Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Climate Scientologists have a plan
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1567
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2012 2:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
(warm: abundance of terrestrial life, as the fossil record shows).


How many times do you have to be told before it penetrates your thick skull: warming is going to devastate life on earth with a mass extinction of around one third of all species, quite likely more. That's not all: there will be an even greater loss of genetic diversity within surviving species, severely curtailing their long-term ability to survive future threats, as well as their ability to evolve into new species. In time, biodiversity will recover but that could take 50 million years, a period very likely much longer than the entire lifespan of our species.

You keep saying that, but I don't think understand what it means. 30% of species is not the same thing as 30% of life. If you want to see radically reduced levels of terrestrial life, then let us enter another glacial period. We don't necessarily have to choose between the two, but I think it is the ultimate in pseudo-scientific self-deception for us to think we can cause our climate to remain precisely as it is indefinitely. We simply don't have that ability. What we do have is the ability to overwhelm the natural cycle and cause warming when we would otherwise be experiencing cooling, and it's a choice between being a few degrees warmer (say three, with reasonable actions being taken, or even eight without), I choose that (to which we have a chance of adapting and still having food sources and habitable terrain) over being ten degrees colder (and having no possibility of more than a few million humans surviving).

mcgruff wrote:
BoneKracker wrote:
mcgruff wrote:
Note that it is not possible to perceive any anthropogenic trends in your graph, a historical record dealing in periods of tens of thousands of years (!). The evidence for a longer interglacial, similar to the one half a million years ago is in the Archer 2005 paper I linked to earlier in the thread. His argument is based on celestial mechanics, not wikipedia graphs.

The graph you linked to clearly shows the plateau I referred to, despite you apparently presenting it as evidence to the contrary.

When did your plateau begin...?

Asked and answered; go back and look at the graphs. It's as plain as the nose on your face. I don't remember exactly and I don't feel like looking. While it will vary depending on what proxies you're looking at, I want to say it's generally over the last 10,000 years or so. Also, this is relative; it only looks like a "plateau" when you consider the geological time scale and the context of glacials, ice ages and such. Obviously, it's not a "plateau" purely within the context of a few thousand years.

mcgruff wrote:
I think every time someone points out an inconsistency in your argument of which you were not aware you panic, wave your arms around and scream "strawman!"

First, sorry if you felt insulted. Secondly, no, you actually do use strawmen, all the fucking time. It's like it's the only form of argumentation you are capable of. It's astonishing, really. Somebody will say, "Solar energy is not a viable short-term solution.", and you pop right out automatically with something like, "Oh, sure! Let's do nothing!" It's as predictable as the sun rising in the morning.
_________________
pjp wrote:
I didn't misquote you, I just misunderstood you.


Last edited by Bones McCracker on Wed Jul 25, 2012 10:48 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2012 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
I was specifically referring to climate change / energy, but that was for the sake of this discussion. In the bigger picture, I do not restrict it to that scope. Also keep in mind that I still think we need to decrease and make our tax system equitable (flat, > "poverty" as an example). Revenue % should be fixed except for catastrophe (sunset provision). Spend wisely.


so you disagree with an greater tax for those that produce more GHG, and subsidies for those that consume GHG? Is this something that you would consider inequitable?
_________________
Jesus Could Be Their Candidate and the Republicans Would Still Lose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16115
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2012 7:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do not support tax as a penalty or tool for social engineering.

If a law is broken, fines may be appropriate.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Poptech
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 0
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
The only witch-hunt is the deliberate targeting of honest scientists with FOI requests and computer hacking and the spurious allegations made against them.

On the other hand, malicious propagandists or simple idiots who spout bullshit regarding a scientific subject which they know nothing about deserve all they get. Bigots may not like getting called out for their bigotry. Doesn't make it wrong.

FOI requests are perfectly legitimate means to obtain state funded information. As Climategate revealed the scientists subject to these requests had a lot to be worried about,

Scientists Behaving Badly (The Weekly Standard, December 14, 2009)
Climategate (Part II) A sequel as ugly as the original (The Weekly Standard, December 12, 2011)

'Consensus' Exposed: The CRU Controversy (PDF) (83 pgs) (United States Senate)

The CRU emails show scientists,
- Obstructing release of damaging data and information;
- Manipulating data to reach preconceived conclusions;
- Colluding to pressure journal editors who published work questioning the climate science “consensus”; and
- Assuming activist roles to influence the political process


The emails speak for themselves,

"I think the only thing that counts is numbers. The media is going to say '1000 scientists signed' or '1500 signed'. No one is going to check if it is 600 with PhDs versus 2000 without. They will mention the prominent ones, but that is a different story." - Joseph Alcamo, Lead Author, IPCC (2001, 2007)

"But the current diagram with the tree ring only data [i.e. the Briffa reconstruction] somewhat contradicts the multiproxy curve and dilutes the message rather significantly." - Chris Folland, Lead Author, IPCC (1990, 1992, 1996, 2001)

"everyone in the room at IPCC was in agreement that this [the Briffa reconstruction] was a problem and a potential distraction/detraction from the reasonably concensus viewpoint we’d like to show w/ the Jones et al and Mann et al series." - Michael Mann, Lead Author, IPCC (2001)

"So, if we show Keith’s series in this plot, we have to comment that “something else” is responsible for the discrepancies in this case. [Perhaps Keith can help us out a bit by explaining the processing that went into the series and the potential factors that might lead to it being "warmer" than the Jones et al and Mann et al series?? We would need to put in a few words in this regard] Otherwise, the skeptics have an field day casting doubt on our ability to understand the factors that influence these estimates and, thus, can undermine faith in the paleoestimates. I don’t think that doubt is scientifically justified, and I’d hate to be the one to have to give it fodder!" - Michael Mann, Lead Author, IPCC (2001)

"I've just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline." - Phil Jones, Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"Anyway, I'll maybe cut the last few points off the filtered curve before I give the talk again as that's trending down as a result of the end effects and the recent cold-ish years." - Mick Kelly, Visiting Fellow, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"...it would be nice to try to "contain" the putative "MWP", even if we don't yet have a hemispheric mean reconstruction available that far back." - Michael Mann, Lead Author, IPCC (2001)

"I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years ago" - Keith Briffa, Lead Author, IPCC (2007)

"The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998. OK it has..." - Phil Jones, Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"If you think that Saiers [GRL Editor] is in the greenhouse skeptics camp ...we could go through official AGU channels to get him ousted." - Tom Wigley, Former Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" - Phil Jones, Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"I'm getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU station temperature data. Don't any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!" - Phil Jones, Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I'll delete the file rather than send to anyone." - Phil Jones, Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"I've managed to persuade UEA to ignore all further FOIA requests if the people have anything to do with Climate Audit." - Phil Jones, Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4? Keith will do likewise. ...Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don't have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise." - Phil Jones, Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"I think we have to stop considering "Climate Research" as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board..." - Michael Mann, Lead Author, IPCC (2001)

"I have refused to send McIntyre the "derived" model data he requests, ...I will continue to refuse such data requests in the future. Nor will I provide McIntyre with computer programs, email correspondence, etc." - Ben Santer, Lead Author, IPCC (1995)

"...If the RMS is going to require authors to make ALL data available - raw data PLUS results from all intermediate calculations - I will not submit any further papers to RMS journals." - Ben Santer, Lead Author, IPCC (1995)

"The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." - Kevin Trenberth, Lead Author, IPCC (2001, 2007)

Subject: John L. Daly [Skeptic] Dead
"...this is cheering news!" - Phil Jones, Director, Climatic Research Unit (CRU)

"Next time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I'll be tempted to beat the crap out of him. Very tempted." - Ben Santer, Lead Author, IPCC (1995)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Poptech
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 0
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 5:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sugar wrote:
You mean it might encourage the forestry industry to expand their forests?

God, what a nightmare.

What benefit does the forest industry have by depleting the forests? How does driving themselves out of business benefit them?

Myth: We Are Destroying Our Forests (ABC News) (Video) (4min)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 6:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poptech wrote:
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeee

I think Wikipedia just jizzed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Muso
l33t
l33t


Joined: 22 Oct 2002
Posts: 656
Location: The Holy city of Honolulu

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 7:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poptech wrote:
sugar wrote:
You mean it might encourage the forestry industry to expand their forests?

God, what a nightmare.

