Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 18201 - 18220 of total 20059 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 16, 2014 - 08:56pm PT
that rick, who doesn't understand anything about science, to make pronouncements about scientists is dark comedy... but then he's given to making (and defending) absurd statements from his demented fantasies.

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2014/12/15/science.1261713.full
from Science Express

Published Online December 16 2014
Science DOI: 10.1126/science.1261713
REPORT

Mars methane detection and variability at Gale crater


Christopher R. Webster, Paul R. Mahaffy, Sushil K. Atreya, Gregory J. Flesch, Michael A. Mischna, Pierre-Yves Meslin, Kenneth A. Farley, Pamela G. Conrad, Lance E. Christensen, Alexander A. Pavlov, Javier Martín-Torres, María-Paz Zorzano, Timothy H. McConnochie, Tobias Owen, Jennifer L. Eigenbrode, Daniel P. Glavin, Andrew Steele, Charles A. Malespin, P. Douglas Archer Jr., Brad Sutter, Patrice Coll, Caroline Freissinet, Christopher P. McKay, John E. Moores, Susanne P. Schwenzer, John C. Bridges, Rafael Navarro-Gonzalez, Ralf Gellert, Mark T. Lemmon, the MSL Science Team

ABSTRACT
Reports of plumes or patches of methane in the Martian atmosphere that vary over monthly timescales have defied explanation to date. From in situ measurements made over a 20-month period by the Tunable Laser Spectrometer (TLS) of the Sample Analysis at Mars (SAM) instrument suite on Curiosity at Gale Crater, we report detection of background levels of atmospheric methane of mean value 0.69 ± 0.25 ppbv at the 95% confidence interval (CI). This abundance is lower than model estimates of ultraviolet (UV) degradation of accreted interplanetary dust particles (IDP’s) or carbonaceous chondrite material. Additionally, in four sequential measurements spanning a 60-sol period, we observed elevated levels of methane of 7.2 ± 2.1 (95% CI) ppbv implying that Mars is episodically producing methane from an additional unknown source.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Dec 17, 2014 - 06:44am PT
A sharp decline in oil prices does, however, provide a rare political opportunity to introduce more carbon pricing. After all, one of the major arguments against a “carbon tax” has been that it would make energy more expensive. Even assurances that the revenue from such a tax would be refunded to taxpayers were inadequate to overcome political resistance, particularly in the U.S.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/oil-prices-the-carbon-tax-moment-is-here/article22113980/
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Dec 17, 2014 - 07:27am PT
Skepticism is all about critical examination, evidence-based scientific inquiry, and the use of reason in examining controversial claims. Those who flatly deny the results of climate science do not partake in any of the above. They base their conclusions on a priori convictions. Theirs is an ideological conviction—the opposite of skepticism.
In the meantime, journalists and others can use a test I turned to on the television program in Australia. After hearing that the individuals in question did not accept the conclusions of climate change modelers at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and other academic bodies, I asked them the simple question: “OK, what do your models predict?”

As you might expect, the response was silence.

If You Don’t Accept That Climate Change Is Real, You’re Not a Skeptic. You’re a Denier.
Dr. Lawrence Krauss
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/12/16/climate_change_deniers_are_not_skeptics.html


As scientific skeptics, we are well aware of political efforts to undermine climate science by those who deny reality but do not engage in scientific research or consider evidence that their deeply held opinions are wrong. The most appropriate word to describe the behavior of those individuals is “denial.” Not all individuals who call themselves climate change skeptics are deniers. But virtually all deniers have falsely branded themselves as skeptics. By perpetrating this misnomer, journalists have granted undeserved credibility to those who reject science and scientific inquiry.
http://www.csicop.org/news/show/deniers_are_not_skeptics

DMT: what do your models predict?
TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Dec 17, 2014 - 08:02am PT
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/climate-change-beavers-boost-emissions-800-million-kg-methane-every-year-1479809

Maybe it's time for beaver felt hats to come back in style

monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 08:06am PT
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 08:26am PT
Er, Um, Chief. Check the temps for 1999 and 2000.

Btw, your 'pause' increased the long term warming rate.



Can someone please explain to The Chief how averages and trend lines work?
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Dec 17, 2014 - 08:26am PT
#1 There are now dozens of hockey sticks and they all come to the same basic conclusion. The recent warming does appear to be unprecedented as far back as we can go. But even if we didn’t have that evidence, we would still know that humans are warming the planet, changing the climate and that represents a threat if we don’t do something about it.

#2 Year by year, decade by decade, gradually over long periods of time, we see that the earth’s temperature is rising and we know from very careful scientific studies that have been done, that the majority of this warming is due to human production of heat-trapping gases.

