Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
|
May 23, 2014 - 07:52pm PT
|
Your ridiculous attempt to drag this down to a personal conflict is just another strawman argument, in this case to obstruct looking at meaningful policy.
It's not about me or you or Al Gore. All of your or my personal efforts or imperfections do not make much difference compared to meaningful societal policy. I only just said that in my previous post. Say that California unilaterally switches from being the US leader at 33% green power target to 100% green power. It wouldn't make much difference if not followed by the rest of the US, Canada, etc., and later most of the rest of the world. And the only way to get such big change is top down policy such as a carbon tax, green incentives, and agreements on trade policy. Most people make individual decisions on fuel & power use based on economic cost, as was clearly demonstrated by the flat line in US gasoline use from about 1986 to 2007.
Overall I am quite uninterested in reviewing your past N000 posts, since they speak on the whole as a substantial body of work, leaving an impression that is far from baseless.
Also as I already said, denialism is not just about denying the science, it is also about denying and delaying for decades the value of any policy change.
But just a few examples:
A recent claim was that W. Antarctic melting is not caused by CC. (I'm not sure if we're supposed to think it's due to the winds of Moriah, the Grand Canyon, volcanoes, or Al Gore).
Next up was the denial of reduction in Arctic sea ice.
Then there are the countless claims that CC science is corrupted by money, when it is actually the denialists who are stuck in a corruption pit funded by alec, koch, cato, fossil fuels... And the similar claim that the military analysis that CC is happening is just corruption.
Another claim is that because we can't exactly predict the future, we should do nothing: "But then that is the premise of this entire CAGW issue. Gotta say that science is able to be, in control of a uncertain and changing climate"
That is just another fabricated from thin air RWTR (right wing talk radio) argument. Science says no such thing. Climatologists use various models, assumptions, and probabilities to predict the likely outcome of doing nothing vs the likely outcome of meaningful reductions in emissions.
And another wierd claim: because there were other climate changes before the industrial era, modern change is no different. It is natural and normal, not our fault, and it's fine no matter how much damage is done.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
May 23, 2014 - 08:02pm PT
|
and today's news regarding the Pentagon and Climate Change
WASHINGTON -- The House passed an amendment to the National Defense Authorization bill on Thursday that would bar the Department of Defense from using funds to assess climate change and its implications for national security.
The amendment, from Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va.), passed in what was nearly a party-line vote. Four Democrats voted for the amendment, and three Republicans voted against it. The bill aims to block the DOD from taking any significant action related to climate change or its potential consequences. It reads: Now that's about as stupid as it gets.
Tie the hands of the DOD because you're either an ignoramus or frightened into obeisance by the Koch-TeaParty-Looney bin complex.
Well Done, cowardly morons.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
May 23, 2014 - 08:07pm PT
|
The sooner all you easily persuaded dupes forget about all the dire warnings and alarmism the sooner the "percieved problems" will fade away with the changing weather and climate, Splater.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
May 23, 2014 - 08:11pm PT
|
A National Intelligence Assessment issued during the George W. Bush administration concluded that climate change poses a significant threat to national security. And just this week, Tom Ridge, who served as homeland security secretary under Bush, said that climate change is "a real serious problem," one that "would bring destruction and economic damage" if we ignore it.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 24, 2014 - 11:07am PT
|
Splater: It's not about me or you or Al Gore. All of your or my personal efforts or imperfections do not make much difference compared to meaningful societal policy.
The Chief: Hey Splater, where are you driving that C02 emitting vehicle of yours this long weekend in order to go... climbing?
Damn good point The Chief. You're getting sharper all the time.
But don't waste it now, get out there and study up for the GED while you're still fresh!
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
May 24, 2014 - 05:54pm PT
|
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 25, 2014 - 07:57pm PT
|
You know what I've learned in this thread?
I hate graphs.
DMT Don't blame ya. The copy/paste is way past comedy now.
But me, I still like a good graph. Here's one I sketched out today, after waking up with the thought that I'd done it wrong before. Will get round to explaining eventually, that's slightly dense, but now it's just for aesthetics.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
May 25, 2014 - 08:13pm PT
|
"All models are wrong, but some are useful."
 George E.P. Box
Box's famous quote seems an apt lead-in for me to mention NASA climate modeler Gavin Schmidt, who recorded this Ted talk. In 12 lively and nontechnical minutes he takes a shot at explaining what climate models are all about.
Worth watching, and if you do you'll already know more than many blowhards you hear making declarations about climate models.
[Click to View YouTube Video]
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
May 25, 2014 - 09:47pm PT
|
Sumner..thanks for the sound advice...
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 26, 2014 - 10:33am PT
|
The news ain't so good...
UN Plea for Urgent Climate Action: 'Time Is Running Out'
"If we are to preserve our planet for future generations, we need urgent action to curb new emissions of these heat trapping gases."
Edit: Even if you don't like graphs, this one is pretty interesting, a graph in motion!
[Click to View YouTube Video]
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
|
May 26, 2014 - 10:37pm PT
|
Meanwhile the Evil Chinese are moving forward
China plans to remove six million vehicles, that do not meet exhaust emission standards, by the end of the year as a way of improving air quality.
More than 300,000 vehicles will be decommissioned in the capital Beijing.
Recent findings from the state's environmental agency showed that 31% of the air pollution in Beijing comes from vehicle exhaust fumes.
Next year, the government plans to scrap up to five million vehicles from other regions.
The action plan, aimed at strengthening control on vehicle emissions, "will be a major agenda item for the country's energy savings, emissions reductions, and low-carbon development during the next two years". http://www.bbc.com/news/business-27583404
TGT
I figured you would come up with that "correlation" site. Right on cue. Fortunately it bears absolutely no relationship to global warming.
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
|
May 27, 2014 - 12:27am PT
|
Pro Climate Change researchers are now engaged in a debate
about whether their science is being crippled
by a compulsion to conform.
Obviously this pressure to reach a consensus casts huge
suspicion on any 'scientific claims of global warming
destroying humanity.
Most people believe it's a mild curiosity that no one should take alarm
about and no new taxes should be levied to fund more pro climate change
researchers who parrot one another about doomsday fraction of a degree
temperature changes.
Researchers are doubly damned when they support the suppression of
critical evidence in peer reviewed publications. No less is at stake
than the credibility of evidence for climate change and the growing
believe that pro climate change researchers are making it up to keep
their funding stream.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/climate-scientists-mixed-over-controversy-surrounding-respected-researcher-a-971033.html
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2014 - 01:52am PT
|
Spot on DAVE 729
Yes indeed, good to see The Chief endorses this, even though it's an opinion piece from a third-rate blog.
I know well The Chief's retort when I post opinion pieces, so it's good to see that his double standard is alive and well.
And BTW, The Chief, Syria has very little to do with climate change (in case you were wondering).
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2014 - 02:03am PT
|
I get it The Chief. You post some irrelevant thing about the Syrian war, but insist it is somehow linked to climate change.
Hahahaha, pretty funny how you thought we wouldn't notice; the two have nothing in common!
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2014 - 02:08am PT
|
Please try to stay on topic, The Chief. If you can.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2014 - 02:28am PT
|
You turn a blind eye to the realities that are going on all around you.
You have no idea what I focus on. Here, on the climate change thread, I focus on the topic of climate change. Even though you try to change that topic.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2014 - 10:20am PT
|
This is funny, considering your penchant for making one unsupported/unsupportable claim after another.
What's funny Sketch, is your constant badgering and incessant unfounded claims. You keep singing the same chorus, but the tune is out of key.
Please post up three unsupported claims on mine. Should be very easy after all, you say I make them one after the other.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2014 - 10:24am PT
|
Let's do all we can to preserve this planet for the future generations.
A picture of the modern day God at work:
This is a guy with kids? Do you not love them?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2014 - 11:11am PT
|
Three unfounded claims?
So while you say you "mostly" believe in science, your views of climate change are based on non-scientific opinion.
Unfounded?? No, I cited why I believed you views on AWG were based on non-scientific opinion. I said that I got my belief of your views from your posts.
Sketch, can you show us where you have shown support the scientific studies, instead of posting right-wing OpEds?
No, I didn't think so.
(1) I can cite numerous posts of yours where you purposely misrepresent what I've said. Don't make me go back and quote you, it won't show a positive reflection of your personality.
I'm gonna give you this one. As I stated in my long-winded post describing how I didn't what to write a bunch of "I-said/ You-said" dialog. Too time consuming. I knew you'd post this, even though I believe I showed how you misrepresent what I say. Such as in this post of yours I'm quoting now, where you bring up this point again:
(2) I got my views of your beliefs from your posts. Would you like me to quote some of your opinions? I don't have to go far back to see the cartoon you posted about the ice melting in Antarctica. If that 'toon doesn't represent your view, then why did you post it (it contained a lot of misinformation and wasn't really funny)?
Where is the unfounded claim Sketch? Perhaps you're unclear on the word you used, unfounded. You should look it up so that you can know what it is you're saying.
(3) The "reasonable study" you posted is a five-year old OpEd. By your own calculation, the US has spent $100B on climate change research in the time since that OpEd was published.
100% truth Sketch. Funny that you would bring this up, when it ended up with you posted an apology. Go back and see, you posted a five-year-old OpEd.
Look who is actually the one making unfounded claims. I asked for three, surely you can do better than to highlight how shady you are.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 27, 2014 - 11:19am PT
|
A fine example of the alarmist mentality.
A fine example of somebody who is unwilling take a position and actually state what it is they are trying to say.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!