Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 16521 - 16540 of total 28062 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:25am PT
I'm glad you responded. How much % of the CO2 component of global warming is contributed by humans, if you please?

Use your own work. Don't ask Ed. Even if its (gasp!) unsupported opinion, what pray tell, is the %?

Thanks!
DMT
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:27am PT
Rick Poedtke wrote:
In other words DMT, PRIVATE money and PRIVATE entities BITD.


Ah, the Free Market way.

No, nothing free market about it. You should read Cadillac Desert.
Sketch

Trad climber
Langley, VA
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:43am PT
I'm glad you responded. How much % of the CO2 component of global warming is contributed by humans, if you please?

Use your own work. Don't ask Ed. Even if its (gasp!) unsupported opinion, what pray tell, is the %?

Thanks!
DMT

That's a tough one, Dingus.

I really don't know.

As I've said before, my position on this issue is man is responsible for rising CO2 levels, which are bad for the planet. They contribute to rising global temperatures. They may even be responsible for most of the warming. This last part I'm not so sure about.

How much % of the CO2 component of global warming deo you think is contributed by humans?
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:53am PT
Thanks for the frank answer Sketch.

I've no idea, to return your frankness. I'm not sure I care, really, as to this % vs. that. What difference does it make?

I'm not a scientist and I don't try to play one on the internet. Do I sit at the feet of science and lap up everything tossed my way?

My pride would demand 'no' but the fact of the matter is I am typing on a computer on the internet. The hysterical (and I mean HYSTERICAL, of course) charges of hypocrisy and even fraud, lobbed daily by the chief et al, directly at chiloe and Ed H, are laughing stock material.

I lap up the fruits of science the same way a sailor on a nuclear weapons platform did and does.

So I'm content to sit it out on the sidelines, burn my JP4 and diesel, live in my woody house, and breathe. I have to go with consensus science on this one...

DMT
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:58am PT
Most studies involving climate change, like the great majority that Cook et al. review, are not themselves attribution research so they make no original claims about what percent of warming is due to what. The IPCC reports on the other hand have the synthesis of attribution research as one of their objectives. Here's how the IPCC AR5 (in a statement that befuddles some innumerates) summarizes the state of the art:

It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together. The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:02pm PT
WTF does DAM building have to do with the fact that MOST of the US power grids are PRIVATELY/PUBLICLY Investor Owned and operated. And the fact that ALL petroleum entities in the United States are also PRIVATELY owned.



Nothing.



Absolutely NOTHING.

The TOP TEN Utility Companies in the nation are Investor Owned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_electric_companies

An investor-owned utility or IOU is a business organization, providing a product or service regarded as a utility (often termed a public utility regardless of ownership), and managed as private enterprise rather than a function of government or a utility cooperative. Such businesses can range from a family whose residential property includes a well whose flow in excess of the family's own needs produces a secondary income, to international communications conglomerates, but political and infrastructure considerations in some countries makes the private sector of the electric-power production and distribution industry the most often discussed investor-owned utilities there.


Absolutely no FED GOV'T ownership.
Largo

Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:16pm PT
THEY ARE CALLED ALTERNATIVES!


Kindly list said alternatives.

JL
Sketch

Trad climber
Langley, VA
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:18pm PT
The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.

Well heck fire. It almost sounds like them IPCC folks are saying man caused ALL of the recent warming. Without all our anthropogenic contributions, we'd be enjoying global temperatures last seen in the 1950s.

Is that the consensus?
raymond phule

climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:27pm PT
I thought you had read about the same information that Chiloe gave in

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/27/global-warming-ipcc-report-humans

or did you just stop to read when you thought he lied in the title?
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:31pm PT
Well heck fire. It almost sounds like them IPCC folks are saying man caused ALL of the recent warming. Without all our anthropogenic contributions, we'd be enjoying global temperatures last seen in the 1950s.

Is that the consensus?


Except for your 1950s part, that is the "best estimate" in the IPCC AR5 consensus.

Most of the world's main scientist organizations (in the US the NAS, AAAS, AMS, ACS, AGU and so forth) have endorsed the conclusions of AR4, which was less a bit less confident and detailed; the difference reflects new research over the past 6 years. The AR4 summary:

Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.

Contrast with the AR5 summary:

It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together. The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:32pm PT
Rick Poedtke wrote:
WTF does DAM building have to do with the fact that MOST of the US power grids are PRIVATELY/PUBLICLY Investor Owned and operated.

One excellent example is Shasta Lake Dam, built by the Federal Bureau of Reclamation.
http://www.usbr.gov/mp/ncao/

The dam's other major purpose is to generate hydroelectricity. With a hydraulic head of 330 feet (100 m), the dam is capable of generating 676 megawatts (MW) from five turbines a pair of 125 MW units and three 142 MW units. Each of the turbines is driven by a high-pressure jet of water fed by a steel penstock 15 feet (4.6 m) in diameter. Two smaller turbines generate power for operations at the dam itself. The plant serves to generate peaking power for the northern Sacramento Valley.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shasta_Dam

I hope that answers your question.
Sketch

Trad climber
Langley, VA
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:39pm PT
I thought you had read about the same information that Chiloe gave in

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/27/global-warming-ipcc-report-humans

or did you just stop to read when you thought he lied in the title?

It's too bad you need to be an as#@&%e with such consistency.

I read the entire article. Dana Nuccitelli demonstrates the same kind of intellectual dishonesty that is seen in the Cook et al paper.

He's consistent, too.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:46pm PT

It's too bad you need to be an as#@&%e with such consistency.

And it is bad that you are such an idiot with such consistency.


I read the entire article. Dana Nuccitelli demonstrates the same kind of intellectual dishonesty that is seen in the Cook et al paper.

Intellectual dishonesty when he is using information from the IPCC report? The same information that chiloe gave above.

All you did in the past was to call him a liar. I really doubt that you have read the article.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:49pm PT
I hope that answers your question.

Nope.

It is just a deflection regarding the issue that both the Power Utility (most of which are currently Coal Fired and CNG driven) and Petroleum providers in the US are in fact, privately owned/operated.

Dam's are not an issue in regards to the CAGW camps Carbon Emission issue that is supposedly going to be the demise of our species and the planet in general.

Deny and Deflect!

Nice Gary.



CHILOE
It is extremely likely ....

Famous last words of Alan Greenspan and the Global Financial Markets Analysts up to their collapse and Greenspan's ensuing "Apology" which Brewasky posted, for believing in such statistical modelling forecasting philosophy.

Amazingly, that too was all considered a "CONSENSUS" by the lot of PhD Economists globally.

Perfect example of all this "Consensus" BS. Greenspan being in the lead.
Sketch

Trad climber
Langley, VA
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:54pm PT
Thanks for further illustrating my point.

And if you weren't such a myopic dumbass, you'd easily see Nuccitelli's lies.

But then again, if "ifs" and "buts" were candy and nuts...
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:56pm PT
And if you weren't such a myopic dumbass, you'd easily see Nuccitelli's lies.

Sketch seems to know only two tricks: sh#t-stained insults, and calling people liars.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
U.N. Ambassador, Crackistan
Oct 30, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
Private enterprise?

The host of federal and state tax credits to power buyers and power generators suggests that public funding of so-called private enterprise, PG&E is an excellent example, continues as strong as ever.

No we're not building dams anymore. We are funding the development of solar power to the tune of 30% tax credit, for example. There are many other examples of tax dollars flowing into the hands of power company investors.

Sorta like the military or any other public commodity... we can all pretend private enterprise, till the sonsaboitches go out of business that is.

That's how Solano County ended up owning the top ten feet of Clear Lake in Lake County... abomination of private enterprise.

DMT

Sketch

Trad climber
Langley, VA
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:01pm PT
It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together. The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.

It's likely that more than half... no... um... I'm mean ALL of the warming was caused by man.

More than half? All?

Such latitude.

It's all so confusing.

I need a nap.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:07pm PT
There are many other examples of tax dollars flowing into the hands of power company investors.

Regardless DMT, the utility power providers are STILL privately/investor run entities. No matter how you put it.

You nor I nor the FEDS have any say on when they can shut your power off if you do not pay your bill.


It is NOT mandatory that every households nor commercial operators/companies in this nation have electricity nor Federally regulated how they get that electricity.


No matter how you twist it, it is a Free Market based function.
raymond phule

climber
Oct 30, 2013 - 01:08pm PT

And if you weren't such a myopic dumbass, you'd easily see Nuccitelli's lies.

I am sure that the chief, rick and ron agrees with you but very few thinking people.

I just found it ironic when the first hit in google when I googled the IPCC quote were an article that you have claimed that you have read (but of course didn't like).

"It is extremely likely [95 percent confidence] more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together."

"The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period ... The observed warming since 1951 can be attributed to the different natural and anthropogenic drivers and their contributions can now be quantified. Greenhouse gases contributed a global mean surface warming likely to be in the range of 0.5C to 1.3 C over the period 1951−2010, with the contributions from other anthropogenic forcings, including the cooling effect of aerosols, likely to be in the range of −0.6C to 0.1C."

"The contribution from natural forcings is likely to be in the range of −0.1C to 0.1C, and from internal variability is likely to be in the range of −0.1C to 0.1C."

Is actually quote strongly suggest the conclusion that he made in the title.

But how would you know, you would need to have read the article... understand the article... putting your biases to the side and considered what he wrote... Neither of which is very likely to ever happen.
Messages 16521 - 16540 of total 28062 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