#3 Weather is your mood and climate is your personality. So on any given day, you can have really cold weather or really violent weather. But the scientific literature does suggest that our climate is changing. Almost every weather phenomenon happens in a warmer and more moist climate.

#4 We know that humans are raising the temperature through the emission of greenhouse gases. We’re beginning to change the climate. Among the things that we’re going to see is more of the hydrologic cycle is going to be rain, and less of it’s going to be snow. As it gets warmer, the snow line is going to move up. What does fall as snow is going to melt earlier, and runoff faster.

#5 ...what we anticipate is that because we’re continuing to add carbon dioxide to the system, we’re going to continue to warm decade by decade by decade. The exact magnitude of where we’re going to go is going to depend a little bit on the system, but also on the decisions that we make as a society to either reduce carbon emissions or just to carry on with business as usual.

#6 Everything I’ve learned about our planet’s past climate history places me, like most of my colleagues, in the camp that says we need to take preventive action to keep the planet from warming further.

#7 There’s no debate. It’s really quite simple. We’ve overloaded the atmosphere with heat trapping gas and the rest are just details.

#8 The take-home message of my coral reef research is that without serious, near-term efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to increase coral reef resilience, the world’s coral reefs will experience dangerously frequent mass bleaching events within decades.

#9 Climate change is coming. If you want to know what it looks like, just look at the Midwest right now. It’s drought; it’s heat. Warmer temperatures don’t mean barbecues and tank tops. It means drought; it means fire; it means suffering.

#10 Compare climate change to a train trundling across America. Some way down the track, we are not sure how far, the bridge is out and disaster looms. Do we want to be the ones to sit back and watch the train wreck, or do we want to be the hero?
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 08:43am PT
That's because it is hot, Chief.

Your 'pause' starts way above the trend.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 08:51am PT
But, Chief, why does your idea of a climate system include such a massive, instantaneous change in 1998?

monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 08:56am PT
But Chief, why is this neutral year hotter than the most massive recorded El-Nino?

BTW, Chief, I see about the same amount of La-Nina's as El-Nino's in your graphs.

Do you know what an oscillation means?
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 09:02am PT
Translation of Chief speak:

But the dial goes to 11!
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 17, 2014 - 09:03am PT
not zero warming...
little change in the global mean surface temperature over a climatically short time period.

try to be precise.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 09:05am PT
Or in other words, a level that is massively higher than the previous level.

monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 09:07am PT
That level is much higher than the previous levels.

Try to focus.

Look at the straight lines above.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Dec 17, 2014 - 09:09am PT
How come you don't like to show trends from the 1970's Chief?

Are you trying to hide that your 'pause' is so much higher than the previous 'pause'?

I'm off to work. Have a good day!
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Dec 17, 2014 - 10:54am PT
I was thinking on the engines of climate change : economy and the fuels that run it.

Seems to me 'big oil' has to be a principle part of any solution moving away from fossil fuels. Same for the economy; big corps have to be a major part of any solution.

Demonizing either, in an effort to convince the unwashed masses that climate change is real, for example, demonizing Koch brothers as 'evil' or big oil as 'standing in the way', is pretty much guaranteed to keep the polarization in play.

To my way of thinking, we should welcome Chevron, Mobile, Shell, et al. sponsoring climate change scientific conferences and studies. We should celebrate those efforts.

The alternative is to declare them dinosaur poop and run them out of business. Who wins then?

I say this in route to a point: rather than beat up on Chiloe for attending a conference sponsored in part by big oil, why not simply acknowledge the fact that big oil seems to want to explore problems and solutions right along with other interested parties?

Now how about that?

DMT
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Dec 17, 2014 - 11:00am PT
And the way to get big oil to "buy in" is via a carbon tax.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Dec 17, 2014 - 11:07am PT
So if I am a big oil salesperson, and by way of carbon tax my U.S. customers start buying less fuel, what shall I do with the excess crude and refined product I have?

Do you think there are buyers on the world market for my product, who perhaps areny't any or as much paying carbon (or other) taxes ?

Carbon tax at least the ideas I've seen, are a jobs and wealth transfer process that seem to do little to curb the overall use of fossil fuels.

Maybe you mean a world-wide tax?

DMT
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Dec 17, 2014 - 11:13am PT
It sounds to me that you are trying to find reasons that a carbon tax won't work instead of recognizing the necessity of change. The carbon tax works fine in BC, and big oil still makes enormous profits.

I worked in the oil & gas industry in Calgary for 20 years. The common attitude was that the industry sucked money right out of the ground.

If big oil wants to sell fracked oil from Oklahoma to Japan, there are governmental ways to prevent that.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Dec 17, 2014 - 11:14am PT
Will it work in Alberta too?

DMT
Messages 18201 - 18220 of total 20059 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