Climate Change skeptics? [ot]


Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 19361 - 19380 of total 20122 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>

Feb 9, 2015 - 09:34am PT
maybe Schwarzenegger should be living in a cave

He is living in a cave.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Feb 9, 2015 - 09:56am PT
My dispatches are from fantasyland Ed?

What about yours. As far as I can tell your dispatches always follow in lockstep with the party line and addressing the issues (scandals) of the day in a losing defensive posture.

Check out the following linked paper on the deviation between the real data and adjusted temp records. These guys noticed the one way disparity by 2011, before a few other generations of adjustment schemes.

The IPCC needed a powerful talking point to go into the 2015 conference. Their naive dreams of unity behind the criminal enterprise will be dashed again. It seems that representatives of more than half the workd's population will only pay lip service to the grand scheme as far as helping the west shoot its own feet.

Get real guys. If you want less polutants go with what we already have on the shelf: abundant NG reserves and new generation nuclear while the huge sums flushed down the toilet of CAGW is diverted to national research programs for viable non-energy starving alternatives.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Feb 9, 2015 - 10:16am PT
I'm too busy right now to read another of your dubious papers, rick
Perhaps I'll glance at it later

What blog told you to look at that one in particular?
Knowing that might save me some time responding to your ignorant silliness from your Fantasyland.

Too bad you can't get vaccinated against ignorance, you caught a bad case of it there.

4 Corners Area
Feb 9, 2015 - 10:34am PT
Ok, skeptics, we can forget all about anthropogenic climate change. Assume your correct, and that all the climate change we may, or may not, now be seeing is completely due to natural long-term fluctuations. Alright? Its off the table!

Now lets look at all of the other impacts of the fossil fuel industry:

Shall we start with the coal industry? Lets look at their environmental track record. Lets not forget to include labor relations (since humans are the most important life form on the planet)

Then we can move on to the oil industry: Exxon Valdez, BP Deepwater Horizon (eat much seafood from the Gulf lately???)

We could look at the automobile and all of the associated impacts.

Then we could move on over to the pesticide industry.

Finally, the oil addicted military industrial complex, totally dependent on fossil fuels at this point in order to maintain global military supremacy.

So what if there is no man-made global warming? Fossil fuels still have to go!
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Feb 9, 2015 - 11:02am PT
Fossil fuels ARE going. All the kings horses a and all the kings men can't replace fossil fuel with the present technology. So what would you have us do? Specifically, that is, not idealistically...


4 Corners Area
Feb 9, 2015 - 12:12pm PT
Get used to a more frugal lifestyle (a.k.a. austerity)
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Feb 9, 2015 - 12:13pm PT
Tell that loudly to 8 billion souls.

Austerity = the death of a lot of us.


4 Corners Area
Feb 9, 2015 - 12:21pm PT
In terms of energy consumption, many are already quite frugal. Not so for those of us in this country, we have no clue. There's really only closer to 1 billion who really need to get this message.

We can decide for ourselves, or mother nature will decide for us. It may already be too late . . .

edit: I'm really misusing "austerity", according to current parlance.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Feb 9, 2015 - 12:23pm PT
Yep we're all dead women walking....

7 billion will not survive sans oil economy. Massive death.


4 Corners Area
Feb 9, 2015 - 12:25pm PT
Don't be so depressing . . .
Roger Brown

Oceano, California
Feb 9, 2015 - 01:17pm PT
I agree. I also think this country is is doing pretty good with regard to reducing our carbon footprint. Our auto industry is moving in the right direction and there are a lot of coal fired power plants converting to natural gas. We are using the power of the sun and the wind. China and India on the other hand have some real issues to deal with. With that said, I think in time, they will move to clean up their act also. They are just people like us. They got common sense, they will figure it out.
I lived in L.A. in the 50's and I remember the air pollution. The population then was nothing compaired to now and today the air is pretty good . I remember the wild ideas to solve the problem and all it took was to admit there was a problem and reduce pollution. Common sense. Oh yea, if you are ambitious, you can be just as rich as Arnie, and have cool toys also. If I was more ambitious and I was rich, I would have a bigger house, in a better neighborhood, a new car or three, and a jet plane. Wow, what could be wilder than flying your own jet plane?
But I am not rich, I will never have any of that stuff, and while I would like to have it, that's cool. I am happy anyway. You rich people, enjoy your toys, most of you earned them.

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Feb 9, 2015 - 03:12pm PT
Back on more or less science topics, Steven Mosher (notoriously skeptical) has an interesting guest post at And Then There's Physics about temperature record adjustments. He sketches basic reasons why adjustments are needed, mostly quoting other skeptics who have been saying so for decades. But his post (maybe part 1 of several?) wraps up with this killer:

Given that both skeptics and the mainstream scientists agree that changes in sensors, changes in time of observation and changes in location can bias the record, the question is. What do you do?
* Attempt to adjust the data.
* Only use “good” data.
* Use the raw data only.
Before we even debate that decision, however, we can start by looking at whether the question really matters. Here, for example, is a comparison of BerkeleyEarth with No adjustments, BerkeleyEarth with metadata adjustments only, and BerkeleyEarth will all adjustments


Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
Feb 9, 2015 - 07:52pm PT
"Massive Death".

Just want to let that sink in awhile.

edit;Ok ,they can ban me now.


Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Feb 9, 2015 - 09:42pm PT
The Chief...Assholes With Guns...He's been calling you this all along...

Ice climber
great white north
Feb 10, 2015 - 06:25am PT
Climate Scientist Andrew Weaver Wins Key Lawsuit
Lawrence Torcello is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of Technology. He has researched and written about the attacks on climate science and climate scientists by various entities (see “Climate Science Denialists Target Academic in Hate Campaign”). I asked Torcello to comment on the Weaver case, and he told me:

Andrew Weaver’s legal victory over Canada’s National Post is an important precedent in the emerging world of climate change litigation. The court’s ruling reflects an understanding that the press has a primary responsibility to report facts and disentangle propaganda. The decision affirms that facilitating smear campaigns against scientists and other academics is devoid of journalistic merit. We can expect critics of the court’s decision to claim it puts too great a burden on news outlets to police how their stories are used across social media; that it will have a chilling effect on journalism. To the contrary, defamation tactics against scientists are calculated to undermine the public’s trust in legitimate expertise and to intimidate researchers into media silence. Media outlets that facilitate disinformation campaigns against science and scientists make the work of responsible journalists more difficult. News sources that continue to take their professional obligations seriously should be cheered by this ruling. It is ethically important that scientists not be intimidated into silence but instead fight back against defamatory assaults on their character. In a world threatened by climate change the public’s safety depends on the ability of politicians and others to discern and be informed by credible experts. Dr. Weaver and other researchers taking a legal stand against defamation tactics should be commended for reminding us that science is not the only realm where facts matter.

Dr. Peter Gleick, of the Pacific Institute, told DeSmogBlog, that this is…

…a victory for climate scientists everywhere. [There is] an extremely long history of efforts by climate deniers and contrarians to attack not just climate science, but climate scientists: to smear their scientific reputations, to distort their statements, and to make false and defamatory accusations. [Defamation] has been a standard tactic for years, especially as the science of climate change has continued to strengthen and solidify. While I’m sure the ruling will not stop the continued assault on climate science and scientists, it should certainly put people on notice that there is a responsibility to avoid such irresponsible attacks and a real cost for failing to do so. I hope this ruling has that effect.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Feb 10, 2015 - 06:29am PT
Good. Proving defamation in court is a difficult thing. The investors behind the national post should be paying through the nose for it. its their fault, start to finish.

It would be good to see Murdoch's kingdom taken down a few more notches, too.


Social climber
Falls Church, VA
Feb 10, 2015 - 11:40am PT
another example of "settled science" (aka, a consensus):

McHale's Navy

Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
Feb 10, 2015 - 01:35pm PT
I would expect the same kind of lobbying in the food industry that made it difficult to show us the health benefits of tobacco and lead in gasoline. It knows no borders really. We all know about that big revolving door. There are all kinds of doors reciprocating doors....

Social climber
So Cal
Feb 10, 2015 - 07:22pm PT

SF bay area
Feb 10, 2015 - 08:00pm PT
TGT, here's a little primer on adjustments.

You 'skeptics' look quite foolish on this issue.

Messages 19361 - 19380 of total 20122 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