24Bingo
24Bingo
Joined: Jul 4, 2012
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 1348
January 11th, 2014 at 1:08:57 PM permalink
You're talking in tired platitudes, "feelings." "This is bigger than that, therefore that cannot be significant to this." Do you think these objections never occurred to them?

I'm not going to say "shut up and listen to the scientists." I'll say "listen to the scientists until you can explain exactly where they're wrong." All you or anyone else are coming up with is intuition and conspiracy theories. If you can't do that, don't complain when people believe them over you.

Don't listen to talking heads and act like you've got the full story. So Al Gore is a massive hypocrite - so what? Even if, as you denialists seem to think, it had been him who started the whole ball rolling, it wouldn't alone make him wrong. (And I know parts of his movie were fudged, that's not the point either; the point is Gore's not important.) I know talking heads (and, yes, a handful of cranks) are all you folk have, but that doesn't mean it's the best the other side has to offer.

I'll admit I engaged in a bit of hyperbole before, but do you not realize how much energy efficiency and agriculture have advanced in the past fifty years? Why do you think that is? Yes, most of them were motivated by self-interest, but that self-interest came from taking into account the looming squeeze in their research rather than sticking their fingers in their ears when the "intoxicating vanity" of ecological reality went against their preconceptions. It's called the "invisible hand" - perhaps you've heard of it?
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 229
  • Posts: 12681
January 11th, 2014 at 1:25:07 PM permalink
Quote: 24Bingo



I'm not going to say "shut up and listen to the scientists." I'll say "listen to the scientists until you can explain exactly where they're wrong." All you or anyone else are coming up with is intuition and conspiracy theories. If you can't do that, don't complain when people believe them over you.



I explained in my list why I am not buying into the entire thing, if it is not "exact" enough well I cannot help you there. I do not see where I put out a "conspiracy theory" but if you see one in one of my points please point it out and I will be man enough to debate it and perhaps refine the wording to better explain myself. Of course you are free to believe them over me, but I do repeat don't just "believe the scientists" but rather look at things and decide for yourself. So many people are not. And many "believers" I have talked to (and I am not saying it is you at all) have told me they think CFCs cause global warming and think CFCs are still in spray cans. They just want to "do something." This part of the population is the problem.

Quote:

Don't listen to talking heads and act like you've got the full story.



I do not take my belief from talking heads. I have developed it on my own through a lifetime of experiences.

Quote:

I'll admit I engaged in a bit of hyperbole before, but do you not realize how much energy efficiency and agriculture have advanced in the past fifty years?



And that is my point. Even if the climate is changing, and I do not concede man is doing it, then things will adapt and life will move on. Man has about 1,000 years left on this planet by my estimates. We will adapt and the way to do it is not to try and change the weather, which we cannot do. It is to adapt to the weather, as we have done for 10,000 years.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
rxwine
rxwine
Joined: Feb 28, 2010
  • Threads: 173
  • Posts: 10461
January 11th, 2014 at 1:58:19 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

It is to adapt



Adapting is certainly an option for several kinds of problems.





The Hall of Unverified Claims is a vast place with many shelves.
24Bingo
24Bingo
Joined: Jul 4, 2012
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 1348
January 11th, 2014 at 3:53:49 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

I explained in my list why I am not buying into the entire thing, if it is not "exact" enough well I cannot help you there. I do not see where I put out a "conspiracy theory" but if you see one in one of my points please point it out and I will be man enough to debate it and perhaps refine the wording to better explain myself. Of course you are free to believe them over me, but I do repeat don't just "believe the scientists" but rather look at things and decide for yourself.



#1-6: Do you honestly think that the state of science is sloppy enough that these things aren't accounted for?! This is you!
#7-10: Tilting at windmills. This is what I meant by "talking heads."

("Conspiracy theories" referred to other posts, especially those where you bring out cranks.)

(Incidentally, if global warming was "invented" in the 80s, Frank Capra must have been psychic. Now, just to be clear, since I know you'll say I'm contradicting myself, I'm talking here about general perception, not the state of science, since that's all you seem to be concerned with.)

Quote: AZDuffman

I do not take my belief from talking heads. I have developed it on my own through a lifetime of experiences.



In a word, intuition. In human affairs, a day of experience can trump a library of books, but in natural science, a thousand lifetimes can't hold up to a well-sourced paragraph.

Quote: AZDuffman

And that is my point. Even if the climate is changing, and I do not concede man is doing it, then things will adapt and life will move on. Man has about 1,000 years left on this planet by my estimates. We will adapt and the way to do it is not to try and change the weather, which we cannot do. It is to adapt to the weather, as we have done for 10,000 years.



Well, sure, we'll adapt. We'll do everything in our power to adapt as painlessly as possible, and you know what? I've got some faith that we'll be able to do it painlessly enough that your successors in fifty years will be squawking just like you are now. But all the while, you'll be actively trying to hamper them by mischaracterizing the problem because its nature doesn't agree with your humble intuition.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
January 11th, 2014 at 6:31:32 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Actually we didn't really "do something about it" anymore than let things take care of themselves. Majors and wildcatters always drilled wells, and they kept doing so. Farmers always farmers always farmed and kept doing so. Methods improved but they had been improving for years.

Consider the following my common-sense position/manifesto on the entire global-warming hoax:

1. The temperature on the Earth has *never* been stable over more than a hundred years or so and never will be
2. Measurements before accurate readings cannot be compared to today's numbers
3. Even among accurate reading you have to be careful how you compare as in the 1950s weather stations started migrating from towns to airports which can easily cause a 1-2 degree difference, even for just a few miles.
4. You cannot take a trend of even 100 years in a 4.5 billion year old planet and get anything meaningful out of it. Humans like to think their lifetime has meaning, but we are but an irritation to the planet in our brief time here.
5. The Sun has more of an effect than CO2 and cannot be separated to get the effects of each. This is the case even when scientists guess as they have been on so-called global warming.
6. There is no reason at all to assume the temperature we are at today is the "right" temperature nor is there reason to assume just a little warmer will mean "severe" weather. Colder might mean more "severe" weather.
7. "Severe weather" has always happened. Global Warming believers make out that we never had a tornado, hurricane, wildfire, snow, or anything else before global warming was "discovered" in the early 1980s.
8. When "deniers" make fun of #7 then all of the sudden the believers say, "one event does not break the theory."
9. Since the 1980s I have heard we might not see snow or cold by now, it is still here. "The Future" always seems 30 years out yet the weather I feel has never changed. Spring/Summer/Fall/Winter all come on schedule. Sure sometimes we have a "late spring" or "Indian Summer" but this has always happened as Mother Nature does not follow our calendar but rather her own.
10. The biggest preachers of lowering my "carbon footprint" whatever on earth that is supposed to be live in mansions and fly on private jets. Sorry if I do not give them a pass for "offsets.:"

I could go on and on and could even write a book. Of course I expect the reply to be "STFU and listen to the scientists! FOUR LEGS GOOD, TWO LEGS BETTER!"



1. The earth's temperature has never changed this much over a 100 year period without an explanation. The explanation of the earth's temperature changing with greenhouse gas emissions is pretty freaking obvious.

2. Sure they can.

3. That's been accounted for quite nicely.

4. I wish you would take the same point of view to your current president. He's only going to be president for 8 years. You like to think your lifetime has meaning, but the current president is but an irriration to the planet in our brief time here. Our lifetime does have meaning. We, in the past hundred of so years, have been responsible for the extinction of millions of species due to our thoughtlessness.

5. Of course the Sun has more of an effect than CO2. But the sun is remarkably effective at keeping its solar output constant enough to have very little effect on temperature over time. A gigantic volcanic eruption or a large number of nuclear explosions would also have a greater effect than CO2.

6. Climate projections have explained that more energy in the atmosphere leads to more extreme weather. A warmer planet is more apt to have severe weather.

7. True.
8. True.
9. I've never heard the 1980s projections that we might not see snow or cold, as a 1 degree difference in global temperature over thirty years would not mean "no more snow"

10. Agreed.


Please write a book.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 229
  • Posts: 12681
January 11th, 2014 at 6:48:48 PM permalink
Quote: 24Bingo

#1-6: Do you honestly think that the state of science is sloppy enough that these things aren't accounted for?!



Yes, I do. Given that they have gone from a new ice age coming in my lifetime to we will all boil to death; as well as who knows how many other "shucks, we had it backwards" things I have seen in my lifetime I think they are that sloppy.

Quote:

(Incidentally, if global warming was "invented" in the 80s, Frank Capra must have been psychic.



I am saying "invented" as to when it hit the news and popular culture, which was the 1980s.


Quote:

Well, sure, we'll adapt. We'll do everything in our power to adapt as painlessly as possible, and you know what? I've got some faith that we'll be able to do it painlessly enough that your successors in fifty years will be squawking just like you are now. But all the while, you'll be actively trying to hamper them by mischaracterizing the problem because its nature doesn't agree with your humble intuition.



I am not "mischaracterizing" a problem because we do not yet have a valid problem. And problems will be local, not global. For example, if storm activity increases in an area then building codes can be changed to the new situation. Currently the answer is more taxes and less freedoms because of a big "maybe." No thanks.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 229
  • Posts: 12681
January 11th, 2014 at 7:01:11 PM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

1. The earth's temperature has never changed this much over a 100 year period without an explanation. The explanation of the earth's temperature changing with greenhouse gas emissions is pretty freaking obvious.



We do not know that because we do not have valid measurements. But the CO2 thing is making an assumption, and a big one.

Quote:

2. Sure they can.



Garbage in. garbage out. Take a guess of a number compared to an accurate measurement and you get a guess.

Quote:

3. That's been accounted for quite nicely.



Again by guessing.

Quote:

4. I wish you would take the same point of view to your current president. He's only going to be president for 8 years. You like to think your lifetime has meaning, but the current president is but an irriration to the planet in our brief time here. Our lifetime does have meaning. We, in the past hundred of so years, have been responsible for the extinction of millions of species due to our thoughtlessness.



Species go extinct all of the time, and they went extinct long before man walked the earth.

Quote:

6. Climate projections have explained that more energy in the atmosphere leads to more extreme weather. A warmer planet is more apt to have severe weather.



They are still guessing as this cannot be tested with a control. I see today and I have seen stories of the Little Ice age. I will take warmer.


Quote:

9. I've never heard the 1980s projections that we might not see snow or cold, as a 1 degree difference in global temperature over thirty years would not mean "no more snow"



This was from 2000, not the 1980s:

However, the warming is so far manifesting itself more in winters which are less cold than in much hotter summers. According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".

"Children just aren't going to know what snow is," he said.

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
24Bingo
24Bingo
Joined: Jul 4, 2012
  • Threads: 23
  • Posts: 1348
January 11th, 2014 at 11:48:40 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

Yes, I do. Given that they have gone from a new ice age coming in my lifetime to we will all boil to death; as well as who knows how many other "shucks, we had it backwards" things I have seen in my lifetime I think they are that sloppy.



Who. Who said it. You freely muddle yellow journalism and humanitarian ego trips with science - which was it.

What do you think science is? Do you think it's some game played in white coats? Do you think an entire field has somehow managed to schmooze with mathematicians and physicists from a complete black hole of rigor? Do you even know what "rigor" means? Do you think it never occurred to them "hey, guys, we should find a way to put some error bars on this"?

I'm tempted to actually dig up papers explaining where the level of certainty comes from, and why your six objections are nonsense, and I probably will in the nearish future, but it's two in the morning, I'm on tomorrow, and you're not worth it. Not as long as you could dream, as you pound away at your computer, powered by almost inconceivably fast and precise manipulations of the electric fields in hundreds of millions of semiconductor junctions arranged on a comparatively tiny motherboard, the results of a forever increasingly honed understanding of effects in depletion zones measured in nanometers, that the people who got us to the point where this is possible are just letting their colleagues turn out research precise to "plus or minus whatevs yo." And yes, I know there are people from other disciplines who are (ahem) "speaking up," but when you bring out these six points, you suggest a world in which they wouldn't have to.

Quote: AZDuffman

I am saying "invented" as to when it hit the news and popular culture, which was the 1980s.



...what the hell do you call The Unchained Goddess if not pop culture?!
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 229
  • Posts: 12681
January 15th, 2014 at 3:40:52 AM permalink
Just one more reason I refuse to believe in this nonsense. The fad is dying it seems based on networks not giving much coverage lately. So liberals in government will demand they cover it more!

Of course they want more coverage, how can you get support to raise more taxes and take more freedoms if people are not aware of a problem that really does not exist? Perhaps even the lamestream media is tired of hyping this so much?
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
treetopbuddy
treetopbuddy
Joined: Jan 12, 2013
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1739
January 22nd, 2014 at 5:57:00 AM permalink
New report in....".global temperatures were unusually warm 2013". No question we're doomed.

The reports also sites the Arctic ice continues to melt and Antarctic ice continues to build.

Does this mean we are sinking in space?
Each day is better than the next

  • Jump to: