[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Trump - edz - Nov 28, 2020 - 12:33pm
 
2020 Elections - haresfur - Nov 28, 2020 - 12:28pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - haresfur - Nov 28, 2020 - 12:26pm
 
Let them eat kale - rhahl - Nov 28, 2020 - 12:12pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - Steely_D - Nov 28, 2020 - 10:00am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - oldviolin - Nov 28, 2020 - 9:30am
 
Iran - Lazy8 - Nov 28, 2020 - 9:27am
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Nov 28, 2020 - 8:33am
 
Marijuana: Baked News. - westslope - Nov 28, 2020 - 8:16am
 
Counting with Pictures - Proclivities - Nov 28, 2020 - 5:47am
 
COVID-19 - rhahl - Nov 28, 2020 - 2:59am
 
I like cheese - Ohmsen - Nov 28, 2020 - 2:51am
 
♥ ♥ ♥ Vote For Pie ♥ ♥ ♥ - rhahl - Nov 28, 2020 - 2:07am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - rhahl - Nov 28, 2020 - 2:00am
 
Republican Party - R_P - Nov 27, 2020 - 8:14pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Nov 27, 2020 - 8:07pm
 
Trump Lies - R_P - Nov 27, 2020 - 7:21pm
 
Google Home - jarro - Nov 27, 2020 - 1:57pm
 
Jam! - rhahl - Nov 27, 2020 - 11:05am
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - miamizsun - Nov 27, 2020 - 5:33am
 
Happy Thanksgiving! - whatshisname - Nov 27, 2020 - 1:50am
 
Supreme Court Rulings - R_P - Nov 26, 2020 - 2:18pm
 
Protest Songs - rhahl - Nov 26, 2020 - 12:16pm
 
Race in America - R_P - Nov 26, 2020 - 12:04pm
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - Antigone - Nov 26, 2020 - 11:28am
 
The Obituary Page - Steely_D - Nov 26, 2020 - 11:06am
 
Outstanding Covers - Steely_D - Nov 26, 2020 - 10:22am
 
Next life I'm going to be a backup singer - Steely_D - Nov 26, 2020 - 10:12am
 
Alice's Restaurant - Angiea16 - Nov 26, 2020 - 9:24am
 
RP on Raspberry Pi - BillG - Nov 26, 2020 - 9:07am
 
Poetry Forum - oldviolin - Nov 26, 2020 - 8:16am
 
A motivational quote - oldviolin - Nov 26, 2020 - 7:49am
 
honk if you think manbird and OV are one and the same ent... - oldviolin - Nov 26, 2020 - 7:47am
 
In My Room - oldviolin - Nov 26, 2020 - 7:38am
 
Arlo Guthrie's Alice's Restaurant Massacree - oldviolin - Nov 26, 2020 - 7:09am
 
Democratic Party - kcar - Nov 26, 2020 - 3:41am
 
Unresearched Conspiracy Theories - Ohmsen - Nov 25, 2020 - 3:30pm
 
want to donate but only use the native internet currency ... - Ohmsen - Nov 25, 2020 - 2:35pm
 
The Best Commercials - Manbird - Nov 25, 2020 - 2:07pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Ohmsen - Nov 25, 2020 - 1:42pm
 
Blues Rock - Ohmsen - Nov 25, 2020 - 1:28pm
 
New Study Finds 'Most Narcissistic Generation' on Campuse... - haresfur - Nov 25, 2020 - 1:28pm
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - Isabeau - Nov 25, 2020 - 1:01pm
 
What are you listening to now? - Ohmsen - Nov 25, 2020 - 12:52pm
 
Sticky, Groovy 70s Tunes - Ohmsen - Nov 25, 2020 - 11:09am
 
Live Music - Ohmsen - Nov 25, 2020 - 9:20am
 
Dear Retail Fashion Industry - Ohmsen - Nov 25, 2020 - 8:55am
 
2001; A SPACE ODYSSEY - R_P - Nov 24, 2020 - 10:26pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Nov 24, 2020 - 5:01pm
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - Manbird - Nov 24, 2020 - 3:11pm
 
Canada - westslope - Nov 24, 2020 - 2:52pm
 
Donating with Bitcoin - why not? - BillG - Nov 24, 2020 - 2:32pm
 
New Music - chris13 - Nov 24, 2020 - 1:56pm
 
Need A Thread Killed? - oldviolin - Nov 24, 2020 - 9:17am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - perruca - Nov 24, 2020 - 6:14am
 
Zappa - miamizsun - Nov 24, 2020 - 5:46am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Nov 24, 2020 - 4:58am
 
Florida - miamizsun - Nov 24, 2020 - 4:53am
 
Oops! - Red_Dragon - Nov 23, 2020 - 3:58pm
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - miamizsun - Nov 23, 2020 - 2:15pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Nov 23, 2020 - 1:44pm
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - haresfur - Nov 23, 2020 - 1:27pm
 
Name My Disease! - buddy - Nov 23, 2020 - 12:58pm
 
songs that ROCK! - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 23, 2020 - 11:49am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Nov 23, 2020 - 11:49am
 
No Points for Trying - miamizsun - Nov 23, 2020 - 6:56am
 
Amazing animals! - Coaxial - Nov 23, 2020 - 6:08am
 
Joe Biden - Steely_D - Nov 22, 2020 - 4:37pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - Antigone - Nov 22, 2020 - 2:40pm
 
Always great listening... - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 22, 2020 - 2:10pm
 
What makes you smile? - Ohmsen - Nov 22, 2020 - 12:53pm
 
Prog Rockers Anonymous - Ohmsen - Nov 22, 2020 - 12:14pm
 
russian mystery - Ohmsen - Nov 22, 2020 - 11:12am
 
Health Care - Steely_D - Nov 22, 2020 - 10:24am
 
You might be getting old if...... - Antigone - Nov 22, 2020 - 9:31am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Climate Change Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 102, 103, 104, 105, 106  Next
Post to this Topic
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 3:57pm

 miamizsun wrote:


Maybe we should just contact him via email to clarify if possible?

I'm slammed right now with work, I'll explore an answer when time allows.

Regards
========================================

 
I did fire off an email to Lindzen, maybe he'll respond.

And now this:

Marine Cloud Whitening?


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 8:52am

 BasmntMadman wrote:

Here's something this here David noticed

In the slide "Impacts as a Chain of Inference."

Where does he get the number 11 in the expression (0.5)11 or (0.2)11
 

Maybe we should just contact him via email to clarify if possible?

I'm slammed right now with work, I'll explore an answer when time allows.

Regards

BasmntMadman

BasmntMadman Avatar

Location: Off-White Gardens


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 8:22am

 miamizsun wrote:

M, here's a scientist I believe wrote most of chapter 7 in the IPCC report. He reportedly agrees with some 90% of the info, however the 10% he disagrees with is apparently enough to get him labeled a contrarian.

Powerpoint

Regards
 
Here's something this here David noticed

In the slide "Impacts as a Chain of Inference."

Where does he get the number 11 in the expression (0.5)11 or (0.2)11

What he's referring to is probability of independent events all occurring - for example, 8 heads in 8 coin tosses, or a sequence 1,2,7,2,3 in 5 tosses of a die.  To calculate that, you multiply the probabilities of each event. 

I count 11 little squares in the slide, so that has to be where he gets the 11.  So he's saying that for global warming to be credible requires all 11 squares to be events that occur, each with probability of 0.5 or 0.2.  The first is "emissions".  Well, the probability of increased emissions in past years sure as hell isn't 0.5, it's 1. 

That's inaccuracy number one - he's playing some games with probability theory.  What makes more sense is if he's saying that there has to be all these events happening for global warming to be a problem:

increased emissions produce high atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases,
and high atmospheric levels lead to high radiative forcing,
and high radiative forcing leads to global response,
and global response leads to regional wind,
and humidity,
and temperature,
and rainfall,
and cloudiness,
and there are other factors influencing impact. 

I think he needs some or's in there after the "global response" block.  You don't need to have all the problems with wind, humidity, temperature, rainfall, and cloudiness for global warming to have a harmful effect.  In fact, rise of ocean levels would be the worst effect of all. The "other factors" influencing impact doesn't have to be part of the chain at all.  Plus, the first item, increased emissions produce high levels of greenhouse gases, has to have a probability of more than 0.5

It's games like this that reduce my confidence in this man - who berates the public for scientific illiteracy - radically. 

He also engages in emotional scare tactics himself, presenting a slide which implies that we'll become like North Korea if we cut greenhouse gas emissions by 80%. 

He mentions a couple pieces of work that differ from the global warming scenario, then use them as proof that the whole thing is absurd, and how could people be so stupid as to believe such absurdity?  Oh, it must be because they're whipped into a frenzy by the politicians and the liberal media. 

Polar bears thriving compared to 50 years ago?  I thought they were hunted to near-extinction 50 years ago, so of course their numbers will be higher than 50 years ago.  It turns out that it wasn't until 1973 that international efforts to curb intensive polar bear hunting were made. 
It turns out that their numbers are now stable, but are projected to decline by >30%.  Five of 19 subpopulations are in decline, which hardly seems thriving. The US Department of the Interior has classified them as a threatened species, but that's the government and they're in on the conspiracy, aren't they?



kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 5:26am

 fuh2 wrote:

More Right wing Corporate fear mongering from the Carbon Industry. I get all my electricity from wind farms and I pay only 10% more for it. In Germany they offer Solar Power panels for customers subsidized by the govermnment and the EXCESS YOU CAN SELL BACK to the utility.   
 
I love how you see that everything is always a right wing sponsored hoax.  The right is always at the bottom with everything wrong with this country.  The solution should be easy, a left wing dictatorship, that will fix everything wrong with the world.

OBTW:  here in Ohio, we have been able to sell excess energy back to the suppliers for years, be it in the form of electricity or natural gas.  Many people in NEO (that's North East Ohio) have gas wells on their properties.  Maybe you should lobby your state to allow electric meters to run backwards and sell back your excess energy to the provider as we do in Ohio.  We can't be the only state.  You infer that selling back excess energy is not allowed in the US.  Maybe that is another right wing hoax.  You should dig a little deeper and consider that there is more than one source of information.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 5:20am

 fuh2 wrote:

More Right wing Corporate fear mongering from the Carbon Industry. I get all my electricity from wind farms and I pay only 10% more for it. In Germany they offer Solar Power panels for customers subsidized by the govermnment and the EXCESS YOU CAN SELL BACK to the utility.   
 
fuh, feel free to read the material and objectively rebut.

Regards

miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 5:16am

 dionysius wrote:


There is justified cynicism, and then also woefully misplaced cynicism.

 
M, here's a scientist I believe wrote most of chapter 7 in the IPCC report. He reportedly agrees with some 90% of the info, however the 10% he disagrees with is apparently enough to get him labeled a contrarian.

Powerpoint

Regards

HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 4:33am

Rising temperatures could be devastating for glaciers surrounding the Himalayas. ITN's James Mates reports


MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 1:33am

 fuh2 wrote:

More Right wing Corporate fear mongering from the Carbon Industry. I get all my electricity from wind farms and I pay only 10% more for it. In Germany they offer Solar Power panels for customers subsidized by the govermnment and the EXCESS YOU CAN SELL BACK to the utility.   


 
as far as I was aware this is not rocket science- many countries operate a system whereby you can sell power back to the grid.

My concern about this thread is how everyone talks about the science not being proven and tries to bring their own scientific theories to play.  There's nothing wrong with exploring and understanding the evidence of course but there seems to be a constant theme of "I won't believe the science until I personally have done my own independent research".

Now, of course some of the climate scientists are tainted by the UEA email scandal but why do we seem to need an amatuer scientist to prove every point now?  This strikes me as a little like some of the comments about the swine flu vaccination.  The science is there and it's good science- you can opt out if you personally wish but let the rest of the world and especially the governments get on with tackling this problem and stop putting up road blocks.


fuh2

fuh2 Avatar

Location: Mexican beach paradise
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:38pm

 miamizsun wrote:

M, how can you say that this obvious corruption means nothing? I must respectfully disagree.

There is more here.

You do realize how much money this carbon tax will generate right?

In Japan estimates are running $1400 & $8600 per household annually.

I don't deny that there is a major problem with pollution and climate change, I'm just questioning the legitimacy of the data, how much is due to man, and why they're going to tax the pants off of us.

Listen, any time corrupt government(s) get involved and wants to help us take care of an issue by taxing us, I get worried. Their track record speaks for itself.

If climate change is such a big deal, why don't they stop the wars, stop the bailouts for their "too big" to fail buddies and focus on taking care of a real issue?

Isn't it obvious government's priority is taxing, borrowing and spending?

I'm just asking....

I have a feeling we're about to take it in the a$$, and somehow the government/corporatists are about to ca$h in again.

Peace
 
More Right wing Corporate fear mongering from the Carbon Industry. I get all my electricity from wind farms and I pay only 10% more for it. In Germany they offer Solar Power panels for customers subsidized by the govermnment and the EXCESS YOU CAN SELL BACK to the utility.   

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:33pm

 miamizsun wrote:

M, how can you say that this obvious corruption means nothing? I must respectfully disagree.

There is more here.

You do realize how much money this carbon tax will generate right?

In Japan estimates are running $1400 & $8600 per household annually.

I don't deny that there is a major problem with pollution and climate change, I'm just questioning the legitimacy of the data, how much is due to man, and why they're going to tax the pants off of us.

Listen, any time corrupt government(s) get involved and wants to help us take care of an issue by taxing us, I get worried. Their track record speaks for itself.

If climate change is such a big deal, why don't they stop the wars, stop the bailouts for their "too big" to fail buddies and focus on taking care of a real issue?

Isn't it obvious government's priority is taxing, borrowing and spending?

I'm just asking....

I have a feeling we're about to take it in the a$$, and somehow the government/corporatists are about to ca$h in again.

Peace
 

There is justified cynicism, and then also woefully misplaced cynicism.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:30pm

 dionysius wrote:


Sorry, I don't know Portuguese.

And the email "scandal"—proves nothing. Zilch. Does nothing to invalidate science being done all over the world, not just in one small organization. There is no smoking gun, not one than can clean up all the smoking chimneys. This is a venial sin next to the mortal one of climate change denial. Look past this well-intentioned error to the much bigger error beyond it.

The hard choices do have to be made. That's why there is a denial movement, to delay (because it cannot be prevented, ultimately) the hard political and economic decisions. Denial is in the short-term interests of a few who are heavily invested in the present carbon economy. The carbon tax and cap-and-trade will benefit us all, in the long run. We have to see that short-term inconvenience is necessary for long-term welfare and, well, survival. For the natural world as well as us.

 
M, how can you say that this obvious corruption means nothing? I must respectfully disagree.

There is more here.

You do realize how much money this carbon tax will generate right?

In Japan estimates are running $1400 & $8600 per household annually.

I don't deny that there is a major problem with pollution and climate change, I'm just questioning the legitimacy of the data, how much is due to man, and why they're going to tax the pants off of us.

Listen, any time corrupt government(s) get involved and wants to help us take care of an issue by taxing us, I get worried. Their track record speaks for itself.

If climate change is such a big deal, why don't they stop the wars, stop the bailouts for their "too big" to fail buddies and focus on taking care of a real issue?

Isn't it obvious government's priority is taxing, borrowing and spending?

I'm just asking....

I have a feeling we're about to take it in the a$$, and somehow the government/corporatists are about to ca$h in again.

Peace

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:19pm

 jadewahoo wrote:

Whoa. You say those names like you have actually read them.
?
 

When I was young and stupid. Now that I am old and stupid, I recognize their fatuity.
Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: Oroville, Ca
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:19pm

 dionysius wrote:


You don't have to respond to every crazy pet conspiracy theory out there. You're already right. You don't have to give Immanuel Velikovsky, Madame Blavatsky and Erich von Däniken the time of day. Let crank scholarship eat itself.
 
Is that chariots of the gods bloke? Jeez I haven't thought about him since I read that book when I was 15. 
fuh2

fuh2 Avatar

Location: Mexican beach paradise
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:17pm

 miamizsun wrote:

M, I was referring to the hapless screw ups/CRU you speak of, here is a list with some of their emails with some parts bolded. I just can't look past this type of thing, especially when there is so much riding on it.(a worldwide tax of mythic proportion)

I'm very concerned they're going to use something like this (obviously manipulated data/evidence) to ram this "carbon tax" through and "f" us royally.

Regards

What do you prefer, a carbon tax that could be used to create millions of green industry jobs (like putting solar on every roof in America), or runaway global warming?   Now THAT is when we will be truly royally f'ed. 

————————————————————————————- 

Runaway Global Warming-
A Climate Catastrophe in the Making

What is runaway global warming, or "runaway heating"?

Runaway global warming is the accelerating (and soon to be unstoppable) chain reaction caused by release of the Arctic's vast stores of the very potent greenhouse gas (GHG), methane. The Arctic methane is released as the result of global warming heating the Arctic. That is called a positive carbon feedback.

This is as close as we've come to a literal End of the World Doomsday scenario. It is the single most catastrophically dangerous effect of global warming to all life on Earth.

The Arctic is already warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet. Regions in Siberia (where most of the carbon is) are warming even faster.

 
jadewahoo

jadewahoo Avatar

Location: Puerto Viejo, Costa Rica
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:16pm

 dionysius wrote:


You don't have to respond to every crazy pet conspiracy theory out there. You're already right. You don't have to give Immanuel Velikovsky, Madame Blavatsky and Erich von Däniken the time of day. Let crank scholarship eat itself.

 
Whoa. You say those names like you have actually read them.
?

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:02pm

 miamizsun wrote:

M, I was referring to the hapless screw ups/CRU you speak of, here is a list with some of their emails with some parts bolded. I just can't look past this type of thing, especially when there is so much riding on it.(a worldwide tax of mythic proportion)

I'm very concerned they're going to use something like this (obviously manipulated data/evidence) to ram this "carbon tax" through and "f" us royally.

Regards
 

Sorry, I don't know Portuguese.

And the email "scandal"—proves nothing. Zilch. Does nothing to invalidate science being done all over the world, not just in one small organization. There is no smoking gun, not one than can clean up all the smoking chimneys. This is a venial sin next to the mortal one of climate change denial. Look past this well-intentioned error to the much bigger error beyond it.

The hard choices do have to be made. That's why there is a denial movement, to delay (because it cannot be prevented, ultimately) the hard political and economic decisions. Denial is in the short-term interests of a few who are heavily invested in the present carbon economy. The carbon tax and cap-and-trade will benefit us all, in the long run. We have to see that short-term inconvenience is necessary for long-term welfare and, well, survival. For the natural world as well as us.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 8:48pm

 dionysius wrote:

How "obviously"? If you have "evidence of collusion" (with whom?), then give us a link to it, or something. Who is the more credible and acknowledged source?

(edit:) Anyone seriously interested can go to: http://www.ipcc-data.org/ There are many, many folks working on this besides the hapless screwups in East Anglia.

 
M, I was referring to the hapless screw ups/CRU you speak of, here is a list with some of their emails with some parts bolded. I just can't look past this type of thing, especially when there is so much riding on it.(a worldwide tax of mythic proportion)

I'm very concerned they're going to use something like this (obviously manipulated data/evidence) to ram this "carbon tax" through and "f" us royally.

Regards

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 7:56pm

 fuh2 wrote:


From what I understand, in 1998 there was an unusual global temperature spike that has not been matched until 2007.
The Carbon Industry PR machine has used that spike to try to show temperatures are now declining. The last 14 years are the hottest on record and the Himalaya glaciers are now 300-400 vertical feet lower than they were in 1920's.

The world pumps 28 BILLION TONS of CO2 into the air every year which is why atmospheric CO2  is increasing 2% a year.  CO2 is a proven greenhouse gas.

Before the industrial revolution began the atmosphere was at 275 Parts Per Million CO2. It is now 390 PPM and many climatologists agree that we have to get it back down to 350 PPM to keep climate change from spiralling out of control.

 

You don't have to respond to every crazy pet conspiracy theory out there. You're already right. You don't have to give Immanuel Velikovsky, Madame Blavatsky and Erich von Däniken the time of day. Let crank scholarship eat itself.
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 7:53pm

Beaker wrote:
Check around - throwing out original source data just isn't done.

Sure it is. Try archiving an ice core for twenty years.

I'm looking forward to what a whole bunch of sunlight will bring to the facts and claims as laid out by the warmists.

Sure, but be prepared to be right back where we started. Being a sloppy codesmith or a belligerent partisan or even a dishonest scientist doesn't make your conclusions wrong.

fuh2

fuh2 Avatar

Location: Mexican beach paradise
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 7:51pm

 Beaker wrote:
 
 
I'm looking forward to what a whole bunch of sunlight will bring to the facts and claims as laid out by the warmists.
 

From what I understand, in 1998 there was an unusual global temperature spike that has not been matched until 2007.
The Carbon Industry PR machine has used that spike to try to show temperatures are now declining. The last 14 years are the hottest on record and the Himalaya glaciers are now 300-400 vertical feet lower than they were in 1920's.

The world pumps 28 BILLION TONS of CO2 into the air every year which is why atmospheric CO2  is increasing 2% a year.  CO2 is a proven greenhouse gas.

Before the industrial revolution began the atmosphere was at 275 Parts Per Million CO2. It is now 390 PPM and many climatologists agree that we have to get it back down to 350 PPM to keep climate change from spiralling out of control.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 102, 103, 104, 105, 106  Next