Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Pepe Le Poseur
Social climber
Parts North
|
|
Good point Chiloe...most repubs are geriatrics
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
The study examined nearly 12,000 abstracts. Among them, 64 explicitly state man is the primary cause of global warming since 1950. Another 922 state man caused some warming. Combined, the account for about 8% of the abstracts considered.
What you're confirming, Sketch, is not just that you haven't read the paper (which you're certain is full of lies) but that you can't read it -- not even the 166 words of the abstract.
But many others here do have that ability. In case some of them are following this, here's what Cook et al. actually wrote, again...
We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors’ self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
except there is no physical theory which has been put forward to explain economics (at least not one generally accepted by economists)
Ed, I think I believe otherwise
there IS a generally accepted "conventional wisdom" theory of not only what is good and not economic "policy" but also a long history of both successes and failures from putting various polices into practice, and it is that experience that has evolved into what we now believe to be an actual, tried and true, economic "theory"
even on its most simplest and most tested and peer reviewed terms, an example would be that we KNOW what causes inflation, and hyperinflation, and we also know the consequences, among MANY of parts of the overall Accepted Economic Theory
yes there is debate and disagreements, largely politically ideologically driven...
and there ARE indeed a large set of undisputed economic theories beyond question
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
The Cook et al. study really is a pretty neat, simple design (actually, two designs, both of which reach that 97% number) though certainly not the last word. It would be straightforward for critics to replicate any number of ways, but for all the blog hysteria none have tried.
At the same time, Cook et al. basically confirms, by new methods, what other studies have found too. And what anyone who is curious could find out for themselves, informally, by checking through recent journals or looking up position statements by any major science organization.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
I've read the abstract. It's bullsh#t.
No, you have not read it. Passing your eyes over the words does not count. Mainly what you've done is repeat over and over that you know it's lies and bullsh#t. But none of your "quotes" corresponds to what the abstract actually describes. C'mon, it's only 166 words, how hard can that be? Focus, see if you can get what they are reporting.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
the Wastelands
|
|
point accepted
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Dayum. You zealous alarmists are a pigheaded dishonest lot.
Seriously full of sh#t.
Fail. I'm neither zealous nor alarmist, and unlike you I actually know what Cook et al. did. All I've tried to do here is get you to read the abstract of an article you've been shouting is "lies." You dodged that challenge over and over, apparently because you can't.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
One last thing: Boo hoo hoo. You sure whine a lot.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
Still can't read it so now you call names. Think that fools anyone but you, sketch?
|
|
crunch
Social climber
CO
|
|
Hey Sketch, I love the way you keep getting shown to be clueless, yet bravely blunder back into the fray, trying to change the subject.
One last thing.
Several pages back, I brought up the subject of what we might do to mitigate rising CO2 levels. One person responded.
All of your chicken little alarmist just went on with efforts to squelch the opposition.
The issue isn't global warming. The issue is shutting down those who aren't on the chicken little bandwagon.
How telling.
That person was me. You stated:
Outside of a global pandemic/catastrophe, eliminating a significant portion of the population, nothing can be done to reduce atmospheric CO2 levels.
It ain't gonna happen..
You were misinformed. When I corrected you, your response was to change the subject, throw out some random, vaguely related questions. A panic response.
You're trying the exact same panic-driven behavior again--Change the subject! Let's change the subject!, now that Chiloe has taken your misinformed assertions about Cook's paper and trampled them like a bunch of grapes.
No mercy on this thread, sorry
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
Awesome.... 100 posts later and nothing new. At least the sunset from the first flat was amazing. all the snow up there so early. Good to see that the earth is cooling.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Lot's of hot air is being blown about today. Really quite entertaining, but do you hotheads really believe you can change climate through forced exercise of your ideals? If so you're quite deluded.
Give it up, you've lost the public's ear through years of crying the big bad wolf is busting the door down. The globe is cooling, the game is up,even the average Joe Liberal is questioning your game. Do you guys really want to be the last deadenders making fools of yourselves?
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
Mentalcase- below is reference to a 2012 study comparing data from the HMS Challenger expedition of the 1870's (69,000 nautical miles around the globe and at various lattitudes with over 900 temp readings to 900 meters) to the Argo data. It seems to put the "big lie" to your silly graph.Alaska dispatch is a reliable and unbiased publication and you can look up the actual referenced paper for verification, like i did.
http://www. alaskadispatch.com/article/data-collected-1870's-suggests-ocean-has-been-warming-135-years
It seems that the warming was more rapid during the first 85 years compared to the last 50 years-contrary to wacko graphs.
|
|
AndyMan
Sport climber
CA
|
|
Hallelujah true believers, did someone say sea levels ? Even IPCC lead author Trenberth told me in a private email that this was the key "proof" that the alarmists' god of CO2-causing-warming exists. Silly Trenberth ran away when I pointed out that sea levels have been rising for the past 20,000 years, at a decreasing rate.
Sorry all you frightened pussies, you'll have to try harder. In your own words, WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE THAT MAN'S CO2 IS CAUSING THE GLOBAL WARMING that stopped 2 decades ago ?
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
Silly Trenberth ran away when I pointed out that sea levels have been rising for the past 20,000 years, at a decreasing rate.
The figure you plot show only a very small rise for the last thousands years. If you read the source of the figure you would also realize that there are no very recent data points in the graph. That figure say nothing about the sea level rise for the last couple of decades. That information where just not included in the work.
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
Mentalcase- below is reference to a 2012 study comparing data from the HMS Challenger expedition of the 1870's (69,000 nautical miles around the globe and at various lattitudes with over 900 temp readings to 900 meters) to the Argo data. It seems to put the "big lie" to your silly graph.Alaska dispatch is a reliable and unbiased publication and you can look up the actual referenced paper for verification, like i did.
http://www. alaskadispatch.com/article/data-collected-1870's-suggests-ocean-has-been-warming-135-years
It seems that the warming was more rapid during the first 85 years compared to the last 50 years-contrary to wacko graphs.
In what way do you believe that that information contradicts anything that we have said? How can it show that "the silly graph" is a "big lie"?
You have of course also misunderstood the last paragraph. It says that the warming during the last 150 years is twice the warming for the last 50 years and that do not suggest that the warming where more rapid during the first 85 years.
So you managed to believe that research that contradicts your world view actually did the opposite...
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
And yet another day of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder posting from The Chief.
Man. You talk about how nice it is to live in Bishop, but if you look at your posts, you sometimes sit on this thread for hours and hours straight.
Fattrad was like that. He was a supertopo addict.
Go out to the Buttermilks today. I loved the fall when I lived over in forty acres at Doug R's house. Dale Bard and Bobbie Bensman were also living there. I would borrow Joe Faint's bike and ride over to boulder all day. I loved Bishop back in the 80's. Now when I pass through it looks like it has gone all Moab on us.
When the cottonwoods were turning, the Owens Valley was absolutely perfect.
|
|
mechrist
Gym climber
South of Heaven
|
|
Man, I came back from a few days climbing and you dipshits have made over 300 posts. Same sh#t... some interesting information clouded by noisy bullshit from idiots like chuff.
I thought Rong would shut up after he was proven to be FLAT OUT WRONG about the EPA saying "cutting out all the coal power plants will have ZERO effects on the CO2 output." I honestly thought, deep down, that he was enough of a man to admit he had been misinformed, yet again, and maybe pull his head out of his ass... just a little. Unfortunately he opted to change the topic and continued spreading more of the sh#t that gets spoon fed to every conservative leaning idiot with a high school diploma and 3rd grade math and science skills. I guess he is more like that despicable chuf than I thought.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!