Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
justin01
Trad climber
sacramento
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 02:10am PT
|
I am not here to state that all statistical models of global warming are bunk...To say that would require some serious graduate degrees in a science I am not <b> that </b> interested in.
Nor am I saying that those who propose that fossil fuels consumption is of no consequence to the environment are correct. They have an equally shaky ground to stand on.
The fact is that CO2 is a green house gas. But what is not well understood is how the globe balances an increase in CO2. Water vapor formation is a clear and obvious mitigating factor. Solar radiation is another. The planet is complicated more complicated than subject of hard or soft science, and it is well advised not to screw it up. But one must balance that with progress and the need to better the lives of those who do not have the luxury of preservation.
I linked the article, because I have a bone to pick with the doomsdayers of the AGW believers. They are not as smart or complete in knowledge as they claim to be.
Surely you can agree to that. They are hucksters of the doomsday cult.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 02:46am PT
|
Surely you can agree to that. They are hucksters of the doomsday cult.
Many of the social scientists -- including some real scientists who hold forth on economic issues -- that have latched on to climate change as a vehicle to drive their political and social agendas are, indeed, hucksters. Not so most of the scientific work. While I'm sure there's some, as there is in any discipline, I haven't found them.
While I have only undergraduate courses in physical sciences, I have enough graduate courses in statistics (as well as decades of experience) to tell good statistics from bad. There are also plenty of people on this forum (Chiloe and Ed H come to mind) who will gladly steer those with a healthy skepticism to objective sources of information in areas where they have doubts.
John
|
|
Lennox
climber
just southwest of the center of the universe
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 03:01am PT
|
justin01,
You make it hard to not "ad hominum" (sic) you.
Your last post starts out fairly sensibly, but, by your own admission, you have come to this site without reading the hundreds of posts by DrDeeg, Chiloe, Ed Hartouni, et al--I have no idea what "research" you have investigated (DrDeeg is a climate researcher by the way, and many others have delved deeply into the available research)--and you insultingly state that those who are trying to raise awareness and seek solutions are "hucksters of the doomsday cult."
So maybe you're confused by the overwhelming evidence and have decided that skepticism is a more dignified stance than befuddlement, or maybe you are a corporate shill--I have a tailpipe you can suck on while you decide, but I can't readily measure your CO levels in my ER without the lab's analysis (CO2 and O2 sats, BP, HR, RR, and heart rhythm yes), but from what you've written I would take it that you wouldn't want us to pull you off the pipe or make any efforts to revive you anyway unless you were actually asystole or maybe even starting to decompose a bit.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 11:47am PT
|
furthermore I have a harder time quantifying man's contributions to things that are unquantifiable. I am not saying we do not play a part. Nor am I saying global warming is not happening, I just think the doomsdayers are without a scientific leg to stand on.
Of course it's all modeling and statistics. Meteorologists often screw up the forecast for the next week, nevermind the next couple decades of climate. But IMO in all likelihood we are changing the climate to some degree. You know where the greenhouse gas idea comes from right? Venus. When we change the amount of co2 by a significant degree of course we'll see a change. We see evidence of it already. So we should do what we can to reduce our impacts without significantly impacting our lifestyles. The people who sow doubt are the people who stand to lose money (e.g Exxon paying the same PR firm who sowed doubt about cigarettes causing cancer) and then the bone head puppets (right wingers) who buy into their B.S. Are there some hucksters who make money trying to stop global warming? Sure but it is a FRACTION of the money from the denial crowd.
And with regards to doomsayers. It's just like Camping and his rapture. Christians say "camping doesn't represent us, he's way out there, he makes Christians looks crazy". Most people concerned with global warming are saying it's an economic issue, deal with it now with better efficiency, reduced emissions, etc. or deal with it later at a much higher cost, e.g. flooding, storms, crop damage, etc. But of course the right wing will find the crazy left wingers who talk of the end of the earth. The earth will be here no matter what, what global warming is really about is keeping the climate good for HUMANS.
Maybe thousands of years from now how we live will effect the survival of our descendants, but that's not really the issue. Most people concerned with global warming are talking about the economic future of our children and grandchildren.
|
|
justin01
Trad climber
sacramento
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 11:56am PT
|
I love this bit...
So maybe you're confused by the overwhelming evidence and have decided that skepticism is a more dignified stance than befuddlement, or maybe you are a corporate shill--I have a tailpipe you can suck on while you decide, but I can't readily measure your CO levels in my ER without the lab's analysis (CO2 and O2 sats, BP, HR, RR, and heart rhythm yes), but from what you've written I would take it that you wouldn't want us to pull you off the pipe or make any efforts to revive you anyway unless you were actually asystole or maybe even starting to decompose a bit.
The last bit is classic, particularly the corporate shill bit. Yup, everyone who disagrees with you is either stupid or paid off by the oil industry. You then go into a bizarre type scenario with me dying and you not helping me. Very classic.
For the record, I have never worked in any energy sector, green or otherwise.
I am sorry for the disturbance.
|
|
justin01
Trad climber
sacramento
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 12:30pm PT
|
Ed, I appreciate your response, and I guess I knew I would be stirring the pot. I just thought it would provide some interesting perspective, even if people dismissed it out of hand. That is fine. Maybe it would temper people from making wild claims.
I think I would probably agree with many of your studies regarding climate change. Admittedly, I have not read much on the subject in the last year, and so am probably missing some great new findings. To put it as stupid simple as I can. I too expect a changing climate to change stuff.
My resentment is born from this kind of journalism. A piece this morning in the Washington post is a great example.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-link-between-climate-change-and-joplin-tornadoes-never/2011/05/23/AFrVC49G_story.html
There is little we know about the anthropomorphic causative link regarding many if not all of the manifestations of global climate change stated in this article. (Is this a true statement?)
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 03:19pm PT
|
Are Global Warming believers and Doomsday adherents demonstrating the same
common human trait?
http://www.ourcuriousworld.com/WhyWeBelieve.htm
...
But that doesn't entirely answer the question as to why intelligent men and
woman—many often holding PhDs—are so quick to accept the most outrageous
claims as a matter of course and hold to them with such tenacity. It seems
that common sense would quickly expose the fallacious nature of most
doomsday claims and limit their adherents to only the most fringe elements
of society, but we often see it evident within large segments of mainstream
America as well. How can this be?
...
...tendency to conform to "group think"...
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 04:04pm PT
|
FortMental - You Warmists and the Doomsday folk are 2 sides of the same coin.
Your ilk believe in a future climate doomsday but claim to be able to stop
it if only you have enough of our money
while the other side readily accepts doom without any thought of stopping it.
fyi
dooms·day/ˈdo͞omzˌdā/Noun
1. The last day of the world's existence.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 06:12pm PT
|
The money 'is' whats its all about.
The smirking media hype and then the failure of Doomsday to happen last Saturday brought to our attention those who believe in such predictions.
Climate Change Global Warming Doomsday Prediction Believers are definitely several magnitudes more annoying than the religious end of the world types because they want to fight to keep it from happening by Carbon taxing the money out of our pockets to develop energy sources that will save the world.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 06:20pm PT
|
Okay KKKorniss...whatever you say.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
May 24, 2011 - 11:52pm PT
|
Dr F - did you just confuse typical tornado weather with climate?
This link will help you.
NOAA – No link between tornadoes and global warming!
A top official at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) rejected claims by environmental activists that the outbreak of tornadoes ravaging the American South is related to climate change brought on by global warming.
http://co2insanity.com/2011/04/28/noaa-no-link-between-tornadoes-and-global-warming/
|
|
Lennox
climber
just southwest of the center of the universe
|
|
|
May 25, 2011 - 11:24am PT
|
My choice is as Lao Tzu recommended well over 6k years ago. And those rec's counter everything that modern day science dictates.
You're a few thousand years off. He lived about 2500 years ago, give or take a century.
And he reputedly said, "Do the difficult things while they are easy and do the great things while they are small."
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
May 25, 2011 - 12:50pm PT
|
6,000 years ago, humans used to keep dozens of human effigies in various parts of their huts... ancestors whose "voices" were still heard and that required talking to
And 4000 years ago (give or take a few hundred years)the value of the sqrt of 2 was known to 5 decimal places and there were tables of pythagorean triples to <4000.
The laws of physics, and economics are imutable.
Human nature and intelectual capacity if they change do so on such time scales as to make them practicaly as invariant.
That's the failure of the "progressive" view of human nature.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
May 25, 2011 - 01:07pm PT
|
Ed - your idea that human behavior needs to be modified to prevent climate
change is so similar to religious teachings of 'don't make the gods angry or
the crops will fail, or the hunt will be unsuccessful, or sickness will
be your doom is just amazing.
And while we're behaving correctly the priest needs money to support
himself while doing all this hard work for us, so hand over the cash.
Right.
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
May 25, 2011 - 01:23pm PT
|
The Chief: Can you clarify something for me? In reading your posts here, I think you are saying that while it is possible that the earth is currently undergoing a period of warming, that past human activity is not part of the cause, and that present and future human activity can not change the outcome.
You also seem to be saying (as does Corniss Chopper) that those who say human activity has been part of the cause of the warming (if there even is any warming) are either charlatans trying to trick people into giving them money, or conspirators using the false bogeyman of "global warming" as one more step toward ending the American ideal and imposing a new world order. Is that about right?
The reason I ask is that your voice is often very angry, and it's hard to separate what you're really trying to say from the way in which you're saying it.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
May 25, 2011 - 01:28pm PT
|
Dr F - We think that you Warmists will falsely claim to have saved the planet from a climate doomsday when nothing was going to happen anyway.
The suspicion that you guys are scamming is surely understandable because you're acting just like grifters.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
|
May 25, 2011 - 01:41pm PT
|
Dr F - but your spokesmen (priests?) are not leading by example.
That says 'scam' to the rest of us.
example- Al Gore buys a nice ocean front CA villa when he could have invested
the money into green energy research.
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
May 25, 2011 - 02:07pm PT
|
My voice is rather a concerned one and pretty much agrees with exactly what CC posted last.
It is the same old story. Just another venue to promote it.
Like most of us here on ST, and indeed most of us in the world, I'm not a climate scientist. So, I can't point to the math, or the observations, or the labwork, and say "This is wrong." Or "This is right." Or "No, you can't logically reach that conclusion from this data."
But looking at the past few hundred years, I don't see any grounds for saying that because I can't personally verify what a group of scientists are saying that it is therefor nonsense and that they're either quacks or NWO conspirators.
That, after all, is what most of the world said about the scientists who proposed the idiotic idea that disease could be caused by -- get this -- creatures so tiny that they were invisible. What a bunch of idiots, right? Disease was just part of Mother Nature's grand plan, and the only thing crazier than saying that our human activities (crowding into cities, shitting in our water supplies, etc) could cause an increase in disease, was saying that by modifying our behavior we could prevent future disease.
Crazy huh? Why, anyone who would believe that would probably also believe that everything is made up of particles even tinier than those crazy "germs" and that through human activity we could actually alter the movement of those particles and generate light and heat.
You'd have to be really gullible to believe something like that!
Which brings us round to the current debate about the causes of global warming, and whether anything we do can alter the future climate.
You say it's all horseshit or hucksterism. Or worse, some kind of conspiracy. But where is your evidence? The scientific community has boatloads of evidence. Have you examined it? Can you show where it is wrong?
Maybe you're right. Maybe this is either an honest mistake on the part of many thousands of scientists worldwide, or a dishonest and immoral conspiracy on the part of those scientists and their evil but unidentified puppet masters. But I'd sure like to see your evidence.
You may also be right that there is nothing we can do to prevent whatever climatic disaster is now looming. But we'd sure be idiots not to try.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - May 25, 2011 - 02:19pm PT
|
Ed - your idea that human behavior needs to be modified to prevent climate change is so similar to religious teachings of don't make the gods angry or the crops will fail ...
Gosh, if I weren't as smart as I am, I might fall for this incredibly inane argument. However, last time I checked, there was no scientific proof that Gods got angry. How about it CC, got proof of Gods, or their beliefs?
On the other hand, read what real live scientists say about Global Warming and how our human actions are effecting the change.
Don't believe in science?? Odd, you're using a computer to communicate. Without science, you'd be using a pencil and paper.
If ignorance is bliss, there are a LOT of blissful folks who deny obvious facts.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!