Official Global Warming thread (merged)

[82_VOL_83]

That is a hypothesis not a fact. Conventional wisdom used to think the Earth was the center of the solar system, that it was flat, that there was an ether until someone intelligent came along and disproved it. Cynical is usually right. If we are globally warming why is Greenland no longer green? If we cause global warming what made the ice age melt? Don't believe every damn thing some pointy headed elitist tells you.

Young, liberal, empty headed, liberal arts student with medical school aspirations. You should be required to get a "technical" degree to get into medical school. One based upon nutrition with some anatomy and organic chemistry thrown in shouldn't come close to qualifying.

 

[Obsessed]

Al gore rallied around science, science didnt rally around him.

No. Al Gore capitalized on fear mongering. A conspiracy if you will.

The earth will destroy itself long before you or I can/will.

Then she will start all over again

 

[82_VOL_83]

Okay, that's fair. Tell me, what is the optimal amount of parts per million of co2 that we should strive to achieve? We're approaching 400ppm right now.

Lemme ask you this: Would you feel comfortable if we reduced the amount of co2 in the atmosphere to, say, 200ppm?

GG, if we reduced it that far we would go into an ice age. All the global warming fanatics should read the book "Angels Down".

PV, how about STOP F'ING *****ing about it on this board. The US has reduced it's carbon footprint 10x what any other civilized country has with a decent sized population. Go ***** at China PV, maybe they will listen to you.

 

[82_VOL_83]

Al gore rallied around science, science didnt rally around him.

You are an f'ing idiot. I don't normally resort to name calling first but the above statement is just so full of stupidity that it can't be ignored. ALgore wouldn't know science if it walked up and bit him. He is a product of a father that didn't give a **** about him while he was being raised in Washington. He emanates stupid every time he opens his mouth. Much like the guy in the white house right now. I don't know who has the lower IQ.....Algore or Unca Joe Biden.

 

[TennTradition]

Why not check the peer-reviewed literature. You'll see there are no trends in extreme weather. The science is being manipulated. I'll take a Harvard-trained MIT scientist over Al Gore (the guy who took one environmental science class while at Harvard and got a D) any day of the week.

Don't worry, though. The people who stand to make billions off this lie will continue to push the carbon myth -- and, sadly, toy with the emotions of people like you. Be sure to bundle up in the near future. We're about to go another mini ice age. Oooooooooooo... I'm shivering right now.

You do realize the peer reviewed literature is filled with studies linking man to recent increases in CO2 and those CO2 increases to recent warming, right?

Also, you should realize that Lindzen is barely tolerated by the other scientists in his own department who view him as a contrarian. I have heard him cherry pick facts before to make a point I know to be logically flawed - I expect more out of my professors, personally.

 

[TennTradition]

Hey, I never said they were uneducated hippies. Hippies actually mean well; they just have s*** for brains. It's a parenting issue, not an education issue.

And there are dozens of factors that affect global temperatures. The idea that co2 is the main driver, which is what the Alarmists claim, is simply false. I'm far more terrified of water vapor, volcanic activity, and solar cycles. We need more carbon dioxide. Do me a favor: go burn some fossil fuels. All the plants and vegetation in the world will thank you for it.

If gravity makes you fall down steps then what makes you go up them? Oh - your legs paired with stairs. Yes, there can be more than one contributing factor to the movement of a variable, including you, up stairs. And while gravity, like the sun compared to climate, is the dominant factor in our position on earth - it is what it is. Changes around that are a function of small changes (relative to the earths surface) in our local geography such as stairs or hills - but these are meaningful changes to us locally.

The sun turns us from a cold extinct ball of dirt to a thriving climate for life. CO2, like stairs, can move us up or down from that comfortable climate (other factors can as well, including fluctuations in the sun, in sulfur in the atmosphere, tiny aerosol particulates, etc). Do it slowly enough and the earths ecosystems and man would fairly easily adapt. Do it too quickly and you get stresses than can become very damaging - similar to rising too quickly through the ocean and getting the bends.

 

[82_VOL_83]

If gravity makes you fall down steps then what makes you go up them? Oh - your legs paired with stairs. Yes, there can be more than one contributing factor to the movement of a variable, including you, up stairs. And while gravity, like the sun compared to climate, is the dominant factor in our position on earth - it is what it is. Changes around that are a function of small changes (relative to the earths surface) in our local geography such as stairs or hills - but these are meaningful changes to us locally.

The sun turns us from a cold extinct ball of dirt to a thriving climate for life. CO2, like stairs, can move us up or down from that comfortable climate (other factors can as well, including fluctuations in the sun, in sulfur in the atmosphere, tiny aerosol particulates, etc). Do it slowly enough and the earths ecosystems and man would fairly easily adapt. Do it too quickly and you get stresses than can become very damaging - similar to rising too quickly through the ocean and getting the bends.

When I walked out to go to work 2 weeks ago and it was 1 degree, I was wanting me some CO2.

 

[82_VOL_83]

If gravity makes you fall down steps then what makes you go up them? Oh - your legs paired with stairs. Yes, there can be more than one contributing factor to the movement of a variable, including you, up stairs. And while gravity, like the sun compared to climate, is the dominant factor in our position on earth - it is what it is. Changes around that are a function of small changes (relative to the earths surface) in our local geography such as stairs or hills - but these are meaningful changes to us locally.

The sun turns us from a cold extinct ball of dirt to a thriving climate for life. CO2, like stairs, can move us up or down from that comfortable climate (other factors can as well, including fluctuations in the sun, in sulfur in the atmosphere, tiny aerosol particulates, etc). Do it slowly enough and the earths ecosystems and man would fairly easily adapt. Do it too quickly and you get stresses than can become very damaging - similar to rising too quickly through the ocean and getting the bends.

LOL, while I was typing the post I remembered what this was called. The global warming/climate change alarmists use what is called the Finagle Factor. They change the equation to fit the outcome. Every time you talk to them, they have "new science" to explain why the climate changes, some new equation, some new model, basically the definition of hind sight is 20/20 and we can prove it.

This is the opposite of the Fudge Factor which is changing the equation to get the desired outcome. I have a whole book on this and can't find it anymore.

 

[TennTradition]

LOL, while I was typing the post I remembered what this was called. The global warming/climate change alarmists use what is called the Finagle Factor. They change the equation to fit the outcome. Every time you talk to them, they have "new science" to explain why the climate changes, some new equation, some new model, basically the definition of hind sight is 20/20 and we can prove it.

This is the opposite of the Fudge Factor which is changing the equation to get the desired outcome. I have a whole book on this and can't find it anymore.

What does that have to do with anything I said?

What you are talking about does happen - but actually in all modeling. In complex systems you try to capture all important variables. Usually you miss some so you begin to include the next tier of factors because apparently something else is important. Usually several things. You use a subset of the data to help tune factors then a larger data set to validate the model.

There is no doubt that doing this for climate is extremely difficult and as can be seen, it's accuracy over short times - say 5-10 years - is still lacking.

A question is given this uncertainty in the model can it give us any useful glimpses into the attribution of recent warming to man. Currently, statistics say yes, a portion of the warming can be attributed to increasing CO2 which has been attributed to man, given a certain confidence interval (in this case >95% I believe).

 

[FLVOL69]

You are an f'ing idiot. I don't normally resort to name calling first but the above statement is just so full of stupidity that it can't be ignored. ALgore wouldn't know science if it walked up and bit him. He is a product of a father that didn't give a **** about him while he was being raised in Washington. He emanates stupid every time he opens his mouth. Much like the guy in the white house right now. I don't know who has the lower IQ.....Algore or Unca Joe Biden.

You left out masochist...he obviously enjoys getting his ass handed to him on a regular basis.

 

[Sandvol]

What does that have to do with anything I said?

What you are talking about does happen - but actually in all modeling. In complex systems you try to capture all important variables. Usually you miss some so you begin to include the next tier of factors because apparently something else is important. Usually several things. You use a subset of the data to help tune factors then a larger data set to validate the model.

There is no doubt that doing this for climate is extremely difficult and as can be seen, it's accuracy over short times - say 5-10 years - is still lacking.

A question is given this uncertainty in the model can it give us any useful glimpses into the attribution of recent warming to man. Currently, statistics say yes, a portion of the warming can be attributed to increasing CO2 which has been attributed to man, given a certain confidence interval (in this case >95% I believe).

So why do these same climate scientists who believed there was global cooling in the 60's and 70's now believe there is global warming now? They get funding from groups and look for data that fits their template. The recent headlines were November was the hottest November in the last 50 years everywhere on the planet except in the North America. On face value does that really make any sense to you?

 

[Sandvol]

What was Al Gore's big claim? Wasn't it by 2010 we'd have seriously rising sea levels and our coastal areas would be in jeopardy?

 

[TennTradition]

So why do these same climate scientists who believed there was global cooling in the 60's and 70's now believe there is global warming now? They get funding from groups and look for data that fits their template. The recent headlines were November was the hottest November in the last 50 years everywhere on the planet except in the North America. On face value does that really make any sense to you?

I hear that all the time but there is very little truth to it. If you search the peer reviewed literature you will find almost no scholarly work on global cooling. There were some openly discussing it. The media picked up on this and Time or someone else gave it a big cover story. It was talked about a lot in the media outlets after that with scientists weighing in. But that was totally different that the current warming studies with regard to the academic literature.

We were probably cooling North Ameriva at the time though. And China is likely cooling itself now. Low altitude sulfur emissions tend to depress local temperatures. Read: coal. There are global consequences of this too though because the CO2 reaches high altitude and is spread globally while the sulfur rains out before it can have global effects.

As to your last point - are you asking how can North America not set a record (of the last 50 years) and the rest of the world can for a given month?

 

[TennTradition]

What was Al Gore's big claim? Wasn't it by 2010 we'd have seriously rising sea levels and our coastal areas would be in jeopardy?

I'm not sure what the year was but he has certainly made claims of great doom.

 

[Sandvol]

I hear that all the time but there is very little truth to it. If you search the peer reviewed literature you will find almost no scholarly work on global cooling. There were some openly discussing it. The media picked up on this and Time or someone else gave it a big cover story. It was talked about a lot in the media outlets after that with scientists weighing in. But that was totally different that the current warming studies with regard to the academic literature.

We were probably cooling North Ameriva at the time though. And China is likely cooling itself now. Low altitude sulfur emissions tend to depress local temperatures. Read: coal. There are global consequences of this too though because the CO2 reaches high altitude and is spread globally while the sulfur rains out before it can have global effects.

As to your last point - are you asking how can North America not set a record (of the last 50 years) and the rest of the world can for a given month?

I remember sitting in the biology classes at UT and the professors talking about global cooling.

 

[Sandvol]

I hear that all the time but there is very little truth to it. If you search the peer reviewed literature you will find almost no scholarly work on global cooling. There were some openly discussing it. The media picked up on this and Time or someone else gave it a big cover story. It was talked about a lot in the media outlets after that with scientists weighing in. But that was totally different that the current warming studies with regard to the academic literature.

We were probably cooling North Ameriva at the time though. And China is likely cooling itself now. Low altitude sulfur emissions tend to depress local temperatures. Read: coal. There are global consequences of this too though because the CO2 reaches high altitude and is spread globally while the sulfur rains out before it can have global effects.

As to your last point - are you asking how can North America not set a record (of the last 50 years) and the rest of the world can for a given month?

Yes, that's my question. Does that make a lot of sense to you?

 

[TennTradition]

I remember sitting in the biology classes at UT and the professors talking about global cooling.

Were they climatologist or discussing the popular press of the day. There was really very little research going on with regard to it and very little publishing.

 

[TennTradition]

Yes, that's my question. Does that make a lot of sense to you?

I can see how it's possible. I guess I would say it 'doesn't not' make sense.

 

[Sandvol]

Were they climatologist or discussing the popular press of the day. There was really very little research going on with regard to it and very little publishing.

Isn't part of being a biologist studying ecosystems?

 

[Sandvol]

I can see how it's possible. I guess I would say it 'doesn't not' make sense.

Here is how it doesn't make sense to me. If there are 360 lines of longitude as you circle the planet the United States covers roughly 60 degrees of that longitude. So you believe there was global warming in 300 degrees of those lines of longitude but in our 60 degrees there was not? The global warming stopped exactly at our lines of longitude on both our east and west borders?

(sorry those should be longitude)

 

[TennTradition]

Here is how it doesn't make sense to me. If there are 360 lines of latitude as you circle the planet the united states covers roughly 60 degrees of that latitude. So you believe there was global warming in 300 degrees of those lines of latitude but in our 60 degrees there was not? The global warming stopped exactly at our lines of latitude on both our east and west borders?

When only taking a slice of a month, you could have depressed continental temperatures. For example, perhaps November was a very wet month or just cloudy which kept surface temps down. Over time these average out but you could see that effect over one month. In general, global average surface temps is a better measure than hottest month on this continent for that reason.

 

[TennTradition]

Isn't part of being a biologist studying ecosystems?

Sure, but that would be more along the lines of we are observing cooling or it has been suggested that we will cool. Not here is a prediction that we will cool and the model it's based upon. So if the buzz is a new ice age then I would think they would talk about the effects it would have on ecosystems. But the important part is where that buzz came from and how many were studying it.

 

[82_VOL_83]

What does that have to do with anything I said?

What you are talking about does happen - but actually in all modeling. In complex systems you try to capture all important variables. Usually you miss some so you begin to include the next tier of factors because apparently something else is important. Usually several things. You use a subset of the data to help tune factors then a larger data set to validate the model.

There is no doubt that doing this for climate is extremely difficult and as can be seen, it's accuracy over short times - say 5-10 years - is still lacking.

A question is given this uncertainty in the model can it give us any useful glimpses into the attribution of recent warming to man. Currently, statistics say yes, a portion of the warming can be attributed to increasing CO2 which has been attributed to man, given a certain confidence interval (in this case >95% I believe).

OK, so you use the fudge factor. You selectively continue to put variables in the equation until it reaches the desired outcome. It doesn't fit as well as the finagle factor it which you actually change the equation (NOT the variables) to fit the current outcome. Libs just keep changing what they want to fed the public (i.e. the equation: Man made global warming -> global warming -> climate change) to fit the current weather: Holy Crap it's hot, damn it's cold, look at all the snow, it's raining at Christmas, etc, etc. Why don't you guys put your efforts toward creating realistic fusion? Why don't you guys figure out a better way to capture natural gas or even produce it. Why don't you guys figure out how to get the oil OUT of the ground without disturbing the environment overly much. Do something useful instead of creating sensationalistic problems that require massive government regulation to do absolutely nothing but raise taxes.

 

[Sandvol]

So it was cloudy or wet in our segment of the planet and we have these invisible walls that keep the rest of the planet's environment out of our segment of the planet as well as molecules and radiant energy? Let me ask you if it was wetter and water vapor is a greenhouse gas why didn't the wetter conditions raise the local surface temperatures?

 

[82_VOL_83]

You left out masochist...he obviously enjoys getting his ass handed to him on a regular basis.

He doesn't understand this. He is so blinded by being a brain damaged liberal coupled with his lack of understanding of the English language that he just doesn't see the idiocy of most of what he writes.