Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Anthropogenic Global Warming (Read 198306 times)

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #425 –
Quote from: Midnight Raccoon on
For example, China is dominating the solar panel market, while America fails to cash in on the new industry and missing out of the good paying jobs making them.

The average assembly worker in Shenzhen now makes 2000 RMB ($328) per month.
The average auto assembly worker makes $23.73 per hour. Do the math.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #426 –
Both sides of this tend to go hyperbolic.

I'm sure a graph that's blowing the numbers right off the grid isn't at all over stating a 1.81 ppm, in a year, rise.

Just for perspective here's a graph showing sea levels over millions of years...


I do believe this can be resolved. But taking the "polar opposite" is the most tactless way to achieve anything. It's so damned obvious how politicians get their money so clearly this is their fault. But only 61% of Americans believe in global warming and 40% of those just believe it's part of nature's cycle (probably because of things like that graph I just posted.). And they really are right, except 100% should know global warming is a thing that's happening and all those should realize we are the ones affecting it. Doesn't matter where political funding comes from and who's to blame when voters take their say. Aside from the fact not every environmental bill has made it without getting cut or eliminated, what is needed for the "better deal" that needs to happen? Well, politically we need the next President to be a Democrat and just once during their term they will need a congressional majority. But that isn't the only way. Not even close.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #427 –
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
AGW is a political/economic theory desperately seeking to perpetuate itself! It's scientific underpinnings are not near secure enough to support it, to the extent that the "true believers" need… (The world will survive this latest apocalyptic cult.)
Oh my God! Another sign of the End of the World… :)

@Midnight Racoon: That's an odd mix of Cargo Cult Science and conspiracy theory! :)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #428 –
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on

Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
AGW is a political/economic theory desperately seeking to perpetuate itself! It's scientific underpinnings are not near secure enough to support it, to the extent that the "true believers" need… (The world will survive this latest apocalyptic cult.)
Oh my God! Another sign of the End of the World… :)

@Midnight Racoon: That's an odd mix of Cargo Cult Science and conspiracy theory! :)


"Cargo Cult Science" caught my attention just now. It's a strange cause-and-effect thing at bottom.

The cargo cults got started on the South Sea islands during WW2. The marines would come in, build a make-shift airfield, then planes would land and disgorge tons of supplies so our guys could fight the Japanese. The islanders saw this happen, and reasoned that building airfields would cause the planes to come. So--- after our guys left, that's what the islanders did. Problem: The planes didn't come.

The islanders didn't realize the cause and effect thing. The marines built their airfields because the planes were coming--- the islanders built airstrips believing that would bring the planes.

So---what are the odds that we're causing climate change, and what are the odds that we're just along for the ride while the planet does what it was going to do whether or not we were here? For my part, I think we give ourselves way too much credit for either being able to harm or save the planet--- it's not so easy as selling carbon-credits or changing out incandescent bulbs for CFC (or LED) bulbs.
What would happen if a large asteroid slammed into the Earth?
According to several tests involving a watermelon and a large hammer, it would be really bad!

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #429 –
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
Are you, sir, Antediluvian? Or merely Quixotic?

A severe case of cognitive dissonance... not sure it can be treated.

You remember me your compatriots defending the world created half a thousand years ago, fossiles included. Exactly the same mind set.
A matter of attitude.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #430 –
Quote from: mjmsprt40 on

For my part, I think we give ourselves way too much credit for either being able to harm or save the planet--- it's not so easy as selling carbon-credits or changing out incandescent bulbs for CFC (or LED) bulbs.

This is resoundingly false at least on the first part. Already ancient civilisations caused their own ecological destruction so many times in so many places that it's common knowledge for everyone who has been through a non-American basic school.

On the second part, I tend to agree that humanity cannot save itself, but this is due to human nature, not due to technological or political impossibility. Technologically or politically everything is possible, but sheer human willingness to self-destruct is most likely going to conquer all other odds.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #431 –
Quote from: mjmsprt40 on
So---what are the odds that we're causing climate change,
100 to 1 for at this stage in our history. Too bad the casino don't offer bets on this. Tell me if it's just coincidence that CO2 emissions have been raising at the same time the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere continue to increase and the average global temperature as well. On these forums, posters have complained that they heard of "global cooling" and now there's concern about global warming. Therefore they disbelieve science. So what happened to the global cooling? Humanity and its CO2 emissions. Back then, climatologists couldn't predicate that atmospheric CO2  concentrations would increase this drastically



Again, how much to you believe in coincidence? We had rapid industrialization in Europe and the US and in later years that spread to various Asian nations. I already mentioned CO2 levels and the temperatures. This is not difficult to understand. Neither is scientifically questionable. Unfortunately, our corrupt politicians made it  political issue so they can continue to get money from traditional energy providers. Instead of clinging to the past, let's ensure future prosperity by investing in renewable, no pollution energy sources. It can be done. Here in Las Vegas, we get energy from the Hoover dam. Nearby Nellis Airforce Base has begun construction of of 15 megawatt solar project (yes, it's actually trivial to store the energy and you won't run out of power at night or if it's cloudy, rainy, snowy...:p ) I already mentioned the economic benefits of the new industries created around cleaner energy sources.

Again, though, even if the climate data is somehow proven false (although I don't see how) the cleaner air will benefit everyone from reduced allergies, lung conditions, etc to side benefits such as our mountains looking even more majestic when not shrouded in smog.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #432 –
Quote from: ersi on
A ton of rye is a whole different thing than the words "ton of rye" written on paper, but financial markets only deal in words on paper. Even worse, they deal in digits in computers...

Even worst, not even anymore "words wriiten on paper" but a casino game about how much those words will "value" a year from now.
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
you revert to Papal Authority? (Or something as similarly silly.) Why?

Because I thought that youl'd be able at least to understand when the Pope adresses the populace. My fault, you're even bellow that.
A matter of attitude.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #433 –
Quote from: mjmsprt40 on
Has Earth ever known a time when the averages haven't been extreme? It seems to swing from warm to cold and back again often enough, if you take a good look at the thing over a long period of time.

Only when it becomes too extreme compared to the preceding equilibrium, which would not be pleasant. I'm sure there's fatalists, misanthropes and masochists who would love it.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #434 –
Quote from: Belfrager on

Quote from: ersi on
A ton of rye is a whole different thing than the words "ton of rye" written on paper, but financial markets only deal in words on paper. Even worse, they deal in digits in computers...

Even worst, not even anymore "words wriiten on paper" but a casino game about how much those words will "value" a year from now.
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
you revert to Papal Authority? (Or something as similarly silly.) Why?

Because I thought that youl'd be able at least to understand when the Pope adresses the populace. My fault, you're even bellow that.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying the Pope bellows?
 

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #435 –
Quote from: tt92 on

Quote from: Belfrager on

Quote from: ersi on
A ton of rye is a whole different thing than the words "ton of rye" written on paper, but financial markets only deal in words on paper. Even worse, they deal in digits in computers...

Even worst, not even anymore "words wriiten on paper" but a casino game about how much those words will "value" a year from now.
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
you revert to Papal Authority? (Or something as similarly silly.) Why?

Because I thought that youl'd be able at least to understand when the Pope adresses the populace. My fault, you're even bellow that.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying the Pope bellows?


Why do you think certain documents were called "Papal Bulls"???
What would happen if a large asteroid slammed into the Earth?
According to several tests involving a watermelon and a large hammer, it would be really bad!

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #437 –
Quote from: mjmsprt40 on

Quote from: tt92 on

Quote from: Belfrager on

Quote from: ersi on
A ton of rye is a whole different thing than the words "ton of rye" written on paper, but financial markets only deal in words on paper. Even worse, they deal in digits in computers...

Even worst, not even anymore "words wriiten on paper" but a casino game about how much those words will "value" a year from now.
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
you revert to Papal Authority? (Or something as similarly silly.) Why?

Because I thought that youl'd be able at least to understand when the Pope adresses the populace. My fault, you're even bellow that.

I'm not sure I understand. Are you saying the Pope bellows?


Why do you think certain documents were called "Papal Bulls"???

I always thought it was a sort of abbreviation.
Sometimes they hit and sometimes they didn't.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #438 –
Quote from: Midnight Raccoon on
Quit so, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.
If you don't know when they're "right" it doesn't matter! Put succinctly: In science, why it's right matters a great deal — at least in some disciplines…
Some people (including so-called scientists) exempt climatology. (Why?)
Quote from: Belfrager on
Because I thought that youl'd be able at least to understand when the Pope adresses the populace. My fault […]
Yes, it is your fault: Not understanding when the Pope speaks with authority and when he's talking out of his a**! You're a pagan, at heart…
Quote from: Midnight Raccoon on
it's just coincidence that CO2 emissions have been raising at the same time the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere continue to increase and the average global temperature as well.
Unless the mechanism is reasonably described and the "effect" continues unabated, yeah. The mere correlation means — Cargo Cult science!
It's approaching 20 years that there's been no appreciable "rise" in temperatures, and atmospheric CO2 has increased unabated! Explain that.
But I'd ask you to do so scientifically, not rhetorically.

mjm gets it pretty much right: He understands Cargo Cult science; you've fallen prey to it…
——————————————————————————————————————————————
@Belfrager and any other Catholics: Pope Francis has no -I repeat, NO- authority to pronounce upon science or economics… And he certainly must know this!
I won't pronounce him the Anti-Christ; I just call him a stupid man, called to a position he's incapable of filling with both dignity and sincerity. (One or the other has to give…) He's a man of his times, and -certainly- a man of his place.
If God wants us to know the niceties of climate science, he'd likely choose a better vessel. (Perhaps, a scientist whose work is unassailable?! :) )
(I miss Benedict… But I understand his decision to step down.)
———————————————————————
BTW, Sang: Indeed, "quit so"! You've neither the expertise nor the intellectual prowess to continue… :)
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #439 –
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
@Belfrager and any other Catholics: Pope Francis has no -I repeat, NO- authority to pronounce upon science or economics… And he certainly must know this!

The Pope has the authority to speak about whatever he desires, that's a fact that you are going to learn either you like it or not.
Even much more interesting, he has the authority for forcing you to change the way he desires, either you like it or not, as you're going to state in no much time.
Get used.

By the way, do I need to post a second time a list or are you going to stop your wanna be pseudo scientific circus?
A matter of attitude.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #440 –
So---- you really think the Pope has power to force me-- and Oakdale or anybody else for that matter--  to think the "right" way about AGW? Hmmmmmm..... I have a surprise for him- (and you, Bel):

What would happen if a large asteroid slammed into the Earth?
According to several tests involving a watermelon and a large hammer, it would be really bad!

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #441 –
Quote from: mjmsprt40 on
So---- you really think the Pope has power to force me-- and Oakdale or anybody else for that matter--  to think the "right" way about AGW?

He doesn't bothers with you, he forces your entire country to change...



Only the elites matters for conducting change. You'll simply follow, no option.

---------------------

This is not a discussion about if climate change exists or not, it's a discussion about your repeated and insistent irresponsibility about it.
A matter of attitude.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #442 –
Bull$#(). The Pope had ONE chance to govern this country. That was when John Kennedy (a Roman Catholic) got elected.

Heck, he didn't even have much of a chance then. The only way JFK could get elected was to assuage fears that an RC president wouldn't secretly allow the Pope to really govern the country. That's a large part of where our present separation of church and state comes from today. The Pope can say what he likes--- the government will respectfully listen--- then go on with the affairs of government as if the Pope had never spoken.

The rest of our presidents-- from George Washington to Obama-- have been some form of Protestant, and if the Pope wants to think he can give any of them orders--- good luck with that. Heck, a lot of our recent presidents don't even seem to listen to their own denominations much, still less the Pope.

Right now, the only reason you have the illusion-- that's all that it is-- that Obama is paying attention to the Pope is that they just happen to be on the same page regarding AGW. Get  Republican in next time--- or even some Democrats who aren't quite so "party line", and see how well they follow Papal dictates.
What would happen if a large asteroid slammed into the Earth?
According to several tests involving a watermelon and a large hammer, it would be really bad!

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #443 –
Quote from: mjmsprt40 on
The Pope can say what he likes--- the government will respectfully listen--- then go on with the affairs of government as if the Pope had never spoken.

Holy ignorance...
Read again the Papal document. It was not written for you to discuss it but to announce you how things will be.
By the way, he's going to your pretty land this year, you'll have the chance to witness the apotheosis. You can sum 2+2, right? :)

A matter of attitude.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #444 –
BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Are you SERIOUS? Are you really under such delusion that you think all the Pope has to do is issue a decree and the US will unquestioningly follow it because the Pope said so?

Look, these days the government doesn't even follow the Word of God much, and you think that the Pope----

BWA-HAHAHAHAHA!!!! WEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!! (Spends twenty minutes pounding on floor, laughing.) Man, this is too good. Stand-up comedians can't come up with something like that, so if you ever get tired of subsistence farming you have a brilliant career ahead of you.
What would happen if a large asteroid slammed into the Earth?
According to several tests involving a watermelon and a large hammer, it would be really bad!

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #445 –
Quote from: mjmsprt40 on
Stand-up comedians can't come up with something like that, so if you ever get tired of subsistence farming you have a brilliant career ahead of you.

I'm a man of many talents.

You'll notice the change, I don't need to remember you how minor and isolated your's and Oakdale's voices are already in the US. You are the retrograde burden that drafts the US backwards and will inevitability doom it's aspirations to be someone at the international scale. A good thing for the rest of the world, by the way.
Unfortunately Chinese are already arriving to substitute you, those are the real problem. Do as your president Obama tells you and get out of the way.

The world needs to prepare to resist the Chinese and can't waste more time with the US hypocrisy in this matter.
A matter of attitude.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #446 –
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
If you don't know when they're "right" it doesn't matter! Put succinctly: In science, why it's right matters a great deal — at least in some disciplines…
Some people (including so-called scientists) exempt climatology. (Why?)

What I'm looking for is evidence against AGW that can at least withstand scrutiny. Unfortunately, it doesn't exist. There was the claim that global temperatures stop increasing in 1998. No, they didn't. There was the claim that yes, the climate was changing but it was due to the sun's cycles. Then it turned out the math was wrong on that study. Ridiculously so.   The issue isn't a scientific one, but a partisan one with the GOP politicians being paid big bucks to lie through their teeth. So where is the evidence to prove this wrong?
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on
It's approaching 20 years that there's been no appreciable "rise" in temperatures, and atmospheric CO2 has increased unabated! Explain that.
But I'd ask you to do so scientifically, not rhetorically.

And who told you this nonsense? But "appreciable" is a vague term. What's appreciable for you might not be for me and vice/versa. Therefore, adjective is meaningless. For the purposes of clarity, I work with absolutes.


As you can see, the trend is still upward. Noting the rise is the most abundant greenhouse house and that it's acting in the expected fashion is quite reasonable. At the most basic level, it's common sense backed up by data. So the explanation you're asking for is that the entire premise of your question is incorrect.

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #447 –
Sang, it's common sense that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones... :) (But I will agree that you deal in absolutes! The Party Line is always the party line. And if it changes tomorrow so will you. :) )

@Belfrager: The Pope can go pee up a rope! If he actually thinks he has some authority on this matter -granted by God?- he's an apostate... I should think you'd find that a sad (and perhaps dangerous) circumstance...
进行 ...
"Humor is emotional chaos remembered in tranquility." - James Thurber
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts!" - Richard Feynman
 (iBook G4 - Panther | Mac mini i5 - El Capitan)

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #448 –
Quote from: OakdaleFTL on

Sang, it's common sense that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones... :) (But I will agree that you deal in absolutes! The Party Line is always the party line. And if it changes tomorrow so will you. :) )

@Belfrager: The Pope can go pee up a rope! If he actually thinks he has some authority on this matter -granted by God?- he's an apostate... I should think you'd find that a sad (and perhaps dangerous) circumstance...


Gotta say something about that bolded: Sooner or later someone will bring up that scientific test where a guy dropped two cannonballs from the Tower of Pisa. Of course both balls landed at the same time, even though one was significantly lighter than the other. Cannon balls are round, and the distance was relatively short.

Drop a can of soup and a piece of paper from the side of the Grand Canyon. You know the paper isn't going to land first, so--- heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones because air resistance slows the lighter object more. Further, you can scientifically prove that the park police frown on littering---..
What would happen if a large asteroid slammed into the Earth?
According to several tests involving a watermelon and a large hammer, it would be really bad!

Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming

Reply #449 –
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDp1tiUsZw8[/video]