Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 21021 - 21040 of total 25982 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
dirtbag

climber
Jan 25, 2014 - 04:44pm PT
Raymond nails it.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 25, 2014 - 04:51pm PT
Hit #946 & #947 DIRTARD!
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 25, 2014 - 05:20pm PT
Nice dodge EDH. You sure are the King of it on this thread.


Dodge and Deflect like the good PhD that you are.
dirtbag

climber
Jan 25, 2014 - 05:33pm PT
Hit #946 & #947 DIRTARD!

LOL...pretty weak "hits."

Of course, we all know #1 is a model of civility...
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 25, 2014 - 05:44pm PT
Nothing like the smug, holier-than-thou assh0le.


If holier-than-thou means knowing how to read and reason, then yeah, I guess I'm that.

As for the name calling, it looks like the only response you can muster. As long as it makes yourself feel good.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Jan 25, 2014 - 05:46pm PT
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Credit: Wade Icey
edited for clarity
TLP

climber
Jan 25, 2014 - 05:53pm PT
Am I understanding correctly that the only substantive point that has been raised on this thread as a criticism of the current generation of climatic models is that surface temperatures have not risen in 13 or so years? (Though for completeness, one notes that ocean heat content, which is a lot more energy, has continued to rise.) Certainly that's the one comment we've seen thousands of times.

We've seen clear explanations of why this is both within the range of expected variation and is consistent with modeling results, but the response seems always to be just to repeat the same criticism without acknowledging that it has been addressed, or providing any logical discussion of the explanation. That makes the contrary argument start to look awfully thin after a while. If there's another piece of substance there, it's been lost in all the hollering.

I still think blahblah had the best question, what's a verifiable prediction? If I'm not mistaken, substantial loss of arctic ice has been one of the specific predictions, and that has definitely happened. That was an expected consequence because it's a shallow sea, thus more vulnerable to global temperature and ocean heat content. So there's a partial answer. I bet there are others that would be testable in another decade or three. Shorter term, not possible: see above.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
Jan 25, 2014 - 06:00pm PT
Am I understanding correctly that the only substantive point that has been raised on this thread as a criticism of the current generation of climatic models is that surface temperatures have not risen in 13 or so years?

yes, you understand correctly

pretty damn weak, eh?
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 25, 2014 - 06:00pm PT
Where's the WARMING??


You gotta be kidding, right? I mean, after all the data that's been posted showing how the Earth is warming, you have the nerve to ask this again?

Why don't you pay attention when people answer the questions you ask? Here:

link: Record High Temperatures Broken in California as Drought Worsens






Yeah, that's current.



Now let's watch you dodge this like you were moving for your life.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 25, 2014 - 06:33pm PT
Ah, like you all redundantly proclaim when all the record low temps and snow stats are posted....


Northeast getting slammed with cold, snow as winter storm intensifies

Coupled with the snow is another bone-chilling winter blast, but it’s not the same as the polar vortex that plunged temperatures to record lows two weeks ago. With the wind chill, the air will feel 10 degrees below zero or worse in some parts.

More than 6,600 flights were delayed and another 3,342 were canceled by 11:30 p.m., according to FlightAware.com. More than 1,000 flights for Wednesday had already been nixed

In anticipation of the storm, Ohio Gov. John Kasich followed the lead of officials in 17 other states — mostly in the Midwest and North — who declared energy emergencies and loosened rules for propane.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/21/22381468-northeast-getting-slammed-with-cold-snow-as-winter-storm-intensifies?lite


It is as you always state when presented with facts like those above,

"it just weather!"

Right KMAN!



Not climate.



Besides KMAN, La Nina is all part of the ENSO "Oscillations" as Larry Hamilton and EDH keep referring to when asked to answer the source of the 1910-1945 temp spike.

And a solid La Nina is what California and the Westcoast are experiencing due to COLD PACIFIC SST's.

Nice try though.....



No Warming since 1998 globally KMAN!






Hey Wade Icey, one of the those that EDH was preaching about in his earlier rant.

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA

Jan 25, 2014 - 11:46am PT


Especially when the posters are anonymous and do not have to face any consequence of their identity being known. This is such an attractive feature that people who are known even though they don't post under their own names take up other identities, an example being FORTMENTAL, DIRTBAG, WADE ICEY's characters. Such is the nature of the internet.

Join your AGW Comrades here in the mumbling and rambling along as it is now the order of the day for them and you Wade Icey...


Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Jan 25, 2014 - 06:54pm PT
Ed's right, this thread seems more wasteland than usual lately. Some people are trying to stay constructive but they're talking to blog-parrots while a grown man throws nonstop LOOK AT ME! tantrums in the center of the room.

So if the Commons Dilemma, Nash equilibrium etc. won't start any discussion, maybe Michael Mann? I saw his name flash by a few pages back. Mann is briefly in the news again due to a ruling by Judge Frederick Weisberg, who denied motions by Mark Steyn, the National Review, Competitive Enterprise Institute and Rand Simberg to dismiss Mann's suit for defamation. The Judge gave this explanation:
. . . .plaintiff alleges that CEI published, and National Review republished, the following defamatory statement: “Mann could be said to be the Jerry Sandusky of climate science, except that instead of molesting children, he has molested and tortured data in the service of politicized science that could have dire economic consequences for the nation and planet.” The allegedly defamatory aspect of this sentence is the statement that plaintiff “molested and tortured data,” not the rhetorically hyperbolic comparison to convicted child molester Jerry Sandusky.
....
Accusing plaintiff of working “in the service of politicized science” is arguably a protected statement of opinion, but accusing a scientist of “molest[ing] and tortur[ing] data” is an assertion of fact.
Possibly Weisberg expects this won't go to trial, but if it does he apparently intends the focus to be allegations of scientific misconduct -- which multiple scientific investigations have found groundless, but the political blogs still trumpet loudly.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 25, 2014 - 07:50pm PT
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH

Jan 25, 2014 - 03:54pm PT
Ed's right, this thread seems more wasteland than usual lately. Some people are trying to stay constructive but they're talking to blog-parrots while a grown man(FORTMENTAL)throws nonstop LOOK AT ME! tantrums in the center of the room.

You of course must be speaking about his (FORTMENTAL) posting all these fine pieces of photoshopped art work to support your sides claim that AGW exists and is a very viable threat to mankind. Correct Larry Himilton?

I am glad that you agree with Werner Braun's assessment of FORTMENTAL's behavior, antics and tactics.

Quite disturbing to have an individual that produces such photoshoped work, representing your side. Don't you think Larry Hamilton?







Amongst several others.


You do of course agree with Werner's assessment of FORTMENTAL, do you not LARRY HAMILTON?


Or is the above all an integral component of the Climate Change Consensus Science that you so proudly are a part of, professionally?
new world order2

climber
Jan 25, 2014 - 08:15pm PT
Anyone (perhaps our resident scientists?) care to comment to the possibility
our climate may have to be geo-engineered to reverse climate change? Al Gore has....

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/01/16


The UN climate panel, in the next edition of its blockbuster reports, will warn that governments might have to extract vast amounts of greenhouses gases from the air by 2100 to limit climate change, according to a draft copy of the report seen by Reuters.

"The idea that we can put a different form of pollution into the atmosphere to cancel out the effects of global warming pollution is utterly insane," he (Al Gore) told a conference call for South African reporters.

Personally, I suspect Al Gore fully endorses this measure.
It's his raison d'ętre. Of course he would support climate geo-engineering.

Sunshade" to fight climate change costed at $5 bln a year
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/08/30/climate-sunshade-idINDEE87T0K420120830[/quote]

More from Al Gore here... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrrWXurroWw

Oh look! There's a jet spraying chemicals into the atmosphere!
Oh look! There's a jet spraying chemicals into the atmosphere!
Credit: new world order2



TGT

Social climber
So Cal
Jan 25, 2014 - 08:21pm PT
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2545153/U-S-braces-coldest-month-century.html
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Jan 25, 2014 - 08:40pm PT
I absolutely must know - IS THAT BUTT UGLY FACE THE CHUFF OR IS IT SOMEONE ELSE?

Christ almighty whoever that is they sure got hit with an ugly hammer
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 25, 2014 - 08:42pm PT
It's actually FORESKINMENTAL's Father.
TLP

climber
Jan 25, 2014 - 08:43pm PT
New, I'll ante up my two cents. Shortest version: bad idea(s). Not going to end up with results that are satisfactory. Seems to me Base put it most clearly, many pages ago, in pointing out that, if you were to decide to do something about CO2, by far the cheapest, easiest, most successful way to do it is to capture it where you produce it. It's very concentrated in that one spot; anything you can do atmosphere-wide, you can do way better right at a stack or tailpipe. It's the same with any pollution: either don't create it, or control it where you do. Once it's loose, costs get ridiculous and success dubious.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Jan 25, 2014 - 08:46pm PT
If there is one single thing I hate about this thread is that you can absolutely never get a straight answer from the idiot side of the room.

It is of course their primary strategy.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Jan 25, 2014 - 08:48pm PT
This just released today by NOAA!


Looks like the pattern is gonna turn sometime next week and get rather narly through next year.

Mark my words, I hope you all enjoyed this dry spell, cus it's gonna turn into something many will be regretting they wished for. It is five times
stronger than it was in 1983 (California's wettest year ever was 1983, with a state precipitation average of 42.33 inches. 45 weather reporting stations
received levels of precipitation that normally occur only 1 time in over 1,000 years) and 2010...


Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Jan 25, 2014 - 08:56pm PT
Wait a minute you stupid ethicless bastard, you mean to say you now believe what a model tells you?
Messages 21021 - 21040 of total 25982 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