Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
Ed - you've made lots of wrong assumptions there. Can we suppose your failure was induced by climate change?
-------------------------------
But how about some good news for a change:
CEO: “The market for carbon capture and storage is dead”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/04/ceo-the-market-for-carbon-capture-and-storage-is-dead/
The Norwegian company Aker Clean Carbon may be closed. Its value is set
to zero. The market for carbon capture and storage is dead according to
their CEO.
...important news especially damaging for the Norwegian politicians and
believers in carbon capture and storage because Norway has put itself as
the avant-garde of this totally useless technology and spent untold
billions of dollars on it...
So now they have to guard the well heads of these underground CO2 reservoirs forever against the risk of a blowout that would kill everyone down wind by CO2 asphyxiation. Ok maybe not good news unless you're a security guard in Norway..
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
Lots of wrong assumptions...Cornice is literate...!
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
Bruce Kay - The strange people the president surrounds himself with tells us a lot.
John P. Holdren, Barack Obama's top science advisor, co-authored a
textbook entitled "Ecoscience" back in 1977 in which he actually
advocated mass sterilization, compulsory abortion, a one world government
and a global police force to enforce population control.
source for that and this:
“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control
laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be
sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became
sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”
So the Fed.gov, acting under the Agenda 21 of the UN, wants to forcibly -
at gunpoint, I assume - abort your babies, put sterilants in the drinking
water, move you to a city center where you can be stacked up like
cordwood, and "live" where every move you make, every thing you eat,
every decision you make, is made for you by the state. If you're one of
the few percent who aren't killed off. All in the name of the skankiest,
most corrupt "science" humans have ever put on paper (pretty good
summary). It's pretty damned obvious why they don't want us armed,
isn't it?
link
http://thesilicongraybeard.blogspot.com/2011/06/lets-tie-couple-of-stories-together_26.html
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
Biffe Kay -once again your post is irrelevant, incompetent, and immaterial.
If some types of air pollution warm the planet other types can cool it.
So should we thank the Chinese for inadvertently solving any global
warming that might have been happening by burning high sulfur coal while
turning off the scrubbers and disabling air monitoring stations around any
and all of their coal fired power plants to maximize profits? Why not.
They'll burn a stash of expensive low sulfur coal during the rare
inspections with the scrubbers running at 100% but when its over go back
to cheap high sulfur coal and shut the power hungry scrubbers off. So
huge amounts of sulfur dioxide go into the air effectively cooling the
planet.
http://www.metafilter.com/75519/China-coal-powerplant-myths-debunked
And remember last year when you Warmists were stabbed in the back by
your pards at the: World Bank invests record sums in coal.
That must have stung.
http://www.onepennysheet.com./2010/09/world-bank-invests-record-sums-in-coal/
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
Corniss, please specifically prove Ed's "assumptions" wrong, as you stated.
Refute the "science".
Come on Corniss, should be no problem for a man of your powerful intellect.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
Been awhile since I visited this thread where the climate denying Neanderthal's debate the Physicists, Meteorologists, Chemists and Engineers.
So as usual CC is foaming nonsense. About John Holdren's early writings.
John P. Holdren, Barack Obama's top science advisor, co-authored a
textbook entitled "Ecoscience" back in 1977 in which he actually
advocated mass sterilization, compulsory abortion, a one world government
and a global police force to enforce population control.
Overpopulation was an early concern and interest. In a 1969 article, Holdren and co-author Paul R. Ehrlich argued, "if the population control measures are not initiated immediately, and effectively, all the technology man can bring to bear will not fend off the misery to come."[21] In 1973, Holdren encouraged a decline in fertility to well below replacement in the United States, because "210 million now is too many and 280 million in 2040 is likely to be much too many."[22] In 1977, Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich, and Holdren co-authored the textbook Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment; they discussed the possible role of a wide variety of solutions to overpopulation, from voluntary family planning to enforced population controls, including forced sterilization for women after they gave birth to a designated number of children, and recommended "the use of milder methods of influencing family size preferences" such as access to birth control and abortion.[12][23]
Please pay attention to the last sentence.
Any careful analysis includes putting all the options on the table. Including forced sterilization because some governments have come VERY close to doing that. e.g. China's One Child Policy.
Holdren very specifically DID NOT recommend forced sterilization, compulsory abortion, a one world government or a global police to enforce birth control.
Either you make up this garbage yourself or you're EXTREMELY gullible.
In either case, I'm considering the option of cutting out your tongue. But I think I'll take the more sensible option of ignoring you in future.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
BK - Q:maybe you think the commie alternative of standing in line for hours just to buy a loaf of bread is preferable?
A:No you don't.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
HT - interesting that you don't quite understand that your rebuttal actually supports my argument about John Holdren.
John Holdren, President Obama’s “science czar...
Surrender to planetary regime
Holdren, has been a longtime climate-change alarmist who has advocated
ideas such as enforcing limits to world population growth.
Holdren’s name was in the e-mails hacked from the Climatic Research Unit
at East Anglia University in the U.K., which show that some climate
researchers declined to share their data with fellow scientists, conspired
to rig data and sought to keep researchers with dissenting views from
publishing in leading scientific journals.
FrontPageMag.com noted Holdren has endorsed “surrender of sovereignty” to
“a comprehensive Planetary Regime” that would control all the world’s
resources, direct global redistribution of wealth, oversee the
“de-development” of the West, control a world army and taxation regime,
and enforce world population limits....
http://utterlunacy.com/?p=200
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
Corniss, please specifically prove Ed's "assumptions" wrong, as you stated.
Refute the "science".
Come on Corniss, should be no problem for a man of your powerful intellect.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
breaking the speed of gravity
|
|
Northon - I'll assign it to you as extra credit. Find the 5 errors Ed made and post 'em.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
No Corny, you made the claim
You do it
Prove to us all you are not the simpleton everyone believes you to be.
|
|
HighTraverse
Trad climber
Bay Area
|
|
CC
OK, you got me for one last rebuttal to your trash.
From your own source: Holdren, meanwhile, has been a longtime climate-change alarmist who has advocated ideas such as enforcing limits to world population growth.
First of all "climate - change alarmist" is nonsense. Unless of course you're a climate change denyer. So within your belief system, this one works for you.
Secondly "enforcing limits to population growth".
I believe I've shown you evidence that this is a lie.
For #1 your intransigent beliefs cannot be refuted by facts. End of story. Your Dad is bigger than My Dad. There are no reasoning nor facts that can affect your opinion. Nya Nya Nya!
For #2, please provide quotations directly from Holdren to support it.
Edit: rude comment deleted
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
Why I Remain a Global-Warming Skeptic
Searching for scientific truth in the realm of climate.
By FRED SINGER
Last month the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project released the findings of its extensive study on global land temperatures over the past century. Physics professor Richard Muller, who led the study, heralded the findings with a number of controversial statements in the press, including an op-ed in this newspaper titled "The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism." And yet Mr. Muller remains a true skeptic—a searcher for scientific truth. I congratulate Mr. Muller and his Berkeley Earth team for undertaking this difficult task in the realm of climate.
The Berkeley study reported a warming trend of about 1º Celsius since 1950, even greater than the warming reported by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). I disagree with this result, which perhaps makes me a little more of a skeptic than Mr. Muller.
Mr. Muller has been brutally frank about the poor quality of the weather-station data, noting that 70% of U.S. stations involve uncertainties of between two and five degrees Celsius. One could interpret the Berkeley study's results as confirmation of earlier studies and of the IPCC's conclusions, despite the poor quality of the stations used. But perhaps the issue is that the Berkeley study and the ones that came before suffer from common errors. I suspect that the temperature records still are affected by the urban heat-island effect—a term given to any local warming, whatever its cause—despite efforts to correct for this. The urban heat-island effect could include heat produced not only in urban areas, but also due to changes in land use or poor station siting. Therefore, I suggest additional tests:
1. Disassemble the "global average" temperature to get a better picture of what's going on regionally. This could involve plotting both the IPCC's and the Berkeley study's data only for tropical regions, separating the northern and southern hemispheres and testing for seasonal variation and differences between day and night.
2. Better describe what we can think of as the demographics of weather stations, a major source of possible error. The IPCC used 6,000 stations in 1970 and only about 2,000 in 2000. Let's examine their latitude, altitude and possible urbanization, and see if there have been major changes in the stations sampled between 1970 and 2000. For example, it is very likely that airports were used as temperature stations in both 1970 and 2000, because airport stations are generally of high quality. But airports are likely warming rapidly because of increasing traffic and urbanization. So if the number of airport stations remained constant at, say, 1,200 over that 30-year interval, the warming observed there might have increased between 20% and 60% over the same period of time, thereby producing an artificial warming trend.
3. The Berkeley study used a total of 39,000 weather stations, an impressive number. But again, we need to know if that number changed significantly between 1970 and 2000, and how the demographics of the stations changed—both for stations that showed cooling and for those that showed warming.
But the main reason that I am skeptical about the IPCC, and now the Berkeley, findings, is that they disagree with most every other data source I can find. I confine this critique to the period between 1978 and 1997, thereby avoiding the Super El Niño of 1998 that had nothing to do with greenhouse gases or other human influences.
Contrary to both global-warming theory and climate models, data from weather satellites show no atmospheric temperature increase over this period, and neither do the entirely independent radiosondes carried in weather balloons. The Berkeley study confined its findings to land temperatures as recorded by weather stations. Yet oceans cover 71% of the earth's surface, and the marine atmosphere shows no warming trend. The absence of warming is in accord with the theory that climate is heavily impacted by solar variability, and agrees with the solar data presented in a 2007 paper by Danish physicist Henrik Svensmark in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society A.
Moreover, independent data using temperature proxies—various non-thermometer sources such as tree rings, ocean and lake sediments, ice cores, stalagmites, and so on—also support an absence of warming between 1978 and 1997. Coral data also show no pronounced warming trend of the sea surface, and there are good reasons to believe that reported sea-surface warming is an artifact of thermometer measurements.
The IPCC's 2007 Summary for Policy makers claims that "Most of the observed increase in global average [surface] temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely [90-99% sure] due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations." While Mr. Muller now seems to agree that there has been such global average warming since the mid-20th century, he nonetheless ended his op-ed by disclaiming that he knows the cause of any temperature increase. Moreover, the Berkeley team's research paper comments: "The human component of global warming may be somewhat overestimated." I commend Mr. Muller and his team for their honesty and skepticism.
Mr. Singer is professor emeritus at the University of Virginia and director of the Science & Environmental Policy Project, with specialties in atmospheric and space physics.
|
|
DrDeeg
Mountain climber
Mammoth Lakes, CA
|
|
The thread sometimes reminds me of Ogden Nash's observation:
"The door of a bigoted mind opens outwards so that the only result of the pressure of facts upon it is to close it more snugly."
It is interesting to note that Fred Singer, quoted above, was also among the "skeptics" about the harmful effects of smoking 50+ years ago, and then in the 1970s was a "skeptic" about the effects of CFCs on stratospheric ozone. The emergence of the Ozone Hole in 1985, and the subsequent measurements of stratospheric chlorine by two different instruments on the NASA Aura mission were a major disappointment for him.
(a good book about the parallels of the current attacks on climate scientists with similar tactics about smoking, acid rain, and ozone depletion is Merchants of Doubt, by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway)
|
|
Jorroh
climber
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2011 - 08:13pm PT
|
We know all that Malemute, the real mystery is why people like CC gobble up the propaganda so eagerly.CC is really stupid though, it took years for him/she to understand even basic stuff like the difference between weather and climate, so maybe its not that much of a mystery.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 18, 2011 - 08:20pm PT
|
Well, it's back in the news:
Scientists Warn New York Must Prepare For Climate Change Now
11/16/11 04:56 PM ET
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - Devastating floods like those caused in upstate New York by the remnants of Hurricane Irene and Tropical Storm Lee are among the climate change effects predicted in a new report written by 50 scientists and released Wednesday by the state's energy research agency.
The 600-page report called ClimAID ... was written by scientists from Cornell University, Columbia University and the City University of New York and funded by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 19, 2011 - 02:32pm PT
|
The tone in the US press is changing. Today, in my local daily rag, they openly talk about AGW as if we knew all along that it's a fact proven by science.
Still, it will be interesting to watch the die-hard deniers, holding onto their beliefs given to them by the Right-wing media, that Gore is just a puppet in it for the money. Will they begin to question the source of their beliefs? How could it be, for so many years, the MSM lied to us?
Tides are changing, and I am not talking about lunar induced.
|
|
Reilly
Mountain climber
The Other Monrovia- CA
|
|
|
Nov 19, 2011 - 05:53pm PT
|
Them prolific little phukkers!
Naughty lemmings skew climate calculus
AFP – Thu, Nov 17, 2011
Really, it's enough to drive a climate scientist over the edge.
In past years, satellite images have shown a perceptible growth in grasses and shrubs in parts of the Arctic, a phenomenon pinned on global warming.
But part of the greening could come from lemmings, surprised researchers have found.
University of Texas scientists counted plant cover and biomass in a huge area in coastal Alaska where brown lemmings (Lemmus trimucronatus) have been monitored for more than 50 years in a project to understand their boom-and-bust population cycles.
On small plots that had been fenced off to exclude the lemmings, certain plant types called lichens and bryophytes had increased, the researchers found.
But where the lemmings scampered unhampered, there was an increase in grass and sedge -- curiously, the very same plants that the hamster-like herbivores feed on.
The reason for this is unclear. Urine and faeces from the lemmings could be acting as a fertiliser, helping the plants to grow, the researchers suggests.
Alternatively, the rodents could be chomping on the dead grass and sedge litter, which encourages new growth.
Either way, the findings pose a tundra conundrum.
"We really need to be careful attributing the greening of the Arctic to global warming alone," said the lead investigator, David Johnson.
"We have shown that lemmings can promote similar greening, through the increase of grasses and sedges, as warming does in Arctic regions where lemmings are present and go through dramatic population cycles."
Global warming is still the big suspect, as greening is happening in areas where lemmings do not occur in large numbers.
Higher temperatures open up habitat that plants previously found too chilly.
Even so, lemmings and other herbivores could play a bigger role than is thought.
Indeed, the lemmings may also be helping to fight climate change.
Vegetation is a "carbon sink," because it stores carbon dioxide (CO2), the principal greenhouse gas, through photosynthesis.
"It is plausible that herbivores, in some situations, may provide a mechanism for higher plant growth, maintaining these ecosystems as carbon sinks," said Johnson.
The paper appears on Friday in Environmental Research Letters, published by Britain's Institute of Physics.
Naughty lemmings
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 19, 2011 - 09:19pm PT
|
^^^^^^
University of Texas scientists ...
Boy, that's a good one.
I wonder if they're going to blame the blackening of the Texan landscape on the lemmings too. Next up: Lemming BBQ, Texan style!
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!