Anthropogenic Global Warming

Topic: Anthropogenic Global Warming (Read 198747 times)

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #325 – 2015-08-16, 22:02:38

Fascinating. I post a link and a couple of observations, you post crap--- sorry, gotta call the smelly stuff as I see it-- about how ignorant Americans are.

Is that the best you can do? Really? If that's the best you can come up with, then-- your argument is pretty lame.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #326 – 2015-08-17, 04:28:20

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-08-16, 22:02:38

Fascinating. I post a link and a couple of observations, you post crap--- sorry, gotta call the smelly stuff as I see it-- about how ignorant Americans are.

Is that the best you can do? Really? If that's the best you can come up with, then-- your argument is pretty lame.

The little issue with your otherwise pertinent observations is their apparent intent in the context: Obama is throwing money at indoor climate change studies --> therefore climate change is all false.

You see, I also don't like anything about my government (or yours), but I don't think that any misreading of science on their part obviates science. I don't even think that misreading of science on the part of scientists (such as Oakdale's statistician) obviates science.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #327 – 2015-08-17, 06:22:15

Quote from: ersi on 2015-08-16, 20:28:20

Obama is throwing money at indoor climate change studies --> therefore climate change is all false.

Ersi, you're not an idiot, hence you're a genius! That's the logic you've been using… Your "therefore"'s usually go beyond any logic a sane person would accept.
I don't know what Obama's "indoor" climate change studies are. (Would you mention what you speak of?) But I do know that his anti-coal, anti-fracking silliness is — anti-human! (Mostly, black humans — so you may not mind so much! Belfrager may or may not agree.

)
But you may be an idiot, and think such is legitimate. (I honestly can't tell…) When you say that science "almost" matters to you, you still hedge!

Obama has taken serious steps to curtail and -soon- stop the U.S.'s use of coal. Why would he? Why should he? Indeed, why should the supply of coal not be used for industrialization?
And does he seriously think that China (and parts of Africa) will follow our lead!

That they should?

Quote from: ersi on 2015-08-16, 20:28:20

[…] I don't think that any misreading of science on their part obviates science […]

Then please cite the science you rely upon for your opinions…

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #328 – 2015-08-17, 07:51:49

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-17, 06:22:15

Quote from: ersi on 2015-08-16, 20:28:20
Obama is throwing money at indoor climate change studies --> therefore climate change is all false.
Ersi, you're not an idiot, hence you're a genius! That's the logic you've been using… Your "therefore"'s usually go beyond any logic a sane person would accept.

Careful, if you don't want to insult the person I was quoting. Namely, he was precisely using that logic.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-17, 06:22:15

I don't know what Obama's "indoor" climate change studies are. (Would you mention what you speak of?)

I was quoting someone. Sober up.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #329 – 2015-08-17, 11:43:32

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-08-16, 22:02:38

Fascinating. I post a link and a couple of observations, you post crap--- sorry, gotta call the smelly stuff as I see it-- about how ignorant Americans are.

Well, look at your post. Implying that all climate change is crap because you don't understand what that study is for is, well, crap.

That said, I've been living here for a while now and it never ceases to amaze me how little actual science they teach in schools here. Maybe it's just TN, in fact I hope it is.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #330 – 2015-08-17, 16:20:20

Quote from: Macallan on 2015-08-17, 04:43:32

Maybe it's just TN, in fact I hope it is.

My high school science teacher refused to teach evolution. He said "We are skipping this chapter. God made everything and if you don't like that you can leave.". I promptly stood up and left. The administration didn't care at all and gave me the option of in school suspension (ISS) or go back to class... My experience in that class wasn't good from then on.

I correct or expand on things my son is taught all the time.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #331 – 2015-08-17, 21:18:03

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-08-16, 22:02:38

Is that the best you can do? Really?

Nope, I can do much better but you don't seem to me as a connoisseur of the great art of satire...
I need not even to take you seriously, others had already such boring trouble for me.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #332 – 2015-08-17, 21:46:05

Quote from: ersi on 2015-08-16, 23:51:49

I was quoting someone. Sober up.

