• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Conservatives and climate change

Status
Not open for further replies.
DC said:
when you think you need a timemachine you need to google ice cores and read about how they measure the CO².
Click to expand...
You got a drill rig, a gas chromatograph, and transportation to Antarctica or Greenland? Great! Let's go. Then we can take these measurements ourselves. Otherwise, again, I have to take someone's word for it. As I said.
 
Malcolm Kirkpatrick said:
You got a drill rig, a gas chromatograph, and transportation to Antarctica or Greenland? Great! Let's go. Then we can take these measurements ourselves. Otherwise, again, I have to take someone's word for it. As I said.
Click to expand...

Clarifying what you said.

We get our information second hand from scientists. Scientists in turn get their information second hand or third hand. Second hand, from their instruments. Third hand, when the instrument reads a proxy measurement.

And ice cores, tree rings, or satellite temperature measurements are proxies.

But if you will only have faith and believe, there is no need for questioning.

Think how simple and easy life will be.


The Truth is the Great Warming, as told by the Gore. The Apocalpyse is nigh. Floods, droughts, epidemics, great wildfires, earthquakes, even disruptions in Internet Service, are coming with the Great Warming.

-----fragment of Gore Dogmaclimatic Catechism found in ruins of a Shrine to Gore's Sliding Ten Year Prophecy of Doom circa 2010.
 
Last edited:
Malcolm Kirkpatrick said:
You got a drill rig, a gas chromatograph, and transportation to Antarctica or Greenland? Great! Let's go. Then we can take these measurements ourselves. Otherwise, again, I have to take someone's word for it. As I said.
Click to expand...

it was merely a coment on your srtange timemachine claim.
but sounds like you know now that you don't need a time machine :) good progress there.
 
mhaze said:
Clarifying what you said.

We get our information second hand from scientists. Scientists in turn get their information second hand or third hand. Second hand, from their instruments. Third hand, when the instrument reads a proxy measurement.

And ice cores, tree rings, or satellite temperature measurements are proxies.

But if you will only have faith and believe, there is no need for questioning.

Think how simple and easy life will be.

The Truth is the Great Warming, as told by the Gore. The Apocalpyse is nigh. Floods, droughts, epidemics, great wildfires, earthquakes, even disruptions in Internet Service, are coming with the Great Warming.
Click to expand...

Gore has added NOTHING to the scinece. why do you keep bringin him up? nobody from the AGW side has brought him up here.

But hey i can play that too. So your lying flipflopping Aids cure inventor Lord Monkton brought the gospel to you about how its all a huge hoax and how we have had cooling trends and how greenland ice is not melting at all and you directly converted without questioning him. Praise the lord.
 
Furcifer said:
We have an obligation to maintain the increase in standard of living for everyone. It's going to "get worse" if you mean +ppm.

You have to look at what we've achieved as a society during the period of increased fossil fuel and CO2 emissions and weigh that against what the downturn in the economy will do.

It's foolish to think we can do anything to curb emissions in the next 50 years world wide barring a significant technological breakthrough. Or a war.

You ever seen that Star Trek episode where they go into a nebula and the stuff starts sticking to the hull? The junk piles up on the hull and they're so far in by the time they realize it they have no choice but continue. That's us, we've got to "Push On Through" and hope for the best. The sooner you realize this the happier you will be. :)
Click to expand...
Every little bit of progress by any country is a step in the right direction. China in particular is significantly advancing plans for nuclear, renewables and additional hydro. Many European countries are pushing more schemes, such as the UKs offshore wind generation. Other technologies are under development - tidal stream, CCS, improved building regulations, etc. Yes, 50 years is a likely timeline for some of the new tech, especially to actually bring it into production. But that just means that further delay is pushing that even further into the future.

Nor does the intoduction of the new technology have to imply a downturn to the economy:

http://thinkprogress.org/green/2011/07/13/267650/brookings-green-jobs-are-real-good-and-growing/
 
Last edited:
DC said:
it was merely a coment on your srtange timemachine claim.
but sounds like you know now that you don't need a time machine :) good progress there.
Click to expand...
No progress at all amending the smug atttitude of AGW defenders in this forum. My points remain.
1. Most of what we call scientific knowledge depends on accepting someone else's word.
2. Unless I have access to a gas chromatograph, a drill rig, and transport to Greenland or Antarctica (or a chromatograph and a time machine), I must rely on someone else's word (not, as jj asserted, measurements I can take myself) for knowledge of relative abundance of different gasses in the atmosphere of earlier times.

I do not see why this simple point has provoked this extended discussion.
 
Malcolm Kirkpatrick said:
You got a drill rig, a gas chromatograph, and transportation to Antarctica or Greenland? Great! Let's go. Then we can take these measurements ourselves. Otherwise, again, I have to take someone's word for it. As I said.
Click to expand...

What other sciences do you mistrust on this basis?


Definitely time for a new sig.
 
Last edited:
Furcifer said:
That's not a made up prediction, that's the projected time span in which China and India industrialize and begin using energy on a per capita basis near that of the Western World.
Keep laughing, it's happening whether you realize it or not.
Click to expand...
They are also investing more in renewables than the US. Even Germany managed to install 3GW of solar in one month, nearly twice what the US did last year!

http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2012/...ed-2-gw-of-solar-pv-in-the-month-of-december/
 
Malcolm Kirkpatrick said:
No progress at all amending the smug atttitude of AGW defenders in this forum. My points remain.
1. Most of what we call scientific knowledge depends on accepting someone else's word.
2. Unless I have access to a gas chromatograph, a drill rig, and transport to Greenland or Antarctica (or a chromatograph and a time machine), I must rely on someone else's word (not, as jj asserted, measurements I can take myself) for knowledge of relative abundance of different gasses in the atmosphere of earlier times.

I do not see why this simple point has provoked this extended discussion.
Click to expand...

i dont get your point, do you want to say that the scinetists around the globe are faking data and fool their collegues that have to work with that data and nobody is able to uncover the huge conspiracy? and all countries that do finance science projects are in on it? or what is your point?
 
mhaze said:
Clarifying what you said.
We get our information second hand from scientists. Scientists in turn get their information second hand or third hand. Second hand, from their instruments. Third hand, when the instrument reads a proxy measurement.
And ice cores, tree rings, or satellite temperature measurements are proxies.
But if you will only have faith and believe, there is no need for questioning.
Think how simple and easy life will be.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, except that I'm willing to call instrument readings that I take myself "first hand". A small point. I'm also willing to call gas samples from ice cores "direct" samples of earlier atmosphere, rather than proxies for atmosphere composition (not temperature). Another small point. The larger point is, very few people do this work and the vast majority of climate scientists (to say nothing about other scientists, generally) do not operate the drills, melt the ice, feed the sample into the chromatograph, and read the chromatograph. Almost all of us simply take someone's word for the result.

This is hardly controversial. It's SOP. It makes the system open to abuse, however. That's why data and methods must be available to critics, and why the behavior of Mann and Jones, as demonstrated by their refusal to archive the raw data in journals that required it and as revealed in the emails, is so offensive.
 
Oh? So if items of evidence A, B, C, D, E, and F are not inconsistent with hypothesis XYZ, then XYZ is proven true.

BWHAHAHAHAHA!

bit_pattern said:
Are you a Creationist too?
Click to expand...

If you are challenged, and cannot quickly find the lie that will rebut the challenge, then mislead, ridicule, insult and jeer. For such is the way of the Faithful as they spread their message of Doom Soon But We Don't Know When.

Lyrics from Green Gospel Hymnbook, dated to shortly after the abortive failed Bamster takeover of US economy.
 
mhaze said:
If you are challenged, and cannot quickly find the lie that will rebut the challenge, then mislead, ridicule, insult and jeer. For such is the way of the Faithful as they spread their message of Doom Soon But We Don't Know When.

Lyrics from Green Gospel Hymnbook, dated to shortly after the abortive failed Bamster takeover of US economy.
Click to expand...

oh thanks , that explains your posting behavior very well.
 
Malcolm Kirkpatrick said:
Pretty much, except that I'm willing to call instrument readings that I take myself "first hand". A small point. I'm also willing to call gas samples from ice cores "direct" samples of earlier atmosphere, rather than proxies for atmosphere composition (not temperature). Another small point. The larger point is, very few people do this work and the vast majority of climate scientists (to say nothing about other scientists, generally) do not operate the drills, melt the ice, feed the sample into the chromatograph, and read the chromatograph. Almost all of us simply take someone's word for the result.

This is hardly controversial. It's SOP. It makes the system open to abuse, however. That's why data and methods must be available to critics, and why the behavior of Mann and Jones, as demonstrated by their refusal to archive the raw data in journals that required it and as revealed in the emails, is so offensive.
Click to expand...

Ice core temperature measurements are by proxy, O18. One unique thing about the ice core work is that the evidence is destroyed by the work itself.
Generally speaking, the ice core work that I've examined seemed to be of higher quality than ... say ... the Warmer tree ring junk pseudoscience.
 
Last edited:
mhaze said:
Ice core temperature measurements are by proxy, O18. One unique thing about the ice core work is that the evidence is destroyed by the work itself. Generally speaking, the ice core work that I've examined seemed to be of higher quality than ... say ... the Warmer tree ring work.
Click to expand...

that is actually not fully true. they only take samples from the core, and other parts are archived.

 
mhaze said:
Ice core temperature measurements are by proxy, O18. One unique thing about the ice core work is that the evidence is destroyed by the work itself.
Generally speaking, the ice core work that I've examined seemed to be of higher quality than ... say ... the Warmer tree ring junk pseudoscience.
Click to expand...
I was seeking the glacier equivalent of "varve" and google-search generated this interesting survey article.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom