Scientists study the scientific standing of pro and con global warmists and find:

[Genx87]

Strawmen Fail. Seriously.

Must be on the right path. You only bring out the fail line when you cant defend something. Which is often.

 

[sandorski]

I wouldnt expect you to see anything like that. Your response is not surprising.

Where is it? Cap n Trade? Not radical at all, more like Tried and True. Carbon Tax? I suppose the argument could be made, which is why Cap n Trade is preferable.

 

[sandorski]

Must be on the right path. You only bring out the fail line when you cant defend something. Which is often.

lol, you wish. Cosmology, Strawman? Check.

 

[chucky2]

You don't have an adult thinking cap. You think like an egotistical child. The best of the world's leading climate scientists have determined that MMGW is real. That it. Get in fucking line. You yourself are unfit to offer alternate opinions because you are unqualified. Only an imbecile arrogates to himself expertise he hasn't got and argues with folk who do. You lack organic shame and modesty. You embarrass the human race.

Er, your whining 'Why won't they just buy into the BS I'm dumb enough to just accept w/o any real proof' rant is nice and all, but....

...I'm not claiming I'm smarter than every scientist out there. What I want to see, before I jump on the bandwagon that support MMCC - MMCC that is clearly established to be causing negative on life change - is clear proof that Man is causing what they're suggesting we're causing.

That's not done by hiding data.
That's not done by corrupting data.
That's not done by scheming to keep others from having the raw data.
That's not done by prohibiting source code of the model being used.
Etc.
Etc.

People/Groups/Movements that do that automatically go into the 'Don't trust these F'ers farther than you can throw them' category. Worse, we're not talking about just throwing them, we're talking about giving them Trillions of dollars.

But, no, some Moonmoron on the Internet is trying to convice anyone that will listen to not question, just accept.

Okey dokey....time for your next medication dose there Mooner....

Chuck

 

[chucky2]

Must be on the right path. You only bring out the fail line when you cant defend something. Which is often.

I really don't know why he's/she's not banned by now. I know this is P&N, and almost anything goes, but when 75% of your posts are either 'Fail' or one line dumb@ss troll posts, I think it's time to either go or take a vacation.

AzN, Moonie, Macro, Socialist234, etc. are at least entertaining.

Chuck

 

[sandorski]

I really don't know why he's/she's not banned by now. I know this is P&N, and almost anything goes, but when 75% of your posts are either 'Fail' or one line dumb@ss troll posts, I think it's time to either go or take a vacation.

AzN, Moonie, Macro, Socialist234, etc. are at least entertaining.

Chuck

Probably because calling it what it is happens to be appropriate. Srsly. This subject has been covered to death. I remember the old days when Deniers were simply denying a Warming trend at all, then denied Man's contribution to it when the Trend became clear, then calling it Good for various reasons, then they went back to denying the Trend, then denied Man's contribution to it, etc etc etc. Circular arguments of Fail that they continue to this day, seemingly with a straight face and expectation of their arguments being Respected as if it were the first time someone brought it up.

The Science is clear and settled. Get over it already.

 

[bfdd]

Probably because calling it what it is happens to be appropriate. Srsly. This subject has been covered to death. I remember the old days when Deniers were simply denying a Warming trend at all, then denied Man's contribution to it when the Trend became clear, then calling it Good for various reasons, then they went back to denying the Trend, then denied Man's contribution to it, etc etc etc. Circular arguments of Fail that they continue to this day, seemingly with a straight face and expectation of their arguments being Respected as if it were the first time someone brought it up.

The Science is clear and settled. Get over it already.

They would be circular arguments if we were basing the next argument off the one previous to it around in a circle, that's not what has been happening. NEW data, NEW studies, NEW projections, NEW etc etc etc have come out since then and bring back up old arguments. You're a goddamn fucking tool and no one takes you seriously.

 

[Genx87]

lol, you wish. Cosmology, Strawman? Check.

Uh you may want to reread this thread dipshit. I didnt bring cosmology into the discussion.

 

[sandorski]

Uh you may want to reread this thread dipshit. I didnt bring cosmology into the discussion.

Perhaps not, but you turned it into a Strawman anyway.

 

[sandorski]

They would be circular arguments if we were basing the next argument off the one previous to it around in a circle, that's not what has been happening. NEW data, NEW studies, NEW projections, NEW etc etc etc have come out since then and bring back up old arguments. You're a goddamn fucking tool and no one takes you seriously.

I take me seriously, I'm someone. Fail again.

 

[shira]

Really? Cap N Tax just showed up out of the blue? The green movement which will cost taxpayers and consumers trillions just showed up out of no where?

Now please tell us where cosmology is pushing similar policies while not being able to explain its position and then we will question it a bit more as well.

"Really" what?

Climatology journals publish data on climatology. Governments formulate policies. Maybe you should educate yourself.

In citing an imaginary figure ("trillions") for the mitigation costs, you've conveniently left out the cost of doing nothing. How about TENS of trillions? Are you really so stupid as to believe that doing nothing now and pushing that much larger expense onto future generations is wise?

 

[Dekasa]

Makes me wonder if we are to believe the adjusted data, or the raw data. As the rate of warming varies dramatically between the two. The claims of warmest RATE of warming, may very well be manufactured after adjusting the data.

(Victoria Temps)

Wish I could make up data... errr, 'adjust' data to suit my needs. No IRS, you see, after I adjust my income, I don't owe you anything at all.

 

[shira]

Er, your whining 'Why won't they just buy into the BS I'm dumb enough to just accept w/o any real proof' rant is nice and all, but....

...I'm not claiming I'm smarter than every scientist out there. What I want to see, before I jump on the bandwagon that support MMCC - MMCC that is clearly established to be causing negative on life change - is clear proof that Man is causing what they're suggesting we're causing.

That's not done by hiding data.
That's not done by corrupting data.
That's not done by scheming to keep others from having the raw data.
That's not done by prohibiting source code of the model being used.
Etc.
Etc.

People/Groups/Movements that do that automatically go into the 'Don't trust these F'ers farther than you can throw them' category. Worse, we're not talking about just throwing them, we're talking about giving them Trillions of dollars.

But, no, some Moonmoron on the Internet is trying to convice anyone that will listen to not question, just accept.

Okey dokey....time for your next medication dose there Mooner....

Chuck

These would all be wonderful, if true. Interesting how you accept on faith all of the waaaaaaaay out criticisms, but the product of the combined efforts of thousands of qualified experts in the field just aren't to be believed.

 

[Genx87]

Perhaps not, but you turned it into a Strawman anyway.

In what way?

 

[Genx87]

"Really" what?

Climatology journals publish data on climatology. Governments formulate policies. Maybe you should educate yourself.

In citing an imaginary figure ("trillions") for the mitigation costs, you've conveniently left out the cost of doing nothing. How about TENS of trillions? Are you really so stupid as to believe that doing nothing now and pushing that much larger expense onto future generations is wise?

We dont know what the cost of doing nothing is though. We have no idea if we do nothing or revert back to a 19th century economy will have any meaningful effect. With cap n tax, and other oppressive govt programs based around the MMGW crowd insistence a single gas is the problem we know it will cost avg users money, and lots of it. And for that we have no real idea if it will do anything, other than give power to a select few in govt.

That is why we dont question cosmology as much as we do the MMGW crowd. Whether or not they can explain 75% of the energy in the universe means little to us, because they arent asking govts to tax us based on their inaccurate and incomplete information.

 

[chucky2]

These would all be wonderful, if true. Interesting how you accept on faith all of the waaaaaaaay out criticisms, but the product of the combined efforts of thousands of qualified experts in the field just aren't to be believed.

Unfortunately it is true, when it should never be true if these were all just good little scientists just publishing their properly collected, analyzed, and supplied raw data.

Those thousands of qualified experts are doing it all for free and no fame or prestige? You mean, they're not funded to find things that will continue to get them funding? They have no political or personal leanings that they allow to influence or dictate their work?

And, even if you confirm everything is on the up and up in regards to the Earth warming or cooling...

...can you conclusively show that it's not because of the Earth and/or solar system itself, but, solely because of man?

Nothing I've seen posted here has done that.

Chuck

 

[Moonbeam]

Must be on the right path. You only bring out the fail line when you cant defend something. Which is often.

What a fucking joke coming from you. The best you've got is that I'm on drugs.

 

[WHAMPOM]

The cost of doing nothing; Venus second from the Sun, hottest planet in the Solar System, run away CO2 green house effect, 900 degrees, no water, no shade, no life. IT can happen here.

 

[Moonbeam]

Oh Moonbeam, lets not forget that we're not 100% sure what kind of cancer it is. No one has successfully projected with 100% accuracy the "warming trend." So how can you even tell it's malignant or benign if you can't even tell me what kind of cancer it is and what caused it.

This is really sad. You can't predict with 100% accuracy that if you drive your car into a cement wall at 100mph that the crash will be fatal. Science is valued because science, based as it on evidence and data, can make valuable and valid predictions. You don't determine what the risks are, you know nothing at all and have a worthless opinion. It is the scientists that do. The experts tell us we face a threat from global warming. You just can't get past the notion that you know anything. You are an ignorant fool who shows not the slightest grip on reality. Stop having an opinion. You could hurt yourself.

 

[LunarRay]

This is really sad. You can't predict with 100% accuracy that if you drive your car into a cement wall at 100mph that the crash will be fatal. Science is valued because science, based as it on evidence and data, can make valuable and valid predictions. You don't determine what the risks are, you know nothing at all and have a worthless opinion. It is the scientists that do. The experts tell us we face a threat from global warming. You just can't get past the notion that you know anything. You are an ignorant fool who shows not the slightest grip on reality. Stop having an opinion. You could hurt yourself.

We are quickly going to enter the survival of the fittest era where only folks with air conditioners fueled by pedal power will survive to evolve into igneous pebbles. So many folks here who want to see dramatic movement based on their view of what is dramatic. They give no credence to the experts who propound interpretation after interpretation of the data that appears to be limited in scope. I don't either, I guess. I think, however, to do nothing is stupid. Even if there is only a slight chance we may be in trouble here we ought to act simply to insure survival of the species. If nothing else it may create jobs in that industry along with jobs in the effort to deal with the potential rapid loss of cool should something visit us from afar and create our very own Venus.

 

[Moonbeam]

We are quickly going to enter the survival of the fittest era where only folks with air conditioners fueled by pedal power will survive to evolve into igneous pebbles. So many folks here who want to see dramatic movement based on their view of what is dramatic. They give no credence to the experts who propound interpretation after interpretation of the data that appears to be limited in scope. I don't either, I guess. I think, however, to do nothing is stupid. Even if there is only a slight chance we may be in trouble here we ought to act simply to insure survival of the species. If nothing else it may create jobs in that industry along with jobs in the effort to deal with the potential rapid loss of cool should something visit us from afar and create our very own Venus.

There are folk on Palau that take this all very seriously. When the indifferent folk her start to hurt they will become believers and rage at the folk further north perhaps who are feeling lucky their heating bills have gone down. The problem with folk who hate themselves is that they hate everybody and really don't care what happens to them. They did not suffer their pain as children but hid it away and so they can't empathize. The fear that a small pain will lead them straight into their inner agony. So they play dead.

 

[shira]

Unfortunately it is true, when it should never be true if these were all just good little scientists just publishing their properly collected, analyzed, and supplied raw data.

Those thousands of qualified experts are doing it all for free and no fame or prestige? You mean, they're not funded to find things that will continue to get them funding? They have no political or personal leanings that they allow to influence or dictate their work?

