Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
anticipating that Sketch will dodge this question in response to his question:
Are you saying it's too early to determine the accuracy of 1988 forecasts?
I'd ask him to define what he thinks "determining the accuracy of xxxx forecasts" actually means. It makes no sense to answer this question otherwise. There are relatively standard methods, but I'm not sure that Sketch is familiar with them.
My assumption is that instead of answering with a definition, he'll come back with some snarky response along the lines: "I'm not an expert, you're the expert, so you tell me..." but I don't really have any time for that... having done it in the past.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Look Eduardo, im not trying to convince you , deep inside your already skeptical. The minutia of physics and mathematics ,and its practitioner scientists, is what you are defending here. Sure, a lot of of us here are unqualified to judge the minutia of the bastardized, contorted, twisted, incomplete and erroneus combination of science used to prop up this failed CAGW theory, however, that is an advantage as we are free of the imperative to support this c*#k and therefore judge the evidence clearly.
Im at a family reunion on the nortern Oregon coast and have no shortage of relatives to laugh at and with as well as argue with. But do jabber on.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
Zzzzzzzz...tool. ^^^^^
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
^^^ ^^^denial from an anxious conformist
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
From Bruce's link,
“Thank God that the people of my district were smart enough not to be purchased,” Ms. Angel said. “When you have people with deep pockets like Tom Steyer coming in and trying to trash candidates, spending this kind of money, it’s a sad day for our democracy.”
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
The first order of business you'd think would be at least try to slow down the use of fossil fuels but as usual, the State Senate is dominated by hill billies, flag waving jar heads and hucksters, mostly all living in forest fire country east of I5 and nothing seems to sink in with that lot, especially giving a sh#t about some oysters. I mean only efette city slickers eat oysters eh?
Your big money boys wavin the green flag want to lower emissions by raising the price for oil and electricity and then build the new toxic shipping port up north by you(what did you think about that one, Canuck?). IF they were really "Green" wouldn't they not build ANOTHER Co2 spewing cargo ship port. Especially one designated for making money and tax revenue over land and construction revenues. But the "Cherry On The Sunday" is that they are pimping out the EXACT thing as to what they're trying to do away with!!!!!!!!!!
They want to sell more coal to China!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Could ya call that being a hypocrite?
It's all money/opinion driven politics man!
Here's an idea, how about move the oysters up north and do away with coal exports??
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
rick you're jumping the shark, man... you should refrain from interpreting what I am writing here.
I am convinced, from my reading of the scientific literature, that human activities are responsible for the climate change of the 20th and 21st century.
My reading of that literature also convinces me that the science, and the scientists doing that science, are credible. Nothing indicates that to me that there is some major conspiracy in place on either side of this issue. Businesses do what business do, and a business will often take what was once termed "a conservative view" of new findings in science, all the more so if it affects their product.
I also believe that the federal support for science, which was a consequence of the contribution of science to the US efforts in WWII, has been money well spent and returned an enormous amount back to the private and the public sectors, and has been a positive driving force internationally. For this particular topic, climate change, there is no discussion that I know of curtailing that funding, and there should not be, it represents a very important activity informing the future challenges that our nation, and the world, will likely deal with.
There are also many ongoing activities, nearly all funded at the federal level, directed at meeting those challenges.
Todays corporations have not taken advantage of the various categories of incorporation to be able to spend the funds required on R&D over the long term, where ROI is defined over a very long term, many decades, and justification to the share holders could be difficult to sustain. In many cases, this R&D might not be successful.
Werner von Braun was quoted as saying "basic research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing," engaging in risky behavior cannot be foreign to you... and as you know, such behavior can have important payoffs... the federal government engages in "risky behavior" that the private sector will not and can not participate in.
I'm typing this on a World Wide Web which is the product of government research in the most arcane and remote areas of human knowledge... and the electromagnetic signals are transmitted on a network first put in place by the federal government, and given to the private sector for their use and development.
Learning how to disagree, respectfully, is a lost art... in your case you may not have so much as "lost" it, but perhaps never had it in the first place.
There is much to discuss on the consequence of climate change and the implementation of policy that would be of value.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
dave729 posted "1350+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting (the convincing) Skeptic Arguments
Against ACC/AGW Alarmism. read them all here..."
(chosen example) Cooling of the Global Ocean Since 2003 (PDF) (Energy & Environment, Volume 20, Number 1-2, pp. 101-104, January 2009)
Craig Loehle
Here is your chosen example from all those "skeptic" papers - A 2009 post from Craig Loehle
"Hansen's theory that CO2 forcing is hiding in the oceans can't be true if the oceans are cooling, as my latest paper shows (Energy & Environment Vol. 20, No. 1&2, 2009). "
A minor paper which was picked up by all of the Denialist blogs/websites, despite later data and findings that supports the opposite conclusion..
Cooling of the global ocean since 2003 By Craig Loehle, Ph.D. National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI)
ABSTRACT
"Ocean heat content data from 2003 to 2008 (4.5 years) were evaluated for trend. A trend plus periodic (annual cycle) model fit with R2 = 0.85. The linear component of the model showed a trend of -0.35 (~0.2) x 10[e]22 Joules per year. The result is consistent with other data showing a lack of warming over the past few years"
In the first place 4.5 years is a tiny cherry-picked time period. The primary question you might ask is what has happened in the longer term.
Did you miss the all the 2013 evidence of ocean warming? It seems Craig Loehle did not miss it, as he does not seem to be posting on that subject anymore. Do you even know what cherry-picking means?
RISING ocean heat content:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/indicators/oceans/ocean-heat.html
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/09/what-ocean-heating-reveals-about-global-warming/
http://www.skepticalscience.com/print.php?n=453
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=311982
A good place to check when you read something that claims to debunk climate change:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
RISING sea level data (caused by temperature and melting, a good delayed indicator of WARMING)
http://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/sod/lsa/SeaLevelRise/LSA_SLR_timeseries_global.php
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/indicators/oceans/sea-level.html
http://nsidc.org/cryosphere/sotc/sea_level.html
Those plots do not even include future predictions, which are much higher.
Global warming:
http://skepticalscience.com/gwpf-lewis-crock-climate-sensitivity-optimism-ill-founded.html
You might also look at the NCASI overall view on climate change.
The first words on their climate webpage are the opposite of denialism:
" The potential implications of the climate change issue to the forest products industry are more complex than for any other industry."
http://www.ncasi.org/Programs/Climate-Change/Index.aspx
|
|
sandstone conglomerate
climber
sharon conglomerate central
|
|
You're very welcome. It matches the forum drama that plays out endlessly on here, lol. Who can get the last word?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 5, 2014 - 08:37pm PT
|
This thread hasn't had a good insult in a while. Here's one I just saw, and I couldn't wait to wing it at somebody.
Either you're a troll, or a few fried peanut butter and banana sandwiches shy of picnic.
If the shoe fits, wear it!
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Says Ed, " my reading of the science and scientists convinces me that it is credible". My god man, are you now saying you are as duped as my more progressive relatives that I argued ideology with over the last several days? What ever happened to "the anthropogenic signal is rather feeble compared to the range of natural variability"? Are you so constrained by the Elizabeth Warren type Internalized propaganda (you didn't build that, the commune did it) that you are now stuck on the CO2 control knob even after CAGW's numerous inconsistencies between observations and model projections?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 5, 2014 - 09:00pm PT
|
My god man, are you now saying you are as duped as my more progressive relatives that I argued ideology with over the last several days?
Bingo!
Looks like we have a winner.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Agreement with El Bruceo? Hell will freeze over before....
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
No, let's go ahead and name it. Bruce and compatriots are under the influence of the "consensus, the "settled science", the "climate authoritarians".
As with any deception, those seeking to "pull the wool over" , project their deficiencies and tactics onto the opposing camp.
I wonder if the gas release during a great subduction zone quake is orders of magnitude more significant than industries intentional and unintentional release. Has there been any studies of industries extraction of high pressure gas alleviating natural release?
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
Catastropharian predictions shown to be wrong again for their global warming hypothesis. Seeing a trend.
Scientifically valid peer reviewed papers confirm global warming is a crock
and taxing energy to reduce CO2 is simply crazy because it will have zero
effect on climate but will kill the economy.
BOMBSHELL: (Peer reviewed) study shows greenhouse gas induced warming
dropped for the past 14 years. Data used in the analysis were
obtained from the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program (ARM) sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy
Journal of Climate
http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/2011JCLI4210.1
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 6, 2014 - 02:14pm PT
|
The first story starts of with:
An analysis of temperature data since 1500 all but rules out the possibility that global warming in the industrial era is just a natural fluctuation in the earth's climate, according to a new study by McGill University physics professor Shaun Lovejoy.
Just a natural fluctuation in the Earth's climate?
Ho man ...
See what we have to deal with here?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Craig Loehle
Let us know!