General Climate Discussion

[lazs2]

moray.. I didn't come up with the flawed analogy.. chair did.  I was only making it as relevant as I could.    I also trust engineers more than scientists... and I know that they are wrong countless times.   neither are saints.

Oh.. of the last 548 peer reviewed papers on global warming only 7% say it is for sure man and that it will end in disaster.   6% say it is not us at all and we have no effect worth mentioning..  the vast majority say that they can draw no conclusions either way..

That simply means that they are not convinced either way.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=84E9E44A-802A-23AD-493A-B35D0842FED8

http://rogerhelmermep.wordpress.com/2007/09/29/peer-reviewed-papers-support-climate-sceptics/

"2007 alone has provided an abundance of peer-reviewed papers debunking the man-made CO2 “consensus”.   A recent survey of peer-reviewed papers from 2004-2007 reveals that less than half of published papers endorse man-made global warming theory.  In the past 4 months, there has been a rush of sceptical peer-reviewed papers.  A good reference is the US Senate report:"

It would appear that only up till about 2005 was there any real majority.. more and more scientists are becoming skeptics every day.

You can't have it both ways.. if you say that the study done of over 900 peer reviewed papers in 2005 said NONE nada.. zilch.. no scientist didn't think that we weren't causing global warming.. if you look at that and then the hundreds of "deniers" now...  well.. you are losing momentum at an astronomical rate!

lazs

[lazs2]

they are dropping like flies.. when no one was really looking at data it was fine to have a "consensus" of the few alarmists all making the news..

Now, more people.. more scientists are getting involved now that "doing something" is a real possibility.. something that may cost trillions and may cause more harm than good.

This is as it should be.   things are going as they should.. the facts are being looked at and some debate is happening.  

The fact is.. there never was a consensus.. just some alarmists and everyone else not really paying to much attention..

now they are and they are taking the alarmists to task.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb

"U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007

Senate Report Debunks "Consensus"
Complete U.S. Senate Report Now Available: (LINK)

Complete Report w/out Intro: (LINK)

INTRODUCTION:      

Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.  
 

The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.

 

Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking." Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears “bite the dust.” (LINK)  In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement. (LINK)  "

lazs

[Angus]

MERRY CHRISTMAS

(BTW, I have WHITE Chritsmas this time by a margin)

[REP0MAN]

Originally posted by MORAY37
Lol... no satire is not wasted...

Especially when you use it to smack down someone commenting on this thread, who says it's 80 in Daytona, and you admit in the next post you have no idea what you're talking about.

Otherwise known as the "Lazs School of Reason"

LoL!

You're right, I've been a resident of Phoenix since 1975 (birth year), minus 7 years I lived in the Great State of Oklahoma. I wouldn't know anything about Florida except sun tan sells well and thats where old people go to wait for God. Otherwise, couldn't care less. I do, however, know that it is the same in Phoenix today as it has been for the last 30 years. Hot in the summer, mild in the winter. Sometimes it rains, most times not. This Global warm....errr.....climate change BS is just another way to make money. But look on the bright side; if I can somehow get in on the cut, I'll be your biggest supporter! Go Green!

[/extrahelpingofsatire]

[Angus]

Note that the doubters of global warming mostly come from areas that have now shown warming. Notably on the continents, like the USA.
Bear in mind that most of the globe is neither USA or a continent....

[bj229r]

I'll ask aGAIN...HOW much global warming has occurred? (this would be worldwide)

[Angus]

Quite a bit

[john9001]

snow blower for sale, low hours, cheap. make offer.

[REP0MAN]

How is it on Carbon Emissions? What's it's MPG?

[Angus]

Originally posted by john9001
snow blower for sale, low hours, cheap. make offer.

Not interested....snow blowing business here has  been very idle for some 17 years, with only one proper punch as an exception, that one was in 1999....

You will need patient finance for snowblower business in .... Iceland

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by MORAY37
Apparently I have a similar misinterpretation of adiabatic.

Kinda funny how many times I can find a scientific paper with the phrase Partially adiabatic in it.  I mean, since you say it can't be.  I guess alot of people are wrong, Holden, me boy.  

Yes they are.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/adiab.html

http://buphy.bu.edu/~duffy/semester1/c27_process_adiabatic_sim.html

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Adiabatic.html

http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0015923.html

Q=0   Adiabatic;  Q not = 0 not Adiabatic.  Show me how zero can be equal to non zero, an I will accept your misuse as proper.

Of course you could have opted out of the discussion altogether by letting an offhand retort go.I can go for a while with posting definitions, not improper usage of the word.

Lets look up another word.

An argument is a connected series of statements or propositions, some of which are intended to provide support, justification or evidence for the truth of another statement or proposition. Arguments consist of one or more premises and a conclusion. The premises are those statements that are taken to provide the support or evidence; the conclusion is that which the premises allegedly support.

So far been arguing with me for what three or four posts after you said, "I simply choose to opt out of any further debate with you, which is sad." Unless you've not been arguing.

[Angus]

Debating about the debating?
Here is a christmas cookie about climate change caused by a big volcanic eruption in recent human history. Sort of a mini-global nuke-war unleashing the force of global dimming, so the primary effect was cooling, and poisoning.
Hmm, just a minute, didn't someone here claim that volcanoes were the contributers of warming no one? (Although same person might be claiming cooling).

Anyway, from the Economist:

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10311405


BTW, I recommend the scenery of the lavafields, look magnificent...
Just a tad more than 200 years ago....

[Angus]

Oh, an add-on.
This was meant to show what gasses in big quantities can do to the global climate in just a short time. This works with dimming, and it works with greenhouse gasses the other way as well.....
This struck me a bit, for after all the "global" deal does not hit everyone with the same force:
"Polluting gases can change global temperatures a lot (in this case by cooling, not warming). Volcanic gases can do as much damage as any amount of human activity. But the poisonous cloud was only part of the story. Weather patterns mattered too. Stable anti-cyclones brought the gas to earth in Europe and stratospheric currents then spread it over a third of the globe. And the connections between pollution and weather are complex and unpredictable: people at the time understood the link between the volcano and the haze, but not the connection with events the other side of the globe. Societies are hit very differently: the impact was modest in most of Europe, but devastating in Egypt, Japan and Alaska. Lastly, people react to environmental disruption in ways that are themselves disruptive."

In our world some weather patterns simply change more than others. And our crew of GW denialists mostly live in (and even scarcely venture out of) areas where the GW is not detectable.

[Angus]

As from Lazs...might I add....
"The real data (satellite) shows that there has been no real problem for the last 20 years here in the states.. "

[bj229r]

In our world some weather patterns simply change more than others. And our crew of GW denialists mostly live in (and even scarcely venture out of) areas where the GW is not detectable.

Ummm...the "G" stands for GLOBAL, not REGONAL