What benefit does the forest industry have by depleting the forests? How does driving themselves out of business benefit them?

Myth: We Are Destroying Our Forests (ABC News) (Video) (4min)


Nice! Thank you for that vid, I had never seen it.
_________________
http://howdovaccinescauseautism.com/
auf alten Schiffen lernt man Segeln.
YOU'RE NOT A LIBERAL!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big dave
n00b
n00b


Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 0
Location: land of first world problems

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 9:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sikpuppy wrote:
Poptech wrote:
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeee

I think Wikipedia just jizzed.

going to need a really big towel.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zixnub
n00b
n00b


Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 66
Location: Brasschaat, Belgium

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 10:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poptech wrote:
sugar wrote:
You mean it might encourage the forestry industry to expand their forests?

God, what a nightmare.

What benefit does the forest industry have by depleting the forests? How does driving themselves out of business benefit them?

Myth: We Are Destroying Our Forests (ABC News) (Video) (4min)


What benefit do banks have to drive their customers into bankruptcy by selling them junk investments?
_________________
https://github.com/Zubnix/trinityshell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Poptech
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 0
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

zixnub wrote:
Poptech wrote:
What benefit does the forest industry have by depleting the forests? How does driving themselves out of business benefit them?

Myth: We Are Destroying Our Forests (ABC News) (Video) (4min)


What benefit do banks have to drive their customers into bankruptcy by selling them junk investments?

There is no such bank policy of driving their customers to bankruptcy or intentionally selling junk investments. Investments are a risk not a guarantee and customers are responsible for taking this risk. Banks do not force anyone to buy any investment.

Regardless, the end result is due to the moral hazard of government bailouts. If banks cannot fail for bad investments and customers have no incentive to care what their banks invest in because of the FDIC then it will happen again. No amount of "regulation" is going to stop it. If you want banks to be accountable then you need to get government out of banking. Banks have no reason to change their behavior if they know the government will bail them out when they screw up. When I say accountable I mean being allowed to fail not being financially obligated for the risk someone took of their own free will.

In relation to the forest industry this is why it is better that they own the land, rather then lease it as they will have an incentive to take care of it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sugar
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
I do not support tax as a penalty or tool for social engineering.

If a law is broken, fines may be appropriate.


what's the difference between a fine and a tax (as a penalty)?
_________________
Jesus Could Be Their Candidate and the Republicans Would Still Lose
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16115
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2012 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do you really think there is no difference? They really seem like entirely different tools.

Tax code should be as minimal and simple as possible to reduce waste.

A tax can be levied arbitrarily. A tax should be the broad stroke, not something fine tuned to try and address an infinite number of possibilities. A fine is based on a determination of guilt, and can be determined based on the unique circumstances of the crime.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sikpuppy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 12 Jun 2012
Posts: 34
Location: Central Coast, NSW

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pjp wrote:
Do you really think there is no difference? They really seem like entirely different tools.

Tax code should be as minimal and simple as possible to reduce waste.

A tax can be levied arbitrarily. A tax should be the broad stroke, not something fine tuned to try and address an infinite number of possibilities. A fine is based on a determination of guilt, and can be determined based on the unique circumstances of the crime.


Then there are levies, stamp duties, road tolls, congestion charges, surcharges, gratuities, accounting fees......:P
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16115
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My point exactly.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aidanjt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1102
Location: Rep. of Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poptech wrote:
sugar wrote:
You mean it might encourage the forestry industry to expand their forests?

God, what a nightmare.

What benefit does the forest industry have by depleting the forests? How does driving themselves out of business benefit them?

Myth: We Are Destroying Our Forests (ABC News) (Video) (4min)

Most lumberjack work is in South America atm, busy wiping out the Amazon rain forest, genius. You know, one of the biggest carbon sinks on land. Believe it or not, events taking place in one part of the world, can actually have an impact on the rest of it.
_________________
juniper wrote:
you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aidanjt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1102
Location: Rep. of Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Poptech wrote:
There is no such bank policy of driving their customers to bankruptcy or intentionally selling junk investments. Investments are a risk not a guarantee and customers are responsible for taking this risk. Banks do not force anyone to buy any investment.

They did (sub-prime market, remember?) and they do when they use customer savings to make risky investments without the customer's consent.

