Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
Chief, it's easy enough to find for yourself. I know you've already seen it. Ninetyfive percent of the people reading this post have seen the overlays. I know you're not that stupid; you just like the bluster of the role you've chosen on this thread.
Take a deep breath, close your eyes.....now open your mind and your heart. See, it's not that hard and it feels good....
I do stand by the position and am returning to real life now. Please carry on.
Oh, and Chief, when I said make your case for the causation, I was referring to everyone. We're past the presence of increasing global temperature. The useful direction for this thread at this point in time is to talk about what the vectors are for the phenomenon and what to do about it. There is some really acute and productive research being done that is challenging a lot of the status quo about what we have believed. Who would have thought that planting trees might actually increase temps through the increased release of volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) into the atmosphere?
Thats where this thread could get on track and be useful. At this point in time it's mostly a big circle jerk. Some rational and civil discourse could go somewhere. To illuminate gives you more street cred than to obfuscate.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
I would never drive a Land Rover! I love my Landcruiser, though. Always enjoy having a reason to use it. But, most of the time it's waiting in the driveway dreaming about mountains and rivers.
This is the car I drive most of the time (~90%), including trips that don't require the Landcruiser.
2004 Volkswagen Jetta TDI 5 speed
Wonderful car, got the manual for better mileage, get 50mpg when driven well. Solid, dependable, has 180,000 miles on it. Plan to drive it for 500,000 or more. Burn biodiesel when I can get it. The Jetta diesel is more sound environmentally than electric or hybrid cars (rare earth metals are an incredibly dirty resource to use and, well, limited; not a big picture answer). It is more sound environmentally to maintain an existing car than buy a new one (the Landcruiser is a 1983 with a newer engine, but the heavy rig only gets 20mpg). I like keeping a car as long as possible because it's less energy and material consumptive than to buy new ones regularly; check into how much is used to make a car, it's mind boggling!
Moving to Ashland, Oregon soon. Building a 1,200 sq ft home passive solar, basement for temp maintenance, garden, the Rogue Valley can provide locavore diet (less consumptive to resources), use tap water or ceramic filtered rather than bottled (wastes plastic, ends up in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch) or RO (wastes water), town structure allows you to walk or bike to everything, I'll only have to get in the car if I'm going out of town, location allows for travel/vacation independent of air travel (the biggest single energy consumer for many people). So, yeah, I've given thought to my footprint.
But, your question wasn't so much the point as to be contrary, confrontational, and put yourself one up. Play differently, it makes more friends.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
Go on Sketch, I'm all ears! ;-)
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
Chief, the older land rovers and landcruisers both get crappy mileage., somewhere around 12-14 mpg. With the newer engine, I get about 19. Still crappy. Yes, the new land rovers get 18/23 and the new Landcruiser gets 13/18.
Yeah, the Rogue Valley area is amazing. Are you a raft?
Curious about your comment about doing the low footprint path for a different reason than mine. Cool that you're doing it. So why are you doing it?
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Bruce Kay says -- "Lets assume ..."
hahaha
The life of Brucey
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
I guess my point in posting that particular abstract was to demonstrate that you would assume it was making a point about climate change and attack it, without having read it or otherwise know anything about it....
that was one of my points. Another point, perhaps the main point, is that you assertion that "all this has happened before" is based on either your grand inference or on the science that has been done to investigate past climate.
You can have an opinion, right or wrong, but when your point is based on the paleoclimate reconstructions I'd rather hear the experts ideas on interpretation. Their ideas drive the science and are the basis of additional studies. You opinions have a sameness that is predictable.
Once again, we can consider our actions and the affect on the climate, where we have identified those affects we can ask ourselves if our actions are worth it. We are aware of our influence on the climate, we can also find ways to alter our activities so that they do not affect climate change.
That is what is different from 10 million years ago, or earlier: we know.
by the way, the paper states clearly:
"ENSO [El Niño–Southern Oscillation] reconstructions indicate that the 20th century was highly variable in the context of the past centuries (18–20) or even millennia (21), which could explain, at least in part, rising variance in the CCWI [California Current Winter Index]. Linkages between anthropogenic climate change and rising ENSO variability remain unclear, and models of future ENSO behavior have not yet reached consensus (22). Thus, CC [California Current] winter climate trends cannot be easily attributed or forecast. However, the importance of these patterns is clear in the CC and adjacent forests, with implications for biological processes beyond those examined here. For example, rising variance in average cool-season precipitation probably hastened the recent extinction of two checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis ) populations in the San Francisco Bay Area (23). Moreover, blocking high pressure (strong NPH [North Pacific High]) and associated drought, snowpack deficits, low river flows, and elevated wildfire risks in early 2013 and now 2014, illustrate the importance of winter climate to agriculture, ecosystems, water security, and even hydroelectric power generation in central and southern California, a region where freshwater resources are currently overallocated, so that any reductions in rainfall cause conflict over this valuable resource."
maybe you made the wrong assumption...
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Eddy, there's been little science emerging from this religion of yours for quite some time. What little legitamacy it retains emerges from studies identifying natural causation. The very science your biased mind dismisses.
Brucey, stir the cornfkakes and watch out for the worm.
Any predictions for this winters NH weather from you geniuses?
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
"Not just the continued assumed correlated reconstructions, rhetoric or conjectures from the CC Science community."
"Eddy, there's been little science emerging from this religion of yours for quite some time. What little legitamacy it retains emerges from studies identifying natural causation. The very science your biased mind dismisses."
Except that I actually read the scientific literature on the topic, and I don't agree that the work of the community can be so casually dismissed (as they are in the latest two posts to this thread from The Chief and rick). This is especially the case when neither The Chief or rick could even understand the papers. In large part, they decide on who to trust, they cannot decide themselves on the science content of any of the research. This is evidenced time and again when one actually reads the papers they will put up which they feel are counter-arguments...
One can construct a "conspiracy theory" on anything, it is not so hard to do, but the ability of constructing such a theory does not make it true. It is something we scientists know about, and why the theories and hypotheses are tested against observation and experiment. And right now, the entire field of climate science is exploring the consequences of human activity and the role it plays on climate change.
Given that human activity is considered a major factor in climate change begs the question of what we should do about it. Unlike other periods of Earth history, our actions can influence climate change. We can make a choice. That is what is different from the past.
We can continue to do what we are doing, but we cannot deny that what we are doing is affecting major changes in the climate.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
Except that I actually read the scientific literature on the topic, and I don't agree that the work of the community can be so casually dismissed (as they are in the latest two posts to this thread from The Chief and rick). This is especially the case when neither The Chief or rick could even understand the papers.
Here, here. It's hard to see any credibility to arguments about science by people who don't get how science works.
The idea that scientists of different disciplines and peer-review journals around the world are involved in a conspiracy to fabricate a human activity modified climate change hoax is the height of delusional folly and proves a minimal understanding of science.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
Then why haven't you? What are you and the rest here waiting for?
I have, and many here have also...
and it is also, at least in part, the subject of my current research (energy sources) by choice...
...because it is important.
By my accounting, my CO2 emission profile is at the per capita World value (not the US value)... and I'm looking for ways to reduce it further. By choice...
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
Chief, yeah, it is painfully obvious that you don't know how the scientific process works. You treat it as if it's a method for making sh#t up and publishing it. Doesn't work that way. Peer-review will rip your throat out. You gotta have your sh#t together - data collection and analysis has to be on it or your peers will ridicule your out of the profession.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
my net CO2 emission is low, how I get there is a matter of tradeoffs (including using ride sharing and public transit).
sounds like you're the one who wants to specify just how the CO2 gets reduced... typical for someone with your background.
as for the "evidence," perhaps you'd like to specify first just what you're looking for, as we've been over this many times before and apparently you're not very receptive (also understandable given your limited science and math skills) to the science.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Thats right Ed, i can't understand this religion you keep presenting as science other than as a criminal enterprise whereby the totalitarian leaning statists smell money and control and the legions of non science scientists have got the "religion" or else loose the gravy train funding. What I really don't understand is those scientists not dependent on climate scam bucks being duped into supporting this wicked false consensus. Doesn't make any sense other than maybe they fear the backlash to all science and funding if this scam is to catastrophically collapse. The papers themselves are easily understood as, by and large, either highly technical contortions buttressing a body of theory that is falsified outside the confines of the laboratory in the still little understood atmosphere, or papers on aspects of the climate, or anything that could possibly be affected by it, with just the required minimum of AGW scam homage like "consistent with" .
Now back to installing my cabinets.
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
Please do not feed the trolls.
It only brings the thread down to their level.
If they didn't gain any understanding after the first 99 times, it is not worth another try.
It's like talking to a Turing test robot.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Cave Creek, AZ
|
|
Rick, are you OK?
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
rick do you ever read your stuff out loud when you're alone. just to hear yourself write?
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
LOL ....^^^^^^
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
I can name many Bruce. James, John, Larry, Peter, Naomi, Tom, Dick, Harry and etc. etc. as nauseum.
Why read it myself Wade? I put it up here to assault these guys senses, not my own.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
How do you know your even alive Bruce, I mean other than counting the empty booze bottles whenever you rise in the morning or afternoon?
You can call it lack of evidence, falsified predictives, the panic of moving past the failed theory to institute consensus controls and taxes. Hell you can even call it intoooition, I don't care, nor do I care to see my family travel down your desired road to ruin.
Im sorry to hear you long ago lost your wife, but im still intolerant of your position enough to call you as#@&%e.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!