RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

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



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 05 2013,12:37   

Quote (Bob O'H @ April 05 2013,12:15)
Quote (midwifetoad @ April 04 2013,13:01)
If the world moved more to natural gas and nukes, much of the problem would be solved. It would certainly buy time -- 50 to 100 years -- for greener technologies to come online.

Indeed. Nuke the US, China, and Europe and you'll reduce CO2 emissions considerably.

Wait a moment, could that be North Korea's plan? They're doing it for the climate?

North Korea may be the most carbon friendly country on earth. Just as Cuba was for decades a wilderness friendly country.

The trick is to get to stability and sustainability without becoming NK.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Arctodus23



Posts: 322
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: April 28 2013,10:38   

A page from RC

--------------
"At our church’s funerals, we sing gospel songs (out loud) to God." -- FL

"So the center of the earth being hotter than the surface is a "gross
violation of the second law of thermodynamics??" -- Ted Holden

   
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: May 12 2013,09:27   

There are some great evolution videos out there, here is one for global warming -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v....04VJDco

The last bit on evidence/fact/hypothesis/etc. is excellent.

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
Arctodus23



Posts: 322
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: May 28 2013,16:10   

Quote (dvunkannon @ May 12 2013,09:27)
There are some great evolution videos out there, here is one for global warming -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v....04VJDco

The last bit on evidence/fact/hypothesis/etc. is excellent.

Just to let you know...The citations were in another picture frame video.

--------------
"At our church’s funerals, we sing gospel songs (out loud) to God." -- FL

"So the center of the earth being hotter than the surface is a "gross
violation of the second law of thermodynamics??" -- Ted Holden

   
Arctodus23



Posts: 322
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: May 29 2013,10:51   

A fun cartoon from RealClimate.org:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.p....-change

--------------
"At our church’s funerals, we sing gospel songs (out loud) to God." -- FL

"So the center of the earth being hotter than the surface is a "gross
violation of the second law of thermodynamics??" -- Ted Holden

   
Thrinaxodon



Posts: 65
Joined: June 2013

(Permalink) Posted: June 06 2013,13:48   

AGW is a myth. For example, some if the glaciers are getting larger.

--------------
Velikovsky is right.

Humans originated in the Devonian.

talk.origins is a place for people to p*ss on others.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: June 06 2013,14:34   

Quote (Thrinaxodon @ June 06 2013,13:48)
AGW is a myth. For example, some if the glaciers are getting larger.

Name one glacier that is larger today than it was 10 years ago.

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

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

   
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 06 2013,15:14   

Quote (Thrinaxodon @ June 06 2013,13:48)
AGW is a myth. For example, some if the glaciers are getting larger.

Since AGW does not expect all glaciers to retreat at the same time, the fact that a few are growing at any one time or location is not evidence that AGW is wrong.

http://www.grid.unep.ch/glacier....ers.pdf  Figure 5.1 shows the retreating glaciers in red, the advancing ones in blue.  Huge difference.

--------------
"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

  
Thrinaxodon



Posts: 65
Joined: June 2013

(Permalink) Posted: June 06 2013,15:19   

Quote (OgreMkV @ June 06 2013,14:34)
Quote (Thrinaxodon @ June 06 2013,13:48)
AGW is a myth. For example, some if the glaciers are getting larger.

Name one glacier that is larger today than it was 10 years ago.

There's been glaciers growing in Alaska, Norway, etc.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008....g-again

--------------
Velikovsky is right.

Humans originated in the Devonian.

talk.origins is a place for people to p*ss on others.

  
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 14 2013,13:27   

Quote
There's been glaciers growing in Alaska, Norway, etc.


That's pretty much the standard level of logic of denialist arguments.

"only 99% of glaciers are shrinking, therefore it is getting colder."

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: June 14 2013,14:12   

Quote (dhogaza @ June 14 2013,19:27)
     
Quote
There's been glaciers growing in Alaska, Norway, etc.


That's pretty much the standard level of logic of denialist arguments.

"only 99% of glaciers are shrinking, therefore it is getting colder."


Yup!

http://www.skepticalscience.com/himalay....sic.htm

Ice may become more plastic as temperature rises, causing a temporary increase in extent. And it may start snowing more (see:"too cold for snow". Ask your granny Thrinaxodon; something of a myth but there is a grain of truth due to inability of colder air to hold as much moisture.). Glaciers are shrinking despite these effects. Now, what could possibly make that happen?

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2138
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2013,10:33   

Don Prothero wrote a nice review of GW data for the Johns Hopkins University Press blog.

http://jhupressblog.com/2013.......ps-back

Edited by Dr.GH on June 15 2013,08:33

   
Henry J



Posts: 4809
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 17 2013,13:26   

...

  
Henry J



Posts: 4809
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 17 2013,13:28   

Quote (Bob O'H @ April 05 2013,11:15)
Quote (midwifetoad @ April 04 2013,13:01)
If the world moved more to natural gas and nukes, much of the problem would be solved. It would certainly buy time -- 50 to 100 years -- for greener technologies to come online.

Indeed. Nuke the US, China, and Europe and you'll reduce CO2 emissions considerably.

Wait a moment, could that be North Korea's plan? They're doing it for the climate?

But, that would alter the climate in a bunch of other ways! ;)

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 17 2013,14:35   

Cooling is a good thing. Right?

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 17 2013,16:24   

Midwifetoad said:  
Quote
If the world moved more to natural gas and nukes, much of the problem would be solved. It would certainly buy time -- 50 to 100 years -- for greener technologies to come online.


The problem won't be solved. The environmentalists here are objecting to further oil and gas exploration and making much noise about CO2 reduction, in a country with total emissions on the order of 1/300th of China's. (Or was it 1/300th of China's yearly increase?) Kids making noise about oh how we have to protect the environment.

We are even refusing to use our own gas, but don't mind receiving electricty generated on the continent - from Norwegian gas (or Danish import coal). El-distribution here is a push-pull operation, cables to the continent used in both directions according to consumption patterns.

Anyway, the less we do to limit emissions, the sooner the world will wake up to realize which way we are going.

ETA 'import'

Edited by Quack on June 18 2013,02:45

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 17 2013,20:26   

If anyone was missing DaveScot from UD, he's currently pretty active in the discussion over at Judith Curry's blog.

The following exchange is from
http://judithcurry.com/2013....missing

Quote
David Springer | June 17, 2013 at 9:52 am | Reply
What’s missing is modeling the earth as a water world instead of a dry rock. If the atmosphere was 99.97% nitrogen and 0.03% CO2 and the surface was dry rock like the moon then doubling CO2 would cause a mean temperature rise across the entire sphere of 1.1C. Water changes everything. Modelers invented, out of whole cloth it appears, so-called water vapor amplification which transforms 1.1C of well modeled sensitivity into 3C of poorly modeled sensitivity. It appears now that is quite wrong and water vapor amplification is non-existent. My take on what happens is that the cloud deck rises by about 100 meters for every CO2 doubling but cloud temperature remains unchanged and instead the lapse rate between cloud and ground changes. This is called lapse-rate feedback. It’s a negative feedback and its magnitude is not well known. If the same temperature cloud is at a higher level in the atmosphere then by definition there is less greenhouse gas between the cloud top and space and more greenhouse gas between the cloud bottom and the ground. This gives the heat in the cloud a less restrictive radiative path to space and a more restrictive path back to the ground. A mere 100 meter change in cloud height equates to a 1.0C lapse-rate feedback and thus nullifies the effect of doubling CO2. Critically, where there is little or no water on the surface to evaporate and form clouds there is nothing to nullify the warming effect. So over land, especially where the land is frozen, we should see a larger warming effect. In fact this is what we do observe.

Rob Starkey | June 17, 2013 at 10:25 am |
Dave

Your theory may be correct, but I think you’s have to admit that there is large leap from a general theory and developing a model that reliably performs. Many of us have theories, but they are worth little. Mine involves the interaction with the deep oceans, but until someone can demonstrate a GCM that reliably performs…..well it is all just meaningless talk

David Springer | June 17, 2013 at 5:50 pm |
Rob the ocean is over 70% of the surface and over 90% of the heat capacity. It isn’t subject to variation from urban heat islands, land use change, albedo change (except a small % due to seasonal sea ice extent change). The entire surface is even all at almost exactly the same elevation.

Ya figures out what the ocean does in response to C02 change and everything else is details.

As of now the best empirical data (which isn’t very accurate at such tiny wattages) says the ocean basin is accumulating heat at the rate of 0.5W/m2. This is enough to raise the basin temperature 0.2C per century. Per CENTURY. That isn’t cause for alarm.


But there is a better exchange that proves Dave is still our Dave earlier in the thread:

Quote
David Springer | June 17, 2013 at 8:55 am | Reply
David Young | June 16, 2013 at 10:43 pm | Reply

“Basically, adding more “physics” doesn’t increase accuracy if in fact it becomes more accurate to constrain all the additional parameters with data.”

Constraining parameters with data. Gee, that almost sounds like something out of the scientific method. You know, like hypothesis (what you think the parameters should be), prediction (the result of the parameterization), and test (does the hypothesis explain the measured result of experiments). Lather rinse and repeat unitl the hypothesis predicts the experimental results. Then you have a candidate for a theory if the final step, replication by others, is successful.

Constraining the existing parameters with data should be the first step. And not just any data. The data itself is often insuffucient in scope and quality such that it’s pencil whipped into “better” fitness for purpose. Better in this case too often means a better fit to desired outcomes (cough cough hockey stick cough cough).

Brian H | June 17, 2013 at 10:13 am |
Note the correction to the sentence you critique. Start over, rewrite.

Steven Mosher | June 17, 2013 at 11:05 am |
Brian, be quiet. Springer is now a fluid dynamics expert. And just yesterday he invention the Li on battery for Dell

Venter | June 17, 2013 at 11:31 am |
Yeah and Mosh is an ” engineer ” with a major in English and Philosophy, eminently qualified and knowledgeable to comment about fluid dynamics.
What a jerk!

Pissant Progressive | June 17, 2013 at 11:42 am |
heh. 2 smart guys that are almost as smart as they think they are.

David Springer | June 17, 2013 at 5:10 pm |
I don’t have a problem with the corrected sentence.

David Springer | June 17, 2013 at 5:14 pm |
@Venter

English and philosophy, huh. That explains why he can’t engineer his way out of a paper bag. But it doesn’t explain why he sucks at English and philosophy.


--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2013,11:34   

Quote
Modelers invented, out of whole cloth it appears, so-called water vapor amplification which transforms 1.1C of well modeled sensitivity into 3C of poorly modeled sensitivity.



Quote
Ya figures out what the ocean does in response to C02 change and everything else is details.


Poor Dave.  As CO2 forcing increases and temps rise, relative humidity stays roughly the same because so much of the earth is covered by ocean.  The second quote is correct.  The first quote is bullshit as "modelers" didn't invent water vapor feedback "out of whole cloth", it is derived from the Clausius-Clapeyron equation and long-established physics used in meteorology.

Sigh.

  
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2013,11:38   

Man, I could get into a cage fight between Steven Mosher and DaveScot Springer.  Dave has met his match in arrogance, immorality, dishonesty, and general all-around assholedness.

For those not familiar with Mosher, some years back he coined the nickname "Piltdown Mann" for Michael Mann, implying that Mann's paleoclimate reconstruction work (aka "hockey stick") was an intentional fraud ala the Piltdown Man fraud.

He, along with an even more ignorant jerk named Tom Fuller, co-authored a book on "climategate" which was filled with accusations of scientific misconduct, etc.

He is slime, as is DaveScot, so I suggest the cage fight be held in a slimepit.

  
k.e..



Posts: 3895
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 18 2013,21:52   

Quote (dhogaza @ June 18 2013,19:38)
Man, I could get into a cage fight between Steven Mosher and DaveScot Springer.  Dave has met his match in arrogance, immorality, dishonesty, and general all-around assholedness.

For those not familiar with Mosher, some years back he coined the nickname "Piltdown Mann" for Michael Mann, implying that Mann's paleoclimate reconstruction work (aka "hockey stick") was an intentional fraud ala the Piltdown Man fraud.

He, along with an even more ignorant jerk named Tom Fuller, co-authored a book on "climategate" which was filled with accusations of scientific misconduct, etc.

He is slime, as is DaveScot, so I suggest the cage fight be held in a slimepit.

better yet set up a blog as an ex Navy lesbian marine biologist with a drinking problem who's battling the PTB in water world over the falseness of AGW and invite him over....

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2013,14:32   

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs....s-graph




--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2013,19:26   

Quote (Richardthughes @ July 10 2013,14:32)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs......s-graph



Quite clearly the temperature has been perfectly flat from 2001-2010.  :p

Edited by Tracy P. Hamilton on July 10 2013,19:27

--------------
"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

  
stevestory



Posts: 10402
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 10 2013,19:54   

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ July 10 2013,20:26)
Quite clearly the temperature has been perfectly flat from 2001-2010.  :p

You laugh, but George Will gets paid 10x what I do to say things like that.

   
stevestory



Posts: 10402
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 17 2013,19:37   

Reddit's Science Forum Just Banned Climate Denial

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

Pages: (7) < ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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