And, even if you confirm everything is on the up and up in regards to the Earth warming or cooling...

...can you conclusively show that it's not because of the Earth and/or solar system itself, but, solely because of man?

Nothing I've seen posted here has done that.

Chuck

No, sorry. What you're doing is confusing anecdotal evidence of isolated issues - which by the way occur in all branches of science - and coming to the wild conclusion that those isolated issues are the rule, not the exception, for climatology. At the same time you make the unsupported assertion that mountains of scientific papers published by thousands of climatologists amount to cooked data, paid for by unnamed deep pockets that are driving the conspiracy.

You're utterly confused and completely irrational.

 

[Moonbeam]

No, sorry. What you're doing is confusing anecdotal evidence of isolated issues - which by the way occur in all branches of science - and coming to the wild conclusion that those isolated issues are the rule, not the exception, for climatology. At the same time you make the unsupported assertion that mountains of scientific papers published by thousands of climatologists amount to cooked data, paid for by unnamed deep pockets that are driving the conspiracy.

You're utterly confused and completely irrational.

Sadly, when we see somebody who doubts in the integrity of others we are looking at somebody who doesn't have any himself. We see in others what we are ourselves.

 

[Jaskalas]

The cost of doing nothing; Venus second from the Sun, hottest planet in the Solar System, run away CO2 green house effect, 900 degrees, no water, no shade, no life. IT can happen here.

I like that drama. You should make a movie out of it.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I like that drama. You should make a movie out of it.

I like the post you mentioned in the other thread about MMGW.

The Iris Effect. I find this most interesting. It is a hypothesis from Richard Lindzen and Yong-Sang Choi.

But even if the iris effect is true ( I still have to read more about it before i would be so bold to promote it myself), it does not give humans a free pass to pollute the planet Earth. Humans should start to think how to create closed cycle systems. Redundancy is the trick. Costs are higher on the short term. But long term returns are very very high.

EDIT:
Perhaps the hypothesis need some more research...

http://blogs.nasa.gov/cm/blog/whatonearth.blog/posts/post_1266867684232.html

NASA Langley’s Takmeng Wong was one of the scientists surprised by the Lindzen and Choi paper. Wong works with data from the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) on NASA's Terra satellite and from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment (ERBE) satellite. Lindzen and Choi used ERBE data for their analysis, so Wong was naturally interested.

“When you see a surprising result, the first thing you do is go to the paper and see what they have,” Wong said. “We tried to do that and to reproduce their results. It’s part of the scientific process.” Being able to reproduce a specific result is an important building block of scientific knowledge.

Wong and Colorado State University’s Chris O’Dell eventually teamed up with Kevin Trenberth and John Fasullo, climate scientists at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, to publish a response. Their examination uncovered a number of deficiencies in Lindzen and Choi’s method, and found their result to be unstable and fragile. That analysis appeared this month in Geophysical Research Letters.

“We went to the same model data, to see if the observations are going one way and the models are going the other way,” Wong said. “When the analysis is done properly using robust scientific technique, what you find is that the observations and the models are consistent to within the uncertainty of the data.”

Wong summarized a few basic problems that led to the surprising finding:

1. Lindzen and Choi focused on a number of selective time periods. But if the beginning and end points of those time periods are adjusted only slightly, their result falls apart.


2. The paper also treated the tropics as a closed system. In other words, it did not take into account any outside influences on what was happening in the tropics, such as the large amount of energy transport moving in and out of the tropics on ocean currents and atmospheric waves during events such as El Nino and La Nina.“The tropics is not a closed system,” Wong said. “But they treated it as such in the study.”

3. Lindzen and Choi took their result from the tropics and applied it globally, instead of using global data to study the link between global temperature increases and global outgoing radiation to space.


When questions arise that run counter to prevailing thought, Wong said, the only thing to do is take a closer look.

“You cannot make a scientific judgment,” Wong said, “until you’ve done the complete analysis.