisted Rick. Better a hypocratic Oath than a hypocritical Oaf.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 15, 2013 - 07:46am PT
Although our ST denialists lack the reading and numerical skills to understand the Cook et al. paper, not everyone is so impaired -- more than 100,000 downloads so far.

Below is their wrapup, which speaks directly to some claims often made on this forum (emphasis added).

5. Conclusion

The public perception of a scientific consensus on AGW is a necessary element in public support for climate policy (Ding et al 2011). However, there is a significant gap between public perception and reality, with 57% of the US public either disagreeing or unaware that scientists overwhelmingly agree that the earth is warming due to human activity (Pew 2012).

Contributing to this 'consensus gap' are campaigns designed to confuse the public about the level of agreement among climate scientists. In 1991, Western Fuels Association conducted a $510 000 campaign whose primary goal was to 'reposition global warming as theory (not fact)'. A key strategy involved constructing the impression of active scientific debate using dissenting scientists as spokesmen (Oreskes 2010). The situation is exacerbated by media treatment of the climate issue, where the normative practice of providing opposing sides with equal attention has allowed a vocal minority to have their views amplified (Boykoff and Boykoff 2004). While there are indications that the situation has improved in the UK and USA prestige press (Boykoff 2007), the UK tabloid press showed no indication of improvement from 2000 to 2006 (Boykoff and Mansfield 2008).

The narrative presented by some dissenters is that the scientific consensus is '...on the point of collapse' (Oddie 2012) while '...the number of scientific "heretics" is growing with each passing year' (Allègre et al 2012). A systematic, comprehensive review of the literature provides quantitative evidence countering this assertion. The number of papers rejecting AGW is a miniscule proportion of the published research, with the percentage slightly decreasing over time. Among papers expressing a position on AGW, an overwhelming percentage (97.2% based on self-ratings, 97.1% based on abstract ratings) endorses the scientific consensus on AGW.
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Oct 15, 2013 - 08:00am PT
"Contributing to this 'consensus gap' are campaigns designed to confuse the public about the level of agreement among climate scientists."

How is American ignorance exploited?...and where do these campaigns come from?

Climate Change Denial Books and Conservative Think Tanks- Exploring the Connection
The conservative movement and especially its think tanks play a critical role in denying the reality and significance of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), especially by manufacturing uncertainty over climate science. Books denying AGW are a crucial means of attacking climate science and scientists, and we examine the links between conservative think tanks (CTTs) and 108 climate change denial books published through 2010. We find a strong link, albeit noticeably weaker for the growing number of self-published denial books. We also examine the national origins of the books and the academic backgrounds of their authors or editors, finding that with the help of American CTTs climate change denial has spread to several other nations and that an increasing portion of denial books are produced by individuals with no scientific training. It appears that at least 90% of denial books do not undergo peer review, allowing authors or editors to recycle scientifically unfounded claims that are then amplified by the conservative movement, media, and political elites.

Climate Change Denial Books and Conservative Think Tanks: Exploring the Connection
Riley E. Dunlap and Peter J. Jacques
American Behavioral Scientist 2013 57: 699 originally published online 22 February 2013

LINKED from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences


Repeat: "...an increasing portion of denial books are produced by individuals with no scientific training. It appears that at least 90% of denial books do not undergo peer review..."
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Oct 15, 2013 - 08:09am PT
Manufacturing Uncertainty: Conservative Think Tanks and Climate Change Denial Books
Riley E. Dunlap & Peter J. Jacques — June 13, 2013

Books denying climate change evidence are a potent means of manufacturing uncertainty. Most are linked to conservative think tanks, with few authored by individuals with scientific credentials, and fewer still having undergone peer review.

No sooner had anthropogenic global warming (AGW) been placed on the public agenda — perhaps most effectively by James Hansen’s 1988 Congressional testimony — than an organized campaign to deny its reality and significance was launched. The early campaign was centered in corporate America, symbolized by the Global Climate Coalition. But from the outset the conservative movement was also heavily involved — the two united by antipathy toward the prospect of government regulations to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Conservative think tanks (CTTs), core components of the conservative movement, have increasingly become central actors in the campaign, forming the Cooler Heads Coalition as flagging corporate support led to dissolution of the Global Climate Coalition.

The disinformation campaign against AGW has used the well-tested strategy of manufacturing uncertainty, constantly asserting that the scientific evidence is too uncertain to warrant regulatory action. CTTs offer an ideal vehicle for manufacturing uncertainty regarding climate science. Typically treated by media and policy makers as credible sources of objective information, CTTs have achieved the status of an “alternate academia.” It is common to see their representatives regarded as independent experts, being interviewed and testifying along with or in lieu of leading academics — including climate scientists.

A growing body of research has documented the multiple roles CTTs play in promoting climate change denial, including sponsoring and amplifying the voices of contrarian scientists and producing a vast range of media material.

Although just one of many forms of media used by CTTs, books are especially important. Authors of books critiquing climate science often come to be viewed by the media and sympathetic politicians as “climate experts,” regardless of their academic backgrounds or scientific credentials. Their books are frequently carried by major bookstore chains, many receive enormous publicity on CTT websites and from conservative and skeptical bloggers, and some are sold through the Conservative Book Club. In short, books are a potent means for diffusing skepticism concerning AGW and the need to reduce GHG emissions.

The authors’ recent study analyzed 108 English-language books espousing climate change denial published through 2010. These books reject evidence that global warming is occurring, that human actions are the predominant cause of global warming over recent decades, and/or that global warming will have negative impacts on human and natural systems — or what are commonly termed trend, attribution and impact denial. Besides focusing on book connections to CTTs, the study also examined the educational credentials and national backgrounds of their authors/editors.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 15, 2013 - 08:12am PT
The narrative presented by some dissenters is that the scientific consensus is '...on the point of collapse' (Oddie 2012) while '...the number of scientific "heretics" is growing with each passing year'



Rick - this is your big chance to make the break from damp proofing foundations in some Wasilla muck pit! You could be writing for the British Tabloids as an "American Conservative Intellectual" or maybe get a weekly skype spot for Sun News. You could even position yourself so the scenic grandeur of the Alaskan wilderness of meth labs and atco trailers is prominently displayed like Sarah made so popular on Fuked Newz. Just think.... hobnobbing with luminaries like Lord Bunkton and Ezra Levant about everything from the the white supremacy revival to climate change caused by Arks on the moon. Your arthritic joints need a well deserved break from that misery you guys call weather up there. Why do you think Sarah bolted? When opportunity knocks you gotta jump man.

Or gang up with Ron down in mound Pie...

FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Oct 15, 2013 - 08:12am PT
Trends over Time

The first denial volume (Sherwood Idso’s Carbon Dioxide: Friend or Foe) was published in 1982. The remaining 107 books started coming out in 1989, the year after AGW had become a highly visible issue in the USA and the IPCC was established, with four being published that year. They were followed by 19 denial books published in the 1990s, 13 in the last half of that decade when the Kyoto Protocol was attracting extensive attention. Another 15 were published during the first half of the next decade, and a veritable explosion of 54 in the second half (especially 2007 to 2009), making a total of 69 from 2000 to 2009. Another 15 came out in 2010, yielding the total of 108 examined in the study.


Several developments fueled the production of more denial books starting in 2007: The release of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth (2006) in both video and book form the prior year and the enormous publicity it received, culminating in an Academy Award for best documentary; Gore and the IPCC receiving the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize; publication of the IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report claiming “unequivocal” evidence of anthropogenic global warming; consideration of climate change legislation in Congress; and an upturn in public concern about global warming.


The ratio of climate change books (back row) to climate change denial books (front row) is illustrated by this chronological sorting of one individual’s extensive, but not all-inclusive, personal collection. See related sidebar below.

A notable aspect of the recent rise in denial books is the growth of self-published volumes. Thirty-three of the denial books were published by individuals on their own or via a “vanity press”: 30 since 2000, and 26 between 2007 and 2010.
FortMentäl

Social climber
Albuquerque, NM
Oct 15, 2013 - 08:14am PT
Book Ties with Conservative Think Tanks

To examine links between the denial books and CTTs we used verifiable evidence of author/editor affiliation with a CTT (e.g., serving on advisory boards), book publication by a CTT press, or both. Seventy-eight of the 108 volumes, or 72 percent, have a verifiable link with a CTT, but underlying this figure are two interesting trends.

While 100 percent of the denial books published in the 1980s and 95 percent published in the 1990s are linked to CTTs, “only” 65 percent of those published since 2000 have a link to CTTs. Second, the large decline in the percentage of CTT links since 2000 is the result primarily of the preponderance of self-published books appearing over the eleven years, as only one-third of the 30 self-published books coming out since 2000 are linked to a CTT.

In contrast, 83 percent of the books from publishing houses since 2000 have links to CTTs. More generally, of the 75 denial books issued by a publishing house, 87 percent are linked to a CTT, whereas of the 33 self-published denial books, only 39 percent have such a link.

In recent years, production of climate change denial books has “diffused” from CTTs to a broader segment of the conservative movement, including lay authors lacking scientific credentials who typically self-publish their volumes, just as climate change denial has spread throughout most of the conservative sector of the public. Yet, on average, books affiliated with CTTs receive far more publicity, sell much better, and reach larger audiences than do self-published titles. In addition, individuals affiliated with CTTs are especially likely to produce multiple denial volumes — most notably Fred Singer with six and Patrick Michaels with five. Indeed, 14 of the 15 individuals who have published two or more denial books are affiliated with CTTs.

CTTs have clearly played a central role in the explosion of books promoting climate change denial. Those playing prominent roles in attacking climate science are especially likely to publish (or co-publish) denial books: the Cato Institute publishing five, the Heartland Institute four, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, The Marshall Institute, the Hoover Institution, and the U.K.’s Institute for Economic Affairs three each. These same groups are linked to many more books via author/editor affiliations.
Messages 16101 - 16120 of total 25067 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