RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (7) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 >   
  Topic: The Global Warming Thread, Featuring Rep. Sheila Butt (R-TN)< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 06 2011,09:20   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 06 2011,13:11)
[SNIP]

I think I speak for everyone when I say...

WTF??!??!!

Indeed. Crocoducks on the other thread, evil wicked OH NOES TEH EVILUSHUNIZMS IZ AN RELIGION KILLING TWEES on this one.

So, what's the betting? Have we got a standard bright meteorite, briefly flaring into our atmosphere, or do we have a long period comet, eventually to become a satellite?

I'm betting passive-aggressive whiner who cuts and pastes and has the reasoning ability of a block of warm dung, who'll briefly flare up then die off in a puff of abuse. Maybe I'm wrong, but I do like the strong start of whack-a-doodlery.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
JohnW



Posts: 2228
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 06 2011,10:19   

Quote (forastero @ Oct. 05 2011,22:13)
Trouble...I dont think its so much the warnings over climate change and/or deforestation that makes them skeptical but rather the femicrat’s use of Co2 levels toward population control.
Why do the likes of Bill Gates, Al Gore, the United Nations etc.. always focus blame on African and Latin American populations, deforestations, dust ect…when African and Latin American ecology is way better than United Nation's ecology? Why is that the United Nations allows epidemics like typhus and malaria in Africa and Latin America but wipes them out only in lands that they occupy?   Is it because they want this land for themselves? Yeah these radical femicrats also deny good stewardship because their religion tells them that their mother-nature selection will “always” evolve better without mankind. But that idea is now literally going up in smoke. Indigenous  agroforesters  knew better and were fantastic stewards from British Columbia to Amazonia. Unfortunately, most of this indigenous knowledge was wiped out and/or suppressed by so called progressives and finally forgotten after years of progressive handouts.

United Nations?  Stooges!

Everyone knows it's the Welsh who are running everything.  Just ask Louis.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 06 2011,10:45   

Quote (JohnW @ Oct. 06 2011,16:19)
Quote (forastero @ Oct. 05 2011,22:13)
Trouble...I dont think its so much the warnings over climate change and/or deforestation that makes them skeptical but rather the femicrat’s use of Co2 levels toward population control.
Why do the likes of Bill Gates, Al Gore, the United Nations etc.. always focus blame on African and Latin American populations, deforestations, dust ect…when African and Latin American ecology is way better than United Nation's ecology? Why is that the United Nations allows epidemics like typhus and malaria in Africa and Latin America but wipes them out only in lands that they occupy?   Is it because they want this land for themselves? Yeah these radical femicrats also deny good stewardship because their religion tells them that their mother-nature selection will “always” evolve better without mankind. But that idea is now literally going up in smoke. Indigenous  agroforesters  knew better and were fantastic stewards from British Columbia to Amazonia. Unfortunately, most of this indigenous knowledge was wiped out and/or suppressed by so called progressives and finally forgotten after years of progressive handouts.

United Nations?  Stooges!

Everyone knows it's the Welsh who are running everything.  Just ask Louis.

Dirty Welsh bastards with their multiple consonants, close harmony singing, leeks, daffodils and horrendous molestation of perfectly innocent sheep.

It's a conspiracy between them and Colonel Sanders.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
khan



Posts: 1481
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 06 2011,14:25   

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 06 2011,10:20)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 06 2011,13:11)
[SNIP]

I think I speak for everyone when I say...

WTF??!??!!

Indeed. Crocoducks on the other thread, evil wicked OH NOES TEH EVILUSHUNIZMS IZ AN RELIGION KILLING TWEES on this one.

So, what's the betting? Have we got a standard bright meteorite, briefly flaring into our atmosphere, or do we have a long period comet, eventually to become a satellite?

I'm betting passive-aggressive whiner who cuts and pastes and has the reasoning ability of a block of warm dung, who'll briefly flare up then die off in a puff of abuse. Maybe I'm wrong, but I do like the strong start of whack-a-doodlery.

Louis

"Cleanup on aisle 4"

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 1954
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 07 2011,00:18   

The spam links are a serious problem.  :angry:

Edited by Dr.GH on Oct. 06 2011,22:20

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 20 2011,12:45   

It seems that I should not have warned Kevin Miller against promoting his other films (SpOILed) in the "Expelled" thread after all.

Global warming, Ben Stein's economics (in which he denied the possibility of any economic recession, right before it happened), and "Darwinism" seem to be connected, if one watches Collapse, in which Michael Ruppert describes how our presumed infinite-growth economy (a pyramid scheme, essentially) is being brought down by the depletion of the world's oil reserves (peak oil).

One thing that has always confused me about deniers is that they speak from the other side of their mouths and actually praise a warmer climate. DaveScot himself did it.

This makes sense if one accepts Ruppert's assertion that the melting of polar ice caps frees up Antarctica for drilling, since ANWAR would produce only 6 months of oil for 10 years' work, and even Saudi Arabia has turned to offshore drilling, an indication that even the Saudis can no longer profit from finding more land-based reserves of sweet crude.

So, there you have it folks: "deniers" are just stalling for time, because they want it to happen.

Ruppert spends some time outlining and connecting the "infinite growth paradigm," derivatives, compound interest (the understanding of which conservatives used to advocate just like gold shares, until derivatives and the housing bubble came along), the recession, the Arab Spring, the bankruptcy of California, and the population explosion with the production and consumption of oil. Whatever you think of his assertions, I recommend the documentary for this section alone.

With all the talk about a "paradigm shift" from ID advocates, Stein, Miller, Mathis, Ruloff, and others, you are not going to hear this from them.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3285
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 20 2011,12:58   

If you like, I'll see if I can dig up the quote, but Saudi has admitted (quietly) that it can no longer supply the oil that the US needs on a day-to-day basis.

US industries are going to have to start kissing the asses of Argentina and (of course) Iraq to maintain the intake of oil that keeps are country going.

sigh...*

*I'm doing a lot of that today.  Doesn't help that my writing is going poorly.  Of course, it doesn't help that the writing standards I have are fundamentally wrong and scientifically inaccurate...

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 1954
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 20 2011,14:09   

Glenn Morton has been pounding the 'peak oil" drum for years, and at the same time became a warming denier.

Oh well...

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 31 2011,07:26   

Just follow where the evidence leads.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Henry J



Posts: 4050
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 01 2011,10:06   

Evidence? Evidence? We don't need no stinkin evidence!!111!!one!!!

(nyuk nyuk)

  
MichaelJ



Posts: 455
Joined: June 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 01 2011,20:16   

Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 31 2011,22:26)
Just follow where the evidence leads.

Science converting denialists one by one

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 02 2011,11:13   

DeNews is IDiot, Dog bites Man:

Quote
Latest climate change scandal: Lead BEST study author accused of trying to mislead the public – by co-author


This would be a climate change skeptic scandal, DeNews!  

The source: the always accurate Daily Mail.
The accusation therein:  Author says climate change is occuring, but coauthor claims results show warming has recently stopped.
The result: this co-author has been asked to provide a statistical justification, with silence so far.  Yes, that is a real scandal DeNews.

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
Dale_Husband



Posts: 118
Joined: April 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 05 2011,10:32   

No forgiveness from me!

http://dalehusband.wordpress.com/2011.......redited
Quote



Climate “skeptic” attempting damage control after being discredited

It should have been obvious from the 1990s onward that global warming was indeed real and that human activities were chiefly to blame, but many who were entrenched in conservative or libertarian political positions found those conclusions offensive and a threat to their interests, hence the ever-present attacks by climate change “skeptics” who would do everything they could to cast doubt on the evidence regarding the issue. They did that instead of examining their political positions, which a true skeptic should have done!

Now one of them, Richard Muller, has changed sides, but is still trying to justify his earlier attitude. That’s an example of a “notpology“, which is dishonest.

http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic....05.html

 
Quote

WASHINGTON (AP) — A prominent physicist and skeptic of global warming spent two years trying to find out if mainstream climate scientists were wrong. In the end, he determined they were right: Temperatures really are rising rapidly.

The study of the world’s surface temperatures by Richard Muller was partially bankrolled by a foundation connected to global warming deniers. He pursued long-held skeptic theories in analyzing the data. He was spurred to action because of “Climategate,” a British scandal involving hacked emails of scientists.

<snip>

“The skeptics raised valid points and everybody should have been a skeptic two years ago,” Muller said in a telephone interview. “And now we have confidence that the temperature rise that had previously been reported had been done without bias.”

Muller said that he came into the study “with a proper skepticism,” something scientists “should always have. I was somewhat bothered by the fact that there was not enough skepticism” before.
 (Emphasis mine)


That is bullcrap. If Muller was wrong before, he was certainly wrong a decade ago, so why not just say that and leave his ego out of it? Scientists, including proponents of the man-made global warming hypothesis, have to be responsible skeptics to do their work at all and prove it by subjecting their findings to peer review, and it was the peer review process that made that hypothesis credible in the first place. Saying otherwise as Muller is doing is slander.

http://www.dictionaryslang.com/notpolo....tpology

 
Quote
An apology that doesnt ACTUALLY apologise, but is simply given to make the evil person LOOK/feel better.



--------------
If you need a man-made book to beleive in a God who is said to have created the universe, of what value is your faith? You might as well worship an idol.

   
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 12 2012,12:43   

Ben Stein has officially become a virus, but that does not resolve the question of whether or not viruses are alive. (With this evidence, probably not.) How can a lawsuit come from a non-lawsuit? Anyone? Anyone? ;) (Yes, my comment is there.)

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2012,15:31   

BullyA is as great a scientist as DeNews:

Quote
Yeti’s House is Safe
February 10, 2012 Posted by Barry Arrington under Intelligent Design
No Comments

Anyone remember how the UN panel assured us the Himalayan glaciers would melt completely in 25 years?



Um, no? I remember a mistake in a regional impacts report that was caught by glaciologists.

Quote
Now we know they are not melting at all.  Do you think all the climate alarmists are slapping their foreheads and yelling ”Doh!  Maybe I should reevaluate my position”?  Me neither.


Here is the abstract of the paper:
Quote
Glaciers and ice caps (GICs) are important contributors to present-day global mean sea level rise1, 2, 3, 4. Most previous global mass balance estimates for GICs rely on extrapolation of sparse mass balance measurements1, 2, 4 representing only a small fraction of the GIC area, leaving their overall contribution to sea level rise unclear. Here we show that GICs, excluding the Greenland and Antarctic peripheral GICs, lost mass at a rate of 148?±?30?Gt?yr?1 from January 2003 to December 2010, contributing 0.41?±?0.08?mm?yr?1 to sea level rise. Our results are based on a global, simultaneous inversion of monthly GRACE-derived satellite gravity fields, from which we calculate the mass change over all ice-covered regions greater in area than 100?km2. The GIC rate for 2003–2010 is about 30 per cent smaller than the previous mass balance estimate that most closely matches our study period2. The high mountains of Asia, in particular, show a mass loss of only 4?±?20?Gt?yr?1 for 2003–2010, compared with 47–55?Gt?yr?1 in previously published estimates2, 5. For completeness, we also estimate that the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, including their peripheral GICs, contributed 1.06?±?0.19?mm?yr?1 to sea level rise over the same time period. The total contribution to sea level rise from all ice-covered regions is thus 1.48?±?0.26?mm??1, which agrees well with independent estimates of sea level rise originating from land ice loss and other terrestrial sources6.


Perhaps BullyA should reconsider what this is telling him - the globe is warming, ice is melting.  Of course, being Faux News, they are only concerned with the 1% of glaciers not melting.  :angry:

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2110
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2012,03:46   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 20 2011,10:58)
If you like, I'll see if I can dig up the quote, but Saudi has admitted (quietly) that it can no longer supply the oil that the US needs on a day-to-day basis.

US industries are going to have to start kissing the asses of Argentina and (of course) Iraq to maintain the intake of oil that keeps are country going.

sigh...*

*I'm doing a lot of that today.  Doesn't help that my writing is going poorly.  Of course, it doesn't help that the writing standards I have are fundamentally wrong and scientifically inaccurate...

"Uh-oh."  -- Canada.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2012,10:37   

Quote (fnxtr @ Feb. 11 2012,03:46)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 20 2011,10:58)
If you like, I'll see if I can dig up the quote, but Saudi has admitted (quietly) that it can no longer supply the oil that the US needs on a day-to-day basis.

US industries are going to have to start kissing the asses of Argentina and (of course) Iraq to maintain the intake of oil that keeps are country going.

sigh...*

*I'm doing a lot of that today.  Doesn't help that my writing is going poorly.  Of course, it doesn't help that the writing standards I have are fundamentally wrong and scientifically inaccurate...

"Uh-oh."  -- Canada.

"I, for one, welcome our US Overlords."

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2012,17:31   

Joe makes excuses for the melting ice:

Quote
Soot and dirt melt ice well before the ambient temperature is above freezing.


Because we all know there was no soot or dirt before the CO2 just coincidentally started to mysteriously rise, coming from nowhere.

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3285
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2012,23:07   

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Feb. 11 2012,17:31)
Joe makes excuses for the melting ice:

Quote
Soot and dirt melt ice well before the ambient temperature is above freezing.


Because we all know there was no soot or dirt before the CO2 just coincidentally started to mysteriously rise, coming from nowhere.

Joe still has a lot of misconceptions about global warming.  I know he's been exposed to reality because he's like 30% of the hits on my blog.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 1016
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 12 2012,09:52   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Feb. 11 2012,23:07)
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Feb. 11 2012,17:31)
Joe makes excuses for the melting ice:

 
Quote
Soot and dirt melt ice well before the ambient temperature is above freezing.


Because we all know there was no soot or dirt before the CO2 just coincidentally started to mysteriously rise, coming from nowhere.

Joe still has a lot of misconceptions about global warming.  I know he's been exposed to reality because he's like 30% of the hits on my blog.

Morton's Demon has helpfully equipped Joe with a pair of Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses which darken at the first hint of reality exposure.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

  
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,08:22   

Har har de har, Ben Stein! Emoshunal Deestress! Oh Noes!
Quote
A judge has dismissed most of Ben Stein's lawsuit that claimed the Japanese company Kyocera Mita backed out of a $300,000 deal to hire him to act in commercials for a line of computer printers after it found out about his controversial beliefs on global warming.

Although Stein claimed that his freedom to speak publicly was at stake, California Superior Court Judge Elizabeth Allen White has ruled that much of his lawsuit itself was a legal maneuver intended to impinge free speech and has dismissed eight of Stein's nine claims. The lawsuit survives, but only barely.


Obviously a not very fit lawsuit. How does a lawsuit come from a non-lawsuit, anyway? ;)

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2110
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,08:38   

Quote (Kristine @ May 15 2012,06:22)
Har har de har, Ben Stein! Emoshunal Deestress! Oh Noes!
 
Quote
A judge has dismissed most of Ben Stein's lawsuit that claimed the Japanese company Kyocera Mita backed out of a $300,000 deal to hire him to act in commercials for a line of computer printers after it found out about his controversial beliefs on global warming.

Although Stein claimed that his freedom to speak publicly was at stake, California Superior Court Judge Elizabeth Allen White has ruled that much of his lawsuit itself was a legal maneuver intended to impinge free speech and has dismissed eight of Stein's nine claims. The lawsuit survives, but only barely.


Obviously a not very fit lawsuit. How does a lawsuit come from a non-lawsuit, anyway? ;)

Descent with modification.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3285
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,08:46   

Quote (Kristine @ May 15 2012,08:22)
Har har de har, Ben Stein! Emoshunal Deestress! Oh Noes!
 
Quote
A judge has dismissed most of Ben Stein's lawsuit that claimed the Japanese company Kyocera Mita backed out of a $300,000 deal to hire him to act in commercials for a line of computer printers after it found out about his controversial beliefs on global warming.

Although Stein claimed that his freedom to speak publicly was at stake, California Superior Court Judge Elizabeth Allen White has ruled that much of his lawsuit itself was a legal maneuver intended to impinge free speech and has dismissed eight of Stein's nine claims. The lawsuit survives, but only barely.


Obviously a not very fit lawsuit. How does a lawsuit come from a non-lawsuit, anyway? ;)

One of Kyocera's business units is manufacturing advanced solar panels.

Their panels will be an option on the nextgen Prius.  That business unit has invested more than half a billion dollars in solar panel manufacturing plants... including on in San Diego to meet the US desire for clean power.

Makes sense to drop Ben Stein to me.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Henry J



Posts: 4050
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,13:02   

So he thinks (?) that freedom of speech obligates employers to hire people who would embarrass them in front of their customers?

  
Kristine



Posts: 3037
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,14:53   

Quote (Henry J @ May 15 2012,13:02)
So he thinks (?) that freedom of speech obligates employers to hire people who would embarrass them in front of their customers?

Well, apparently he's willing to do to others what he's already done to himself. ;) Isn't that the Golden Shower Rule?

I think he was going for the See-I'm-A-Skepptik-BuddI-DriveAPrius emotional blackmail, or he was really, really counting on singing "Big in Japan" over a montage of Occupy students protesting high loan debt.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2110
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,19:46   

Quote (Kristine @ May 15 2012,12:53)
I think he was going for the See-I'm-A-Skepptik-BuddI-DriveAPrius emotional blackmail, or he was really, really counting on singing "Big in Japan" over a montage of Occupy students protesting high loan debt.

Thanks for that CITR-FM flashback. I must now go to YouTube.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2012,14:00   

Denialist follies:

So this psychology professor at Univ of West Australia does a survey to see if belief in global warming conspiracy theories is correlated with other conspiracy theories which are not climate related in any way.  Short answer: yes.  Long answer: hell, yes!

http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/ccc1.ht....c1.html

Commenter make accusations that he lied about contacting skeptic blogs to post a link to the surveys, in order to get the answer he wanted.  Demonstrating the very conspiracist ideation that they are offended by being linked to!

Subsequent posts continue the fun:

http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/ccc2.ht....c2.html "It has come to my attention that one of the individuals who initially denied—yes, folks, that's the correct word, look it up in a dictionary—having received an invitation to post a link to my survey on the rejection of science on his blog, has now found that email."

http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/lewando....e1.html "The public response to my forthcoming paper in Psychological Science, entitled "NASA faked the moon landing—Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science," has provided a perfect real-life illustration of the very cognitive processes at the center of my research.

In fact, the cascading eruption of allegations and theories about the paper and myself have illustrated the impoverished epistemology of climate denial better than any mountain of data could have done."

http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/lewando....te.html

http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/lewando....f4.html

What a bunch of dumbasses!

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3553
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2012,15:33   

I've watched this debate from several perspectives, and I'm convinced it isn't at all the same as the general anti-science, religious fundamentalist anti-science response.

I don't think it's even about money in the usual sense.

First of all, technological luddism is not typically a conservative thing. Conservatives may object to science when it targets specific religious beliefs, but they are generally happy with technology.

I think even the oil companies would be more than happy to enter alternative energy markets if opportunities really existed.

I think the problem is that good alternatives simply don't exist.

Before that claim is summarily dismissed I would like to point out that manufacture of wind and thermal generators depends on rare earth elements that are really messy to produce, The United States has simply banned all the mining technologies needed to produce the materials needed for high efficiency magnets. China produces the raw materials, but at a horrendous environmental and human cost.

I am not fully up to speed on solar electric, but it does not seem like a mature technology. The one big effort in the United States went bankrupt.

Batteries are still not a mature technology.

The only proven technology that could quickly replace coal and oil is nuclear, and the Japanese tsunami seems to have set that prospect back about thirty years.

So the political opposition to AGW amelioration seems to be motivated by a lack of alternatives that would not induce a massive global recession. If there were some mature technology that simply required lots of labor and investment, I think we would see support. Unfortunately, the only real solutions all seem to call for making people poorer.

--------------
”let’s not make a joke of ourselves.”

Pat Robertson

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3285
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2012,15:45   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 11 2012,15:33)
I've watched this debate from several perspectives, and I'm convinced it isn't at all the same as the general anti-science, religious fundamentalist anti-science response.

I don't think it's even about money in the usual sense.

First of all, technological luddism is not typically a conservative thing. Conservatives may object to science when it targets specific religious beliefs, but they are generally happy with technology.

I think even the oil companies would be more than happy to enter alternative energy markets if opportunities really existed.

I think the problem is that good alternatives simply don't exist.

Before that claim is summarily dismissed I would like to point out that manufacture of wind and thermal generators depends on rare earth elements that are really messy to produce, The United States has simply banned all the mining technologies needed to produce the materials needed for high efficiency magnets. China produces the raw materials, but at a horrendous environmental and human cost.

I am not fully up to speed on solar electric, but it does not seem like a mature technology. The one big effort in the United States went bankrupt.

Batteries are still not a mature technology.

The only proven technology that could quickly replace coal and oil is nuclear, and the Japanese tsunami seems to have set that prospect back about thirty years.

So the political opposition to AGW amelioration seems to be motivated by a lack of alternatives that would not induce a massive global recession. If there were some mature technology that simply required lots of labor and investment, I think we would see support. Unfortunately, the only real solutions all seem to call for making people poorer.

I disagree.  We have a solar PV station going in down the street.  It's going to be a 30 Megawatt system.  Yeah, not much, but it's a start.  Texas generates something like 10% of its total electricity needs from wind.

There are production solar thermal stations going up in Spain as well.  That one is particularly interesting, but solar mirrors melt a chemical salt, which boils water.  The system can run at full power for up to 14 hours without sunlight... meaning it works at night.  It can store the heat energy for like 3 days without boiling water for electricity.

My understanding is that wind is fully competitive with coal and natural gas... without the fossil fuel subsidies.  If they subsidies are not included, wind beats fossil fuels, solar is about 5 cents more than fossil fuels, and nuclear is roughly equivalent.  With the subsidies in place, fossil beats them all... of course, the subsidies really shouldn't count, since we're paying for that too... just as taxes instead of electricity costs.

Think about it.  Major oil companies are getting 10 billion dollars a year from the government AND bringing in record profits.  If they spend their subsidy money on politicians, then they get to keep every dime of the income and still control the entire debate.

Here's some more.  http://ogremk5.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/renewable-energy-and-the-economy/

And companies are getting involved in clean energy.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 11 2012,17:03   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 11 2012,15:33)
I've watched this debate from several perspectives, and I'm convinced it isn't at all the same as the general anti-science, religious fundamentalist anti-science response.

I don't think it's even about money in the usual sense.

First of all, technological luddism is not typically a conservative thing. Conservatives may object to science when it targets specific religious beliefs, but they are generally happy with technology.

I think even the oil companies would be more than happy to enter alternative energy markets if opportunities really existed.

I think the problem is that good alternatives simply don't exist.

Before that claim is summarily dismissed I would like to point out that manufacture of wind and thermal generators depends on rare earth elements that are really messy to produce, The United States has simply banned all the mining technologies needed to produce the materials needed for high efficiency magnets. China produces the raw materials, but at a horrendous environmental and human cost.

I am not fully up to speed on solar electric, but it does not seem like a mature technology. The one big effort in the United States went bankrupt.

Batteries are still not a mature technology.

The only proven technology that could quickly replace coal and oil is nuclear, and the Japanese tsunami seems to have set that prospect back about thirty years.

So the political opposition to AGW amelioration seems to be motivated by a lack of alternatives that would not induce a massive global recession. If there were some mature technology that simply required lots of labor and investment, I think we would see support. Unfortunately, the only real solutions all seem to call for making people poorer.

Good alternatives do exist (all energy sources,and conservation (designer forbid), yet require significant up front costs and need widespread implementation to achieve economy of scale.  I think the ultimate limit on scale is raw materials, as you point out.  

The motivation for the science rejection is two-fold: businesses with immediate profit motive opposing regulation, and the victims who are led to believe that government solutions are always worse than free market solutions - even if the government allows the free market to include costs and not externalize them.

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
  203 replies since April 15 2011,16:21 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (7) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]