RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists.

RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/11/2014 10:18:37 AM)
Their introduction on their website makes clear their bias (whereas independent scientists would not be starting from a reaction, but rather, a true search--which has been done repeatedly), i.e., "we're the 'unheard other side' in an either/or fallacy": The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) is what its name suggests: an international panel of nongovernment scientists and scholars who have come together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change. Because we are not predisposed to believe climate change is caused by human greenhouse gas emissions, we are able to look at evidence the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ignores. Because we do not work for any governments, we are not biased toward the assumption that greater government activity is necessary.

DomKen -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/11/2014 11:20:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: epiphiny43 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131113092217.htm Opps, wrong link earlier. The linked study shows No pause in global warming, as expected when the most dynamic climate area lately is fully studied and included in the total biosphere caloric balance. During the supposed 'pause' the Arctic actually warmed, about 8 times faster than the rest of the planet. This along with similar now quantified mid ocean depth warming in the South Pacific changes our understanding by clearly eliminating the warming 'pause'. Which knocks not just holes but the whole foundation from under the deniers position that there is in reality any serious deviation from predictions of accelerating global warming in lockstep with atmospheric carbon and other greenhouse gasses. Weak paper. And saying "we know where the heat is going" doesn't change the fact that the average temperature has declined over the last 15 years. And it doesn't change the fact that the IPCC model predicted they would increase. Wrong. As the paper shows. if the Arctic was properly included the globe was warming throughout the period in question. Why do you refuse to acknowledge new facts when they are presented. I thought you claimed to be open minded about science? You weren't lying were you?

epiphiny43 -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/12/2014 4:35:37 PM)
A "weak paper"?? Which is simply an organized, comprehensive summary (NO 'creativity', theory or criticise-able experiments involved) of all the available climate records from the area and period, no editing, in previously unorganized form. What could possibly be stronger? A faux meta study that agrees with you before they even did the arithmetic? My initial reaction can't appear here, it's not allowable on this forum. But your ability to embarrass yourself seems infinite? The temps have risen some places, lowered others. As documented by: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140504133207.htm See, those doctrinaire scientists, focused only on a climate warming agenda again? Does the concept of Total Caloric Average ever get considered? Surely you know what 'average' and 'mean' signify? Or the existence of known 'tipping point' changes we really don't want to see. The latest: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140512134613.htm This sweet little change is the now warmer Antarctic water melting the underside of a major ice shelf back far enough to reach a down slope that will eventually melt enough ice cap in that basin to increase sea level 4 ft, which wasn't part of previous estimates of sea level change risk. Total meltout could take up to 200 years, small comfort as it is in addition to the other previously understood contributions to sea level change.

papassion -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/13/2014 11:20:30 AM)
Just to add to the mix. I was watching the weather channel where they had a piece about volcanos. I was surprized at the number of volcanos in the world. Said one fairly large volcano puts out more ash, gas and debris in one HOUR than the coal fired power plants do all YEAR. Seems like Libs should be figuring out ways to "block" volcano eruptions! lol Sundays' Parade Magazine has a piece just about every week by Marilyn Vos Savant. She is listed in the Guinness Book of Records as having the highest IQ (228) in the world. Her article this week was answering a question about windmills. To condense it, she said windmills take energy from the wind and thus change weather thus change climate. Said it is known that the ground miles downwind of them is warmer and drier. Said these effects will increase as we get more and more windmills. Damm, Just like medicines have side effects, windmills, which we put up to help prevent climate change, are also CAUSING climate change! Oh well, back to the drawing board! And the Sierra Club and other wildlife, nature groups have complained that windmills kill as high as 500,000 birds/year including protected hawks, eagles, etc. Bet the wolves, fox, bears love it! Makes their life a lot easier! Hungry? Just go to the windfarm "butcher shop" and get an easy free meal! Hey! Welfare for animals!!! I guess its come full circle. Free food will make the animals unable to fend for themselves just like Welfare has done to humans.

Yachtie -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/13/2014 12:37:10 PM)
No good deed goes unpunished. [:D]

PeonForHer -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/13/2014 1:48:21 PM)
quote: To condense it, she said windmills take energy from the wind and thus change weather thus change climate. Said it is known that the ground miles downwind of them is warmer and drier. Said these effects will increase as we get more and more windmills. An article on how that much-celebrated, nutty little myth got started: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2012/feb/07/wind-farms-climate-change-weather I hope that helps. [;)]

DomKen -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/13/2014 2:04:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: papassion Just to add to the mix. I was watching the weather channel where they had a piece about volcanos. I was surprized at the number of volcanos in the world. Said one fairly large volcano puts out more ash, gas and debris in one HOUR than the coal fired power plants do all YEAR. Seems like Libs should be figuring out ways to "block" volcano eruptions! lol Seems like that is complete bullshit. An eruption may put out that much but volcanoes do not erupt continuously. As a matter of fact most are dormant for centuries at a time.

PeonForHer -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/13/2014 4:17:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Seems like that is complete bullshit. An eruption may put out that much but volcanoes do not erupt continuously. As a matter of fact most are dormant for centuries at a time. Sometimes I think, what's the point, Ken? If you cut down one denialist toadstool, another will grow in its place. And so on, and so on, till it's too frigging late to do anything. Whether or not they're still denying by that time won't make one iota of difference anyway.

DomKen -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 3:03:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Seems like that is complete bullshit. An eruption may put out that much but volcanoes do not erupt continuously. As a matter of fact most are dormant for centuries at a time. Sometimes I think, what's the point, Ken? If you cut down one denialist toadstool, another will grow in its place. And so on, and so on, till it's too frigging late to do anything. Whether or not they're still denying by that time won't make one iota of difference anyway. That seems to be the denialist game plan. Which they have achieved. We have lost the Antarctica West ice. We've lost effectively all of the Greenland ice cap. It may take a few hundreds years for the melting to finish but its is inevitable at this point. The heat and CO2 is in the atmosphere and there seems to be no way to reverse it. That means roughly a 20 meter sea level rise. That means the displacement of something like 3 or 4 billion, at present, people plus the inundation of all the associated cropland and infrastructure.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 4:55:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: papassion Just to add to the mix. I was watching the weather channel where they had a piece about volcanos. I was surprized at the number of volcanos in the world. Said one fairly large volcano puts out more ash, gas and debris in one HOUR than the coal fired power plants do all YEAR. Seems like Libs should be figuring out ways to "block" volcano eruptions! lol Seems like that is complete bullshit. An eruption may put out that much but volcanoes do not erupt continuously. As a matter of fact most are dormant for centuries at a time. I dunno Ken... At present, there are about 600 volcanoes that have had known eruptions during recorded history, while about 50-70 volcanoes are active (erupting) each year. At any given time, there is an average of about 20 volcanoes that are erupting. Source: http://www.volcanodiscovery.com/volcanoes/faq/how_many_volcanoes.html 50-70 erupting each year and an average of 20 at any given time???? That's a shitload of gas, ash, heat and other shit warming us up all the time. Even taking the lower estimate of 50 a year, that's 50 years worth of coal-fired pollution being spewed out annually. Or to put it another way, a years worth of coal-fired pollution damned near every fucking week!! Might be worth taking that into account dont'cha think??

thishereboi -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 9:05:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: papassion Just to add to the mix. I was watching the weather channel where they had a piece about volcanos. I was surprized at the number of volcanos in the world. Said one fairly large volcano puts out more ash, gas and debris in one HOUR than the coal fired power plants do all YEAR. Seems like Libs should be figuring out ways to "block" volcano eruptions! lol Seems like that is complete bullshit. An eruption may put out that much but volcanoes do not erupt continuously. As a matter of fact most are dormant for centuries at a time. I dunno Ken... At present, there are about 600 volcanoes that have had known eruptions during recorded history, while about 50-70 volcanoes are active (erupting) each year. At any given time, there is an average of about 20 volcanoes that are erupting. Source: http://www.volcanodiscovery.com/volcanoes/faq/how_many_volcanoes.html 50-70 erupting each year and an average of 20 at any given time???? That's a shitload of gas, ash, heat and other shit warming us up all the time. Even taking the lower estimate of 50 a year, that's 50 years worth of coal-fired pollution being spewed out annually. Or to put it another way, a years worth of coal-fired pollution damned near every fucking week!! Might be worth taking that into account dont'cha think?? This is one of the main reasons I like CM. There are always interesting links popping up that I might never have thought of looking for. Thanks for the contribution [:)]

DomKen -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 10:57:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: papassion Just to add to the mix. I was watching the weather channel where they had a piece about volcanos. I was surprized at the number of volcanos in the world. Said one fairly large volcano puts out more ash, gas and debris in one HOUR than the coal fired power plants do all YEAR. Seems like Libs should be figuring out ways to "block" volcano eruptions! lol Seems like that is complete bullshit. An eruption may put out that much but volcanoes do not erupt continuously. As a matter of fact most are dormant for centuries at a time. I dunno Ken... At present, there are about 600 volcanoes that have had known eruptions during recorded history, while about 50-70 volcanoes are active (erupting) each year. At any given time, there is an average of about 20 volcanoes that are erupting. Source: http://www.volcanodiscovery.com/volcanoes/faq/how_many_volcanoes.html 50-70 erupting each year and an average of 20 at any given time???? That's a shitload of gas, ash, heat and other shit warming us up all the time. Even taking the lower estimate of 50 a year, that's 50 years worth of coal-fired pollution being spewed out annually. Or to put it another way, a years worth of coal-fired pollution damned near every fucking week!! Might be worth taking that into account dont'cha think?? Nope. the eruptions in question do not release that much gas. And the actual eruptions that do occur are taken into account. Before humans started adding CO2 to the atmosphere the CO2 level was roughly stable which means that, including volcanic activity, the amount being put into the air matched the amount being taken out of the air. What humans have done is overwhelm the natural systems for removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Both by cutting down huge swaths of forest and pumping huge amounts of CO2 into the air.

papassion -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 11:26:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: To condense it, she said windmills take energy from the wind and thus change weather thus change climate. Said it is known that the ground miles downwind of them is warmer and drier. Said these effects will increase as we get more and more windmills. An article on how that much-celebrated, nutty little myth got started: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2012/feb/07/wind-farms-climate-change-weather I hope that helps. [;)] ???? What I got from this source was that both sides admittedly don't know all the long or short term effects. I'll put MY money on Marilyn, the smartest girl in the world and assume she is right on this subject.

thompsonx -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 11:54:27 AM)
ORIGINAL: papassion Just to add to the mix. I was watching the weather channel where they had a piece about volcanos. I was surprized at the number of volcanos in the world. Said one fairly large volcano puts out more ash, gas and debris in one HOUR than the coal fired power plants do all YEAR. Seems like Libs should be figuring out ways to "block" volcano eruptions! lol By your own admission you are ignorant of volcanos and got your firs cursory look at them on the weather chanel yet you have the vulger temerity to speak as if your opinion was worth any more mention than a fart in church. Sundays' Parade Magazine has a piece just about every week by Marilyn Vos Savant. She is listed in the Guinness Book of Records as having the highest IQ (228) in the world. Her article this week was answering a question about windmills. To condense it, she said windmills take energy from the wind and thus change weather thus change climate. Said it is known that the ground miles downwind of them is warmer and drier. And yet the paper that she drew her opinion from states quite clearly that the change is limited to about 300 meters. Damm, Just like medicines have side effects, windmills, which we put up to help prevent climate change, That windmills were put up to prevent climate change is an ignorant unsubstantiated opinion. Windmills were invented to harnes the mechanical energy in the wind. Jacobs windmills were operating at the south pole giving the scientist electric power when n.y city was still using gas lighting. Windmills purpose is to lower the cost of power by useing the free energy in the wind.. are also CAUSING climate change! Actually not. And the Sierra Club and other wildlife, nature groups have complained that windmills kill as high as 500,000 birds/year including protected hawks, eagles, etc. Yup and the designers of the air screws have been hard at work making them more "bird friendly". Same gang that has made underwater turbines more "fish friendly" Bet the wolves, fox, bears love it Might want to check your grip on reality here. Which wind farms are situated in bear habitat???wolf habitat??? Makes their life a lot easier! Hungry? Just go to the windfarm "butcher shop" and get an easy free meal! Hey! Welfare for animals!!! I guess its come full circle. Free food will make the animals unable to fend for themselves just like Welfare has done to humans. How has the welfare in the u.s. hampered your ability to fend for yourself?

thompsonx -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 11:59:23 AM)
ORIGINAL: papassion ???? What I got from this source was that both sides admittedly don't know all the long or short term effects. I'll put MY money on Marilyn, the smartest girl in the world and assume she is right on this subject. What you are failing to notice here is that there are not two sides. We have a scientist submitting a paper and a non scientist making a conclusion that is not supported by the paper bieng critiqued. Now if you are happy with her opinion then who am I to disabuse you of your ignorance?

papassion -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 12:16:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: papassion ???? What I got from this source was that both sides admittedly don't know all the long or short term effects. I'll put MY money on Marilyn, the smartest girl in the world and assume she is right on this subject. What you are failing to notice here is that there are not two sides. We have a scientist submitting a paper and a non scientist making a conclusion that is not supported by the paper bieng critiqued. Now if you are happy with her opinion then who am I to disabuse you of your ignorance? Maybe in your video war games world in your mom's basement, you think writing a paper trumps a world known brilliant person's opinion. If I say I wrote a paper, will you idolize me? Did it ever occur to you that she has studied climate change herself? Or does your super powers know that she didn't? go back to shooting up the "enemy" in your games! And you spelled being wrong.

thompsonx -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 12:53:32 PM)
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Snicker. Typical nervious habit of liars. I have read well north of 2000 climate papers. And there are hundreds of papers that disagree with the IPCC theory of global warming. So by your own research only about 10% of the shit you read actually agrees with your ignorant opinions. Hell for that matter the IPCC's data doesn't agree with their theory either. So, I suggest you read CERN's experiments on aerosol formation especially the endpapers (which are hard to find) and then Svenmark's research on ionizing radiation and cloud formation. If there were anything there you would have linked it. You did not link us to your "secret site" so your opinions remain ignorant unsubstantiated childish opinions.

thompsonx -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 12:55:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail From a fuckin weatherman on TV? Please say nobody is stupid enough to quote that. I could try but it would hurt my mouth. It is not too uncommon for the ignorant to quote the ignorant.

thompsonx -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 1:00:34 PM)
ORIGINAL: papassion Maybe in your video war games world in your mom's basement, you think writing a paper trumps a world known brilliant person's opinion. Your bitch is commenting on smething outside her field of expertise...on a paper written by someone deeply associated with the issue. That you would defer to the opinon that supports your position is typical of the ignorant. If I say I wrote a paper, will you idolize me? When your credentials match his or when pigs fly which ever comes first. Did it ever occur to you that she has studied climate change herself? When you show some validation for that opinion then we shall consider it until then you are just talking like a man with a paper asshole trying to fight a forest fire.

thompsonx -> RE: interesting post on the politics of alarmists. (5/14/2014 1:08:10 PM)
Sorry, PFH, you're just not American enough to understand. Lawson doesn't agree with the Liberals and Obama, so it's obvious he's a racist. Any chance of discussion here before you get yourself firmly nailed to your cross?

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875