Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
The Bizarro-World Ranter comes back!
your fellow jihadists They dance only in your head, Rick.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
^^^^and infowars...lol^^^^
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Meanwhile back in reality ... in case anyone hasn't heard,
Antarctic ships escape from ice trap as weather changes
8 January 2014 Last updated at 06:17 GMT
The Russian research ship Akademik Shokalskiy and Chinese icebreaker Xue Long have broken free from Antarctic ice where they had been stranded for several days.
The Russian ship's captain said a crack had appeared in the ice after a change in wind direction. The AS originally became trapped when a wind shift drove unexpectedly thick ice (apparently connected to a previous glacier calving and collision event) around it so the ship quickly became 20km from the ice edge, in thick ice, without having moved much. The XL which seems to have icebreaking capabilities and a very experienced crew also became unexpectedly trapped. The blown-in ice was too thick, apparently with pressure ridges from wind movement, for the smaller French or Australian icebreakers nearby to break through.
Now the wind shifted again, driving the ice, and both the AS and XL sailed free under their own power. Their original entrapment was not evidence that global warming was false, as the usual suspects on this thread were happy to suggest. If they really believed that perhaps they should now tell us they're convinced of the equally false proposition that the ships' escape is evidence that global warming is true, but of course they won't, it was just a talking point all along.
|
|
anita514
Gym climber
Great White North
|
|
why do you hate black people?
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Poedtke, what goes on in your head when you write this crap?
Not a peep from you during the rescue due to the situ.
Not a peep except maybe this. Or this. Both of which involved me actually looking up facts and writing them down, with references and satellite imagery -- instead of posting cartoons or talking points.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
You really are a tin eared idiot Larry. We weren't trying to make the case that the entrapment disproved CO2 scientology. WE were laughing our asses off at the bumbling ship of fools dispatched to Antartica in a dseperate attempt to highlight any twisted interpretation of reality they could manufacture to keep ship of lies afloat. And the idiots damn near crush their hull and capsize. Complete incompetence, the haulmark of your religion over it's entire existence. Larry go back to your cave, nobody is buying your scriptures.
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Social climber
SLO, Ca
|
|
"haulmark" Classic!!
Why do you guys even care? Do you own a refinery or something? What ever is eventually done (and is being done) re emissions will have zero effect on your lives, aside from better gas mileage.
Oh, and industry has essentially accepted forthcoming change and even includes it in accounting forecasts. So, even if it's a crazy conspiracy theory the working world has accepted it. But please feel free to continue ranting on the internet.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Rick Sumner writes today
We weren't trying to make the case that the entrapment disproved CO2 scientology. But Rick Sumner wrote two days earlier, about this same ship entrapment,
Besides the obvious fact that Antartica has ignored the blessed models of CO2 scientology
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
Talk about an over education and detachment from reality, you really take the cake with your response to Blah Blah Larry. You really should get out of your cave, away from false intellectual reinforcement by your fellow jihadists, and talk to some real folks rather than writing about their lack of understanding due to lack of education. You and your fellows are the joke of the nation and you are truly living in la la land if you think other wise.
rick sumner, I'd suggest that the scientific community in the US (one that attracts talent from all over the world) is one of the things that makes the US a far better place than those counties where real jihadists are in control.
You do have a valid point that scientist sometimes communicate poorly with the non-scientific public.
But Chiloe is making a huge effort to "talk to some real folks" right on this thread, over and above anything he really needs to do. Certainly not deserving of the snarky comments.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Regarding the ill-fated Australasian Antarctic Expedition 2013 ... I mentioned I was catching up on reading that had piled up in the mail. Last night this included the 13 Dec issue of Science, which had a write-up describing some general science goals of the trip. The key idea evidently was to compare new observations with the "extensive and little-studied" data recorded by Mawson a hundred years ago. The original Mawson expedition was a desperate adventure as were most back in the Heroic Age; but unlike some better-known expeditions from that era they did a good deal of science along the way.
"I was attacked by sea lions this morning," says Chris Turney by satellite phone from the Southern Ocean. It's all in a day's work for Turney, a climate scientist with the University of New South Wales in Australia, who boarded a Russian icebreaker heading south toward Antarctica on 27 November. Turney is leading a group of nearly 40 scientists and doctoral students and a handful of media representatives on the Australasian Antarctic Expedition (AAE) 2013. The team will spend the month retracing the steps of Australian geologist Douglas Mawson's original 1911 to 1914 expedition over the frozen continent.
The trip is more than just an adventure. It aims to investigate how poleward-shifting westerly winds affect the Southern Ocean, the Antarctic ice sheet, and the plants and animals of sub-Antarctic islands. AAE's scientific team will duplicate and extend the data that Mawson and his companions collected in surveying work marred by mishaps, brushes with starvation, and the deaths of two explorers. "Having observations a century ago covering several years is unique," says Turney of the extensive and little-studied data sets. Besides sea lions, the AAE 2013 has been attacked by right-wing pundits for having some non-scientists on board, and having a media component, both part of the "ship of fools" meme that Rick repeats upthread. That was a way to obtain some private rather than government support for the trip; it's ironic who is attacking this now as if only government-supported science can be serious.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Ed, i guess it's reassuring that you are working all hours of the day and night, weekends and holidays too if necessary, to keep the deterrents push button ready. But let me make another suggestion to the others on this thread that your prolific postings on this thread are also part of your job description, or at least in compliance with orders from headquarters that non belief in CO2 scientology will not be tolerated.This intolerance to dissent is not something new as the free press reported last year. It was highly discouraged from day one of this current regime out of Chicago. Now Ed, you have never convincingly demonstrated ( to anyone paying attention at least) that CO2 is the primary driver of climate change, nor has any combination or consensus of scientists. You guys don't even know the quantity of unknowns affecting climate change. You post papers citing previous papers, who have in turn built their studies on analyses of previous papers or used previous interpretations of data. There is very little legitamate original studies being done in support of AGW. This is a house of cards only barely staying intact because of the maginot line the CAGW defense forces have formed around it to prevent the winds of change from blowing the poorly constructed house down. Nowadays you are mostly engaged in the science of semantics, an interpretation of a phrase here, a cherry pick of a single line like "consistent with AGW" there. When you are occaisionally caught you seem surprised that somebody is paying attention. Sometimes you surprise us with revealing the filter of bias that most information coming from you must pass through, other times you come right out and say things like " the anthropogenic signal is feeble compared to the range of natural variability". There is a large wave of studies of natural forcing mechanisms about to crest that the CAGW crowd is trying their best to ignore or discredit. Somehow i think that by the time the professor retires the cooling climate along with acceptance of the primacy of natural variability will allow him to sing a new and true tune.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
As usual, you can't take multiple factors into account, and must cherry-pick.
From the study:
Apart from melting, the southward drift through Fram Strait is the main loss.
lol!
In case you still don't get it, winds play an important role in year to year sea ice extent variability variability variability variability.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Any other potential source/forcing, is not to be factored into the equation.
We could pick just about any post he makes but this one, as clearly as anything, shows the Chief does not read.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
So dropping in for my occasional dose of astonishment.
I've only looked back 3 pages (there was ENOUGH name calling in that span to deter me from going back to my last time here).
It appears that Sketch had posted a pretty sketchy graph, according to his interpretation. This is the prediction of global temperature rise from 1988 to 2016 and shows three trends. Also plotted is something called Subsequent Reality. I won't debate the validity of that data. The predictions are from Hansen in 1988.
So why are some of the common interpretations of this chart off base?
1 - Our current climate change vs carbon in the atmosphere models are much better. They have been improving continuously since 1988. A discrepancy between 1988 and current models is to be expected. This chart doesn't compare the models that were available in 2012 (his last data point).
2 - The chart is attributed to Dr David Evans. Well known climate change denier. He's not exactly a domain expert: (Dr David Evans)...has written 1 science peer-reviewed paper back in the 80s not related to climate change science.
3 - Now lets look at the data itself. Notice that Dr Evans starts his data at the same baseline as Dr Hansen's trends. Very convenient for Dr. Evans since 1988 was significantly warmer than 1989 through 91. This choice of timeline obscures the overall trend. The wide year to year variation in temperature is obvious. Dr Evans could be accused of cherry picking his data. Why does he exclude the preceding 100 years of data.
4 - The only appropriate way to compare trends of data which is so noisy is to apply an appropriate statistical model to the data and then offset to a common starting point. Dr Evans doesn't do this.
Try doing #4 with your naked eye and hopefully not intoxicated brain. Then you'll see a pretty close resemblance between Dr Hansen's forecasts and Dr Evans' data.
Regarding #1, Dr Hansen's predictions of temperature rise are based upon nearly 100 years of data (as of 1988). The correlation of increase in atmospheric CO2 to increased global temperature is startling.
A graph from 1960 - 2005 comparing actual temperature to the models shows very good correlation:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen
The data also shows the "cold period" from 1989 - 1992 corresponding to Dr Evans' graph posted by Sketch.
So keep on ranting and raving about conspiracy theories "promoting" global warming and climate change. Swallow the global warming deniers' claims. Many of whom are funded by corporations and people with their own agenda (profit motive).
You'll have to explain your ignorance to your children and grand children in another few years.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
And now about the icebreakers stuck in the Antarctic ice pack. The ocean didn't freeze around them. The wind and currents drove a large area of pack ice into the wide gulf the survey ship was in. This was ice that had broken off the ice shelf. The existence and travel of that ice was certainly not a result of cooling temperatures.
I've seen wind driven ice that captured and destroyed a good sized fishing boat in Spitzbergen. The ice floes were driven several feet up onto the beach. A few days later it had all disappeared.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
OK Chief, good luck to your children. Accept the bad science and propaganda. It's your and their right.
Please post where anyone here counter to your opinion, ever stated as such. I never claimed anyone said anything counter to my "opinion" regarding the Antarctic ice.
Oh, and speaking of rampant generalizations. I haven't watched/listened to MSNBC in several months.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
Aww c'mon Chief. Because it's an interesting example of the facts being sometimes different than they first appear.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 9, 2014 - 08:03pm PT
|
While the focus is more on advocacy than on promoting specific legislation, Boxer said she believes members could help build momentum for bills on fuel economy, alternative fuels and energy efficiency. Boxer acknowledged that they "don't have the votes" for many of the measures they would like to see passed in the Senate right now, "but we're going to get them."
Yep, fuel economy, alternative fuels, and energy efficiency.
Go ahead The Chief, tell us why this isn't a good idea. Or better yet, quote one of your PhD kids.
|
|
anita514
Gym climber
Great White North
|
|
Another black paint cooooooooooooooooooozer.
racist.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!