Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 16521 - 16540 of total 26023 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Gary

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Oct 30, 2013 - 10:45am PT
What a moron you truly are GARY.

Good morning, to you, Rick Poedtke. Just thought you might find it an interesting subject. Sorry to have bothered you.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Oct 30, 2013 - 10:48am PT
Ed Hartouni responded by essentially saying it's a factor. I'd say that's a position most skeptics would support.

None of the skeptics on this board support it. Step 1 of the 3-step shuffle. Deny deny deny.

DMT
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
And every fool knows, a dog needs a home, and...
Oct 30, 2013 - 10:54am PT
Most all of the big dam projects out west were produced with public money that was never paid back. The electrification and irrigation of the west was funded in large part with eastern tax money.

You know, that tough western git-r-dun attitude (with someone else's money, lol lol lol)

Same as it ever was.

(same as it ever was)

Its like saying climate control science is bogus and then demanding and using and accepting as valid the answers from climate control scientists. It makes me lol.

Ed what % of the warming component comes from humans bwahahahahahahaha!

DMT
Cragar

Trad climber
MSLA - MT
Oct 30, 2013 - 10:59am PT
Thanks DMT.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:00am PT
Brewasky....


HARRY WAXMAN!! Are you fking kidding me.

No the video is not about Harry Waxman. Very good guess Chuff, But only if your guessing is completely reliant on knee jerk prejudicial judgement cued by a single image. Otherwise it is a terrible guess. Are you sure you read Greenspans book? My intuitive sense is telling me your a liar on that one. You may have flipped every page over but if read also means comprehend then You endlessly demonstrate that you can't read so I really doubt you read anything.

This is where you become a joke. It is not a crime to not comprehend. The crime is to not even bother trying. you could care less about comprehension and to your credit your at least not shy to demonstrate it without any attempt at deception, which is a damn sight more than Sumners can say. He can't comprehend either but in his world every day is Halloween and he loves to pretend.

At least Sketch is trying. He wants to comprehend the real meaning of the purported 97% consensus. It is a completely worthy goal on two counts:

1) It recognizes the value of the expert consensus - versus the worthlessness of the non expert.

2) Which means whatever the expert consensus is determined to be, that is the fact that is actionable.

So Sketch, if you trust the institutional science as you imply, why do you doubt how the institutional experts explain it?

Or do you in fact not trust them, in which case why invest so much in determining what their consensus is?

Sumners dosn't trust them either. In fact he thinks they are part of the Illuminati / scientism / communism trifecta of evil hell bent on destroying America. He has yet to produce actual evidence to support his theory but his finely tuned intuition - and enthusiasm - more than compensates for that little detail. Anyway, Rick dosn't need no stinking consensus. Why do you need one?
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:01am PT
In other words DMT, PRIVATE money and PRIVATE entities BITD.


Ah, the Free Market way.


Hey Brewaswky,

I watched it.

Thus my post....

Ironically, that exact same "apology" by Greenspan will be mimic'd by your Senior AGW Croanies in 15 years when the temperatures stabilize then begins to drop and the CAGW/IPCC Ideology completely collapses. The Financial Market STATISTICAL MODELLING in this case was.... Wrong!



Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:14am PT
^^^^^^^^^

uh, no once again. Greenspans error was not in modeling but in trusting his understanding of human herding behavior to intuition and making no attempt to validate his intuition. He states that the error was not modeling but ignoring critical factors as vital to the model inputs.

Does he say there is a better method for predicting than modeling?

Oh yeah, I keep forgetting.... your not interested in comprehension. Forget it.
Sketch

Trad climber
Langley, VA
Oct 30, 2013 - 11:19am PT
None of the skeptics on this board support it. Step 1 of the 3-step shuffle. Deny deny deny.

DMT

I guess that means I'm not a skeptic.

Now, I'll be able to sleep at night.
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.
Messages 16521 - 16540 of total 26023 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