While it's true I missed the exchange you refer to (the topic, as it appeared in my browser, had split to a new page and I failed return to the previous one), one needn't be sober to note your obtuseness… Quoting someone usually involves naming them and using their words.
(And Macallan seems a little foggy on the meaning of "imply"…)
mjm might have said, somewhere, that climate change "is false", as in "catastrophic climate change as a result of human activity is a false conclusion". But your frequent puppetry is unbecoming, ersi.

Quote from: ersi on 2015-08-16, 00:57:20

It's like the hydrologic cycle extended to space. Everybody knows it, only Oakdale's textbooks somehow don't have it.

Yes, ersi, everyone's basic texts us similar graphics to depict the greenhouse effect. But you surely know that such is a gross simplification: The devil's in the details!
Attempting to draw discrete conclusions from a closed dotted line (with arrows!) on a graphic is a pastime appropriate for children. For adults concerned with climatology, and science in general, finer detail is required.
And the details I'm familiar with don't add up to a catastrophic climate change…

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #333 – 2015-08-17, 22:04:16

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-17, 21:46:05

Quote from: ersi on 2015-08-16, 00:57:20
It's like the hydrologic cycle extended to space. Everybody knows it, only Oakdale's textbooks somehow don't have it.
Yes, ersi, everyone's basic texts us similar graphics to depict the greenhouse effect. But you surely know that such is a gross simplification: The devil's in the details!

But you are disagreeing precisely with the big picture. More correctly, you are completely uninterested in the scientific topic. You are interested in the politics. You discredit the science based on the politics, all the time, incessantly, thus consistently talking past the real issue.

You have said nothing relevant about the science, except "warming, warming, warming", as if that were the (entire) science of climatology. It's not. Is ECB's stated goal of keeping inflation rates "below, but close to, 2%" relevant to economics? Is it economics? Is it the scientific definition of inflation rates? Is it a devil in the scientific details? No! It's sheer politics, absolutely nothing to do with science. Unfortunately this is the only thing you are interested in.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #334 – 2015-08-17, 22:29:41

Quote from: ersi on 2015-08-17, 22:04:16

No! It's sheer politics, absolutely nothing to do with science. Unfortunately this is the only thing you are interested in.

I would say that, more than politics, Oakdale's defending a retrograde and doomed to failure economical policy.

The big game between developed countries it's not based in coal (or oil) but in technology. Technology for free, clean, endless energy. Only that will cause a shift of the energetic and environmental paradigm.
Only that can create sustainable development.

Oakdale's defending America's collapse. Obama and his advisers knows it perfectly.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #335 – 2015-08-18, 00:14:13

Oakdale mentions the politics of the thing and you have a cow about that. Well--- I have bad news for you. Politics and science are in an incestuous relationship on climate change, and have been for quite awhile. The politics actually corrupts the science (why am I not surprised) so the end result is, at best, questionable.

It gets worse--- seems there's more than a little deception. On the part of the alarmists. In order to get everybody to make the changes that would be necessary to make us stop making so much CO2, they have to do stuff to data that makes it subject to glaring errors.

See here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/08/17/how-we-broke-the-climate-change-debates-lessons-learned-for-the-future/

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #336 – 2015-08-18, 03:19:25

Quote from: ersi on 2015-08-17, 14:04:16

But you are disagreeing precisely with the big picture.

You, ersi, may prefer picture books and graphics… (I'll admit that D'Arcy Thompson's most famous volume was a lot of fun! But it advanced no ideas in his field, biology.) But what you call the big picture is -without the details and caveats- a simplistic surmise. And from that you'd get — what?

Calling CO₂ a pollutant is jejune. Oxygen is a better candidate! But you must use your pejorative terminology, for your purpose… (Perhaps you yourself don't consider fossil fuels the cause of dangerous climate change — you've never actually said, that I recall. Would you care to go on record?

) At least, the political actors must; and that certainly includes the IPCC and most government agencies.

The big picture -as I see it- includes much that is out of focus and much that is obscured — even when seen correctly. Looking at it through political lenses distorts it beyond recognition. (Looking at the politics surrounding the "issues" is something else. It's another and an important topic.) Shouldn't scientists be working on sharpening the focus, cleansing the grime and removing the obstacles?
—————————————————————————————————————————
@mjm: In his farewell speech Eisenhower warned about government financed science

Quote

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
(http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ike.htm)

Every one remembers or has heard his warnings about the military-industrial complex… It's odd, how few know of his equally dire warnings only a few lines later!

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #337 – 2015-08-18, 04:52:56

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-18, 03:19:25

You, ersi, may prefer picture books and graphics… (I'll admit that D'Arcy Thompson's most famous volume was a lot of fun! But it advanced no ideas in his field, biology.) But what you call the big picture is -without the details and caveats- a simplistic surmise. And from that you'd get — what?

But you don't even have this much. You have nothing. And with nothing you only get nothing - as you have. Why don't you get on topic?

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-18, 03:19:25

Calling CO₂ a pollutant is jejune. Oxygen is a better candidate!

Because we have oxygen pollution in the air, oxygen waste in waters, and we have industrial technology that makes oxygen an ever more urgent concern that we should do something about?

A few pages ago, I wrote you off as totally insane and incapable of engaging this topic. You keep confirming your status and you even manage to make it worse. It's amazing really.

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-18, 03:19:25

(Perhaps you yourself don't consider fossil fuels the cause of dangerous climate change — you've never actually said, that I recall. Would you care to go on record? )

I have said everything relevant in this thread - before you began participating. Simply read up, it's all there. Not only are you devoid of your own relevant opinion, you are unable to read up on those who have an opinion. You only babble about nothing as if it were something. But it's nothing.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #338 – 2015-08-18, 21:25:45

Here's something of interest. It covers the tropics-- actually an area a bit larger than the tropics since it covers 40 North to 40 South-- winds and rainfall patterns. You might find it worth a look.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/08/18/cooling-and-warming-clouds-and-thunderstorms/

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #339 – 2015-08-18, 22:44:47

Quote from: mjmsprt40 on 2015-08-18, 21:25:45

Here's something of interest. It covers the tropics-- actually an area a bit larger than the tropics since it covers 40 North to 40 South-- winds and rainfall patterns. You might find it worth a look.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/08/18/cooling-and-warming-clouds-and-thunderstorms/

What's interesting here? This?...

Quote from: Willis Eschenbach

My hypothesis is that the earth has a thermoregulatory system keeping the global temperature within narrow bounds (e.g. ±0.3°C over the 20th century).

Why is it interesting?

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #340 – 2015-08-20, 18:55:34

I take it, ersi, that you disagree with Willis' "I think that the debate should not be about feedback at all, it should be a debate about the types and the effects of the various natural homeostatic mechanisms." (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/14/its-not-about-feedback/) Why?

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #341 – 2015-08-20, 19:12:53

We have discussed this point rather recently. You forget too fast.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #342 – 2015-08-20, 19:57:05

Ah! Then you still maintain that magical words "industrial pollution" affect the earth's climate system…

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #343 – 2015-08-20, 20:32:00

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-20, 19:57:05

Ah! Then you still maintain that magical words "industrial pollution" affect the earth's climate system…

And you think pollution magically adds up to zero.

Seriously, no, the point was something totally different, directly to do with how your article starts. I will not remind you. You are not worth it.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #344 – 2015-08-20, 22:52:38

Sorry to interrupt your love affair, gentleman's duel, whatever.
This is turning ridicule.

What we should be discussing at this thread, it's how to implement change.

What we should be discussing at this thread, it's how to convince underdeveloped countries to do it. We showed them the delights of
consumerism, so they can buy from us, and they started doing what we've done (and some wants to keep on doing it)... how to change that? How to solve that?

What we should be discussing at this thread, is the intergenerational problem. Why the next ones have to suffer because what we've done. Should they pay for it instead us?

What we should be discussing at this thread, is, basically, what a fucking future we want for ours sons.

What we should be discussing at this thread, is the humility required for stating that we created a hell of a fucking problem.

Not a small problem. At least, be courageous to approach it. To solve it, it's completely different. It demands much more than posting at forums. I do my part.

Post Scriptum. Yes I know, for some, language bothers more than destroying our habitat...

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #345 – 2015-08-21, 03:20:14

Quote from: Belfrager on 2015-08-20, 14:52:38

Yes I know, for some, language bothers more than destroying our habitat...

I don't much mind the language… But —granted that you almost understand the problem— I'm amazed at your callousness: You'd task much of the world (and its future generations) with "correcting" such by poverty and privation?
Because you feel guilty?

Go to confession!

Out habitat is in little danger from technology and industry, compared with what it faces from the political forces of Luddite-Environmentalists and silly World Government proponents.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #346 – 2015-08-21, 04:06:02

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-21, 03:20:14

Quote from: Belfrager on 2015-08-20, 14:52:38
Yes I know, for some, language bothers more than destroying our habitat...
I don't much mind the language… But —granted that you almost understand the problem— I'm amazed at your callousness: You'd task much of the world (and its future generations) with "correcting" such by poverty and privation?
Because you feel guilty?

Go to confession!

Out habitat is in little danger from technology and industry, compared with what it faces from the political forces of Luddite-Environmentalists and silly World Government proponents.

See, Belfrager, your questions cannot be discussed. More properly, your questions have the worst kind of answer because the greatest powers in the Occident want to keep their level of comfort. The will to obstructionism rules all. Simple observations matter nothing. And Oakdale has already earlier called morality itself evil.

Delusion is bad, self-delusion is worse, but active propagation of delusion due to wilful self-delusion is... let's call it unique.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #347 – 2015-08-21, 07:21:25

In other words, ersi would tell everyone else how to live — because he knows better than anyone else!
And, because some dare to question his omniscience, he uses his wits to berate them — rather than refute them.
Well, Belfrager, at least you have an ignorant pope to lead you! ersi has only his own ignorance and sour disposition!
(There seems to be an awful lot of that, over the pond… Why are so many Europeans so pessimistic? You are not likely going to be allowed to screw things up again. "Relaxen und watchen das blinkenlichten!")

Are you upset, frustrated and bemused — that much of the world refuses to prostrate itself and subject itself to privation, because you have qualms?!

The so-called Third World will become prosperous, and thus deal with "pollution" as others have. Like I said above: Relax, and watch the blinking lights…

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #348 – 2015-08-21, 08:39:11

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on 2015-08-21, 07:21:25

Are you upset, frustrated and bemused — that much of the world refuses to prostrate itself and subject itself to privation, because you have qualms?!

You see (of course you don't see, but I'm just typing English here), it's not a matter of qualms. It's a matter of facts that have happened over and over and over again in human history. Roman Empire deforestated the Mediterranean. Forests grew back during the so-called Dark Ages. People actually died of polluted environment during the industrial revolution in England and America (and everywhere else, for that matter). Etc.

It's a matter of facts like this, not of qualms. You have always talked past the topic. You are free to go on and on talking past the topic. Nobody is stopping you. Just be true to your own principle, namely, since you consistently express panicked paranoia over that someone might meddle with your comfy life, then do the world a favour and keep yourself out of other people's way too. Keep away.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #349 – 2015-08-21, 09:29:25

You seem, ersi, to have kept yourself out of it! I'm not much involved: I'm just "regular people" — you're -by your own credence- a paragon! Be that, where you live; where others do, leave them alone — until you've shown the power of your -whatever it is!- to make things better!

Read this (and tell me it isn't what you'd like…).