Author Topic: The Official Climate Change Thread  (Read 31146 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
The Official Climate Change Thread
« on: August 13, 2011, 06:52:31 AM »
Because GP asked for it. :P

We are all going to die.  Discuss.  Nah, jk...or am I?
« Last Edit: February 13, 2012, 03:07:00 PM by Super Dude »
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2011, 07:24:59 AM »
I'd say that if you live in India, Bangladesh, or sub-Saharan Africa, your odds aren't great.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline MasterShakezula

  • Posts: 3733
  • Owes H $10
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2011, 07:40:26 AM »
I know, sad, sad; misery, misery.

BUT JUST ATTEMPT TO COMPREHEND THE MASSIVE AGRICULTURAL POTENTIALS THAT ALASKA COULD VERY WELL POSSESS!

C'MON, GUYS!  IT'S NOT AN EVERYDAY OCCURRENCE FOR ALASKA TO BE USEFUL FOR SOMETHING BEYOND A MASSIVE OIL SURPLUS THAT WE AREN'T EVEN ALLOWED TO USE! 

Offline William Wallace

  • Posts: 2791
    • My blog
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2011, 09:29:02 AM »
Do we really need this thread?

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #4 on: August 13, 2011, 09:36:13 AM »
It can just be the thread that all new discussion goes into.  We get threads related to the topic once or twice a month, and putting it all in one thread makes sense.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #5 on: August 13, 2011, 09:42:54 AM »
It can just be the thread that all new discussion goes into.  We get threads related to the topic once or twice a month, and putting it all in one thread makes sense.

This.  There's no reason not to have a thread like this, and I think more P/R threads should actually be issue-centered news and discussion dumps.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline TempusVox

  • Descendant of Primus
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5359
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #6 on: August 13, 2011, 11:03:26 AM »
Global Warming................so it's "official" now? *yawn*  :biggrin:

Please continue.
You don't HAVE a soul.You ARE a soul.You HAVE a body.
"I came here to drink milk and kick ass; and I just finished my milk."

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #7 on: August 13, 2011, 02:57:41 PM »
Global Warming................so it's "official" now? *yawn*  :biggrin:

Please continue.

You know, for someone who (rightfully) derides 9/11 conspiracy theories, you're quite eager to buy into others. 
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline TempusVox

  • Descendant of Primus
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5359
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #8 on: August 13, 2011, 03:20:04 PM »
Global Warming................so it's "official" now? *yawn*  :biggrin:

Please continue.

You know, for someone who (rightfully) derides 9/11 conspiracy theories, you're quite eager to buy into others. 

 :lol :rollin :lol :rollin
You don't HAVE a soul.You ARE a soul.You HAVE a body.
"I came here to drink milk and kick ass; and I just finished my milk."

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #9 on: August 13, 2011, 05:26:06 PM »
Global Warming................so it's "official" now? *yawn*  :biggrin:

Please continue.


You know, for someone who (rightfully) derides 9/11 conspiracy theories, you're quite eager to buy into others. 

 :lol :rollin :lol :rollin

That's bullshit. What? Are you going to list the more than 1,000 scientists that the IPCC has lied about? Constantly the anthro camp uses red herrings, failed logic, and unsupported or debunked facts to support the POLITICIZED AL Gore manufactured kool-aid. It's not a fucking football game. "Let's see the score is 2,105 to 2,102- WE WIN!!"

I can't even bring myself to even debate this shit with some of you. It's like arguing with people who refuse to believe the Earth is round. Soundbites from the Keith Olbermann show, or Al Gore's bullshit movie (which has been discredited about 9 ways to Sunday) doesn't make it so. I used to want to believe in the anthro model, but I talked to people. I've studied research from those who have studied it. The data doesn't add up. Computer models only extrapolate the data that you start with. It's all bullshit. You might as well believe in the fucking Easter Bunny. Is the planet warming? Yes. Is it man's fault? Fuck no.

From what I remember of your opinions (and a couple of the posts I was able to find via the search function) you seem to hold the position that scientists are deliberately backing faulty or known to be false research, either for professional or personal gain.

I'd say that's a conspiracy theory.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."


Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #11 on: August 13, 2011, 08:11:25 PM »
So?
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #12 on: August 13, 2011, 08:35:45 PM »
You'd start cussing too if you had to talk to a wall.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27137
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #13 on: August 13, 2011, 08:40:27 PM »
You'd start cussing too if you had to talk to a wall.

Doesn't matter, the fact that he didn't keep calm is proof that his entire theory is wrong.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline TempusVox

  • Descendant of Primus
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5359
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #14 on: August 13, 2011, 09:50:51 PM »
Global Warming................so it's "official" now? *yawn*  :biggrin:

Please continue.


You know, for someone who (rightfully) derides 9/11 conspiracy theories, you're quite eager to buy into others. 

 :lol :rollin :lol :rollin

That's bullshit. What? Are you going to list the more than 1,000 scientists that the IPCC has lied about? Constantly the anthro camp uses red herrings, failed logic, and unsupported or debunked facts to support the POLITICIZED AL Gore manufactured kool-aid. It's not a fucking football game. "Let's see the score is 2,105 to 2,102- WE WIN!!"

I can't even bring myself to even debate this shit with some of you. It's like arguing with people who refuse to believe the Earth is round. Soundbites from the Keith Olbermann show, or Al Gore's bullshit movie (which has been discredited about 9 ways to Sunday) doesn't make it so. I used to want to believe in the anthro model, but I talked to people. I've studied research from those who have studied it. The data doesn't add up. Computer models only extrapolate the data that you start with. It's all bullshit. You might as well believe in the fucking Easter Bunny. Is the planet warming? Yes. Is it man's fault? Fuck no.

From what I remember of your opinions (and a couple of the posts I was able to find via the search function) you seem to hold the position that scientists are deliberately backing faulty or known to be false research, either for professional or personal gain.

I'd say that's a conspiracy theory.


 :lol :rollin :lol
You don't HAVE a soul.You ARE a soul.You HAVE a body.
"I came here to drink milk and kick ass; and I just finished my milk."

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #15 on: August 13, 2011, 10:21:41 PM »
Five posts before the thread turned into a shitstorm...we may have reached a new P/R record.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline yeshaberto

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8970
  • Gender: Male
  • Somebody Get Me A Doctor! - VH
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #16 on: August 13, 2011, 10:29:25 PM »
Indeed new record.   There is hope to get back on topic if we all just move right along

Offline El JoNNo

  • Posts: 1778
  • Gender: Male
  • EMOTRUCCI
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #17 on: August 14, 2011, 05:18:37 AM »
Global Warming................so it's "official" now? *yawn*  :biggrin:

Please continue.


You know, for someone who (rightfully) derides 9/11 conspiracy theories, you're quite eager to buy into others. 

 :lol :rollin :lol :rollin

That's bullshit. What? Are you going to list the more than 1,000 scientists that the IPCC has lied about? Constantly the anthro camp uses red herrings, failed logic, and unsupported or debunked facts to support the POLITICIZED AL Gore manufactured kool-aid. It's not a fucking football game. "Let's see the score is 2,105 to 2,102- WE WIN!!"

I can't even bring myself to even debate this shit with some of you. It's like arguing with people who refuse to believe the Earth is round. Soundbites from the Keith Olbermann show, or Al Gore's bullshit movie (which has been discredited about 9 ways to Sunday) doesn't make it so. I used to want to believe in the anthro model, but I talked to people. I've studied research from those who have studied it. The data doesn't add up. Computer models only extrapolate the data that you start with. It's all bullshit. You might as well believe in the fucking Easter Bunny. Is the planet warming? Yes. Is it man's fault? Fuck no.

From what I remember of your opinions (and a couple of the posts I was able to find via the search function) you seem to hold the position that scientists are deliberately backing faulty or known to be false research, either for professional or personal gain.

I'd say that's a conspiracy theory.


 :lol :rollin :lol

Is that an ":lol you're right" or ":lol I'm wrong"?

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #18 on: August 14, 2011, 05:29:12 AM »
I think it's an " :lol I think you're stupid and I'm going to be really cocky about it."
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #19 on: August 14, 2011, 05:56:53 AM »
Well, he is objectively correct on the issue, while the overwhelming majority of the scientific community is not.  And that's just by "researching it on his own," not even through decades of post-graduate work, research, and publishing of articles, so that clearly speaks to his superior intellect.  He's obviously justified in his condescension. 
« Last Edit: August 14, 2011, 06:08:02 AM by GuineaPig »
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #20 on: August 14, 2011, 05:58:49 AM »
Okay I agree with you, but let's still try to keep things civil.  Or else I'm going to request a lock...on the global warming thread, fuck me.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #21 on: August 14, 2011, 06:04:31 AM »
OK, on topic.  Here's a post from RealClimate about that Roy Spencer article that created some discussion a few weeks ago:


“Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedback”
Filed under:

    Climate Science

— mike @ 29 July 2011

Guest commentary by Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo

The hype surrounding a new paper by Roy Spencer and Danny Braswell is impressive (see for instance Fox News); unfortunately the paper itself is not. News releases and blogs on climate denier web sites have publicized the claim from the paper’s news release that “Climate models get energy balance wrong, make too hot forecasts of global warming”. The paper has been published in a journal called Remote sensing which is a fine journal for geographers, but it does not deal with atmospheric and climate science, and it is evident that this paper did not get an adequate peer review. It should not have been published.

The paper’s title “On the Misdiagnosis of Surface Temperature Feedbacks from Variations in Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance” is provocative and should have raised red flags with the editors. The basic material in the paper has very basic shortcomings because no statistical significance of results, error bars or uncertainties are given either in the figures or discussed in the text. Moreover the description of methods of what was done is not sufficient to be able to replicate results. As a first step, some quick checks have been made to see whether results can be replicated and we find some points of contention.

The basic observational result seems to be similar to what we can produce but use of slightly different datasets, such as the EBAF CERES dataset, changes the results to be somewhat less in magnitude. And some parts of the results do appear to be significant. So are they replicated in climate models? Spencer and Braswell say no, but this is where attempts to replicate their results require clarification. In contrast, some model results do appear to fall well within the range of uncertainties of the observations. How can that be? For one, the observations cover a 10 year period. The models cover a hundred year period for the 20th century. The latter were detrended by Spencer but for the 20th century that should not be necessary. One could and perhaps should treat the 100 years as 10 sets of 10 years and see whether the observations match any of the ten year periods, but instead what appears to have been done is to use only the one hundred year set by itself. We have done exactly this and the result is in the Figure..
[ed. note: italics below replace the deleted sentence above, to make it clearer what is meant here.]

SB11 appears to have used the full 100 year record to evaluate the models, but this provides no indication of the robustness of their derived relationships. Here instead, we have considered each decade of the 20th century individually and quantified the inter-decadal variability to derive the Figure below. What this figure shows is the results for the observations, as in Spencer and Braswell, using the EBAF dataset (in black). Then we show results from 2 different models, one which does not replicate ENSO well (top) and one which does (second panel). Here we give the average result (red curve) for all 10 decades, plus the range of results that reflects the variations from one decade to the next. The MPI-Echam5 model replicates the observations very well. When all model results from CMIP3 are included, the bottom panel results, showing the red curve not too dis-similar from Spencer and Braswell, but with a huge range, due both to the spread among models, and also the spread due to decadal variability.

Consequently, our results suggest that there are good models and some not so good, but rather than stratifying them by climate sensitivity, one should, in this case, stratify them by ability to simulate ENSO. In the Figure, the model that replicates the observations better has high sensitivity while the other has low sensitivity. The net result is that the models agree within reasonable bounds with the observations.

To help interpret the results, Spencer uses a simple model. But the simple model used by Spencer is too simple (Einstein says that things should be made as simple as possible but not simpler): well this has gone way beyond being too simple (see for instance this post by Barry Bickmore). The model has no realistic ocean, no El Niño, and no hydrological cycle, and it was tuned to give the result it gave. Most of what goes on in the real world of significance that causes the relationship in the paper is ENSO. We have already rebutted Lindzen’s work on exactly this point. The clouds respond to ENSO, not the other way round [see: Trenberth, K. E., J. T. Fasullo, C. O'Dell, and T. Wong, 2010: Relationships between tropical sea surface temperatures and top-of-atmosphere radiation. Geophys. Res. Lett., 37, L03702, doi:10.1029/2009GL042314.] During ENSO there is a major uptake of heat by the ocean during the La Niña phase and the heat is moved around and stored in the ocean in the tropical western Pacific, setting the stage for the next El Niño, as which point it is redistributed across the tropical Pacific. The ocean cools as the atmosphere responds with characteristic El Niño weather patterns forced from the region that influence weather patterns world wide. Ocean dynamics play a major role in moving heat around, and atmosphere-ocean interaction is a key to the ENSO cycle. None of those processes are included in the Spencer model.

Even so, the Spencer interpretation has no merit. The interannual global temperature variations were not radiatively forced, as claimed for the 2000s, and therefore cannot be used to say anything about climate sensitivity. Clouds are not a forcing of the climate system (except for the small portion related to human related aerosol effects, which have a small effect on clouds). Clouds mainly occur because of weather systems (e.g., warm air rises and produces convection, and so on); they do not cause the weather systems. Clouds may provide feedbacks on the weather systems. Spencer has made this error of confounding forcing and feedback before and it leads to a misinterpretation of his results.

The bottom line is that there is NO merit whatsoever in this paper. It turns out that Spencer and Braswell have an almost perfect title for their paper: “the misdiagnosis of surface temperature feedbacks from variations in the Earth’s Radiant Energy Balance” (leaving out the “On”).

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/07/misdiagnosis-of-surface-temperature-feedback/
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #22 on: August 14, 2011, 06:08:39 AM »
I mean, all I can really say to this is "Derp!"  Sounds like as rapid anthropogenic climate change is becoming more accepted in the mainstream, more people are trying to come out and debunk it.  It's like what they say about the battle with religion: they speak the loudest because they're on the losing side.  I dunno, that's my take on it.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline PlaysLikeMyung

  • Myung Protege Wannabe
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 8179
  • Gender: Male
  • Maurice Moss: Cooler than you
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #23 on: August 14, 2011, 04:15:53 PM »
Global Warming................so it's "official" now? *yawn*  :biggrin:

Please continue.


You know, for someone who (rightfully) derides 9/11 conspiracy theories, you're quite eager to buy into others. 

 :lol :rollin :lol :rollin

That's bullshit. What? Are you going to list the more than 1,000 scientists that the IPCC has lied about? Constantly the anthro camp uses red herrings, failed logic, and unsupported or debunked facts to support the POLITICIZED AL Gore manufactured kool-aid. It's not a fucking football game. "Let's see the score is 2,105 to 2,102- WE WIN!!"

I can't even bring myself to even debate this shit with some of you. It's like arguing with people who refuse to believe the Earth is round. Soundbites from the Keith Olbermann show, or Al Gore's bullshit movie (which has been discredited about 9 ways to Sunday) doesn't make it so. I used to want to believe in the anthro model, but I talked to people. I've studied research from those who have studied it. The data doesn't add up. Computer models only extrapolate the data that you start with. It's all bullshit. You might as well believe in the fucking Easter Bunny. Is the planet warming? Yes. Is it man's fault? Fuck no.

From what I remember of your opinions (and a couple of the posts I was able to find via the search function) you seem to hold the position that scientists are deliberately backing faulty or known to be false research, either for professional or personal gain.

I'd say that's a conspiracy theory.


 :lol :rollin :lol

now, see, if one of us had posted that, we'd have been excoriated immediately

But tempus vox is above the law

Offline yeshaberto

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8970
  • Gender: Male
  • Somebody Get Me A Doctor! - VH
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #24 on: August 14, 2011, 05:36:32 PM »
This is the second notice to move on.

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27137
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #25 on: August 14, 2011, 05:39:30 PM »
I think this is a very interesting topic especially as it pertains to how people misinterpret other peoples arguments.


What GW people say: This is a major event happening and we should start planning on how to deal with it so that future generations don't have to suffer.
How anti-GW people interpret that: OMG THE WORLD IS ENDING LETS TAX MORE PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!


What anti-GW people are saying: I'll admit that there is a climate shift, but I don't think it's as extreme as you and I don't think humans are to blame.
How GW people interpret that: THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING EVERYTHING IS COOL DRILL DRILL DRILL!
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #26 on: August 14, 2011, 05:55:35 PM »
To be quite frank, it's a topic that's beyond the province of anyone here on DTF.  Now, when most people don't have a good deal of knowledge on a scientific issue, or special insight to the larger scientific community, they don't go around pretending that they are better informed, and know the real "truth" in fields that millions of people have dedicated their professional lives to working and researching in. 

The reason people deny global warming, or evolution, rather than other commonly accepted scientific theories is typically because they have political or religious beliefs that override these.  One has to approach the issue from a skewed angle to conclude that the weight of evidence is against global warming; I suppose the exception would be if one is only exposed, or initially exposed, to a one-sided representation.  I think that people who ignore the political basis for their beliefs are being fundamentally dishonest with themselves and others.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline El JoNNo

  • Posts: 1778
  • Gender: Male
  • EMOTRUCCI
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #27 on: August 14, 2011, 06:20:49 PM »
To be quite frank, it's a topic that's beyond the province of anyone here on DTF.  Now, when most people don't have a good deal of knowledge on a scientific issue, or special insight to the larger scientific community, they don't go around pretending that they are better informed, and know the real "truth" in fields that millions of people have dedicated their professional lives to working and researching in. 

The reason people deny global warming, or evolution, rather than other commonly accepted scientific theories is typically because they have political or religious beliefs that override these.  One has to approach the issue from a skewed angle to conclude that the weight of evidence is against global warming; I suppose the exception would be if one is only exposed, or initially exposed, to a one-sided representation.  I think that people who ignore the political basis for their beliefs are being fundamentally dishonest with themselves and others.

I 100% agree.

Offline William Wallace

  • Posts: 2791
    • My blog
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #28 on: August 14, 2011, 11:23:15 PM »
So?
Honestly, I hope it leads to his marginalization. He's not a scientist nor a particularly informed lay person; he's just a cheerleader for a cause.  And if you notice, he didn't really engage his critics, except to call them "pseudo scientists." There's legitimate arguments against the mainstream view of climate change and they have nothing to do with volcanoes or sunspots. The truth is that he's probably unaware of Spencer's work, or that of any number of other publishing researchers who don't hold his views. 

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #29 on: August 15, 2011, 06:55:21 AM »
So?
Honestly, I hope it leads to his marginalization. He's not a scientist nor a particularly informed lay person; he's just a cheerleader for a cause.  And if you notice, he didn't really engage his critics, except to call them "pseudo scientists." There's legitimate arguments against the mainstream view of climate change and they have nothing to do with volcanoes or sunspots. The truth is that he's probably unaware of Spencer's work, or that of any number of other publishing researchers who don't hold his views. 

I wouldn't mind Gore's marginalization all that much.  The presentation of global warming as an issue should come from the larger scientific community that is qualified to speak with some measure of authority on the topic.

There are arguments against mainstream views of global warming, but there are reasons why they aren't in the mainstream.  As much as  some people would like to pretend they aren't, the core hypotheses surrounding global warming are virtually unchallenged. 

And more importantly, there's not even a scrap of a competing theory.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline TempusVox

  • Descendant of Primus
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5359
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #30 on: August 15, 2011, 09:38:40 AM »
Global Warming................so it's "official" now? *yawn*  :biggrin:

Please continue.


You know, for someone who (rightfully) derides 9/11 conspiracy theories, you're quite eager to buy into others. 

 :lol :rollin :lol :rollin

That's bullshit. What? Are you going to list the more than 1,000 scientists that the IPCC has lied about? Constantly the anthro camp uses red herrings, failed logic, and unsupported or debunked facts to support the POLITICIZED AL Gore manufactured kool-aid. It's not a fucking football game. "Let's see the score is 2,105 to 2,102- WE WIN!!"

I can't even bring myself to even debate this shit with some of you. It's like arguing with people who refuse to believe the Earth is round. Soundbites from the Keith Olbermann show, or Al Gore's bullshit movie (which has been discredited about 9 ways to Sunday) doesn't make it so. I used to want to believe in the anthro model, but I talked to people. I've studied research from those who have studied it. The data doesn't add up. Computer models only extrapolate the data that you start with. It's all bullshit. You might as well believe in the fucking Easter Bunny. Is the planet warming? Yes. Is it man's fault? Fuck no.

From what I remember of your opinions (and a couple of the posts I was able to find via the search function) you seem to hold the position that scientists are deliberately backing faulty or known to be false research, either for professional or personal gain.

I'd say that's a conspiracy theory.


 :lol :rollin :lol

now, see, if one of us had posted that, we'd have been excoriated immediately

But tempus vox is above the law

REALLY PLM??  Really?? While it's no secret I disagree with the pro-GW "experts" on this board, I simply posted a wry comment and added a smiley emoticon (to show my attempt at humor). Then I'm called a Conspiracy Theorist by the Pig, and instead of taking the bait, I simply laugh. Then an old comment of mine is brought forward, again by the Pig (I guess he keeps tabs on these things), and again I laugh at the antics, and now I'm above the law?? Really!  Hell I was even reported for not contributing anything to the thread. Apparently I didn't have too. Now my intent was not to derail the thread, and it still is not; and I refuse to be drawn into the same old tired arguments over this issue. But above the law? Not quite! I am not, nor do I assume or pretend to be. But the hate speak is really over the top here sometimes. Since I made my little harmless snide humorous remark, I will NOT act as a moderator in this issue, but name calling and then basically calling me and the mod staff out is really bad form. Don't ya think?
You don't HAVE a soul.You ARE a soul.You HAVE a body.
"I came here to drink milk and kick ass; and I just finished my milk."

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3068
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #31 on: August 15, 2011, 09:55:03 AM »
I think I missed the thread that preempted this one... But I do believe we have a climate shift. As far as what is the main cause, I have no idea.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #32 on: August 15, 2011, 10:07:32 AM »
**Big block o' text**

REALLY PLM??  Really?? While it's no secret I disagree with the pro-GW "experts" on this board, I simply posted a wry comment and added a smiley emoticon (to show my attempt at humor). Then I'm called a Conspiracy Theorist by the Pig, and instead of taking the bait, I simply laugh. Then an old comment of mine is brought forward, again by the Pig (I guess he keeps tabs on these things), and again I laugh at the antics, and now I'm above the law?? Really!  Hell I was even reported for not contributing anything to the thread. Apparently I didn't have too. Now my intent was not to derail the thread, and it still is not; and I refuse to be drawn into the same old tired arguments over this issue. But above the law? Not quite! I am not, nor do I assume or pretend to be. But the hate speak is really over the top here sometimes. Since I made my little harmless snide humorous remark, I will NOT act as a moderator in this issue, but name calling and then basically calling me and the mod staff out is really bad form. Don't ya think?

For what it's worth, I think that there's a distinction to be had between people who consciously buy into a conspiracy theory (like PraXis, for example, or that other guy... InTheNameofGod?  I think?) and people whose pattern of thinking mirrors that of a conspiracy theory.  I think you're in the latter category.  I found that interesting, considering your stance on 9/11 conspiracy theories.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #33 on: August 15, 2011, 11:06:32 AM »
I think I missed the thread that preempted this one... But I do believe we have a climate shift. As far as what is the main cause, I have no idea.

True. We have a climate shift. As we have had climate shifts throughout the course of history. We do not know the cause, and we will never know the cause. So, there is nothing we should do about it at all. The whole idea of carbon credits is absurd. Oil supplies are due to run out in a very short period of time anyway, and the problem will take care of itself. If there even IS a problem, which I do not believe at all. Climate changes and changes back. it's natural. Sea levels rise and fall over time. It's perfectly natural. Our job is not to invent explanations that enable some to curtail the freedom of others. Our job is to adapt to the new climate and figure out the new opportunities that will come about. Climate change can be GOOD. Let's embrace it and stop inventing new ways to stop progress and achievement.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2011, 11:11:39 AM by Major Thirteenth »

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #34 on: August 15, 2011, 11:49:23 AM »
I think I missed the thread that preempted this one... But I do believe we have a climate shift. As far as what is the main cause, I have no idea.

True. We have a climate shift. As we have had climate shifts throughout the course of history. We do not know the cause, and we will never know the cause. So, there is nothing we should do about it at all. The whole idea of carbon credits is absurd. Oil supplies are due to run out in a very short period of time anyway, and the problem will take care of itself. If there even IS a problem, which I do not believe at all. Climate changes and changes back. it's natural. Sea levels rise and fall over time. It's perfectly natural. Our job is not to invent explanations that enable some to curtail the freedom of others. Our job is to adapt to the new climate and figure out the new opportunities that will come about. Climate change can be GOOD. Let's embrace it and stop inventing new ways to stop progress and achievement.


So wait, the greenhouse effect doesn't exist?
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."