Actually all this trolling reminds me of Alex Libman.
_________________
juniper wrote:
you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Or David Irving.

I'm not sure how much is deliberate lies and how much is just some kind of personality disorder. His "forum" is kind of weird. You'll find topic after topic with no replies to his original post, like some lonely guy masturbating in an empty room. Now he's found a public space to expose himself to. Lovely.

He does pop up on climate blogs from time to time to "rebut" the criticisms of his bogus list, like a 9/11 obsessive insisting that only he knows the truth.

Bad move letting him back in here. Such determined, single-minded bigotry is, er, unheard of on OTW.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big dave
n00b
n00b


Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 0
Location: land of first world problems

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aidanjt wrote:
Most lumberjack work is in South America atm, busy wiping out the Amazon rain forest, genius. You know, one of the biggest carbon sinks on land.

that "on land" is a HUGE qualifier there. you do realize that it's actually plankton and ocean plants that do over 70% of all life-based carbon sequestration... that rainforests aren't even a third of it...

it's like saying "you're the smartest person who types on your keyboard more than 10 hours a week."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aidanjt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Posts: 1102
Location: Rep. of Ireland

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big dave wrote:
that "on land" is a HUGE qualifier there. you do realize that it's actually plankton and ocean plants that do over 70% of all life-based carbon sequestration... that rainforests aren't even a third of it...

it's like saying "you're the smartest person who types on your keyboard more than 10 hours a week."

It only takes pin to unbalance two cars sitting on a swing.

Seriously, why are you people so fucking non-stop retarded?
_________________
juniper wrote:
you experience political reality dilation when travelling at american political speeds. it's in einstein's formulas. it's not their fault.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If changing weather patterns and drought mean that the Amazon rainforest becomes a carbon source rather than a carbon sink, annual carbon emissions could easily equal those of China. Small temperature rises of only a few degrees could eventually see over 80% of the rainforest, and thousands of species, destroyed.

That's definitely a big deal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Poptech
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 0
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aidanjt wrote:
Poptech wrote:
sugar wrote:
You mean it might encourage the forestry industry to expand their forests?

God, what a nightmare.

What benefit does the forest industry have by depleting the forests? How does driving themselves out of business benefit them?

Myth: We Are Destroying Our Forests (ABC News) (Video) (4min)

Most lumberjack work is in South America atm, busy wiping out the Amazon rain forest, genius. You know, one of the biggest carbon sinks on land. Believe it or not, events taking place in one part of the world, can actually have an impact on the rest of it.

My apologies, I do not live in Brazil. Should the U.S. Invade them to stop them from deforesting the Amazon? I suggest petitioning the Brazilian government.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Poptech
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 0
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aidanjt wrote:
Poptech wrote:
There is no such bank policy of driving their customers to bankruptcy or intentionally selling junk investments. Investments are a risk not a guarantee and customers are responsible for taking this risk. Banks do not force anyone to buy any investment.

They did (sub-prime market, remember?) and they do when they use customer savings to make risky investments without the customer's consent.

Really? They illegally used customers money? This is news to me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Poptech
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 0
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
I'm not sure how much is deliberate lies and how much is just some kind of personality disorder. His "forum" is kind of weird. You'll find topic after topic with no replies to his original post, like some lonely guy masturbating in an empty room. Now he's found a public space to expose himself to. Lovely.

He does pop up on climate blogs from time to time to "rebut" the criticisms of his bogus list, like a 9/11 obsessive insisting that only he knows the truth.

Bad move letting him back in here. Such determined, single-minded bigotry is, er, unheard of on OTW.

Name one thing I have lied about, as I use the forums to archive things more than for discussion and it has nothing to do with your projections. I am a member of numerous heavily trafficed forums so I have no need to "find" a public space.

You have failed to make a valid argument against the list and as I already demonstrated - I have a whole article debunking 911 conspiracy theories so you can drop this smear. Your ranting instead of addressing my actual arguments is transparent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 147

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Asperger's is a terrible thing.

PS: do you like gladiator movies?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Poptech
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 0
Location: U.S.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcgruff wrote:
Asperger's is a terrible thing.

PS: do you like gladiator movies?

You have aspergers? Your ranting is getting more bizarre.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum