Anthropogenic Global Warming

Topic: Anthropogenic Global Warming (Read 199181 times)

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #650 – 2015-11-20, 10:20:23

Well, Belfrager, I'm -sort of- glad that you still like me; I -sort of- still like you, too. What I don't get, is why you accept an obviously political agenda in place of legitimate scientific research?
CO₂ has an effect on the earth's climate, of course! (We -all of us post-Cambrian creatures- require it's 0.04 % of our atmosphere to survive!) And we humans have a sometimes enormous effect on our local environments…
Unlike other animals? Hm.
(Did God say "Go forth, and be inconspicuous? I haven't found that verse…)

It's not the thousands you pretend to; it's the pretension of those "thousands" that most offends me…

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #651 – 2015-11-20, 10:36:13

I'd thought I'd posted something that might be important… But, considering who responds here, and how, that seems unlikely. (I might try to find it; I might not.)

Quote from: Belfrager on 2015-11-18, 15:17:12

A screed? not only thousands and thousands of scientists are connected at some secret organization against Oakdale and the oil tycoons but philosophers have joined it as well...

Apparently, you're very much a joiner, Bel.
I've known more than enough "philosophers" to know that what they say has no particular "warrant"… You have a different view, I take it?

Silly people often do!

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #652 – 2015-11-20, 23:54:56

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-11-20, 10:36:13

I've known more than enough "philosophers" to know that what they say has no particular "warrant"… You have a different view, I take it?

No I don't, I just don't have patience for your silly crusade. Too much démodé.
I'm afraid that your cultural "circumstances" (remember Ortega Y Gasset?) prevents you of realizing it.
Tell me something new, radically new. That I like it.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #653 – 2015-11-21, 02:45:22

I have to do this. Some time back, our fellow from Portugal put up a long list of scientific and religious organizations that have gotten onto the AGW /Stop Climate Change train. Now, truth is I've never been one to jump onto bandwagons, and sometimes there's good reason to stay clear of the bandwagon.

Since Bel seems to like long, exhaustive lists, how about a list of all the things that Global Warming is supposed to be causing? Some things on the list are contradictory-- how can AGW cause less Antarctic ice and MORE Antarctic ice? Some things are patently silly. I fully expect that if you stub your toe on a chair leg and utter a stream of words nobody thought you even knew, stubbing your toe can be blamed on AGW. Well, why not? They're already saying terrorism is caused by it, so we might as well blame AGW for stubbing your toe.

Warning: The list is something of a link-farm, and if you trace all that stuff down it'll take forever--- and the list is growing.

http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #654 – 2015-11-21, 14:07:26

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-11-21, 02:45:22

Now, truth is I've never been one to jump onto bandwagons, and sometimes there's good reason to stay clear of the bandwagon.

Bandwagons of no bandwagons... bandwagons of lonely cowboys.

It results very clear to me, self called skeptics on Climatic Changes are denialists, limited by a cultural influence that confuses freedom with relativism.

In the intellectual world there's no freedom for being wrong but you keep insisting that a triangle has four sides and why? because and just because you don't take the three sided triangle bandwagon...

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #655 – 2015-11-21, 14:41:04

I never even once said that a triangle had four sides. Where on Earth did you get a silly idea like that?

But, since you seem to think I did, at some time, insist that a triangle has four sides--- I suspect I can safely discard anything else you have to say since it's obviously not based on reality. Four sided triangles? Must be a Portuguese thing.

Reality right now: Where I live, we're under "Winter storm warning" with several inches of "Global warming" expected to accumulate. While I'm at it, a look at the regional maps shows that it is, in fact, snowing in Hell right now. (I'm not just a-woofin'. It is snowing in Hell, Michigan according to the radar images.)

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #656 – 2015-11-21, 15:29:39

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-11-21, 14:41:04

I never even once said that a triangle had four sides. Where on Earth did you get a silly idea like that?

But, since you seem to think I did, at some time, insist that a triangle has four sides--- I suspect I can safely discard anything else you have to say since it's obviously not based on reality. Four sided triangles? Must be a Portuguese thing.

There he starts again...

From where I got such a silly idea was from things called allegories, metaphors and other indirect writing resources and general literacy proficiency.

You do well mjm, forget my posts, just don't read them, let them rot in hell.

Quote from: mjmsprt40

Reality right now: Where I live, we're under "Winter storm warning" with several inches of "Global warming" expected to accumulate.

Ain't reality right now a wonderful place to be... never leave it.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #657 – 2015-11-21, 19:06:10

I look out the window, glad I don't have to go anywhere. "Global warming" has served up a snorter of a blizzard, with heavy snow, high winds and low visibility. My landlord shoveled the drive not an hour ago, and at this moment you can't tell that he did a thing. With these winds, we get ground-effect blizzard into the bargain.

The weather prognosticators say the snow should end in a couple of hours, but that the temperature will plunge tonight. Bring in the brass monkey!

Edit; add-on: The snow stopped, and landlord and I joined forces to clear the drive. Good thing to get that done too, it was heavy and wet, and with tonight's low temps it would have frozen to rock-hard in the morning. Good luck moving it then.

I know my personal observations don't count because I don't have the "right" (or maybe that should be "left") credentials, but I do have 60 years of noticing things around me. That's why I'm a skeptic--- I just don't see the calamities that were forecast to have already happened, but have not. I suspect it won't happen by 2115 either--- but conveniently for the forecasters of CAGW doom, nobody now living will be alive to call them out on it and they won't be alive--- at least in the sense that we understand life on this planet-- to face the music.

Now, wait a bit while I brush the snow off of my flying car. Oh, wait, that's right--- they're still toys in the hands of inventors, not ready for public use and may never be. See what a problem predicting the future can be?

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #658 – 2015-11-22, 10:10:44

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-11-21, 19:06:10

I know my personal observations don't count because I don't have the "right" (or maybe that should be "left") credentials, but I do have 60 years of noticing things around me.

It sounds more like you're too focused on the term "global warming" while you should really be calling it something like "climate change" instead. Although as it happens, I was outside in a t-shirt just last week because it was approaching 18° — the warmest November temperature in recorded history. (Right now it's 2°, btw. Much more seasonally appropriate, possibly a touch cold.) But just last month it reached -6° in October — the coldest since record-keeping started. And if the Gulf Stream were interrupted, it'd get a heck of a lot colder in winter and warmer in summer around here, basically a Central European climate instead of what we're used to. The English term "global warming" isn't wrong per se, in the sense that on a worldwide average the temperature is increasing ever so slightly, but it's ultimately quite misleading. But ersi said more than enough about that already either here or on My Opera.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #659 – 2015-11-22, 10:36:23

Global Warming had to morph into Climate Change, because the so-called science made predictions that were wrong. (All ersi's said is the slogan "Be resolute: Don't pollute!" Very helpful, no?

) The so-called "misleading" term Global Warming is the lynch-stone of the CAGW movement… If global warming, produced by anthropogenic atmospheric CO₂ isn't so bad, the political forces, which drive this controversy and ask -or require!- serious and untested restructuring of the world's economy, are easily seen to be purely political.

What has anyone said, that makes stopping or stifling the world's hydrocarbon economy…?

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #660 – 2015-11-22, 11:28:18

Quote from: Frenzie on 2015-11-22, 10:10:44

The English term "global warming" isn't wrong per se, in the sense that on a worldwide average the temperature is increasing ever so slightly, but it's ultimately quite misleading.

Deliberately.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #661 – 2015-11-22, 11:52:35

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-11-22, 10:36:23

Global Warming had to morph into Climate Change, because the so-called science made predictions that were wrong. (All ersi's said is the slogan "Be resolute: Don't pollute!" Very helpful, no? )

Actually, I said that the issue concerns the greenhouse effect, to which industrial pollution contributes. Your reductionism shows again.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-11-22, 10:36:23

The so-called "misleading" term Global Warming is the lynch-stone of the CAGW movement… If global warming, produced by anthropogenic atmospheric CO₂ isn't so bad, the political forces, which drive this controversy and ask -or require!- serious and untested restructuring of the world's economy, are easily seen to be purely political.

Global Warming is misleading because the issue scientifically is the more subtle greenhouse effect, not warming. However, warming is simpler to understand and sloganise for political purposes on both sides. This is why the climate conferences tout warming and this is what the denialists batter, ignoring the real issue.

Next up again is "the target to keep human made global warming less than 2°C" It's the same thing as ECB's definition of price stability as "inflation rates below, but close to, 2%"

The issue is scientific, but when politicians deal with it, they formulate it politically. It's inevitably reductive and wrong of them to do this, but it's also wrong and reductive to think that due to political involvement it ceases to be a scientific issue. In truth, it's a discernibly scientific issue where one can take sides without any political allegiance. Except Oakdale, who is only capable of taking sides along political lines while blaming everybody else for it.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #662 – 2015-11-22, 12:11:28

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-11-22, 10:36:23

Global Warming had to morph into Climate Change, because the so-called science made predictions that were wrong.

As far as my recollection goes, the range of phenomena encompassed by the term "global warming" has traditionally (at least as far back as the '80s and '90s) always been called the (versterkt) broeikaseffect (enhanced greenhouse effect or just greenhouse effect) in Dutch. The occasional use of the calque opwarming van de Aarde ("warming of Earth") seems to be a more recent development. I'm inclined to agree with ersi that the problem you perceive is primarily English or American (and political) in nature, and even then only in popular parlance, not in scientific literature.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #663 – 2015-11-22, 14:18:06

You can call it whatever you like. "Climate Change", "Global Warming" "CAGW" or whatever else you choose to hang on it when the present name has worn out its welcome. It's still the same old same old---- a bunch of rich guys who want to remain rich and get even richer are ready, willing and able--- through political muscle-- to impoverish the rest of the world through made-up crapola. Frankly, they don't care if you and I freeze in the dark so long as they continue to live the high-life, and the fact that you're ready to sign on to your own impoverishment just makes it easier.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #664 – 2015-11-22, 17:11:27

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-11-22, 14:18:06

It's still the same old same old---- a bunch of rich guys who want to remain rich and get even richer are ready, willing and able--- through political muscle-- to impoverish the rest of the world through made-up crapola

And it doesn't occur to that the crapola is being made up by said rich guys but on the opposite side than you seem to think? The crapola is the emissions have nothing to do with the increased average temperature of the Earth. I pointed out before that ExxonMobile is behind a disturbing large amount of the "skeptics" , manufacturing confusion for the public around the issue for political and monetary gain. Anthropogenic climate change directly threatens the livelihood for rich guys at the helm the fossil fuel industry.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #665 – 2015-11-22, 20:16:08

Midnight, I may not be the sharpest tack in the box. But, I do possess a few things that have stood the test of time.

1. A window. These panes of glass are excellent for allowing you to see outside to see what is happening. Right now--- there's snow on the ground. We've cleared it from the driveway here, and the streets have been plowed, but there's still ice to be watchful for.

2. A thermometer. A really useful device for telling you--- before you step outside--- that it's cold in November in Chicago. It's been like that every November that I can remember.

3. Some degree, at least, of common sense, and with it a sense of the history of conditions. You know, things really haven't changed in all the years (60 so far) that I've been alive. It's warm in the summer and cold in the winter, every year--- and it doesn't vary much.

I also developed, over a period of years, a sense of who should and who should not be trusted--- and why. Right now, the warmunists are really low on my trust-o-meter, and there's no sign of that changing any time soon.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #666 – 2015-11-23, 02:23:13

Yes, let's make sure to confuse what's happening in the moment for long term global climate trends

That doesn't disprove climate change any more than it being well above our scorching 105 F normal all summer long proves it. Cold is a relative term. Fifty degrees here is cold, due to how hot it is in the summer. So your summers being warmer establishes a different threshold of how you perceive cold.

This is the The Weather Channel's outlook for this winter:

So somebody of limited vision and scientific knowledge in Seattle could take their conditions as proof of "global warming" , while somebody in Florida could come to the opposite conclusion. Both cases would be like a blind man confusing an elephant for a tree. But you'd say you have snow on the ground. It's not winter, or even December, yet :p

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-11-22, 20:16:08

I also developed, over a period of years, a sense of who should and who should not be trusted--- and why.

Right. Trust the "rich guys" at ExxonMobile because clearly they don't have an agenda, unlike the huge thousandaire professors that have been tracking CO2 levels and global temperatures for years and could probably actually make more money doing a bogus study for ExxonMobile or writing a distraction blog against Climate Change (ie, disingenuously claiming increased Antarctic sea ice disproves climate change while ignoring the shrinking Arctic and Greenland ice and the fact that total global sea ice is still decreasing...)

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #667 – 2015-11-23, 05:44:23

It's regular now. As soon as winter arrives, mjm begins to discuss global warming.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #668 – 2015-11-23, 06:04:53

I'm just pleasantly drunk, so I was only going to say "You really do love your conspiracy theories, Sang!

"
But I had to refresh the page and, so, re-read your opening salvo…

Trends?!?! Do you play the stock market, using the length of ladies' hems?

(Typical "social science" — BTW.)
Without a verified causal model, trends are "voodoo science"; and with contrary data, they are no longer trends — no matter the results of computer simulations designed to generate such.

But there is one area of disputation where trends are certainly acceptable: Thousands of years of repeating cycles… These, of course, are not explanations; they are merely data — with hints…
(One would think scientists would be interested. But, perhaps, a great many of them have other interests…)

The CO₂ "control knob" was a good hypothesis. I admit it: It had empirical backing (our fairly recent measurements of atmospheric CO₂, supposed anomalous increases in SAT…) and naive physics (the greenhouse effect…). But it hasn't panned out.
Recent (and better) data confute it; and recent theory can't explain it's failures.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #669 – 2015-11-23, 10:48:17

Some people confuse global climate with snow in their backyard.
Is it an American thing?

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #670 – 2015-11-23, 20:35:40

I never said I trust Exxon/Mobil either. You say that, Sang, because you need to discredit what I did in fact say---- and the only way, apparently, that you can do that is to suggest that I am in the back-pocket of Big Oil.

Good luck in your fairy-tale dream world--- you'll need it.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #671 – 2015-11-23, 23:31:33

Do you still wonder why I don't believe this hoo-hah about climate change?

Consider that Prince Charles, heir apparent to the Throne of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, believes that climate change caused the present terrorism. I am not making this up. In fact, I've been reading several items that suggest that our esteemed world leaders believe tough talk on climate change will show ISIL that this time, we mean business! That'll scare 'em.

Yeah---- maybe it'll scare ISIL that men with their heads so firmly planted up their @&& are actually world leaders. I know it scares me.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/11/23/prince-charles-climate-change-is-to-blame-for-war-in-syria/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #672 – 2015-11-24, 00:04:20

How about this one? King of Sweden wants to ban baths to stop climate change......

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3329759/King-Sweden-calls-ban-BATHS-admits-ashamed-run-one.html

Look, folks, there's TONS of this kind of stuff. Makes you think that maybe we're in a lot of trouble, and it's not from climate change.

We're not off the hook here in the states either. President Obama says that climate change is a bigger and more important threat than terrorism--- and last I heard, he seemed so convinced of this that I daresay he would believe it even with ISIL operatives in the Oval Office holding a knife to his throat. Our leaders do not appear to be well.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #673 – 2015-11-24, 01:57:58

Actually the King of Sweden didn't seem to indicate that it has anything to do with climate change, but rather the amount of energy and water it uses :p But since when is the DM a credible source anyway?

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #674 – 2015-11-24, 06:03:16

Credible sources?

You're a funny fellow, Sang!