Merged Global Warming Discussion II: Heated Conversation

[CapelDodger]

I'm not worried. We got a short life span here on the planet. Why worry?

Short it may be in the scales of History, but I'm still keen on enjoying a full one.

I am thrilled that the polar bears are thriving though.

What do you have against seals?

 

[macdoc]

The issue is teasing out natureal variations from forcings.
Kinda hard to see this as a natural variation

Care to explain ABC??
By the way argument from ignorance begs the question of why you are participating in a science forum in the first place.
Some other agenda perhaps?

 

[ABC10]

Short it may be in the scales of History, but I'm still keen on enjoying a full one.

What do you have against seals?

Isn't that amazing? Put a ban on killing the seals and the polar bears go wild.
Yes, some peace, serenity and a little joy with a bit of luck for all.

 

[ABC10]

The issue is teasing out natureal variations from forcings.
Kinda hard to see this as a natural variation

[qimg]https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-ZCHz1c8hRTk/UsloSbBUNSI/AAAAAAAADi8/G-qm4-Vzjv8/s720/Total_Heat_Content_1024.jpg[/qimg]

Care to explain ABC??

Not me, but will email Doc Richard and Anthony Watts for an explanation.

 

[CapelDodger]

Lindzen ?? oh my poor choice of mentor. Fossil fuel paid shill definitely past best by date.

Lindzen's real problem is motivated reasoning, and research shows that intelligence actually makes that problem worse. He clearly craves attention as well, which is why he's so drawn to contrarian causes such as AGW denial or the health benefits of tobacco. It makes him a big fish in a pond of minnows.

Not that he turns down the money, of course. Who would?

Lindzen still pitches his Iris Theory to uninformed audiences, from what I hear. A sad old man, way past what was never a particularly good best.


ETA : for a paid scientist shill par excellence, look no further than Smokin' Fred Singer. A true professional who shaped the whole industry.

 

[ABC10]

Lindzen's real problem is motivated reasoning, and research shows that intelligence actually makes that problem worse. He clearly craves attention as well, which is why he's so drawn to contrarian causes such as AGW denial or the health benefits of tobacco. It makes him a big fish in a pond of minnows.

Not that he turns down the money, of course. Who would?

Lindzen still pitches his Iris Theory to uninformed audiences, from what I hear. A sad old man, way past what was never a particularly good best.

MIT sure liked him. I pray we all have the gift of olde age and thrilled it was given to this brilliant man. Hope it comes to all. Sadly, it doesn't. Far to many die young.

 

[CapelDodger]

Isn't that amazing? Put a ban on killing the seals and the polar bears go wild.

What on Earth are you talking about?

Yes, some peace, serenity and a little joy with a bit of luck for all.

Sorry, that fared no better. Are you speaking some sort of Californian patois?

 

[macdoc]

So ABC....do you agree with this??

According to an April 30, 2012 New York Times article,[67] "Dr. Lindzen accepts the elementary tenets of climate science.

He agrees that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, calling people who dispute that point "nutty."
He agrees that the level of it is rising because of human activity and that this should warm the climate."

and as to MIT liking him....perhaps not

Kerry A. Emanuel, another M.I.T. scientist, said of Lindzen's views "Even if there were no political implications, it just seems deeply unprofessional and irresponsible to look at this and say, ‘We’re sure it’s not a problem.’ It’s a special kind of risk, because it’s a risk to the collective civilization."[67]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lindzen

AGW is accepted reality and being acted on - you dredge up sound bites from a decade ago.

The difficult part is what to do about AGW. There are no easy answers to that.

 

[CapelDodger]

Far to many die young.

Especially if they trust to luck over matters which are predictable.

 

[Warmer1]

I am not a physicist.[snip]. An no, I can't explain those charts folk throw around,

So you are telling us you are not intelligent enough to understand charts but you came into a science forum to change our minds how? Are we supposed to change our minds based on your "feelings" about climate science?

You admit that you don't understand the science but your failure of logic leads you to believe you are going to explain climate science to us? WOW!

That's the biggest intellectual face plant we've seen in this forum in a long time.

Thanks for the entertainment!!!!

 

[Warmer1]

An no, I can't explain those charts folk throw around,

"The graph is self explanatory."

If one cannot understand a chart........................?

 

[ABC10]

So you are telling us you are not intelligent enough to understand charts but you came into a science forum to change our minds how? Are we supposed to change our minds based on your "feelings" about climate science?

You admit that you don't understand the science but your failure of logic leads you to believe you are going to explain climate science to us? WOW!

That's the biggest intellectual face plant we've seen in this forum in a long time.

Thanks for the entertainment!!!!

And a hardy you are welcome.
This is easy - I am not a Physicist, not even Sheldon Cooper. I doubt anyone's mind is going to be changed on this issue, however just expressing my thoughts, my opinions, my viewpoints on a thread of a discussion board. Nope, never made an effort to explain climate science to you. Actually, referred the warmers to the great Doc Richard Lindzen and Anthony Watts.
Nope, trying to over read posts can't be good for folk.
The "not intelligent" part is offensive though and nope, didn't write that.
Sad that we here will be missing the End of the Story and will never know who was right or who was wrong. What's to be done anyway?
Nobody in 1st World Countries are giving up their lifestyle to go back to 18th Century low tech or bicycle riding. I think the folk who want to do that should move to 3rd world countries and walk 3 miles a day for water.

 

[lomiller]

It's a wild, unpredictable world out there and always has been.

Are you trying to argue science can't make predictions about the world around us?

 

[lomiller]

Not me, but will email Doc Richard and Anthony Watts for an explanation.

Why not go to a scientist instead?

I pray we all have the gift of olde age and thrilled it was given to this brilliant man.

If Lindzen is so brilliant why can't he get a paper published or even let go of ideas that were debunked 2 decades ago?

 

[macdoc]

meanwhile moving beyond the head in the sand poster who ignores the obvious...

World is unprepared for major El Niño later this year
07 May 2014 by Michael Slezak

Wild weather is coming in 2014, with floods, storms and droughts expected around the Pacific, but little is being done to protect the people on the front line

THE weather is preparing to go wild, and will wreak havoc and death around the globe later this year. An El Niño, a splurge of warm water in the Pacific Ocean, is coming. It will unleash floods in the Americas, while South-East Asia and Australia face drought. Yet little is being done to address these consequences.

"The tropical climate system is primed for a big El Niño," says Axel Timmermann of the University of Hawaii in Honolulu (see diagram).

An El Niño begins when warm water near Indonesia spreads eastwards and rises to the surface of the Pacific. The warm water carries rain with it, so El Niño takes rain from Asia and Australia and dumps it on the Americas (see "Rising waters").

The effects can be deadly. A big El Niño in 1997-98 killed 20,000 people and caused almost $97 billion of damage.

http://www.newscientist.com/article...jor-el-nino-later-this-year.html#.U2sPzV5mv3x

While El Nino conditions are not a direct result of AGW, like most events it is made more extreme.....the extent of the warm pool and it's temperature signals a a severe one
( now maybe you can connect the dots - much increased wamth in the ocean, slower increase in the air .....about to be reversed as it was in 1998 )

 

[macdoc]

Dear Anthony....not a climate scientist...very wrong

Anthony Watts is not a climate scientist...just another blogger paid by fossil fuel funds.

Anthony Watts studied Electrical Engineering and Meteorology at Purdue University, but has been unwilling to state whether he graduated. [1], [2]

Watts previously worked as an on-air meteorologist for WLFI-TV in Lafayette, Indiana, and later joined KHSK-TV in 1987. In 2002, Watts left his position as a television weatherman to devote time to his private business, ITWorks. He returned to work part-time at KHSL in 2004, and has also been the chief meteorologist for KPAY-AM (an affiliate of Fox News) since 2002. [21], [22]

Watts admits “I'm not a degreed climate scientist”

March, 2011

Watts recently praised the Berkeley Earth project, which was chaired by Richard Muller and set out to “resolve current criticism of the former temperature analyses, and to prepare an open record that will allow rapid response to further criticism or suggestions.” The study also evaluated Watt's concerns about weather station locations.

Watts had declared he was “prepared to accept whatever result they produce, even if it proves my premise wrong.”
Muller testified before congress on March 31, 2011 where he released preliminary results showing “a global warming trend that is very similar to that previously reported by the other groups [NOAA, NASA, and the Hadley Center Climate Research Unit (CRU)s].” [7], [8]

Muller addressed Watts's concerns, mentioning how “Many US stations have low quality rankings according to a study led by Anthony Watts. However, we find that the warming seen in the 'poor' stations is virtually indistinguishable from that seen in the 'good' stations.”

Anthony Watts was a speaker at the Heartland Institute's 7th International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC7).

DeSmogBlog researched the co-sponsors behind Heartland's ICCC7 and found that they had collectively received over $67 million from ExxonMobil, the Koch Brothers and the conservative Scaife family foundations.

http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

Pretty dodgy fellow travellers.....I do hope you are at least getting paid for climate change nonsense ABC as they are.

So Watts sets out to prove a premise and contracts a scientist.....the scientist he picks disproves the premise....Watts won't accept it.

 

[Trakar]

Nobody in 1st World Countries are giving up their lifestyle to go back to 18th Century low tech or bicycle riding. I think the folk who want to do that should move to 3rd world countries and walk 3 miles a day for water.

The only people asking them to do so are those that say we don't need to take any action to deal with the problems we are causing. Personal responsibility for one's actions is a sign of maturity, we are encouraging humanity to grow up accept responsibility for their actions, and plan for the future rather than waking up each day and rolling the dice to decide how to address the problems they face now and in the future.

Just as science has discovered and defined the climate problem facing us, science offers a broad range of ways to address and deal with the problem. Each day, however, the problems continue to grow and the options available grow fewer. The sooner we act the cheaper and easier the solutions, each day of delay increases the price we all must pay.

 

[ABC10]

Anthony Watts is not a climate scientist...just another blogger paid by fossil fuel funds.









http://www.desmogblog.com/anthony-watts

Pretty dodgy fellow travellers.....I do hope you are at least getting paid for climate change nonsense ABC as they are.

So Watts sets out to prove a premise and contracts a scientist.....the scientist he picks disproves the premise....Watts won't accept it.

I love Big Oil, Big Gas and Big Electricity. I am grateful for the light in the darkness, gas in the car and heat in the cold. It's a miracle. No problem getting paid by anyone. Anthony is great. What a fantastic fellow. And those Koch brothers who employ so many people, give em work, help the country.

 

[Trakar]

...Polar bears? Really? That's what you worry about? I know they look impressive and almost cuddly from a distance, but get within reach and they're a bloody menace. Stick some in zoos and shoot the rest, I say.

If you really want something to worry about, worry about coffee. It only grows in certain climates, and those climates are becoming more and more uncertain.

Polar bears are a variant of brown bears/grizzlies, we may kill off those that were on the separation path to a new species, but I would not be happy about hastening the extinction of any species on this planet.

Genetic manipulation can help the coffee issue (as can simple breeding programs over a longer period of time - or even climate controlled growing conditions).

 

[macdoc]

AB

I love Big Oil, Big Gas and Big Electricity. I am grateful for the light in the darkness, gas in the car and heat in the cold. It's a miracle. No problem getting paid by anyone. Anthony is great. What a fantastic fellow. And those Koch brothers who employ so many people, give em work, help the country.

I noticed you seem to have purposefully omitted King Coal in your Paeon of Praise.

Bit too much death and destruction even for you?

New Harvard Study Examines Cost of Coal
Report released Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School estimates coal costs U.S. one-third to over one-half a trillion dollars annually

U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants: Update or Close?
The owners of power plants that burn coal are playing high-stakes poker as they decide whether to install expensive pollution controls or shut down
May 20, 2013 |By Daniel Cusick and ClimateWire

not a good outlook for the king

http://planetsave.com/2011/10/07/true-cost-of-coal-new-analysis/

The Numbers
NASA researchers did a study in 2011 to estimate the number of deaths would have been caused if fossil-fuel burning was used instead of the nuclear energy that was used to produce electricity from 1971-2009. Using numbers that include deaths related to all aspects of the source, including the mining and the actual power generation, the team estimated that 5,000 deaths were caused by the use of nuclear power, including accidents and cancer deaths caused by radiation fallout.

So does 5,000 seem high? Over 38 years, nuclear power generation has caused about 5,000 deaths,
but

the NASA research team also estimates that using nuclear instead of coal and natural gas has saved over 1,800,000 lives.

The team also calculated that if coal or natural gas replaced nuclear use until 2050, natural gas would cause an additional 420,000 deaths, and coal would cause about 7,000,000 deaths.

7 million deaths....a very large number many of which are avoidable...

seems you know the score and purposefully omitted coal even tho for the Koch Bro it's a mainstay.

Now we know what you are......I guess it's just a matter of the price for your "love affair with fossil"....