Climate Change skeptics? [ot]


Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 18921 - 18940 of total 20085 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Wade Icey

Trad climber
Jan 27, 2015 - 09:57pm PT

Credit: Wade Icey

WTF is up with you people?

LMAO at you deceptive clowns.
Keep dancing your bullshet

The point is
delusional ideological brainwashed individuals such as yourself
trying to deduce a meaningful trend
Have you ever entertained the thought that you might be wrong..?
How's bout that propaganda BS?
Yet another lie
All I can say is "Wow."
Says who?

You are one pure brainwashsed jackazz of a political ideological stupidity,

LMAO at you deceptive clowns.
Keep dancing your bullshet

truly pathetic one funnee azz brainwashed skitzo
seriously one delusional left wing whack job
only sees what he wants to see and believes pure bullshet are reality
Keep trying boys.
Yet another fairy tale dropped by the delivering physician
brought to you by
one pure jackazz of a ideological stupidity
Gullible and weak minded a false and totally inaccurate statement
totally inaccurate statements etc
What don't you understand?
Idiocy speaks for itself, It’s really just an issue of honesty
Our mental limitations prevent us from accepting our mental limitations
Stop the bullshet.
The devil is in the details.
Yet you all come on here covering his ass.
them pesky details always seem to come back and haunt the untruths
and you just keep posting more and more desperate shet to substantiate your bullshet.

LMAO at you deceptive clowns.
Keep dancing your bullshet

How many times do we have to go over this
Now the uncertainty range helps us answer the question
What a strange little man.
Its all good

LMAO at you deceptive clowns.
Keep dancing your bullshet

Just more insistent political rhetoric and finger pointing.
It's bullshet exaggerated verbiage like yours that really makes this whole deal a propaganda deceptive game.
And you condoned it
and are now dancing.

WTF is up with you people?

(So, does this spark a discussion?)

Gym climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 27, 2015 - 09:59pm PT
Here are some thoughts on ways to move:

Citing various instances of governments turning to the public sector to drive their transitions (including the German experience [stated above in the book]), as well as examples of large corporate-driven renewable projects that were abandoned by their investors midstream, the Greenwich research team concludes, "An active role for government and public sector utilities is thus a far more important condition for developing renewable energy that any expensive system of public subsidies for markets of private investors."

Sorting out what mechanisms have the best chance of pulling off a dramatic and enormously high-stakes energy transition has become particularly pressing of late. That's because it is now clear that--at least from a technical perspective--it is entirely possible to rapidly switch our energy system to 100 percent renewables. In 2009, Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University, and Mark A. Delucchi, a research scientist at the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Davis, authored a groundbreaking, detailed road map for "how 100 percent of the world's energy, for all purposes, could be supplied by wind, water, and solar resources, by as early as 2030." The plan includes not only power generation but also transportation as well as heating and cooling. Later published in the journal of "Energy Policy," the rod map is one of several credible studies that have come out in recent years that show how wealthy countries and regions can shift all, or almost all, of their energy infrastructure to renewables withing a twenty-to-fourty-year time frame. Those studies demonstrating the potential for rapid progress include:


Most promising of all is new work by a team of researches at Stanford, lead by Mark Jacobson (who contributed to the 2009 global plan). In March 2013, they published a study in "Energy Policy" showing that New York state could meet all of its power needs with renewables by 2030. Jacobson and his colleagues are developing similar plans for every U.S. state, and have already published numbers for the country as a whole. "It's absolutely not true that we need natural gas, coal or oil--we think it's a myth," he told "The New York Times."


Rebuilding, and Reinventing, the Public Sphere


It's no mystery where that pubic money needs to be spent. Much of it should go to the kinds of ambitious emission-reducing projects already discussed--the smart grids, the light rail, the citywide composting systems, the building retrofits, the visionary transit systems, the urban redesigns to keep us from spending half our lives in traffic jams. The private sector is ill suited to taking on most of these large infrastructure investments if the services are to be accessible, which they must be in order to be effective, the profit margins that attract private players simply aren't there.

Transit is a good example. In March 2014, when air pollution in French cities reached dangerously high levels, officials in Paris made a snap decision to discourage car use by making public transit free for three days. Obviously private operators would strenuously resit such measures. And yet by all rights, our transit systems should be responding with the same kind of urgency to dangerously high levels of atmospheric carbon. Rather than allowing subway and bus fares to rise while service erodes, we need to be lowering prices and expanding services--regardless of the costs.

Public dollars also need to go to the equally important, though less glamorous projects and services that will help us prepare for the coming heavy weather. That includes things like hiring more firefighters and improving storm barriers. And it means coming up with new, nonprofit disaster insurance programs so that people who have lost everything to a hurricane or a forest fire are not left at the mercy of a private insurance industry that is already adapting to climate change by avoiding payouts and slapping victims with massive rate increases. According to Amy Bach, co-founder of the San Francisco-based advocacy group United Policyholders, disaster insurance is becoming "very much like health insurance. We're going to have to increasingly take the profit motive out of the system so that it operates efficiently and effectively, but without generating obscene executive salaries and bonuses and shareholder returns. Because it's not going to be a sustainable model. A publicly traded insurance company in the face of climate change is not a sustainable business model for the end user, the consumer." It's that or a disaster capitalism free-for-all, those are the choices.

These types of improvements are of course in far greater demand in developing countries like the Philippines, Kenya, and Bangladesh that are already facing some of the most severe climate impacts. Hundreds of billions of dollars are urgently needed to build seawalls; storage and distribution networks for food, water, and medicine; early warning systems, and shelters for hurricanes, cyclones, and tsunamis--as well as public health systems able to cope with increases in climate-related diseases like malaria.

Though mechanisms to protect against government corruption are needed, those countries should not have to spend their health care and educational budgets on costly disaster insurance plans purchased from transnational corporations, as is happening right now. The people should be receiving direct compensation from the countries (and companies) most responsible for warning the planet.

This Changes Everything
    Naomi Kline

The book has much more to offer in terms of details and examples (as well as many pages of citations). By viewing our "problem" through this lens, I see that the capitalistic system of continuous growth and for-profit enterprises will not be the right system to get us to where we need to be.

So, does this spark a discussion?

Gym climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 27, 2015 - 10:04pm PT
The entire paper is speaking of "trends".

Um, no, it isn't addressing climate trends.
Sorry pal.

Can you figure out what it is addressing? Perhaps you can refer to the title:

The Average Temperature of 2014
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jan 28, 2015 - 06:16am PT
Will you please stop with the insults?

Roger Brown

Oceano, California
Jan 28, 2015 - 06:25am PT
Hey Wade,
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jan 28, 2015 - 06:32am PT
Morning Roger. Thank you the chief.


Gym climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 28, 2015 - 07:19am PT
So The Chief, if the Berkeley Earth paper is about "tends," what does it say about trend in the weather/temperature for any years after 2014?

If the paper is about trends, as you state, then there should be a clear statement in the paper about what that trend will be in the coming years.

I know, it's not there. And I also know my point will be lost on you, The Chief.

Trad climber
Jan 28, 2015 - 07:33am PT
Like sands through the hourglass...

Ice climber
great white north
Jan 28, 2015 - 07:35am PT
Google Exec: Climate Change Deniers Are “Just Literally Lying

♦ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ♦
    Climate Change Deniers are Liars - Google
♦ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ♦
Flip Flop

Trad climber
Truckee, CA
Jan 28, 2015 - 07:47am PT
Dal Maxvill

Social climber
Granite City, Illinois
Jan 28, 2015 - 08:01am PT
All I can say is "Wow."

You really believe yourself, don't you.

You guys should stop picking on The Chief. He spent the majority of his life in a drunken stupor. You can't expect him to make up for all that lost time right away. He's still learning about reality.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 28, 2015 - 08:19am PT

You notice Chiloe is not defending his statement regarding the MET release.

You are stubbornly defending the indefensible

Time to move on. You wont win this one.

Trends, if you accept the tampered data all the various reporting agencies use as real, you would expect the statistical flat line of GMT to continue. But if you accept that the waning solar cycles large variation in some bands of the spectrum effects earth temps and couple this with acceptance that huge quantities of stored ocean heat has and is being released into an already cooling atmosphere you would expect the flat trend to turn downwards over the coming 3-4 years.

Gym climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 28, 2015 - 08:36am PT
As a tip of the hat to EdwardT, I suppose time will tell.

Gym climber
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 28, 2015 - 08:41am PT
And yet Kelly, you have totally failed to produce any viable remedies to the issue at hand. None.

I suppose you missed my long post from the book This Changes Everything.

Now go drink some coffee so you can regurgitate more bile.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Jan 28, 2015 - 09:20am PT
not sure the Chiloe made "exaggerated and distorted statements" at all, since the 10 highest temperature years are all recent... many of them coming in this period of "the hiatus" of rising temperatures

I haven't done the analysis, but the paper I posted did...

Credit: Arguez, et al. "Annual Global Temperature Rankings"

and the results for the HadCRUT4 are in line with all the other global mean temperature time series.

That's not an exaggerated or a distorted claim at all.

Maybe The Chief or rick can repeat the analysis? not only is this unlikely (simply because they do not posses the ability) but they will likely not believe it necessary, since doing so would only further undercut their tenuous accusation that such information is "exaggerated and distorted." Arguing from ignorance they have an air tight defense.

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 28, 2015 - 10:10am PT
Let's talk about a real world , but unintended ,experiment Ed. On Sunday we were both outdoors in very similar atmospheric conditions of clear skies, low particulate levels, low humidity, relatively still air. In the direct sw of sunlight all objects, our bodies, the rock, the equipment, absorbed radiation rapidly and diffused it slightly less rapidly which caused the sensation of warmth. It was downright toasty. In my case at the top of pitch three we were on the edge of a rounded buttress, though not up against the face of the rock which absorbed the direct sunlight as a black (or probably more precisely a grey) body. On the ledge, the sensation of warmth seemed less, probably ten degrees or more less. Stepping to the left around the buttress and out of the sunlight it suddenly seemed thirty degrees or so less warm. Granted the RH was low, but considering the the claims of LW radiation absorbtion and downwelling attributed to well mixed atmospheric CO2 one wouldn't expect such a degree of variation in temps. The LW radiation emmitted from the grey bodies were escaping the lowest troposhere largely unimpeded. What gives? Where is the effect ascribed to the mythical molecule?

Trad climber
Western America
Jan 28, 2015 - 10:28am PT
The people need to be reminded daily that the most important task for mankind is to keep boosting the CO2 levels so crop harvests keep going up
to feed mankind.

Anyone who tries to stop CO2 from going up is naturally looked at as a terrorist with a goal of mass murder. They are scum. Fight them to save our children.


Trad climber
Lee, NH
Jan 28, 2015 - 11:34am PT
You notice Chiloe is not defending his statement regarding the MET release.

OFCS. The statement I made about the HadCRUT4 data just released is true. Ran the calculations myself, you could too if you want. Anyone who does so will see that 2014 has the highest mean temperature anomaly in the HadCRUT4 record, as it also does in the NOAA, NASA and Japan Meterological Agency records. That's exactly what I wrote, even drawing a picture:

(1) HadCRUT4 data just released agree with NOAA, NASA and the Japan Meteorological Agency that 2014 was the warmest year they've seen:

I said nothing whatsoever about the Met Office press release. All the accusations that I did so are things Chief made up, shrieking them out in post after post after post.

Are you now stating that the UK MET OFFICE's press release is inaccurate, Chiloe?
No where in the UK MET OFFICE press release does it state ..
Maybe you can show us where the UK MET OFFICE made such a claim as Chiloe states they did, Splater.
The point is that CHILOE made a false and totally inaccurate statement regarding what UK MET OFFICE states regarding 2014.
NOT what Chiloe stated they supposed stated.
Thanks Bolte, Splater and CHiloe for confirming the ongoing distorted CAGW bullshet ideology.
Any more takers on the Chiloe's bullshet totally inaccurate post??
No where in the UK MET OFFICE press release does it state ...
Second time around for that one.
What is up with that completely false statement CHILOE????
What is up with that completely false statement CHILOE?????
Really, he screamed that twice too, caps and extra question marks both times. Meanwhile, no one else on the thread seemed to have any trouble reading what I'd actually written. Some laughed at him, some tried to explain, but either way just made Chief madder.
That is NOT what Chiloe posted MONO. Stop the bullshet.
Oh yeah, it's NOT warming and hasn't since 1998. Thanks for confirming that Chiloe.
It in fact was NOT the warmest year that the MET OFFICE has seen as Chiloe posted.
Nothing about 2014 being the WARMEST that they have seen in the UK MET OFFICE statement. Nothing any where.
Nothing about 2014 being the WARMEST that they have seen in the UK MET OFFICE statement. Nothing any where.
Yep, one more that's so good Chief screamed it twice.
Chiloe's post is totally false.
The reality that Chiloe totally distorted the UK METS actual statement is a clear indication how this whole issue has become a game of distortion and twisted verbiage.
The fact that Chiloe falsely posted what the UK Met office actually stated regarding 2014 being the warmest they have seen?

I could keep on quoting, think I've skipped some already, but it gets even deeper with more things made up. And Chief gets confused once again about what "trend" means. But now Rick joins the party and perhaps it's time for another outburst of his terrorist/Taliban/communist/Nazi accusations.

Sometimes LA
Jan 28, 2015 - 03:38pm PT

Why are you conversing with idiots?

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Jan 28, 2015 - 03:54pm PT
Why are you conversing with idiots?

Fair question, mostly I try to avoid it. In this case one person had made a false accusation about me so obsessively -- about 18 unanswered consecutive posts in a few hours -- that another person, no brighter, took it for true. So I laid out what really happened in a single clean post. You'd answer back too if that happened to you, don't you think?

Yes I'd rather move on. Had some fun times in the snow the last couple of days, and evenings read the latest issue of Eos -- very interesting piece about urbanization and air pollution, comparing what's happened in Los Angeles and Beijing. Also a note about Jessica Tierney winning a well deserved award for her paleoclimate studies in Africa. Just to see how it works I replicated Tamino's It's the Trend, Stupid analysis; he did it with GISTEMP, I used HadCRUT4 since that's the flavor of the day, and found that Tamino's analysis works equally well with either. (Still waiting for the last shoe to drop: Cowtan and Way to update.) So there's all that, plus some new research I've been working on, that could make interesting posts here.

But as the last days have shown all would get read through bizarro goggles too.
Messages 18921 - 18940 of total 20085 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 Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews