Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Lies from open mouthed ManBearPig earns bitchslap from NWS
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Off the Wall
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3313

PostPosted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good on Gore for bringing problems to light but that should be the extent of his involvement.

Maybe we can make the knobs on his amp go up to 1
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pjp
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16090
Location: Colorado

PostPosted: Sun Aug 25, 2013 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cokehabit wrote:
Good on Gore for bringing problems to light but that should be the extent of his involvement.

Maybe we can make the knobs on his amp go up to 1
Only if it is a Playskool knob.
_________________
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
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pantsonfire wrote:
This is like watching a bunch of elderly Victorian gentlemen masturbating furiously over a glimpse of stocking-covered ankle - and they only imagined they saw the ankle. As usual, you are projecting your own ignorance and bigotry onto entirely innocent events.

Gore was correct to say there is talk of adding a cat 6. Read some f*cking books.

Quote:
We may have to invent a category 6," says David Enfield, a senior scientist at the University of Miami and former physical oceanographer at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This new level wouldn't be an arbitrary relabeling. Global satellite data from the past 40 years indicate that the net destructive potential of hurricanes has increased, and the strongest hurricanes are becoming more common—especially in the Atlantic.

That came after, not before, Gore's blurt-gaffe, and therefore cannot serve as evidence to support it. You do understand the concept of "before" vs "after", right? In fact, that's the very article (shat out into a blog just Friday, and using quotes probably elicited over the phone that very day) which I was talking about in my post above. :lol:
Quote:
There was a mad scramble of phone interviews and a self-referencing web of articles suddenly shat out to quickly manufacture history and make him appear 'close enough' to correct. It's fucking hilarious.

Take, for example, the article by "freelance writer" Jim Harper (who holds degrees in journalism and communication) on the opinion page of Scientific American's blog on Friday (the same day the Gore staff hazed Ezra Kline into making some kind of a statement at least vaguely resembling a correction and throwing the red herring of a quibble over "adding category six" vs "proposing category six" when in fact both are false). The "article" cites one clown at some state university saying (probably on the phone that day) 'maybe we need to add a six to the hurricane scale!' Magic! Abracadabra and we kind of have an illusion that Gore knew what he was talking about and wasn't just doing his "serial exaggerator" schtick.

In fact the idea of "category six" hurricanes has only been mentioned twice ever that I can tell, and that was way back in 2005 and 2006, right after a major hurricane, and during the heart of the Global Warming Fap-Frenzy, and it was by journalists, not scientists. These two eight-year-old articles include a suggestion by their journalist author that a category six should be added, and neither article actually cites a scientist suggesting it (although in the seond one, the guy says, "a couple of scientists have told me..." but never gives a name, a quote, a place or time, or any kind of reference:
http://www.livescience.com/426-wilma-rage-suggests-hurricane-categories-needed.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/Science/story?id=1986862

So, basically, Gore is stuck in 2006, still spewing the same exaggerations and bullshit that was going around back then.


pantsonfire wrote:
Since the source of the original quote has accepted his mistake and apologised (he's got a frickin' tape he doesn't have to rely on Gore's aides) what does that make you?

Fuckwits.

No, he didn't "apologize", and I also already addressed this point in the same post.

Still waiting for you to respond to this:
Quote:
But it doesn't matter that he didn't really say "proposing" (which I believe he didn't), because Gore was talking bollocks either way you slice it, "adding" or "proposing" -- neither are right. Show me scientists who have proposed that we add Category Six (uh... in recent climate science history and prior to Gore's gaffe, that is).

And before you waste my time, don't show me crap about people saying we need a new scale or proposing revisions to the scale, or proposing it's replacement with a new multidimensional scale, etc., etc., Show me scientists proposing the addition of a Category Six to the scale, recent enough that it could support Gore blurting, 'squaaaaak... and now they're adding [proposing] a category six! Squaaaaak!!'

Come on, I'm sure you can find the name of one scientist out there SOMEWHERE, at SOME TIME (demonstrably prior to Gore's gaffe that is), who once actually proposed or even seriously discussed adding Category Six. If it's common enough knowledge for Gore to blurt it out like that, there must be some evidence of it somewhere. (Oh, and please don't cite one of the two seven- or eight-year-old articles I've already linked to above, because I've already ruled those out -- neither actually cites a scientist.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cokehabit wrote:
Good on Gore for bringing problems to light but that should be the extent of his involvement.

Maybe we can make the knobs on his amp go up to 1

:lol:

He can't give up the spotlight. It's his calling in life to be an asshat. If he were smart, he'd start marketing himself as an object of ridicule, like William Shatner.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I'm glad you finally chose to accept the facts ie Gore didn't say what you think he said and the idea of a cat 6 has been raised by climate scientists.

Oh no wait - what am I saying! It's just more fuckwittery.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Butts McCokey
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 Apr 2004
Posts: 3313

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

pantsonfire wrote:
Well I'm glad you finally chose to accept the facts ie Gore didn't say what you think he said and the idea of a cat 6 has been raised by climate scientists.

Oh no wait - what am I saying! It's just more fuckwittery.
Don't try and talk climate science to this board. The American reds (they virtually all are here) on here just come out with the biggest fuckwittery possible
_________________
Since the bible and the church are obviously mistaken about where we came from, how can we trust them with where we're going?

"An eye for an eye will make us all blind" - Gandhi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 3:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Still waiting for you to respond to this:
Quote:
But it doesn't matter that he didn't really say "proposing" (which I believe he didn't), because Gore was talking bollocks either way you slice it, "adding" or "proposing" -- neither are right. Show me scientists who have proposed that we add Category Six (uh... in recent climate science history and prior to Gore's gaffe, that is).

And before you waste my time, don't show me crap about people saying we need a new scale or proposing revisions to the scale, or proposing it's replacement with a new multidimensional scale, etc., etc., Show me scientists proposing the addition of a Category Six to the scale, recent enough that it could support Gore blurting, 'squaaaaak... and now they're adding [proposing] a category six! Squaaaaak!!'

Come on, I'm sure you can find the name of one scientist out there SOMEWHERE, at SOME TIME (demonstrably prior to Gore's gaffe that is), who once actually proposed or even seriously discussed adding Category Six. If it's common enough knowledge for Gore to blurt it out like that, there must be some evidence of it somewhere. (Oh, and please don't cite one of the two seven- or eight-year-old articles I've already linked to above, because I've already ruled those out -- neither actually cites a scientist.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 3:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I honestly don't know where to start... The blog post from "last Friday" wasn't from last Friday at all, was it? It was from two years ago.

I am sorry I called you a fuckwit though. This isn't simple fuckwittery: it's magnificent fuckwittery. It's the kind of fuckwittery they write about in textbooks. For fuckwits.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 6:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alright, so I myself have provided you with one case of one professor at a state university being quoted (in a blog) as purportedly saying, 'we ought to have a category six', probably at the prompting of the interviewer, who doesn't provide a transcript but only selected bites of text.

Are there any others, anywhere? Surely there must be. Surely you must have found some by now.

Please tell us Al Gore's sterling reputation as a factual man of science doesn't hang upon a single blog post.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK who are you and what have you done with BoneKracker? The real BK would now be arguing furiously and at great length that 2011 is really 2013.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pantsonfire wrote:
OK who are you and what have you done with BoneKracker? The real BK would now be arguing furiously and at great length that 2011 is really 2013.

:lol:

No, I fucked up and thought that article said 2013. I would have suspected somebody actually tampered with the date, but all the comments are dated 2011 too.

But it's still just one blog entry quoting one state university professor two years ago. Without further evidence that this is being seriously discussed and proposed by scientists, Gore's comment is still just more of the same hyperbole he's become famous for, and which the scientists are wishing he'd stop because it harms their credibility. He's a serial exaggerator -- a big bullshitter -- and while that might make for good populist demagoguery in the political arena, it has no place in discussions of science.

The truth is that there is practically never a storm with winds high enough justify an additional category, and there are other important drivers of the destructiveness of storms besides wind velocity, such as their size, the pressure and temperature gradients (which do not always correlate neatly with wind velocities but are a predictor of other destructive activity such as storm surges, microbursts, hail, etc.), and the amount of moisture they are carrying. And if he had any climate scyent, he'd know this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Er.. the truth is almost all climate scientists expect the strongest hurrricanes to become more severe so a cat 6 would be useful, in a sense. However it's kind of tinkering around the edges. The real problem is the Saffir-Simpson scale which nobody really thinks is an adequate way to describe the impact of hurricanes where winds are only one part of the destructive potential, often not the worst. As Read said: hide from the wind; run from the water.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flysideways
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pantsonfire wrote:
So much fuckwittery. It burns!


Yeah, the Saffir-Simpson scale Category 1 hurricane Sandy was just a minor blow. It's the douche that counts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pantsonfire wrote:
Er.. the truth is almost all climate scientists expect the strongest hurrricanes to become more severe so a cat 6 would be useful, in a sense.

Er... no. And sticking "in a sense" in there doesn't make it yes, that just makes it you trying to play wishy-washy word games to twist the truth. You're being intellectually dishonest, because you are overly emotionally invested in the issue. It's not scientific. You're just trying to defend Gore, even though you know in your heart that he blurted out in classic Gore fashion, "and now they adding a category six" (and then his staff tried, unconvincingly, to cover it up), and instead, if you were intellectually honest with yourself, you would be agreeing with what was initially said:
Quote:
“Politicians and others can be effective communicators of climate science and guide us toward policy action, but they risk creating confusion and eroding public confidence in science when they make misrepresentative statements."


I don't believe Gore's staff. You can even read it in Klein's response. He points out that he uses a tape recorder and actually transcribes interviews. His original quotes read like a transcript -- he didn't pull all that detail from memory or a few hand-scrabbled notes. He's just being gracious, and leaving Gore a way out, because that's what any decent person would do.

You need to decide whether you're on the side of science, or on the side of propaganda, because propaganda has no place in science. People once thought that asshats like Gore would help solve the problem, but he didn't. He made it worse. Even some scientists made the same mistake and started to treat the problem as a "cause" and bend the truth to persuade the ignorant masses to act, and coupled with Gore's exaggerations and divisiveness, set the "cause" back by years, wrecking the credibility of climate science and causing the number of skeptics and outright deniers to increase by 20%. You don't have to be part of that problem.

pantsonfire wrote:
However it's kind of tinkering around the edges. The real problem is the Saffir-Simpson scale which nobody really thinks is an adequate way to describe the impact of hurricanes where winds are only one part of the destructive potential, often not the worst. As Read said: hide from the wind; run from the water.

Yes, I agree. As I said, there are many drivers of destructiveness of storms besides wind velocity. A good single classification would amalgamate the most salient and practically measurable ones.

And that is what scientists are discussing and proposing, not "adding a category six".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
McGruff
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 145

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 3:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You're talking out your ass again and none of it has any more link to reality than your idiotic ranting about a blog from "last Friday" which was in fact two years old. Gore was quite correct to say that there have been suggestions to add a cat 6. Ezra Klein has acknowledged his error and apologised. The Union of Concern Troll Scientists spokesperson did the same. There is no factual basis for any of this bullshit and when you are confronted with that it doesn't even make you pause because facts and evidence never really mattered to you in the first place. You want something to be true so it is true! That's all the proof you ever need, isn't it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bones McCracker
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1553
Location: U.S.A.

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pantsonfire wrote:
You're talking out your ass again and none of it has any more link to reality than your idiotic ranting about a blog from "last Friday" which was in fact two years old. Gore was quite correct to say that there have been suggestions to add a cat 6. Ezra Klein has acknowledged his error and apologised. The Union of Concern Troll Scientists spokesperson did the same. There is no factual basis for any of this bullshit and when you are confronted with that it doesn't even make you pause because facts and evidence never really mattered to you in the first place. You want something to be true so it is true! That's all the proof you ever need, isn't it?

I was trying to be nice, and now you're just getting all emotional and irrational again, repeating the same failed nonsense.

Point of fact: Gore was NOT correct. One college professor two years ago is not "scientists" (especially since the entire quote was six words, which means his words were at least literally being taken out of context).

Point of fact: Klein did NOT apologize. He, almost tongue in cheek, went along with Gore's desperate assertion that he was misquoted, saying that it was possibly correct. No apology is anywhere in there.

Point of fact: YOU have yet to produce one piece of evidence supporting Gore's hyperbole (either version of it). I provided one blog post from two years ago that arguably provides a weak modicum of support. You haven't come up with squat. So don't spout off about "facts and evidence" to me, you bet-welching, honorless, mealy-mouthed mincer of words (all points of fact as well).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flysideways
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 151

PostPosted: Mon Aug 26, 2013 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yet again, we're hearing about manbearpig instead of those who stand to contribute something.
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
Page 2 of 2

 
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