Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 6741 - 6760 of total 25079 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
May 11, 2013 - 09:21am PT
Ron - the significance is in the rate of change. If broad scale eco-system changes were to happen gradually over centuries then we would have a chance to adapt. If it happens suddenly, well lets just say that even under the current idilic conditions we have more than a little difficulty in holding our sh#t together and as is already dem
wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
May 12, 2013 - 01:34pm PT
Stunned ,follow the money.http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/05/09/wall-street-journals-idiocracy-co2-is-what-plan/19398
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
May 12, 2013 - 05:52pm PT
There you go again Ed, participating in the coordinated "climate consensus machine-division of destruction of contrary opinion, evidence, and the scientists that voice them".

The CAGW crowd has lost this battle.Every day more prominent scientists are coming out against this malicious consensus machine. The public by and large sees the CAGW crowd as buffoons and make all manner of jokes about their efforts to misinform.

For those who care google the following articles:

Consensus and controversy- Sintef
The perils of confirmation bias-Matt Ridley
A case against precipitous climate action-Richard Lindzen

Ed or Chiloe if you have the time read the paper-Geocarb III: A Revised Model Of Atmospheric CO2 Over Phanerozoic Time Berner and Kothvala American Journal Of Science 2001. What do you guys think this paper says to the average layman reading it?
McHale's Navy

Trad climber
Panorama City, California & living in Seattle
May 12, 2013 - 05:57pm PT
Every day more prominent scientists are coming out against this malicious consensus machine.

Give us some names of some prominent 'climate' scientists that have jumped ship 'recently'.

The public by and large sees the CAGW crowd as buffoons and make all manner of jokes about their efforts to misinform.


Is this you joking around again? You admitted that your posts were all in good humor not too many posts ago. The AGW crowd here knows a buffoon when they see one.

CAGW is an acronym invented by climate science deniers

The public by and large sees the CAGW crowd as buffoons and make all manner of jokes about their efforts to misinform.


Somebody that is actually informed does not have to debate in such an insulting and childish manner.


Since the acronym CAGW was created by deniers, the quote is not very sympathetic to your agenda Rick.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
May 12, 2013 - 06:54pm PT
.Just got off the phone with my handler from the Cato Institute-hehehe.

What that paper highlights to me is the high degree of uncertainty in the data used for paleoclimate reconstruction.It also brings to light the gross negligence in sampling error. Come on, dwarf birch and desert.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
May 12, 2013 - 07:37pm PT
Yes, many tens of billions of dollars wasted adressing those and other problems with the science in a vain attempt to establish a consensus.

It's time for a strategic retreat for the CAGW group, after all the last men standing get the credit, or blame, and who among you want that.
rSin

Trad climber
calif
May 12, 2013 - 07:38pm PT
yes!

the estimates made in formulating the baselines that paper was drawn on have proven to be to conservative
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
May 12, 2013 - 07:41pm PT
The public by and large sees the CAGW crowd as buffoons and make all manner of jokes about their efforts to misinform.

A little exagerated . A significant proportion of the public does make those jokes, but really no more than 20% in Canada, perhaps as high as all the red state populations in the US. As for the actual content and quality of the humor involved, it is debatably measurable. Remember, all the right wing has for late night humor is Ann Coulture. Fine I suppose if you think a spitting cobra is the height of comedy.



About those 3 deniers you just mentioned:

I just glanced at the Sintec paper and the first thing i noticed is a section devoted to "climate gate". Here they verbatim quote all the sellacious bits of the emails in question, which long ago were investigated and dissmissed as nothing more than purile banter between various pencil pouch climate geeks. It seemed an odd thing to include in a supposedly objective examination of the state of climate science, unless perhaps Sintec is not all objective science. Who the heck is Sintec? Do you know?

Matt Ridley I am a bit familiar with through his book "The Rational Optimist". I had no preconceptions to start but by the time I was finished I thuoght him a bit of a kook. His premiss, as the title suggests, is that no matter what crazy sh#t goes on, nuclear armagedon for instance, things just have a way of working out. I didn't think much about it til now so I googled him and was not too surprised to find out he is indeed a kook. In fact he sounds like a classic upper class twit of the year like Christopher Monkton with some sh#t pile of family money and peerage with all the requisite rightwing libertarian feudal notions of ruling the under classes. He even ran a bank into the ground in 08.

He's a zoologist by the way.

The other guy, Lindzen, has a pile of appropriate credentials so you would think he might have a legitimate argument, which you or i certainly cannot pass judgement on. If you wiki the guy you'll see that he has been strongly criticized by his peers and is uniformly described as "contrarian" and not just limited to his science. We all known that contrarian is not a scientific discipline, it is a significant personality trait, one that seldom has anything to do with reason and in fact often defies reason.

Do you have any expertise in that field Rick?


rSin

Trad climber
calif
May 12, 2013 - 07:47pm PT
you know about the edit history function there dont you?
its shows a timeline...
bobinc

Trad climber
Portland, Or
May 12, 2013 - 08:38pm PT
So far Rick Sumner appears to be a politer version of The Chief. But when he'a asked a serious question, he uses the ''I was just kidding" rope-a-dope...
wilbeer

Mountain climber
honeoye falls,ny.greeneck alleghenys
May 12, 2013 - 08:48pm PT
TENS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS.edit:MANY
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
May 13, 2013 - 08:45am PT
So far Rick Sumner appears to be a politer version of The Chief. But when he'a asked a serious question, he uses the ''I was just kidding" rope-a-dope...

Yes, its a pleasant change from bombastic threat and chest pounding, but when you get right down to it, that is a matter of style not substance. Rick is much more civil which is appreciated, but this is Super Topo after all and its hardly a prerequisite. No matter what style you present, the substance of this issue is science and in that regard he is identical to The Chief.

Level one disease. Both of them. In fact its boring engaging them on science but when it comes to style they should both be in Vogue magazine. Rather outrageously flamboyant really.



rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
May 13, 2013 - 07:57pm PT
Thankyou Bruce, i take your last post as a compliment.Your also somewhat civil at times.

I know nothing of The Chief, but i can tell you this-a more stubborn man than me you will not meet. Also i'm going to win this little debate in the end and it won't be through a discussion of "your science", though i am increasing my understanding of it all the time.I define victory as the conversion of just one individual.

Nothing new on scientific deconstruction front, but Alaska continues its historic, very late ascent out of winter. Snow and rain showers predicted the next two days with nightime lows below freezing point. The ice is still not off the lakes and the leaves have yet to unfurl.This extreme persistance of winter is a common phenomenon this year in most parts of the higher latitudes.
slayton

Trad climber
Here and There
May 13, 2013 - 08:18pm PT
The leaves are indeed unfurling right outside my door here in SE Alaska, and the ice really is actually melting on the lake about a half mile away. It's been a late, cold and wet spring for sure but that doesn't make Rick's argument any more true. It's hard to argue with someone who doesn't seem to understand the meaning of "overwhelming scientific consensus" or the process by which that comes about.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 13, 2013 - 09:18pm PT
Also i'm going to win this little debate in the end and it won't be through a discussion of "your science", though i am increasing my understanding of it all the time.I define victory as the conversion of just one individual.

ok then, so if victory is convincing just one person, how ya doing Rick?

think you got any leaners going our way on this thread yet?

surely you can snag one person so you can claim victory.......
Malemute

Ice climber
the ghost
May 13, 2013 - 09:27pm PT
I define victory as the conversion of just one induhvidual.

Fixed it for you.
mountainlion

Trad climber
California
May 14, 2013 - 06:15am PT
Rick you don't have to be the most stubborn man on the planet...when YOU get to DEFINE everything for yourself...getting to define victory in the debate and what/how/when/if the climate is changing must make life pretty simple for you...

As for the rest of us we have to live in the REAL world not some fantasy we have in our own heads...that means science and evidence collected by others...even if we are scientists like Ed...

I love science but am not on the same level as Ed, Base, etc but I can tell something is very different about the world and weather now than when I was growing up (I'm only 40) so it is not a big sample of time...

Hate to say it but some things that make our life more convenient MUST change...that is if you care about the planet after we are gone AND are looking at the EVIDENCE of the changing earth.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
May 14, 2013 - 10:07am PT
I doubt Rick Sumner is going to convert even one person by repeating talking points from denier blogs. Or by noting that right now it's cold someplace.

Even in Alaska, the folks of Newtok, which could be underwater by 2017, perhaps take climate change more seriously. That's one of several dozen Alaska communities facing near-term threats from erosion accelerated by climate change (such as permafrost failure, increased river flow, and decreased sea-ice protection of shorelines in fall).

But what's the big picture? For that we need science, not anecdotes. For example, new research in Nature last month (emphasis added):

Recent temperature extremes at high northern latitudes unprecedented in the past 600 years
Tingley & Huybers

Recently observed extreme temperatures at high northern latitudes1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 are rare by definition, making the longer time span afforded by climate proxies important for assessing how the frequency of such extremes may be changing. Previous reconstructions of past temperature variability have demonstrated that recent warmth is anomalous relative to preceding centuries2, 8, 9 or millennia10, but extreme events can be more thoroughly evaluated using a spatially resolved approach that provides an ensemble of possible temperature histories11, 12. Here, using a hierarchical Bayesian analysis13, 14 of instrumental, tree-ring, ice-core and lake-sediment records, we show that the magnitude and frequency of recent warm temperature extremes at high northern latitudes are unprecedented in the past 600 years. The summers of 2005, 2007, 2010 and 2011 were warmer than those of all prior years back to 1400 (probability P > 0.95), in terms of the spatial average. The summer of 2010 was the warmest in the previous 600 years in western Russia (P > 0.99) and probably the warmest in western Greenland and the Canadian Arctic as well (P > 0.90). These and other recent extremes greatly exceed those expected from a stationary climate, but can be understood as resulting from constant space–time variability about an increased mean temperature.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v496/n7444/full/nature11969.html
blahblah

Gym climber
Boulder
May 14, 2013 - 10:56am PT
I love science but am not on the same level as Ed, Base, etc but I can tell something is very different about the world and weather now than when I was growing up (I'm only 40) so it is not a big sample of time...
\

You're almost certainly wrong about that. Even if you fully believe the alarmists, the "changes" in the past few decades wouldn't be something that is noticeable in your normal life (as compared to statistical analysis), since an average change of a degree or 2 is insignificant compared to general variations in weather. And remember there hasn't been any significant change in the past 10 years or so.

The knucklehead who posts on this thread who seems to be fascinated by psychology of the "deniers" can weigh in why people think they're experiencing "global warming" first hand when they aren't.
Norton

Social climber
the Wastelands
May 14, 2013 - 11:01am PT
Also i'm going to win this little debate in the end and it won't be through a discussion of "your science", though i am increasing my understanding of it all the time.I define victory as the conversion of just one individual.

and if I can't "convert" one individual then I will turn everyone to stone and burn your village
Messages 6741 - 6760 of total 25079 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