Global Warming, eh?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Sounder » Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:18 pm

Well I for one am very impressed with the durability of this system that finds its survival through putting more and more layers of lipstick on this pig.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby publius » Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:43 pm

The system works rather well since Nature is fecund. Our machine age can crash and burn and thousands years from now a new civilization emerges no wiser than the last. The boundless psychopathology of man assures that not being angels or demons we are a bit of both.
“To think is easy. To act is hard. But the hardest thing in the world is to act in accordance with your thinking.”
― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
User avatar
publius
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:39 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby wintler2 » Mon Jan 30, 2012 5:31 pm

BenD: +12C, even +6C, these are not mainstream or high-likelihood projections, and i note you provide no evidence that they are, just repeatedly claim it. I think what you call alarmists are in most cases merely modellers doing their job and exploring all possible outcomes. Do you also campaign against aircraft engineers who 'fear-monger' about updraughts?

My own position is that the 0.8C we already have has caused devastation enough, we have another 0.5C 'in the pipe'/on the way due to the longevity of many GHGs and loss of arctic ice & albedo, and any further GHGpollution or deforestation is profoundly irresponsible.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby wintler2 » Mon Jan 30, 2012 5:40 pm

Sounder wrote:Wintler2 wrote…
You'd think a billion dollar 'perception management' industry could come with some new lines every decade or so .. but no.

That is just humor coming from you, Mr. you guys are pro-polluter Koch bros. loving swine.
Or is it more like, Stay on the bandwagon folks, this writer is a conservative shit so there is no need to consider the content of the article.

Gay marriage & pollution taxation as preparing the country for communism? i'm sorry, that gives me a red flag big enough to hide the opera house, i think its relevant.

Sounder wrote:Yet the facts remain that Professor Garnaut is the go to guy on climate policy and the chairman of Lihir Gold.

Garnaut is an economist. He was first annoited by notorious AGW denier Prime Minister Howard. Labor plc. kept him on because he had already proved himself obedient and compliant on the issue. He is an expert only in some Australian media, and that because Australian media as a rule never look further than the old boys club.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby wintler2 » Mon Jan 30, 2012 5:48 pm

publius wrote:"Notorious" Bias Affects IPCC Climate Models - Unable To Successfully Predict Abrupt Climate Changes

The IPCC climate models almost complete failure at climate prediction has become an embarrassing joke within the general science community as these money-eating simulation efforts starve other science projects of funds. Almost on a weekly basis there is new research revealing the climate model failure fiasco, which likely will remain the case for the foreseeable future, per a recent study.

Wan et al. analyzed the Atlantic tropical bias that exists in the major IPCC climate models that prevents the coupled models from accurately reproducing Atlantic equatorial sea surface temperatures. This failure will not be solved in the near future they determine, which precludes these models being able to "predict" abrupt climate change.

"The authors write that "the notorious tropical bias problem in climate simulations of global coupled general circulation models manifests itself particularly strongly in the tropical Atlantic,"... they state that "the climate bias problem is still so severe that one of the most basic features of the equatorial Atlantic Ocean -- the eastward shoaling thermocline -- cannot be reproduced by most of the IPCC assessment report models,...as they describe it, "show that the bias in the eastern equatorial Atlantic has a major effect on sea-surface temperature (SST) response to a rapid change in the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC)."...ultimate implication of Wan et al.'s findings is, in their words, that "in order to accurately simulate past abrupt climate changes and project future changes, the bias in climate models must be reduced." But if "little or no progress" on this problem has been made in the tropical Atlantic "over the past decades,"..." [Xiuquan Wana, Ping Changa, Charles S. Jacksonn, Link Jia, Mingkui Lia 2011: Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography]


Yes, existing climate models have limitations, and recreating (or back-casting its sometimes called) sea surface temps in the equatorial Atlantic seems a particular weakness, according to Wan et al. Several postgrads will now hopefully devote their MSc or PhDs to trying to do that bit a bit better, another day in the life of climate modelling. Your point is?
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby publius » Mon Jan 30, 2012 6:07 pm

Bad models are bad science and bad policy comes from both. In the grand scheme of things humanity has been warmer and colder. We have technology today for both. So models that "predict" outcomes are maps and not the terrain and are subject to manipulation by idealistic men of conviction who know the data set requires some adjustment. Like dissapearing the Medieval Warm period.

Surely the precautionary principle would be to rethink the convictions of Capitlaism rather than impose Diktat by Capitalist countries on the world. Especially since these states spray the atmosphere with crud that has multiple purposes and which is not in the models either.

Garbage In, Garbage Out. But is it the right sort of garbage we thought leaders like Al Gore ask? Can we carbon trade it? Can we demand public money for projects we like and invest in with this trash? Is it credible to create a panic over a climate emergency and cede more liberty he asks?

pity this busy monster, manunkind,

not. Progress is a comfortable disease:
your victim (death and life safely beyond)

plays with the bigness of his littleness
--- electrons deify one razorblade
into a mountainrange; lenses extend
unwish through curving wherewhen till unwish
returns on its unself.
A world of made
is not a world of born --- pity poor flesh

and trees, poor stars and stones, but never this
fine specimen of hypermagical

ultraomnipotence. We doctors know

a hopeless case if --- listen: there's a hell
of a good universe next door; let's go

E. E. Cummings
“To think is easy. To act is hard. But the hardest thing in the world is to act in accordance with your thinking.”
― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
User avatar
publius
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:39 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby wintler2 » Mon Jan 30, 2012 6:16 pm

Memory lane - global warming threads from days of yore..

Arctic updates

”Earth getting mysteriously windier”

Case closed: “Climategate” was manufactured

Monster jump in greenhouse gases exceeds worst-case scenario

Koch Brothers thread

The climate change denial industry

There’s many familiar faces from this thread on those, I think publius is the only ‘newbie’. Heres a pearl stumbled on..

The Consul wrote:Scream me the change unimagined in the fire of revolt. Let the poor and the bourgeois lock arms in an unstoppable rush of the castles. Scream what Kafka said so long ago “the world order is based upon a lie.” Let the fury of the masses rise in a flood to drown out the vile clowns of propaganda and let the politicians, bankers and kings, bow down before our feet and beg us for mercy as we instruct them on how to reorganize society and save some small piece of what we now call life for our progeny - for if we don't, in two generations there will be nothing left to breathe but fire.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Sounder » Mon Jan 30, 2012 6:46 pm

Yeah those were the days, when all kinds of folk would join in on your bandwagon. And remember hopenhagen, that was a really good one, ha, ha, that was soooo funny, I loved that one, and, and that 1010: No Pressure bit, that was sooooo funny, all those people blowing up at the push of a red button, remember that, that was sooooo funny, man those were the days.


Top Climate Scientist: Copenhagen Must Fail, Slams CapnTrade

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=26130&hilit=10%3A10+hopenhagen

1010: No Pressure

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=29641&hilit=10%3A10+hopenhagen
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby publius » Mon Jan 30, 2012 6:49 pm

Koch vs. Rothschild eh. I agree we need to follow all the money. That's because it is all about the money. There is no white hat in the room, only black hats fighting it out in a Mafia turf war.

Two professors of sociology think they can explain why “Climate Deniers” are winning. But Riley E. Dunlap and Aaron M. McCright start from the wrong assumption and miss the bleeding obvious: the theory was wrong, the evidence has changed, and thousands of volunteers have exposed it.

The real question sociologists will be studying for years to come is: how was an exaggerated scare, based on so little evidence, poor reasoning and petty namecalling, kept alive for two whole decades?

Many of the formulas, calculations, studies, and other data cited as evidence of man-made climate change have been exposed as seriously flawed over the past several years. But because the problem is “systemic” rather than “conspiratorial,” according to Nova, this monopoly on science and scientific thought is strangling any real progress towards discovering the real truth about climate change. As a result, the man-made global warming theory is still considered to be truth, despite a lack of credible evidence.

To make matters worse, the few scientists and climate experts that are brave enough to speak out against global warming, using real science to back up their claims, continue to be ignored or ridiculed by the establishment. There simply is no room for alternate theories, or any type of evidence that contradicts the official story, after all.

As a result, many others in the scientific industry who feel the same way are intimidated from speaking out themselves, for fear that they will lose funding or even their careers. Many of the major scientific groups that study climate science are funded by the same interests pushing the man-made climate change theory, after all.So unless the system undergoes a massive overhaul, those that have much to gain from pushing the man-made climate change theory will continue to push their agenda, and corner the market on climate science. And with a virtually unlimited supply of taxpayer dollars to maintain this monopoly, any legitimate, independent scientific inquiry into climate change will remain in the shadows.

Climate Change Scare Machine Cycle: see how your tax dollars are converted into alarming messages

See your tax dollars converted into their scare.

http://joannenova.com.au/2011/10/map-th ... chine-the.. Reference: Climate Money, Science and Public Policy Institute, 2009.
“To think is easy. To act is hard. But the hardest thing in the world is to act in accordance with your thinking.”
― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
User avatar
publius
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:39 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Sounder » Mon Jan 30, 2012 7:01 pm

So unless the system undergoes a massive overhaul, those that have much to gain from pushing the man-made climate change theory will continue to push their agenda, and corner the market on climate science.


Much like war mongers, the hard warmists cannot stop because their self identity is built on their manner of 'saving the world'.

Who really wants an epiphany anyway, those fuckers can hurt. :starz:
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby publius » Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:59 pm

Sounder, these people had their epiphany. With absolute zealotry now they crusade in it's name. This is quite like Hume. We need convictions to live by, and if they are not true in the world, so long as they offer comfort, they are agreeable and useful.

Interestingly enough their perfect foil is big businesses like Exxon or BP who also spin their truths with zeal.

Zealotry is the order of the hour. Yeats- "The best lack all conviction, while the worst/ Are full of passionate intensity. Surely some revelation is at hand; Surely the Second Coming is at hand."
“To think is easy. To act is hard. But the hardest thing in the world is to act in accordance with your thinking.”
― Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
User avatar
publius
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:39 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby wintler2 » Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:10 am

publius wrote:Koch vs. Rothschild eh. I agree we need to follow all the money. That's because it is all about the money. There is no white hat in the room, only black hats fighting it out in a Mafia turf war.

Two professors of sociology think they can explain why “Climate Deniers” are winning. But Riley E. Dunlap and Aaron M. McCright start from the wrong assumption and miss the bleeding obvious: the theory was wrong, the evidence has changed, and thousands of volunteers have exposed it. ...

http://joannenova.com.au/2011/10/map-th ... chine-the.. Reference: Climate Money, Science and Public Policy Institute, 2009.


Yo publius, have you noticed that when copy-pasting other peoples articles, many posters put the text in a quote box? It saves confusing your line with the whole article you posted of J.Nova. If you hover mouse pointer over the quote button on Post a Reply page, the format will appear in grey bar atop text box.

Also, did you know that the Science and Public Policy Institute, formerly known as Center for Science and Public Policy, is one of the better known fronts for megapolluters?

I find the quickest way to tell is that the PR flacks never provide links or evidence, relying entirely on their rhetoric. Works for some, apparently.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby slimmouse » Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:32 am

Nice thread here on the successful testing of the Rossi E-Cat, which of course illustrates one of the many areas where our collective minds should perhaps be focusing, instead of the usual out of context bickering we all too often indulge in (even here) ;

http://www.overunity.com/11404/first-fr ... -here/165/
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby wintler2 » Tue Jan 31, 2012 7:14 am

slimmouse wrote:Nice thread here on the successful testing of the Rossi E-Cat, which of course illustrates one of the many areas where our collective minds should perhaps be focusing, instead of the usual out of context bickering we all too often indulge in (even here) ;

http://www.overunity.com/11404/first-fr ... -here/165/


Mystery blue box sank 'cold fusion' for Dick Smith

THE engineer charged by entrepreneur Dick Smith with examining the plausibility of "cold fusion" technology being spruiked by a NSW retiree has detailed a string of reasons why he believes the mooted invention is flawed.

Aerospace engineer Ian Bryce said sloppy procedures, shoddy set up and a mysterious power supply to the contraption developed by an Italian inventor all pointed towards it almost certainly not working as hyped.

Italian scientist Andrea Rossi claims to have invented "cold fusion" technology, which could solve the world's energy problems by producing almost limitless power.

The claims and the contraptions -- of which Mr Rossi claims to have sold several for about $2 million each -- have been met with deep cynicism from the scientific community.

Mr Smith, a self-described long-time sceptic of outlandish technological claims, has offered $200,000 to NSW north coast man Sol Millin -- who is spruiking the technology locally -- if he can prove it actually works.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/he ... 6248815868


Noone has managed to collect the 200k just by proving it works. But you can buy one for 2mil. Get in early, 10% off! :lol:
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Global Warming, eh?

Postby Sounder » Tue Jan 31, 2012 8:10 am

I find the quickest way to tell is that the PR flacks never provide links or evidence, relying entirely on their rhetoric. Works for some, apparently.


That is really good for you wintler2. Personally I think a better marker for such a thing would be a narrow range of interest and an apparent inability to think things through on their own. (You know, kind of like PR flacks) And that's cool, each to his own I suppose.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests