Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 7181 - 7200 of total 28535 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
slayton

Trad climber
Here and There
May 29, 2013 - 01:42am PT
Ed, your patience is beyond amazing. Thank you for the information, scientifically based, that you provide.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
May 29, 2013 - 01:51am PT
Which of the following is the most verifiable of sciences and forms a foundation of modern technology ;that described by Religion,that described by catastrophic anthropogenic global warming, or that described by quantum mechanics?

Who among you can verify or refute the sciences described above using math,the closest thing we have to a universally correct language? Is not absence of quantifiable values of evidence, evidence of absence? Or is the "faith" of some of us justified if the effects of it's practice is imposed on us all? Who among you can prove that all three sciences/religions listed above are clearly not distinguishable from each other?

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
May 29, 2013 - 02:11am PT
Not a damn thing other than it is the most successfully applied theory of modern life and has so far survived all tests. And i know you can describe quantum mechanics and describe the religion of CAGW if it is valid, given enough time.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
May 29, 2013 - 02:50am PT
How about if i hire a crew to reside your entire house with chalkboard, then a course setter to festoon it with holds and randomly placed ledges for monitors hooked to a mainframe. I know of natural chalk outcrops in the nevada wilds from which i will harvest a truck load of high quality chalk to be painstakingly fashioned into writing utensils by a genuine american indian flint knapper. Hell, we'll even bring in JL's belayer. After tying in (correctly i hope) you'll be able to happily work out the CAGW equations on the convenience of your own home. And in a jiffy, a mere eternity or two, you'll have the proof of the theorem for all the neighborhood to see.
f_the_trolls

climber
May 29, 2013 - 03:32am PT
Ed, why should we believe science dogma?

some scientists are focusing on freeing science

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKHUaNAxsTg

bobinc

Trad climber
Portland, Or
May 29, 2013 - 03:39am PT
Ah yes, Sheldrake... Do you think he has an Orgone Box in his backyard?
slayton

Trad climber
Here and There
May 29, 2013 - 04:18am PT
Reading through this thread over the years, I have a hard time understanding those who claim that the scientists doing the research and writing papers (that are peer reviewed and as such open for others to test in an attempt to come to the same conclusions) have some kind of nefarious agenda. They do have an agenda, but that agenda, on it's most pure level, is to simply better understand the world we live in.

In its most simple terms scientists, doing the work of science, develop a hypothesis and then test that hypothesis using various methods. Despite the findings of those tests, true science, the kind that actually works, has something to say and moves forward, is testable and able to be replicated by other scientists familiar with the methodology in the first place. If the hypothesis is shown to be functional, testable, and able to be replicated, then you move on to the next set of questions.

I'm sure, like most of us, scientists want to keep their jobs. If a scientist comes up with an hypothesis, tests it, writes papers about it's effectiveness and is then proven wrong when others try to replicate it, after too many times that scientist will be out a job in that particular field. Or at the very least won't be taken credibly by those that actually understand the science. It's the way it works.

Common sense is great. But in the world of science, if it's not testable or verifiable it doesn't work into the fabric.

Science is funny that way. It's all about method. How it's done and whether it can be reproduced. There's really not much of an agenda beyond that.

Science comes from an agenda of trying to understand what is and why. Posters such as The Chief, Rick, Blaahbaa, Ron, etc., come from an agenda of ideology. Their minds are already made up about what is happening. They don't understand how the method of science works and they don't care to. Time after time they pull up info and links that are either outdated and wrong or just wrong in terms of the way science actually works.

The Chief has stated that this thread is about ideology. Don't believe that. Folks like Ed, Chiloe, and Base are providing science that back up their claims. The ideology is coming from those who have a beef with the science being provided, knowing nothing of that science or seemingly how science works, and then moving on to something else they learned on a blog when they've been shown to be wrong. But even that's too generous as all too often they'll cycle back to an argument that has already been brought up and shown to be outdated and wrong.

I realize that I'm speaking to the choir here. There are those that already understand the process and how it works and those that don't. Those most vociferous among us who don't understand but have already made up their minds probably never will.

Again, Ed, Chiloe, and Base, thanks for your input. Your patience in providing scientific information is much appreciated.
mountainlion

Trad climber
California
May 29, 2013 - 07:21am PT
Rick--Ed is right Einstein's work is the basis for quantum mechanics and would not have been possible without his theory of general relativity. The science is old and involves other's work as well like Ed mentioned (Planc). Check out the history channel this month it has an excellent line-up of scientists (Einstein and Ben Franklin to name a two who's biographies are featured).

Upthread I posted how long it took---this was due to bad luck (cloudiness and war in Russia when he already had 2 teams there to photograph a total solar eclipse (never photographed prior to his work)...

This bad luck proved to be good luck because he returned to his theory of general relativity and began reworking his mathmatics and DISCOVERED his calculations were WRONG...if they had been able to photograph the eclipse it would have been proven by someone else his theory and predictions of what would happen were wrong (he was very specific and precise on what would happen to light bending due to gravity which was what the pics of the total eclipse would show.

He was able to work in secret with only a few other scientists having real details of his work, otherwise he would have been ridiculed. Instead he was able to look at his theory with fresh eyes and focus to determine what he proved after 15 years of work.

It was fascinating because he proved gravity bends light, time is warped etc etc

Degaine

climber
May 29, 2013 - 07:37am PT
new world order2 wrote:
Honestly, Ed....You work for the Man. You are, the Man.

No, WE are the man.

Society and government is what we make of it. So is science. There is the method, which most agree is beyond politics, and then there are human beings, with all of their strengths and weaknesses, who put that science to use: sometime for the good of the many, sometimes for the good of the one.

Scientists range from Mengele to Pasteur to Einstein to Curie. Science both put lead in the atmosphere (leaded gasoline) and realized relatively quickly that this was a mistake. Politics and money made sure the public stayed ignorant and that leaded fuel stayed around for a long long time.

If you don't like the way things are going, locally, statewide, nationally, then do something about it. Either by voting someone into or out of office, or by protesting (with your wallet, in the streets, ...).

Telling Ed that he's the MAN and the root of your problems while sitting around on your ass watching TV or typing on the Internet really doesn't get you anywhere, does it?
The Chief

climber
Climber from the Land Mongols under the Whites
May 29, 2013 - 09:29am PT
Science both put lead in the atmosphere (leaded gasoline) and realized relatively quickly that this was a mistake.

80-100 years is "relatively quickly"? Impressive.

Science designed and then helped implement the atomic weapon and all other forms of WMD's to terminate thousands upon thousands of human beings. Science designed and helped implement Chemical Weapons. They too have terminated thousands upon thousands of human beings. Science designed and implemented Insecticides that we have absolutely NO clue as to how many humans and other species of creatures they have terminated instantaneously and over a long term basis via various terminal diseases and physical abnormalities. Autism comes to mind. Science designed and implemented Freon systems. We all know how that ended up. Now science has designed and is implementing Genetically Modified foods of various sorts and is on the verge of Genetically Modifying human beings to conform to some human standard of "perfection". Soon, science will design a manner to maintain that selective design so humans can live longer and longer and longer. Terminating those that do not conform to that design. Thus continue it's constant furious need to perfectly consume itself outta of house and home. Destroying everything in it's path. All in the quest to live forever.

Science has done more than any other human entity to assist in mankind's destruction of planet earth all in the name of keeping humans comfortable, alive and ultimately attempt to cheat physical death.

Science these days spends more time covering it's ass than it does anything else. Desperately thinking of how to clean up after itself.

Refute that.

BTW, you and I are all going to die. So is Mankind. That is the law of the Universe. Man will never change that. Never. Accept it as it is all part of the Big Process.


The Goodness of the Universe will infinitely prevail.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
May 29, 2013 - 09:59am PT
BTW, you and I are all going to die. So is Mankind. That is the law of the Universe. Man will never change that. Never. Accept it as it is all part of the Big Process.

Why don't you just stop breathing then?
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
May 29, 2013 - 10:03am PT
Ed, while the graph in the JOKE picture may indeed not be accurate - it may well be ass accurate as climate models since no one knows the flat lining of temps for the past decade or so. In that vein they are equally "accurate".

That is a rather glaring inconsistency isnt it? "We dont know what caused the flat line exactly but we CAN predict the future with accuracy"..

One fact known is the polar bears seem to dig it all. And have been doing quite nicely, contrary to propaganda.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
May 29, 2013 - 10:30am PT
Ah, yes... since one graph is not accurate it may well be just as accurate as something you know nothing about. The brain power on this thread has the strongest bimodal distribution of any discussion 3v34.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
May 29, 2013 - 10:33am PT
YOU wescrispie DO NOT KNOW what caused the flat line in the global warming theory.. Neither does Ed, nor any other human on the earth.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
May 29, 2013 - 10:34am PT
Western Hudson Bay polar bears are declining. They aren't digginit Anderson.

Water temps are not flat lining either.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
May 29, 2013 - 10:37am PT
sure about those polar bears Mono?


Population in Canada’s Western Hudson Bay Unlikely to Survive Climate Disruption.” But it seems that since then this subpopulation, previously believed to be among the most threatened subpopulations due to global warming, has made a miraculous recovery. According to aerial surveys released by the Government of Nunavat this month, their numbers are at least 66% higher than expected. This region, which straddles Nunavat and Manitoba, is critical because it’s considered to be a bellwether for how well polar bears are faring elsewhere in the Arctic.

Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
May 29, 2013 - 10:40am PT
here is some more science,, GUESSING..



Alarm over biodiversity peril got a big boost a decade ago when Harvard ant biologist Dr. Edward O. Wilson estimated that 50,000 species are going extinct. When Environmental activist Tim Keating of Rainforest Relief was asked if he could name any of them he replied: “No we can’t, because we don’t know what those species are. But most of the species we’re talking about in those estimates are things like insects and even microorganisms.” Apparently they primarily inhabited the computer hard drive that generated his theoretical model.






guess whut? weve seen no decimation of unknown species.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
May 29, 2013 - 10:41am PT


Are you sure global warming is flat lining, Anderson?
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
May 29, 2013 - 10:43am PT
I'm not concerned with the flat line you are fixated on. I realize it is just another TINY PIECE of the puzzle that you nutjobs latch onto in a feeble attempt to discredit the VAST amount of research that contradicts your unfounded position on GCC. You idiots grab onto anything and everything, it gets shot down, and you latch onto the next piece of bullsh#t. I don't think there is anyone with an IQ over 80 that believes that flat spot negates the obvious increase in temperature caused by anthropogenic emisisons.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Soon to be Nipple suckling Liberal
May 29, 2013 - 10:47am PT
And THERE^^^^^^is the tactic of the Warmers as well.


let me coin ol billarys saying again,,,,"WHAT DIFF does it make that we dont know why temps have flatlined",, we can STILL predict them ahead ! Anyone buying that?
Messages 7181 - 7200 of total 28535 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 Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews