Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 06:49am PT
|
Rick is interesting only as a study in stubborn ignorance, but then again that is the title of this thread.
So tell us Rick, in the 3.5 years you have posted 1600 times about climate, have you learned anything about the subject besides the profoundness of your own denying voice? Is denialism justified when scientists aren't all as nice to you as your 2nd grade teacher? How should it be packaged to make a pleasing breitbart trumpet?
Climate science deniers aren't here to learn anything. Trying to convince diehard climate science deniers to change their mind, or to even consider other possibilities, is no different than arguing with them about religion. Their minds are made up, facts have absolutely no place and you're an elitist if you think that your science should carry more weight than their simple opinions.
Curt
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 06:55am PT
|
You're a smart guy Curt. What do you think needs to be done?
( besides arguing over the cause, which has been well established )
|
|
divad
Trad climber
wmass
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 07:44am PT
|
It isn't being caused by humans therfore humans can't affect it
There are 7.4 billion humans on the planet using fire and burning fossil fuels. What possible effect could that have?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 07:52am PT
|
You know better than claiming 93% of CO2 emissions are man made Ed. Perhaps a high percentage of the recent rise in atmospheric content, but a tiny percentage of the whole of emissions. Get more precise, my gosh your a scientist.
As far as the Cloud experiment not establishing causation between increased cloudiness and increased GCR, Jasper Kirkby (the head of the experiment) begs to differ. Even the opponents of causation admitted a marked increase in cloud nuclei.
It is well established that the alphabet soup of pro hysteria government agencies pushing the myth of unprecedented recent temp rise accomplished this propaganda tool via through the magic of cooling the past climatic data and cherry picking the current data points such as UHI, relying on ship intakes rather than buoys if the temp difference is beneficial to the cause, and finally the grandaddy of all trickery-infilling- most famously Cowan and Way.
One only has to take into account the modern increase in OLR as compared to the exceedingly modest GAT to realize there are moderating negative feedbacks preventing a runaway greenhouse scenario.
Give it up freaks, embrace reality and stumble your way into this new age.
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 08:36am PT
|
You know better than claiming 93% of CO2 emissions are man made Ed.
Ed actually said:
1) it looks like 96% of the CO2 going into the atmosphere is from natural sources.
and
2) When you add it all up, a net effect of increasing CO2 is due to humans, without the additional human contribution the system would be in equilibrium.
Is that really that hard to understand?
Curt
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 08:48am PT
|
The CLOUD experiment has made many very interesting findings, but the connection to the galactic cosmic rays (GCRs) is not one of them, what they found regarding that topic was the effect is negligible.
Given Kirkby's original opinion that CLOUD would prove the connection between cloud cover and GCRs, the findings of the experiment have done just the opposite. While there is more to learn, it is doubtful that this is a major effect. The contribution to cloud formation physics is important, and especially in terms of aerosols and their role in drop nucleation.
The words I quoted above come from the CERN press release, which I linked. You can also look for news items in the scientific press:
e.g.
http://www.nature.com/news/cloud-seeding-surprise-could-improve-climate-predictions-1.19971
If you care to look around, you can find speculations from 2011 made by Kirkby that by now we'd be two years into a "Little Ice Age" induced by a Maunder Minimum... with plunging temperatures and all that... seems not to have happened.
Jasper should stick to the experimental findings of his experiment, which are providing good information for modeling cloud formation needed in the climate models.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 09:20am PT
|
BraveCowboy said: Do you understand that China and other countries will happily continue funding research and supplant our position
So when are China and India actually going to actively implement measures to combat global
warming? They merrily sign all manner of accords but then they more merrily continue
polluting like there's no tomorrow. Is there a catalytic converter in one car in China? Yes,
on imported ones. And the gasoline they produce there is refined only one step past diesel.
|
|
thebravecowboy
climber
The Good Places
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 09:49am PT
|
Reilly, I was responding to Rick's gleeful talk about defunding scientific research in the USA. Antiscientism is a serious problem: I myself have serious concerns about subjectivity in research. But to cease public funding of scientific research is absolutely ridiculous.
I agree that China and India are totally beating us in the race to the bottom re consumption, pollution, etc.
|
|
skcreidc
Social climber
SD, CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 10:47am PT
|
Malemute, good try to put it into terms anyone can understand.
How about this. Think of it like compound interest, where the yearly interest gained is generally a small amount of your total investment value. But over those 20 or 30 years, boy does it add up.
Edit; to clarify this gross analogy, consider the total CO2 emitted each year like the total capitol investment at years end. The amount gained in interest each year would be like the amount of anthropogenic CO2 added to the CO2 cycle each year.
|
|
Fossil climber
Trad climber
Atlin, B. C.
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 11:27am PT
|
Only a very few on this forum are qualified to make a reasonably informed judgement on the causes of global warming and the effects of anthropogenic CO2. You see a few competent scientists here, but a helluva lot of miscellaneous anecdotal material from either side which, like any such “evidence”, proves nothing and is the weapon of the emotional, who become more strident as they defend a position they can’t prove.
And some who can claim to be scientists may not have any training or expertise in this particular field, so a claim to be a scientist does not necessarily carry a great deal of weight.
There are indeed some in the scientific community who cast doubt on the causes of climate change, but the conclusions of 98% - plus or minus - of worldwide climate scientists must not be lightly dismissed.
I feel that a more accurate means of understanding the conflict is to “Follow the Money”. Who is likely to benefit from a particular position? And here we find that - in general, and not unanimously - Republicans strongly tend to be deniers, in line with the money-oriented attitude and policies of the party. And Democrats - the party of social equality - tend to recognize climate change as at least partially anthropogenic; that part, added to any normal cycle, pushing us inexorably toward increasingly dangerous climatic conditions and social unrest.
This statement will of course be strongly contested with anecdotal material, but in general will be found to be true.
In this, as in so many arguments, “Follow the Money”!
|
|
McHale's Navy
Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 11:56am PT
|
Nevertheless, there are many facts that can help dispel myths about climate change. We often hear that volcanoes are causing most of the CO2. Well, it's a fact, that on a year to year basis, humans put out 130 times the amount volcanoes do. It's a fact.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 12:22pm PT
|
Nevertheless, there are many facts that can help dispel myths about climate change.
And then there's the over-the-top rhetoric, which hurts the cause.
Harold Wanless:
We should be planning for a minimum 6.6 foot sea level rise by 2100.
The reality will probably be 10 to 30 feet.
|
|
McHale's Navy
Trad climber
From Panorama City, CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 01:11pm PT
|
And then there's the over-the-top rhetoric, which hurts the cause.
Are you worried about the cause EdwardT? Wanless admits he is a bit of an outlier with his 10 to 30 foot prediction. He says that in a Vanity Fair article if you are interested.
Also, I was wondering if you accept the less radical 6 foot projections.
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 03:09pm PT
|
It is well established that the alphabet soup of pro hysteria government agencies pushing the myth of unprecedented recent temp rise accomplished this propaganda tool via through the magic of cooling the past climatic data and cherry picking the current data points such as UHI, relying on ship intakes rather than buoys if the temp difference is beneficial to the cause, and finally the grandaddy of all trickery-infilling- most famously Cowan and Way. Quite a thoughtful reply. I feel better already.
Did Jody give up trying to persuade us that the earth in flat?
To answer the OP's question, people are lazy, in denial or believe there's nothing they can do as individuals when all the world's governments seem content to stand by and hope for the best. When the sh#t hits the fan, I'm sure Rick and Jody will blame Obama.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 03:19pm PT
|
I'll tell you gents; I ain't too concerned with the climate since the 52f temps are perfect here and the cragging incredible.
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 03:49pm PT
|
^^^
I like this response much better. Thanks Rick.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2016 - 04:53pm PT
|
So when are China and India actually going to actively implement measures to combat global
warming? They merrily sign all manner of accords but then they more merrily continue
polluting like there's no tomorrow. Is there a catalytic converter in one car in China? Yes,
on imported ones. And the gasoline they produce there is refined only one step past diesel.
China actually is doing a lot. Given the next POTUS, I actually think China is going to be more of leader than the US.
China's top echelon actually has a lot of engineers in it. (Engineering was seen as a key part of the "Great way Forward".) They are facing huge public pressure from bad air quality. No, it isn't a democracy but the elites are scared of public demonstrations getting out of hand. Plus, the elites are breathing/living in foul air in Beijing also. They are leading the world with solar plant installations and have big plans for nuclear power (will have to see how that one plays out). They are building a lot of coal plants but at the same time they are retiring older, dirtier, less efficient ones.
They have huge concerns over water scarcity and realize that climate change is going to make that much worse for them. Sea level rise is also a really big deal for some of their coastal, large population areas.
Which isn't to say that China has a Scandinavian attitude and infrastructure, they don't. For starters, they are far poorer per capital. And the rapid increase in car ownership is discouraging. But I am actually pretty hopeful about China as regards climate change.
India, not so much.
Even if legislation is passed (dubious), the central government is too weak to enforce anything.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
long heating rise time of oceans,
Let us know!