Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 19361 - 19380 of total 29643 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Jan 18, 2014 - 09:19pm PT
Yes I do agree with him. So you think that that fact automatically negates the validity of his words?

You are a bizarre fully fuked in the head individual. Its not just your complete lack of ethics, it is your comprehension. It appears - certainly to us layman observers - that you fail to comprehend even that which you hold most dear to your heart, the understanding of Tao. Which leads us to your other defects - your complete lack of skill in communications and persuasion. The fact is, if you ever hope or care to persuade us to your understanding ( doubtful that you do, considering your ethics) then you are forever shackled by your incompetence. Wether Mark is right or you are, he at least is capable of communication.

As for my "agreement" it has to do with my belief in process, not predetermined ideology. The process Mark Force describes I agree with which really places the value of scientific process in context with the human condition. I am also gladdened that it appears at least by some interpretation that Tao and Lao Tzu is not just some Aryan Nation Chuffian Darwinism. I don't care wether the guys name is Lick Balls or Lao Tzu, I just care that his ethics are admirable rather than not.
briham89

Big Wall climber
san jose and south lake tahoe, ca
Jan 18, 2014 - 09:20pm PT
I miss the snow :,(

That's all...carry on
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Jan 18, 2014 - 09:23pm PT
Then you'd like it here today.
BASE104

Social climber
An Oil Field
Jan 18, 2014 - 11:21pm PT
This seems a good juncture to express appreciation to everyone who has posted links to actual publications, and anything objective about the actual science. I have learned a lot! Having had a professor in college present, in all seriousness, a couple of lectures to the effect that the "theory" that the continents have moved around all over the place was not proven, while at the same time in another class we were getting the geomagnetic data showing the actual rates of Atlantic sea floor spreading, I learned long ago not to take any expert pronouncements as definitive unless I could read the actual papers it was based on, look at the graphs, be sure they fit data that is reviewable, and so on. So this thread has been very useful to me.

That is a classic story, and the same happened to me in a litho stratigraphy class. It was a graduate class, and unfortunately the really good stratigraphy professor was on sabbatical that year. The old fart who taught it probably hadn't read a paper in decades.

So we were taught geosynclinal theory, which is an incredibly weird way to explain tectonic features. It is now a totally discarded theory. You can google geosynclinal theory on wiki and read about 1960's geology.

I was taking a clastic facies class at the same time, and that professor would give us reading assignments that were cutting edge.

So when I had a test in the bogus class, I would give the answer taught in class, but write the real answers in the margins and stuff on the test. That professor was old and not engaged in the science.

Plate tectonics explains the planet's major tectonic features very well. It has stood up to zillions of papers which use it, and is an incredibly simple and beautiful theory. Much like Evolution is for biologists.

I see that you are still insulting people like it actually means something, Napoleon. In a real debate, people would walk out of the lecture hall. Unfortunately, Napoleon has a captive audience. This is an interesting topic, but to be tied down with dogma only reveals the shaky ground would fall away.

Those who use the ad hominen attack, which relies on insults rather than rational dialogue, is more or less choosing to live an intellectually inferior life.

Just saying the way I see it.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 19, 2014 - 01:12am PT
Odd EDH.

Your above "model" does not even indicate the temp reality that occurred from 1910-1945!

The temp C02 "plot" comes from MONO that is superimposed onto the NOAA/NCDC historical records graph.






Maybe you EDH can have a go and tell us what was the forcing mechanism that initiated the temperature spike from 1910-1945 that is equivalent to the current occurrence.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 19, 2014 - 01:22am PT
Ah, EDH, the C02 levels do not follow the temp spike from 1910-1945.




http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/time-series/global


What caused that incident?

The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 19, 2014 - 01:30am PT
Really....Your graph does not even indicate that 1910-1945 temp spike event that is equal in quantity as the latest event.








According to the study that MONO posted there is not one mention of C02 as a primary driver. None.


Since the model includes no forcing from interdecadal variations of volcanic emissions or solar irradiance, this suggests that the observed early 20th century warming could have resulted from a combination of human-induced increases of atmospheric GHG and sulfate aerosols, along with internal variability of the ocean-atmosphere system.




However, the warming in the early part of the century has not been well simulated using these two climate forcings alone. Factors which could contribute to the early 20th century warming include increasing greenhouse gas concentrations, changing solar and volcanic activity, and internal variability of the coupled ocean-atmosphere system.

The relative importance of each of these factors is not well known.
http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/early-20th-century-global-warming.


The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 19, 2014 - 01:40am PT
That event was not just a "bump or a wiggle" EDH.

You nor the current models have any idea what was the forcing involved. It was as significant and impressive in temperature quantity as the one we currently experienced.


Another example of your back peddling EDH. Another example of how the "models", even in the summary that MONO posted, states, they do not know.

Since the model includes no forcing from interdecadal variations of volcanic emissions or solar irradiance, this suggests that the observed early 20th century warming could have resulted from a combination of human-induced increases of atmospheric GHG and sulfate aerosols, along with internal variability of the ocean-atmosphere system.




However, the warming in the early part of the century has not been well simulated using these two climate forcings alone. Factors which could contribute to the early 20th century warming include increasing greenhouse gas concentrations, changing solar and volcanic activity, and internal variability of the coupled ocean-atmosphere system.

The relative importance of each of these factors is not well known.
http://www.gfdl.noaa.gov/early-20th-century-global-warming



TLP

climber
Jan 19, 2014 - 02:16am PT
The Chief: The "simple answer please" that you requested was provided pages and pages ago but you conveniently ignored it. In a word (acronym, actually): ENSO. If you have to have a simple answer (one factor), for the time period you are asking about, that's the one that will best correlate with the few-to-ten-year swings in temperature in your graph which you have posted maybe 20 or more times. I posted a plot which you can compare with the temperature line. Temperature upswings with El Nino; downswings with La Nina conditions. You can easily find places where the SOI or ENSO graph doesn't match the temps, but that's because, as Rick Sumner has frequently pointed out, it is not a simple system and other factors do have effects.
bookworm

Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Jan 19, 2014 - 06:32am PT
"Most scenarios that meet the 2-degree Celsius (3.6-degree Fahrenheit) cap on global warming endorsed by world leaders require a 40 percent to 70 percent reduction in heat-trapping gases by 2050 from 2010 levels, according to the third installment of the UNís biggest-ever study of climate change."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-16/climate-protection-may-cost-4-of-world-gdp-by-2030.html

so, when are all you climate change prophets going to condemn the un for continuing to push global warming? that theory is so...1998; we're into climate change now:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2541599/Is-mini-ice-age-way-Scientists-warn-Sun-gone-sleep-say-cause-temperatures-plunge.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 19, 2014 - 09:56am PT
The "MODELS" EDH are full of shet.

You are dodging EDH.

The one you keep posting does not even indicate the 1910-1945 event. Blows right over it.


Please do show where your "Models" indicate that particular event and what was the forcing mechanism.



Now the model you keep posting that clearly shows NO evidence of that 1910-1945 temp spike event!

Where is it EDH??

dirtbag

climber
Jan 19, 2014 - 10:03am PT
The "MODELS" EDH are full of shet.

You are dodging EDH.

The one you keep posting does not even indicate the 1910-1945 event. Blows right over it.


Please do show where your "Models" indicate that particular event and what was the forcing mechanism.


Chief Number One: utterly incapable of S-ingTFU.

Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Jan 19, 2014 - 10:15am PT
The "simple answer please" that you requested was provided pages and pages ago but you conveniently ignored it. In a word (acronym, actually): ENSO. If you have to have a simple answer (one factor), for the time period you are asking about.....

In the world of avalanche hazard, among the worst possible things a person can do is pick a single factor / indicator and ascribe meaning and significance to it all out of proportion to its true value, then ignore the values of all other factors. If you storm off into the mountains and then build your decisions based on one or even a few snow pits and a judicious study of the layers and the shear tests, you would be a fool to have confidence.

I would assume a similar situation here. Particularly problematic is the ability to weight factors, even if you have the luxury of a wide smorgasbord of factors to weigh. This is where expertise starts to punch way over its weight. "Weighting", the ability to ascribe value, takes knowledge, skill and above all experience. This expertise is available to us externally via the public avalanche Bulletins. If a person is deficient in that expertise as most non professionals are, they can proceed but their confidence in varying or modifying their actions from the advisory should be low.

This is why we know Chuff, Rick and the entire Red States of America is deficient in their judgement. They have supreme confidence in the certainty of their judgement in an environment where they are about as inexpert as a so- called educated person can be. First, their bias is off the charts - the most important element of their decision making is their hatred and mistrust of "environmentalism". This drives them to cherry pick single factors that suit their objective. Then they ascribe value to those factors (and / or minimize value to others) that is beyond their capacity for comprehension.

Whenever you encounter people like this in the mountains, if you are smart you avoid them like the plague or at least cut them completely out of the decision making process. If you don't your risk sky rockets.

"Confidence in your own council" has serious limits. Chuff could care less but what interests me is Rick Sumner. If he still claims to care the slightest about humanities future or the process of science he needs to explain - in detail and persuasively - his "confidence of his own council" and his ability to weigh factors.

I don't think he will. He will sulk in passive aggressive butt hurt. besides, then he would also need to define intuition, his moral principles, understanding of ethics, loyalty to process.....

all of which he has avoided at all cost to date.

The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 19, 2014 - 10:17am PT
Temperature upswings with El Nino; downswings with La Nina conditions. You can easily find places where the SOI or ENSO graph doesn't match the temps, but that's because, as Rick Sumner has frequently pointed out, it is not a simple system and other factors do have effects.

Good excuse. But, according to the 97% Consensus, they claim that the last event from 1970 through 1998 is all settled and clear cut.


Yet they do not have a definitive "certain" clear answer for this recent event that was just as "impressive". They basically have no idea. None.




Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jan 19, 2014 - 10:48am PT
I find myself in the bizarre position of agreement
posts 1-300 expurgated, recontextualized,,,

Duh?

I find myself in the bizarre position of agreement
with much of what you say in this thread,
did they all die off from gagging on all the right-wing spin on the subject?
Hopefully they're as extinct as the Dodo
I'm a climate change legislation skeptic
As I recall, the ditch used to be filled with ice
the question is "do any of the unaffordable targeted projects reduce the temperature of the globe, one fraction of a degree?"
I think the answers would be a lot more honest if you guys simply said
"I just don't give a sh#t."

I crossed the line towards accepting the science about a decade ago.
The subject is very difficult to wade through in the popular media.
It IS something that would be tremendously difficult to address.
Very expensive.

Most of my life, I'd probably side with the tree hugging, salmon saving, don't dirt bike in the wilderness types, whilst growing up in a predominant timber town.
What we have is a lack of will to make the necessary changes.
I'm not a government hater like many here.
Is this the forum for the flat earth society?
There are smart measures and there are dumb ones.
more data needed on your terlit reading...
That was during the early Cretaceous.
At that time practically any shoreline on Earth was unrecognizable in any but a general sense.
the ocean is still right where it always was.
I am the law, up till the mean high water tide line
I can't believe people buy into the bullshit propagated by big oil

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.

Are the GCC deniers just a bunch of guilble nuckle heads that have been brainwashed by the Corporate media, doing the work of big oil to help them buy time, and confuse the issue, so nothing gets done

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

hopefully we can have a constructive conversation and leave the name calling
Just remember that scientific data in isolation cannot lead to sound economic decisions.
It's too bad lack of beer isn't causing Climate change or we'd get a lot more support curing the issue.
Poor countries are always going to suffer, no matter what happens.
and it continues to pile up:

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

I'm more than happy to risk the future of your kids and grandkids,
thinking the denial about cigarettes is a good analogy
Its like trying to use science on creationists.
There are no solutions, only compromises.
What is the priority?
Every action has an equal, and opposite reaction.
Just spent 2 days in a room full of Arctic scientists.
I can't think of any issue other than Evolution
How soon will it be warm enough for some modern day Vikings

I remember when I was in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania back in the 50's the steel mills created so much smog that it changed the climate there to a very disturbing quality.

Let's say your penis was withering and you were afraid it was going to fall off.
Water runs downhill.

Whenever I hear these type of thoughts it is the highest form of selfishness.
The problem is Civilization has got to crap,
Unless of course you volunteer to go kill yourself first ....

And since non-smokers sometimes get lung cancer smoking is not responsible for lung cancer.
Do I think that we are being a bit ignorant and arrogant about what we will be able to accomplish with our endeavours?
every cloud has a silver lining...
when the ocean rises, it will flood most of newport beach and displace hundreds of thousand climate change skeptics that call reagan country their home....ha , ha ....
Yes!

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

And of course I'm excluding those fumes exuded from T-Rex after partaking in Sauropod Burritos:-)
Wow, you're so brilliant.
Amazing how this thread went silent so quickly...Bluering
What does all this mean?
The sun is responsible for Global Warming...
duh?

Only the truth suffers.
It seems reasonable given the large and increasing numbers of us...
how do you know the center of the earth is 6000 degrees, C?
This is the Green equivalent to Weapons Of Mass Destruction.
I clicked on this thread by accident

You are wrong.Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

Ya can type "wrong" a thousand more times, but it won't truthify the points you make up

Acid rain does cause damage,
Climate models were not invented to show doom,
they were developed to try to untangle natural from anthropogenic effects in complex dynamic systems.
I find myself in the bizarre position of agreement with much of what you say in this thread,
We ourselves and every individual on the planet are the problem.

The transformation starts with us.
As one pundit put it, the science is indeed settled

I hate it when ideas show up on threads.
I would be against borrowing money from China to give to other countries as an apology for melting ice.
Go breath the air in LA and you'll be in far worse danger than one in a million via terrorist attack.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

Why do you try to reason with climate change deniers and creationists. These people believe what they want to believe in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
They don't use reason and logic,
they have beliefs and will latch onto any scant evidence or controversy to support those beliefs.

Thank you for that sober assessment.I will level with you, I am a bona-fide retard and a hardheaded zealot in my grass-roots belief
Group promoting climate skepticism has extensive ties to Exxon-Mobil
That's the dumbest sh'it I've ever heard.
We are a debtor nation.
This is out of our hands now.

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

I'm sure it's riveting, honest, and factually correct.
But we shall see.
As one pundit put it,
duh?
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Jan 19, 2014 - 11:00am PT
wow Wade. That is an impressive bit of breakfast table work!
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 19, 2014 - 11:00am PT
Observed HADCrut 3 and 4 Data


Now the model you keep posting that clearly shows NO evidence of that 1910-1945 temp spike event!

Where is it EDH??

Sketch

Trad climber
H-ville
Jan 19, 2014 - 11:03am PT
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jan 19, 2014 - 11:20am PT
Oh my god! Data!
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 19, 2014 - 01:18pm PT
Wade Icey

Trad climber
http://www.alohashirtrescue.com

Jan 19, 2014 - 07:48am PT
I find myself in the bizarre position of agreement
posts 1-300 expurgated, recontextualized,,,

Duh?

I find myself in the bizarre position of agreement
with much of what you say in this thread,
did they all die off from gagging on all the right-wing spin on the subject?
Hopefully they're as extinct as the Dodo
I'm a climate change legislation skeptic
As I recall, the ditch used to be filled with ice
the question is "do any of the unaffordable targeted projects reduce the temperature of the globe, one fraction of a degree?"
I think the answers would be a lot more honest if you guys simply said
"I just don't give a sh#t."

I crossed the line towards accepting the science about a decade ago.
The subject is very difficult to wade through in the popular media.
It IS something that would be tremendously difficult to address.
Very expensive.

Most of my life, I'd probably side with the tree hugging, salmon saving, don't dirt bike in the wilderness types, whilst growing up in a predominant timber town.
What we have is a lack of will to make the necessary changes.
I'm not a government hater like many here.
Is this the forum for the flat earth society?
There are smart measures and there are dumb ones.
more data needed on your terlit reading...
That was during the early Cretaceous.
At that time practically any shoreline on Earth was unrecognizable in any but a general sense.
the ocean is still right where it always was.
I am the law, up till the mean high water tide line
I can't believe people buy into the bullshit propagated by big oil

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.

Are the GCC deniers just a bunch of guilble nuckle heads that have been brainwashed by the Corporate media, doing the work of big oil to help them buy time, and confuse the issue, so nothing gets done

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

hopefully we can have a constructive conversation and leave the name calling
Just remember that scientific data in isolation cannot lead to sound economic decisions.
It's too bad lack of beer isn't causing Climate change or we'd get a lot more support curing the issue.
Poor countries are always going to suffer, no matter what happens.
and it continues to pile up:

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

I'm more than happy to risk the future of your kids and grandkids,
thinking the denial about cigarettes is a good analogy
Its like trying to use science on creationists.
There are no solutions, only compromises.
What is the priority?
Every action has an equal, and opposite reaction.
Just spent 2 days in a room full of Arctic scientists.
I can't think of any issue other than Evolution
How soon will it be warm enough for some modern day Vikings

I remember when I was in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania back in the 50's the steel mills created so much smog that it changed the climate there to a very disturbing quality.

Let's say your penis was withering and you were afraid it was going to fall off.
Water runs downhill.

Whenever I hear these type of thoughts it is the highest form of selfishness.
The problem is Civilization has got to crap,
Unless of course you volunteer to go kill yourself first ....

And since non-smokers sometimes get lung cancer smoking is not responsible for lung cancer.
Do I think that we are being a bit ignorant and arrogant about what we will be able to accomplish with our endeavours?
every cloud has a silver lining...
when the ocean rises, it will flood most of newport beach and displace hundreds of thousand climate change skeptics that call reagan country their home....ha , ha ....
Yes!

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

And of course I'm excluding those fumes exuded from T-Rex after partaking in Sauropod Burritos:-)
Wow, you're so brilliant.
Amazing how this thread went silent so quickly...Bluering
What does all this mean?
The sun is responsible for Global Warming...
duh?

Only the truth suffers.
It seems reasonable given the large and increasing numbers of us...
how do you know the center of the earth is 6000 degrees, C?
This is the Green equivalent to Weapons Of Mass Destruction.
I clicked on this thread by accident

You are wrong.Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

Ya can type "wrong" a thousand more times, but it won't truthify the points you make up

Acid rain does cause damage,
Climate models were not invented to show doom,
they were developed to try to untangle natural from anthropogenic effects in complex dynamic systems.
I find myself in the bizarre position of agreement with much of what you say in this thread,
We ourselves and every individual on the planet are the problem.

The transformation starts with us.
As one pundit put it, the science is indeed settled

I hate it when ideas show up on threads.
I would be against borrowing money from China to give to other countries as an apology for melting ice.
Go breath the air in LA and you'll be in far worse danger than one in a million via terrorist attack.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

Why do you try to reason with climate change deniers and creationists. These people believe what they want to believe in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
They don't use reason and logic,
they have beliefs and will latch onto any scant evidence or controversy to support those beliefs.

Thank you for that sober assessment.I will level with you, I am a bona-fide retard and a hardheaded zealot in my grass-roots belief
Group promoting climate skepticism has extensive ties to Exxon-Mobil
That's the dumbest sh'it I've ever heard.
We are a debtor nation.
This is out of our hands now.

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

Oh my god! Data!
Water runs downhill.
Not a skeptic... and I care a little.... But I just can't care too much...
Calm, reason, think critically. Be skeptical.

I'm sure it's riveting, honest, and factually correct.
But we shall see.
As one pundit put it,
duh?






In the meantime, you WADE, like the others here spewing all this eco-frenzy ideology, get into your gas guzzling C02 emitting Van and drive around the West, aimlessly and selfishly, climbing.

Obviously doing your part to Walk your Talk.....


Nice.
Messages 19361 - 19380 of total 29643 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