Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 19921 - 19940 of total 20085 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Mar 21, 2015 - 04:15pm PT
I'm skeptical of laying this drought at the feet of climate change.
you're not the only one, but many other skeptics have better reason than just a gut feeling.

Its more than a gut feeling. You cited several examples above, that concur with my skepticism. I am not convinced science has evolved sufficiently to make these sorts of claims.

Show me the money.

DMT
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Mar 21, 2015 - 04:21pm PT
one of the regional predictions of climate change models is that dry places will get dryer, wet places will get wetter... and that certainly seems to be the recent trends, at least in the USA.

You've got your money riding on the "it will swing back to normal" pony... which is fine, of course, it's your money. But we don't know what "the normal" is anymore, it's changing before your eyes.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Mar 21, 2015 - 04:29pm PT
You've got your money riding on the "it will swing back to normal" pony... which is fine, of course, it's your money.

I don't have my money nor heart invested in either outcome. I am skeptical. You don't seem to understand the difference from that position and partisan...

DMT

(post edit) Some folks see global warming in every weather phenomena. Some folks see business as normal in every weather phenomena. I am equally dismissive of both; malemute and Rick Sumner are cut from the same fanatical cloth, the only difference is which side they pick. I deplore the endless parade of blog based bullsh#t.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Mar 21, 2015 - 06:12pm PT
You don't seem to understand the difference from that position and partisan...

I understand scientific skepticism fine, but it is true that I might not be able to discern your position as you articulate it.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Mar 21, 2015 - 08:54pm PT
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/fossil-fuel-free-future-plan-pitched-by-canadian-scientists-1.3003005
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 22, 2015 - 07:58am PT
I deplore the endless parade of blog based bullsh#t.

While I understand this sentiment, I don't actually see a lot of blog-based posts on the AGW side of the fence in this thread. I see a lot of science-based considerations.

As for Robert Kennedy's quote above--we know that there is a lot of dark money paying for anti-science campaigns. In the face of what the science says, I agree with him. They are playing a deadly game, and those who purposely cook the books should be called out and hung out to dry.

While only time will tell how accurate the models are, they are consistent enough now to let us know we should be taking strong action. It's pretty hard to deny the models, especially when the empirical evidence upholds what the scientists have been warning us about, for decades.
Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.
Mar 22, 2015 - 08:12am PT
malemute and Rick Sumner are cut from the same fanatical cloth, the only difference is which side they pick.

This is insanity!

Malemute presents science, rick presents opinions and so much BS about science that it makes me ill to read, all he does is insult science and us scientists like we have no idea what were doing, yet he loves science in at every other level since it's part of our modern world, just another wacko hypocrite

One side is respectful, the other side is a fool.
How can that be the same, anyone that thinks that is a fool in my mind

There are No Climate Change Skeptics that do not believe that climate change is being forced by human activity, that it is real and it has been causing them problems we now see.

Skeptics go directly to the experts and read their material to form an opinion.

Deniers listen to the conflict and the BS propaganda and then have doubt about which side is correct.

I am a Climate Change Skeptic, and science will always answer the my questions, denying science is the antithesis of a Skeptic.


Skeptics, deniers, and contrarians: The climate science label game

Describing climate science doubt is harder than describing the science
http://arstechnica.com/staff/2014/12/skeptics-deniers-and-contrarians-the-climate-science-label-game/

http://skepdic.com/climatedeniers.html
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Mar 22, 2015 - 08:13am PT
While I understand this sentiment, I don't actually see a lot of blog-based posts on the AGW side of the fence in this thread. I see a lot of science-based considerations.

Ah, but the deniers & so called skeptics don't know the difference between science & blogs. They are called "useful idiots" for a reason.
rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Mar 22, 2015 - 08:18am PT
Was The Chief banned..?
Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.
Mar 22, 2015 - 08:24am PT
THE CHIEF is Finally gone!!!

ya mean we can post to this thread again without have getting attacked by the pit bull from hell?

Yea!!

By the way, I'm a Air Pollution scientist, and no one has ever paid me to say anything either way on CC. We are paid to collect and report the data as found, there are no pay offs going on, ever. That's a sure way to lose your job and be discredited forever.

In fact, I think the opposite is true.

Several journals I get for things like minerals and plants avoid all mention of CC just because it's too hot of topic for the editors to broach, they don't want a bunch of wackos writing back about how their journal is now backing a liberal hoax or other lame ass crap.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Mar 22, 2015 - 08:39am PT


Bill Nye to Climate Change Deniers: You Can’t Ignore Facts Forever




A Bad Day for Climate Change Deniers … and the Planet
Time Magazine
http://time.com/3672276/climate-change-oceans/
wilbeer

Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
Mar 22, 2015 - 09:05am PT
Goddamn blogs just lie......
2013 febuary composite
2013 febuary composite
Credit: modis
2014 febuary composite
2014 febuary composite
Credit: modis
2015 febuary composite
2015 febuary composite
Credit: modis
http://modis.gsfc.nasa.gov


Craig Fry

Trad climber
So Cal.
Mar 22, 2015 - 09:30am PT
Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming

http://www.merchantsofdoubt.org/

The troubling story of how a cadre of influential scientists have clouded public
understanding of scientific facts to advance a political and economic agenda.


The U.S. scientific community has long led the world in research on public health, environmental science, and other issues affecting the quality of life. Our scientists have produced landmark studies on the dangers of DDT, tobacco smoke, acid rain, and global warming. But at the same time, a small yet potent subset of this community leads the world in vehement denial of these dangers.

In their new book, Merchants of Doubt, historians Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway explain how a loose–knit group of high-level scientists, with extensive political connections, ran effective campaigns to mislead the public and deny well-established scientific knowledge over four decades. In seven compelling chapters addressing tobacco, acid rain, the ozone hole, global warming, and DDT, Oreskes and Conway roll back the rug on this dark corner of the American scientific community, showing how the ideology of free market fundamentalism, aided by a too-compliant media, has skewed public understanding of some of the most pressing issues of our era.




“A well-documented, pulls-no-punches account of how science works and how political motives can hijack the process by which scientific information is disseminated to the public.”—Kirkus Reviews

Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Mar 22, 2015 - 10:21am PT
Just curious, by how many posts did this thread shrink when The Chief was banned?

Wasn't banned, he quit, shortly after it was pointed out that he had made well over 6,000 posts (not counting his sockpuppets) to this thread.

Blogs, like books, newspapers or anything else, don't all belong in one basket. On climate topics there are some very good ones by scientists, and good ones by nonscientists who work hard to get science right.

And then you've got what And Then There's Physics characterized as an "anti-science hate site." I think any bright non-ideologue could see the difference pretty soon without being told.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Mar 22, 2015 - 12:14pm PT
Florida and the Science Who Must Not Be Named
http://www.wired.com/2015/03/florida-science-must-not-named/
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Mar 22, 2015 - 03:17pm PT
Skeptics, deniers, and contrarians: The climate science label game

Hypocrite.

DMT
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Mar 22, 2015 - 04:53pm PT
One of the largest groups of people, however, are those who engage in what I call semi-skepticism. They accept that the planet has warmed and that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and is probably producing some of that warming. But they don't accept scientists' conclusions on the likely extent of future warming, arguing that the Sun's influence is too large, that CO2's influence is too small, or that there's some feedback or another that will tone down future warming.

It's possible to make a decent scientific argument for some of this—I've read a few papers that do, written by people who might genuinely be labelled skeptical. But the semi-skeptic doesn't bother. They don't look into the various ways that people have estimated the climate's sensitivity to carbon dioxide or the data we've gathered on solar activity. They don't understand how we've quantified the various climate feedbacks, or they reach their conclusions by eyeballing graphs rather than a detailed numerical analysis.

So overall, the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry is right: denialism like Inhofe's deserves to be called out for what it is. But the world rarely breaks down into binary distinctions, and nowhere is that more true that human behavior. By choosing any one term for a spectrum of behavior, you'll undoubtedly get things wrong. In fact, you'll also get some things wrong about individual people, who may shift categories over time. (For example, Anthony Watts was originally a semi-skeptic about the reliability of our temperature records, but as he has continued questioning them even as more data on their reliability came in, he's moved into the denialism camp.)

Does using the right label matter? I'd argue that it does. For one thing, people often get offended when you place them in the wrong camp. When they're offended, they're less likely to listen to anything you say. That probably won't matter to the denialists, who aren't going to register anything that goes against their beliefs anyway. But there are a lot of other people who fall into the other camps and might be more inclined to listen. And knowing who your audience is and where they fit on this spectrum might allow you to more finely craft a message they'll find compelling.
from the above link
http://arstechnica.com/staff/2014/12/skeptics-deniers-and-contrarians-the-climate-science-label-game/
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Mar 22, 2015 - 05:40pm PT
The climate models, far from being melodramatic, may be conservative in the predictions they produce. For example, here’s a graph of sea level rise:


Observed sea level rise since 1970 from
tide gauge data (red)
and satellite measurements (blue)
compared to
model projections for 1990-2010 from the IPCC Third Assessment Report (grey band).
(Source: The Copenhagen Diagnosis, 2009)

Here, the models have understated the problem. In reality, observed sea level is tracking at the upper range of the model projections. There are other examples of models being too conservative, rather than alarmist as some portray them. All models have limits - uncertainties - for they are modelling complex systems. However, all models improve over time, and with increasing sources of real-world information such as satellites, the output of climate models can be constantly refined to increase their power and usefulness.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models.htm
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Mar 22, 2015 - 07:42pm PT
http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-friday-edition-1.3003183/pacific-warm-water-blob-threatens-salmon-seabirds-1.3003744
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Mar 22, 2015 - 08:33pm PT
http://www.king5.com/story/tech/science/environment/2015/03/13/washington-drought-emergency-declared/70276974/
Messages 19921 - 19940 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 Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews