Climate Change Mega Thread

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby JLives » Dec 11th, 2018, 2:04 pm

monilynno wrote:Nobel Laureate in Physics; "Global Warming is Pseudoscience"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXxHfb6 ... 7BbcJIkh0E


Dude, your Youtube video is not sufficient to disprove the documented findings of a planet full of climate scientists. Do you have a peer reviewed study to post? Because that is Nobel prize worthy if it disproves AGW. And from a physicist instead of a climate scientist? Do you get dental advice from your heart surgeon?
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."

Jmfva likes this post.
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 15993
Likes: 3549 posts
Liked in: 6070 posts
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 11:53 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby monilynno » Dec 11th, 2018, 2:14 pm

JLives wrote:
monilynno wrote:Nobel Laureate in Physics; "Global Warming is Pseudoscience"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXxHfb6 ... 7BbcJIkh0E


Dude, your Youtube video is not sufficient to disprove the documented findings of a planet full of climate scientists. Do you have a peer reviewed study to post? Because that is Nobel prize worthy if it disproves AGW. And from a physicist instead of a climate scientist? Do you get dental advice from your heart surgeon?


That Nobel Laureate is a physicist and he shreds the fake math used to sell the global warming lie, but hey you go right ahead and keep taking Al Gore's and Bill Nye's word for it. Oh BTW Here's Gore making a killing off of the global warming lie. https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/ ... be47b432dc

The Green Barbarian likes this post.
monilynno
Fledgling
 
Posts: 221
Likes: 321 posts
Liked in: 165 posts
Joined: Jan 9th, 2014, 9:26 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby JLives » Dec 11th, 2018, 2:19 pm

monilynno wrote:That Nobel Laureate is a physicist and he shreds the fake math used to sell the global warming lie, but hey you go right ahead and keep taking Al Gore's word for it. Oh BTW Here's Gore's making a killing off of the global warming lie. https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/ ... be47b432dc


Al Gore isn't a climate scientist. Why do I care what he has to say about climate change? His profit is irrelevant to the facts being true. I ONLY care what the actual people studying it find. Not bloggers, not youtubers, not forum posters, not phsycists but only climate scientists. How arrogant of you to think you have a higher understanding of this issue than (and I will continue to repeat this) an entire frickin planet full of them.

BTW, I don't support carbon tax. I get why they do it because they think profit margins are the only way to get people's attention but I don't support everything being monetized or having a profit motive. This is an issue with an "I like living on this planet and breathing the air" motive for me.
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."

3 people like this post.
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 15993
Likes: 3549 posts
Liked in: 6070 posts
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 11:53 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby rustled » Dec 11th, 2018, 2:27 pm

JLives wrote:Dude, your Youtube video is not sufficient to disprove the documented findings of a planet full of climate scientists. ...

Interesting how the dogma has changed from "planet full of scientists" to "planet full of climate scientists".

"No scientist from outside the tribe shall be acknowledged!" So climate scientists who do not support the consensus narrative are vigorously flamed. Funnily enough, the consensus narrative was created by a blogger. Ah, well.

So, only climate scientists who agree with the consensus should be believed. Well, that's not a very scientific approach. IMO, of course.

But as always, this sort of response does shows that what's most important is to immediately defend the narrative. Any evidence that casts doubt must immediately be ridiculed and dismissed. Not examined, no. Ridiculed and dismissed. Cuz it's all about the science, right? LOL.

2 people like this post.
rustled
Guru
 
Posts: 6339
Likes: 9540 posts
Liked in: 7662 posts
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 1:47 pm

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby JLives » Dec 11th, 2018, 2:36 pm

rustled wrote:Interesting how the dogma has changed from "planet full of scientists" to "planet full of climate scientists".

"No scientist from outside the tribe shall be acknowledged!" So climate scientists who do not support the consensus narrative are vigorously flamed. Funnily enough, the consensus narrative was created by a blogger. Ah, well.

So, only climate scientists who agree with the consensus should be believed. Well, that's not a very scientific approach. IMO, of course.

But as always, this sort of response does shows that what's most important is to immediately defend the narrative. Any evidence that casts doubt must immediately be ridiculed and dismissed. Not examined, no. Ridiculed and dismissed. Cuz it's all about the science, right? LOL.


I would never be so arrogant, as you are, to think I know more than the people actually studying the issue. It's not a narrative and it's not tribal. It's a whole bunch of experts separately coming to the same conclusions. Why? Because it's true! You jump all over a blogger or scientist not even in the relevant field of study who disagrees with the consensus but don't accept the finding of years of studies from actual climate scientists all over the planet, from both public and private backgrounds. Why? Why is it so hard for you to accept that a whole bunch of experts coming to the same conclusions from their studies, just may actually be right about it? Why do you think you know better?

Findings, and methods are found here: https://www.ipcc.ch/ Happy reading!
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."

2 people like this post.
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 15993
Likes: 3549 posts
Liked in: 6070 posts
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 11:53 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby rustled » Dec 11th, 2018, 2:43 pm

Gentle JLives, I have pointed out that refusing to examine anything that is contrary to the narrative, contrary to the consensus, is not science.

That ignoring (or worse, ridiculing and dismissing) climate scientists who have not come to the same conclusions as others is not science.

This is not arrogance. This is not about what I know and what I don't. It is simple fact.

:130:

3 people like this post.
rustled
Guru
 
Posts: 6339
Likes: 9540 posts
Liked in: 7662 posts
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 1:47 pm

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby blue iguana » Dec 11th, 2018, 2:44 pm

The model-observational discrepancy is real, and needs to be taken into account especially when using models for policy guidance. Only observational should be used for policy. Can we seriously make a decision impacting billions of people with such an uncertainty?

Computer models are not science. They are tools used by scientists. You can doubt the accuracy of the models and still be 100% compatible with science. Reducing pollution and being more efficient are desirable goals on their own. That said, such measures have to be realistic. They have to work and pass a cost/benefit test.

My Poster Presentation for the AMS Annual Meeting Jan 8, 2019
https://edberry.com/blog/climate-physic ... ment-51023

PREPRINT: Contradictions to IPCC’s Climate Change Theory
https://edberry.com/blog/climate-physic ... ge-theory/
Note: Interesting debate in comments section. Apparently, the science is not settled.

What is really behind the increase in atmospheric CO2? Murry Salby
Video - Climate Change models vs Observational
https://edberry.com/blog/climate-physic ... heric-co2/

RESPONSIVENESS OF ATMOSPHERIC CO2 TO FOSSIL FUEL EMISSIONS: UPDATED
https://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.ph ... 03&EXT=pdf
ABSTRACT: The IPCC carbon budget concludes that changes in atmospheric CO2 are driven by fossil fuel emissions on a year by year basis. A testable implication of the validity of this carbon budget is that changes in atmospheric CO2 should be correlated with fossil fuel emissions at an annual time scale net of long term trends. A test of this relationship with insitu CO2 data from Mauna Loa 1958-2016 and flask CO2 data from twenty three stations around the world 1967-2015 is presented. The test fails to show that annual changes in atmospheric CO2 levels can be attributed to annual emissions. The finding is consistent with prior studies that found no evidence to relate the rate of warming to emissions and they imply that the IPCC carbon budget is flawed possibly because of insufficient attention to uncertainty, excessive reliance on net flows, and the use of circular reasoning that subsumes a role for fossil fuel emissions in the observed increase in atmospheric CO2.

CO2 Residence and Bern Model
http://climateilluminated.com/CO2_facts ... model.html
Another article questioning the Bern model
No matter how talented, rich or intelligent you are, how you treat animals tells me all I need to know about you.

The Green Barbarian likes this post.
blue iguana
Fledgling
 
Posts: 155
Likes: 197 posts
Liked in: 239 posts
Joined: Oct 3rd, 2008, 5:37 pm

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby The Green Barbarian » Dec 11th, 2018, 3:33 pm

JLives wrote:
Dude, your Youtube video is not sufficient to disprove the documented findings of a planet full of climate scientists.


LOL - a planet full of scientists saying one thing isn't sufficient to disprove another planet-full of scientists saying another. That's how dumb this debate is getting.

Your "planet-full of scientists" are saying what you want to hear - an apocalyptic fairy tale, whose only "cure" is to tax everyone into oblivion and force everyone to live in caves. That's what you want to hear. So therefore, this must be "truth".
If you see someone using the term "dimples", you are dealing with a bonehead.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 31019
Likes: 14189 posts
Liked in: 19625 posts
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby The Green Barbarian » Dec 11th, 2018, 3:38 pm

JLives wrote:It's not a narrative and it's not tribal. It's a whole bunch of experts separately coming to the same conclusions. Why? Because it's true!


No, it's because their scientific grants are all predicated on the myth existing. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. And anyone who jeopardizes the free ride of government money is immediately black-balled, and called a "denier". It's just disgusting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_s ... al_warming
If you see someone using the term "dimples", you are dealing with a bonehead.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 31019
Likes: 14189 posts
Liked in: 19625 posts
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby Omnitheo » Dec 11th, 2018, 4:18 pm

Climate scientists are not being paid more than other scientists. Scientists are paid to do their jobs, which is to look st the data, and present their findings. I don’t get what right wingers problem is with people being paid to do their jobs? The recent report that came out from the White House was not produced for money. The scientist who assembled and published the report got paid nothing extra for it, and her job as a climatologist paid no higher than her previous job in her other area of speciality in physics.

The only agenda that scientists have is to further knowledge.

If you want to go on about money in rejection of science, look at the fossil fuel industries. Look at the billionaires who don’t want anything cutting into their profits. Now tell me where all the billionaire scientists are.
"The Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians, every one of us, even when it is uncomfortable."
- Justin Trudeau

3 people like this post.
User avatar
Omnitheo
Guru
 
Posts: 5438
Likes: 8253 posts
Liked in: 4379 posts
Joined: Jul 19th, 2011, 10:10 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby The Green Barbarian » Dec 11th, 2018, 4:28 pm

Omnitheo wrote:Climate scientists are not being paid more than other scientists. Scientists are paid to do their jobs, which is to look st the data, and present their findings.


And as long as those "findings" support what the UN wants them to support, the money will continue flowing. That's how the game is played.

I don’t get what right wingers problem is with people being paid to do their jobs?


I don't know who the "right wingers" are here, but I'd like to know why Left-wingers like paying people to lie.

The only agenda that scientists have is to further knowledge.


Oh were that only the truth.

. Now tell me where all the billionaire scientists are.


It's not just about money, it's about fame. That's what lures in the James Hansens and the Michael Manns.
If you see someone using the term "dimples", you are dealing with a bonehead.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 31019
Likes: 14189 posts
Liked in: 19625 posts
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby Jmfva » Dec 11th, 2018, 7:23 pm

Climate change deniers will be the laughing stock of civilization in 20-30 years. People will look back and shake their heads in disbelief. At least it's documented here. [icon_lol2.gif]

kevingerry78 likes this post.
User avatar
Jmfva
Board Meister
 
Posts: 666
Likes: 1504 posts
Liked in: 729 posts
Joined: Mar 10th, 2010, 6:02 pm

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby The Green Barbarian » Dec 11th, 2018, 8:01 pm

Jmfva wrote:Climate change deniers will be the laughing stock of civilization in 20-30 years. People will look back and shake their heads in disbelief. At least it's documented here. [icon_lol2.gif]


no one that I know is denying that the climate is changing. Of course it is. What people want to see is proof that humans are making any difference to climate. Eighteen years ago supposed "climate scientists" told us that snow was a thing of the past in the UK. And they were dead wrong. The only laughing stocks are the losers who have bought into this nonsensical fairy tale. And have advocated for spending billions and even trillions "fighting" this fairy tale. All of you should be hanging your heads in shame. You are wrong. Your fairy tales aren't coming true.
If you see someone using the term "dimples", you are dealing with a bonehead.
User avatar
The Green Barbarian
Admiral HMS Castanet
 
Posts: 31019
Likes: 14189 posts
Liked in: 19625 posts
Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby JLives » Dec 11th, 2018, 8:13 pm

Jmfva wrote:Climate change deniers will be the laughing stock of civilization in 20-30 years. People will look back and shake their heads in disbelief. At least it's documented here. [icon_lol2.gif]


They're laughing stocks NOW. There is no actual debate that humans are accelerating climate change. How it will affect us and what to do about it is where the debate lies but we do know that it's happening.
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."

2 people like this post.
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
 
Posts: 15993
Likes: 3549 posts
Liked in: 6070 posts
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 11:53 am

Re: Climate Change Mega Thread

Postby Jmfva » Dec 11th, 2018, 8:31 pm

JLives wrote:
Jmfva wrote:Climate change deniers will be the laughing stock of civilization in 20-30 years. People will look back and shake their heads in disbelief. At least it's documented here. [icon_lol2.gif]


They're laughing stocks NOW. There is no actual debate that humans are accelerating climate change. How it will affect us and what to do about it is where the debate lies but we do know that it's happening.


So true.

kevingerry78 likes this post.
User avatar
Jmfva
Board Meister
 
Posts: 666
Likes: 1504 posts
Liked in: 729 posts
Joined: Mar 10th, 2010, 6:02 pm

PreviousNext

Return to World

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests