Global Warming - Discussion-Rant

[dubshow]

The earth was only created 6000 years ago. It'll be fine.

[Tar]

I'd like to know why you think the science is crap. Also, do you see disadvantage in having more sustainable energy sources & transportation & why? I'll be disappointed though if you won't discuss this with some level of open mindedness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I had a whole thread on dfd 1.0.


1. AGW science was started to promote nukes.
2. Give enough grant money to convince the comunity that x is a problem and they will
3. The base hypothesis is crap at best.
4. the error bars on the proxy co2 measurements we use for the past or HUGE. like an order of magnitude huge.
5. even based on those measurements, co2 FOLLOWS temperature, not vice - versa.
6. Solar output and orbital path vary, alot
7. The solar wind has a huge influence. Solar wind low (low sunspot activity), allows more cosmic rays to seed clods, changing the reflectivity of the earth in a big way, making it colder. Our solar system also passes through places in the cosmos that filter more or less cosmic rays on a ~300 year cycle
8. Climate is cyclical. It has been both much hotter and much colder over the course of just recorded history.
9. IPCC, the scientists that do this work, IS NOT PEER REVIEWED SCIENCE.

I could go on.

more beef:
1. focusing on 'co2 pollution' takes away from real, actual sources of pollution. Such as the acidification of the ocean.
2. Thinly veiled way to add another tax.
3. Unrealistic goals and doomsday scenarios that never play out. 20 years ago , 2015 was supposes to be the end of the world as we know it if we didn't do something.

You can solar this, wind that all you want, but there aint enough solar power online to make a dent in the amount of power you'd need to refine silicon in the amounts you'd need to build your precious solar panels. Not to mention, steel, glass, concrete.


Do I think we should make progress to get off fossil fuels for power generation and cross ocean shipping? YES, ABSOLUTELY. but do it for the right reasons and not the wrong ones. And yes, lets build electric cars, solar plants (both photovoltaic and thermal), and the like.

Lets focus on keeping the planet clean. Focusing on the wrong problem will cause more damage in the interim to the planet, to the human race, and to the cause of good science.

Well put!

Man I can't get away with any statement or opinion without a bunch of grumpy cats attacking me. Have you guys never heard of core sampling? Carbon can be measured in the samples and it goes up and back down. Sun has an effect, that's why one side of the moon is scorching hot and the other side (in the shade) is minus 200 degrees. Also the sun has cycles of higher output. I think it has bigger impact then pollution. Anyways, that's my rant on the subject. Take it for what it's worth.

I know very well about core samples. Vostok ice cores ring a bell?

Anyways, yes - the earth has cycles that are regulated by feedback loops. Problem is, we've reached a tipping point (not pointing at cars alone as the cause) that is causing temperatures to rise, and as those temperatures rise, you have permafrost melting, releasing even move greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at a rate that's outpacing the feedback loops that have kept earth's temperature relatively steady for thousands of years.

There are so many factors at play, though:

- Solar activity
- Carbon output rates
- Carbon sink rates (rate of carbon absorption by plants, oceans, or other naturally occurring process)
- Geothermal activity (volcanoes)

Whether we have the ability to make any kind of lasting effect is unknown - honestly I think we're at the point of too little, too late, and even if we, as a country (or continent) were to drastically reduce our carbon footprint, you still have lesser developed nations or more ignorant nations who just either can't give a fuck, or don't give a fuck, and it's all for naught anyway.

But one thing is 100% for certain: As the temperature rises, the gulf stream slows down and becomes... lazier. We end up with longer lasting, more extreme weather. And that in itself is something to take very seriously.

Bottom line: We're

Al Gore?

[Tar]

Just kidding about the Al Gore thing.

[goIftdibrad]

Anyways, yes - the earth has cycles that are regulated by feedback loops. Problem is, we've reached a tipping point (not pointing at cars alone as the cause) that is causing temperatures to rise, and as those temperatures rise, you have permafrost melting, releasing even move greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at a rate that's outpacing the feedback loops that have kept earth's temperature relatively steady for thousands of years.

Al Gore?

re: tipping point.

Humans are not even a full percent of the annual carbon cycle.

[goIftdibrad]

In carbon cycle caculations, houman output is also the only number we can estimate with reasonable certainty.

[dubshow]

In carbon cycle caculations, houman output is also the only number we can estimate with reasonable certainty.

i strapped a monitor to them cows and that volcano.

[goIftdibrad]

re: tipping point.

Humans are not even a full percent of the annual carbon cycle.

Wasn't pointing fingers at humans alone.

But we're not helping.

The permafrost melting; that will be interesting to see unfold.

The planet will survive us.

We will either adapt or we will not.

[4zilch]

re: tipping point.

Humans are not even a full percent of the annual carbon cycle.

Wasn't pointing fingers at humans alone.

But we're not helping.

The permafrost melting; that will be interesting to see unfold.

#savethemammoth

[Apex]

The planet will survive us.

We will either adapt or we will not.

Well, there's always the nuclear winter scenario.

Time to YOLO! Ain't nobody got time for savings.

[NeonJonny]

I had a whole thread on dfd 1.0.


1. AGW science was started to promote nukes.
2. Give enough grant money to convince the comunity that x is a problem and they will
3. The base hypothesis is crap at best.
4. the error bars on the proxy co2 measurements we use for the past or HUGE. like an order of magnitude huge.
5. even based on those measurements, co2 FOLLOWS temperature, not vice - versa.
6. Solar output and orbital path vary, alot
7. The solar wind has a huge influence. Solar wind low (low sunspot activity), allows more cosmic rays to seed clods, changing the reflectivity of the earth in a big way, making it colder. Our solar system also passes through places in the cosmos that filter more or less cosmic rays on a ~300 year cycle
8. Climate is cyclical. It has been both much hotter and much colder over the course of just recorded history.
9. IPCC, the scientists that do this work, IS NOT PEER REVIEWED SCIENCE.

I could go on.

more beef:
1. focusing on 'co2 pollution' takes away from real, actual sources of pollution. Such as the acidification of the ocean.
2. Thinly veiled way to add another tax.
3. Unrealistic goals and doomsday scenarios that never play out. 20 years ago , 2015 was supposes to be the end of the world as we know it if we didn't do something.

You can solar this, wind that all you want, but there aint enough solar power online to make a dent in the amount of power you'd need to refine silicon in the amounts you'd need to build your precious solar panels. Not to mention, steel, glass, concrete.


Do I think we should make progress to get off fossil fuels for power generation and cross ocean shipping? YES, ABSOLUTELY. but do it for the right reasons and not the wrong ones. And yes, lets build electric cars, solar plants (both photovoltaic and thermal), and the like.

Lets focus on keeping the planet clean. Focusing on the wrong problem will cause more damage in the interim to the planet, to the human race, and to the cause of good science.

Well put!

I know very well about core samples. Vostok ice cores ring a bell?

Anyways, yes - the earth has cycles that are regulated by feedback loops. Problem is, we've reached a tipping point (not pointing at cars alone as the cause) that is causing temperatures to rise, and as those temperatures rise, you have permafrost melting, releasing even move greenhouse gases into the atmosphere at a rate that's outpacing the feedback loops that have kept earth's temperature relatively steady for thousands of years.

There are so many factors at play, though:

- Solar activity
- Carbon output rates
- Carbon sink rates (rate of carbon absorption by plants, oceans, or other naturally occurring process)
- Geothermal activity (volcanoes)

Whether we have the ability to make any kind of lasting effect is unknown - honestly I think we're at the point of too little, too late, and even if we, as a country (or continent) were to drastically reduce our carbon footprint, you still have lesser developed nations or more ignorant nations who just either can't give a fuck, or don't give a fuck, and it's all for naught anyway.

But one thing is 100% for certain: As the temperature rises, the gulf stream slows down and becomes... lazier. We end up with longer lasting, more extreme weather. And that in itself is something to take very seriously.

Bottom line: We're

Al Gore?

Al gore? The same al gore than wanted to drill "millions of miles" into the Earth's core for its heat?
Don't care really. The air here is as clean as its ever been. The mountains here are beautiful. Not much to complain about except
People here suck
jobs
high cost of living
people
traffic
closing forest trails.

[dubshow]

AH HA

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -data.html

A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015.

The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.

It was never subjected to NOAA’s rigorous internal evaluation process – which Dr Bates devised.

[goIftdibrad]

AH HA

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -data.html

A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015.

The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.

It was never subjected to NOAA’s rigorous internal evaluation process – which Dr Bates devised.

not even any internal peer review, great

[dubshow]

AH HA

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... -data.html

not even any internal peer review, great

things we already knew that were being suppressed.

When the WRITER of the paper comes forward and says WOE, maybe we should rethink.

[goIftdibrad]

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/mars-rover-j ... 39889.html

We — and by “we” I mean scientists that are way more intelligent than you or I — know few concrete things about Mars’ past, but one thing we’re sure of is that liquid water once existed on its surface. There’s been ample evidence to suggest it, and at this point it’s something most scientists assume as fact.


However, in order for liquid water to have existed on the surface of the red planet billions of years ago the conditions would have to have been warm enough, and the models that climate researchers rely on suggest it simply wouldn’t have been. So, a theory arose that perhaps Mars’ atmosphere was so thick with carbon dioxide that the planet was able to remain warm enough to support liquid water, thanks to a greenhouse effect. So with that theory in flux, the Curiosity rover set out to confirm it by sampling bedrock from an ancient lake, assuming it would find ample carbonate materials, thereby supporting the greenhouse warming theory. Well, it didn’t.

ITT: global warming theories and principles don't even seem to work on Mars.

[dubshow]

https://www.yahoo.com/tech/mars-rover-j ... 39889.html

We — and by “we” I mean scientists that are way more intelligent than you or I — know few concrete things about Mars’ past, but one thing we’re sure of is that liquid water once existed on its surface. There’s been ample evidence to suggest it, and at this point it’s something most scientists assume as fact.


However, in order for liquid water to have existed on the surface of the red planet billions of years ago the conditions would have to have been warm enough, and the models that climate researchers rely on suggest it simply wouldn’t have been. So, a theory arose that perhaps Mars’ atmosphere was so thick with carbon dioxide that the planet was able to remain warm enough to support liquid water, thanks to a greenhouse effect. So with that theory in flux, the Curiosity rover set out to confirm it by sampling bedrock from an ancient lake, assuming it would find ample carbonate materials, thereby supporting the greenhouse warming theory. Well, it didn’t.

ITT: global warming theories and principles don't even seem to work on Mars.

but but but. mars is like far away. and scary.

and jesus didnt walk on mars with the dinosauras

we the galactic

[dubshow]

its so true

[goIftdibrad]

its so true

[Tar]

ol:

its so true

Fuck that little turd.

http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/news/ ... 2017-02-17

The mega-fraud was the assertion that the science was settled, which the IPCC trumpeted with claims that 2,500 scientists from around the world endorsed its findings. Except those 2,500 — a number that was soon inflated to 3,000 and then 4,000 — didn’t endorse anything. They merely reviewed some of the studies heaved into the IPCC’s maw, many of them giving the research the thumbs down.

[goIftdibrad]

Fuck that little turd.

http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/news/ ... 2017-02-17

The mega-fraud was the assertion that the science was settled, which the IPCC trumpeted with claims that 2,500 scientists from around the world endorsed its findings. Except those 2,500 — a number that was soon inflated to 3,000 and then 4,000 — didn’t endorse anything. They merely reviewed some of the studies heaved into the IPCC’s maw, many of them giving the research the thumbs down.

Im reading a book now about how our (bad) diet recommendations came about, the parallels to "climate science" are astounding.

[max225]

Well, we still need to address the fact that 8 billion humans is not ok and we need to stop breeding... but

Babies are the future, blah blah BS

[max225]

its so true

Anyone claiming we don't need another plague is wrong

https://twitter.com/TheBhadBhabie?lang=en

[Tar]

ol:

its so true

Anyone claiming we don't need another plague is wrong

https://twitter.com/TheBhadBhabie?lang=en

Eww annoying!
In some alternate reality, I'd love to cash her ousside doe

[goIftdibrad]

its so true

Anyone claiming we don't need another plague is wrong

Someone read Inferno recently.

[Melon]

Anyone claiming we don't need another plague is wrong

Someone read Inferno recently.

No, I just interact with the general public.

[dubshow]

its so true

Anyone claiming we don't need another plague is wrong

https://twitter.com/TheBhadBhabie?lang=en

breh. this is the school down my street.

http://www.wbrz.com/news/catholic-hs-re ... ory-month/