Whistle blowing on Global Warming

[33Vortex]

oh cmon ...

Of course, this reaction was expected. Remember that there would be no new discoveries if everyone had the same mindset as you Sir.

"To Robert Fulton What, sir, would you make a ship sail against the wind and currents by lighting a bonfire under her deck I pray you excuse me. I have no time to listen to such nonsense."
- Napoleon I, 1769-1821

[RTHolmes]

people with "my mindset" know snake oil when we see it, it means we can spend our time on more useful things.

[33Vortex]

Sure.

[RTHolmes]

... like the laws of thermodynamics for example.

btw if this thread is stressing you out at all I have a small bottle of water ... ahem ... homeopathic remedy I can send you. just send $20 paypal and tell me the ailment and I'll print off the appropriate label and mail it over

[33Vortex]

So you believe the laws of thermodynamics to be flawless? They are 100% correct?

Just making a point of the fact that you believe completely in the system you've been taught. Which isn't perfect, and we know it isn't.

Not entering a debate with you, you've already shown that nothing positive can be expected.

[RTHolmes]

there is an overwhelming body of theoretical and experimental work which supports the laws of thermodynamics.

there are a couple of guys on the internet who claim to be breaking them, although they have no credible theory or experimental results to prove it.

I'm >99% sure that the laws of thermodynamics are sound. If I was 100% sure I couldn't claim to be a scientist could I?

[Angus]

we're all gonna die, who cares? Everything living must die. Its our fate 

So I guess you want to sloppily get it over with. Same with your kids maybe?

Oh, And 3 inches of sea rise may not seem a lot in 50 years, - but it is quite a bit of water. Now, who's the first to bring that volume calculated. Hmmm. A ball, 40.000 kilometers of a belt, with some 70% covered in water of mere 3 inches. Easy isn't it?
Anyway, since there have been preachers here of global cooling, where did them 3 inches come from???

[CptTrips]

If I was 100% sure I couldn't claim to be a scientist could I?

You could claim to be a Climatologist.   

Wab

[Angus]

Oh, by the way, people here seem to belive that the Ice-age meant that the globe was simply frozen over.
Not so, it was mostly in the north. Lookie:

Now, your Ice-age has quite a span. Dozens of thousands of years. Roll into it and you'd better move to...N-Aussieland.
But seriously, Ice and SL is a good indicator of what is actually happening. And what we know is that SL does not rise without some water being added. Which goes rather in harmony with the land-based Ice that is added. Bear in mind that sea-ice melting does NOT raise SL, while the melting of it is a good indicator of what is going on.
Freezing over apparently takes a lot less time than thawing. (Well, any northerly working farmer will tell you that!). Anyway, once ice starts piling up, it bounces back the sun-heat and accelerates things into some equilibrum of an ice-age, that then stays and will give in when conditions are more....warm. So, that's how it looked:

Not a completely uninhabitable planet, but somewhat different from today.
So....what are 3 inches in 50 years?? They actually indicate the same melting as 80.000 years of Ice-age did on the opposite. Except that the Ice-age started much faster. And yet not, for most of the melting that has occured does NOT cause a rise in SL, since that ice is already in the water.
You may ask....so what? Okay, look at the Ice-age map again. Plenty of habitable space on earth. Then see this one,  - a classic example of what greenhouse gases are capeable of doing.....not much life there and no Wallmart.


Hot, ain't she???

[DMBEAR]

Climate change is inevitable.  We've also had climate catastrophes long before we had industry farting on the planet.  To say the climate is changing and then pin it on Man is obviously a debatable assumption.  However, we are in a Brawndo age where the extreme voices of both sides are the loudest and claim there is no debate.

I don't have a problem with common sense and preservation.  It's preservation without common sense that has two sides fighting each other. We can get more efficient as time goes by.  Alarmists want the change today at any cost because they have no common sense.  People that don't give two flips about improving our waste management and or industry standards are as clueless as the Alarmists.

Crippling our economy to appease a small amount of experts who's beliefs and fudged #'s are debated by another small amount of experts with opposing views is ridiculous.

Screw it.  Time to go

[Mace2004]

Then see this one,  - a classic example of what greenhouse gases are capeable of doing.....not much life there and no Wallmart.
(Image removed from quote.)

Hot, ain't she???

You're seriously going to compare Venus with the Earth as an object lesson?  What a great comparison, one with a blanket of sulfuric acid clouds and the other with a tiny bit of CO2.  Of course we might want to consider that it's 23million miles closer to the sun than the Earth and takes almost one Earth year to rotate once around it's axis.  I'm pretty sure that could have something to do with its unusual atmosphere....or was the internal combustion engine actually invented there first?   

Other than those issues I guess it's a perfect exemplar of the hazards of MMGW.

[morfiend]

 It's all smoke and mirrors to cover up the fact that man made estrogens being released into the water will get us long before any other catastrophic event does.


   

[Widewing]

I know its not the first time I've done it and it surely won't be the last...

Wasn't comparing anything or anyone in this thread to nazism--merely comparing the potential fascism that can arise from the global warming debate.  Do some reading on eugenics and tell me I'm wrong, especially when you read the lists of very smart and famous people that supported the theory as hard science back in the day...

You are absolutely right.. Eugenic "racial hygiene" theory is no different that the AGW mob's "intellectual hygiene" being practiced today.


My regards,

Widewing

[Mace2004]

This is from the Wall Street Journal:

Another story, appearing on the Reuters Web site but attributed to something called SolveClimate.com, has a defensive quote from the hockey-stick guy:

Michael Mann, co-author of the Copenhagen Diagnosis and lead author of the UN IPCC Third Assessment Report, blamed skeptics for taking the personal emails out of context. "What they've done is search through stolen personal emails—confidential between colleagues who often speak in a language they understand and is often foreign to the outside world. Suddenly, all these are subject to cherry picking," he said.

Ah yes, they were speaking a language that the outside world doesn't understand. One of our readers, in an admittedly somewhat juvenile spirit, tested the notion by searching the East Anglia emails for a versatile but obscene four-letter word--a word that everyone knows but that is not printable here. He found a few hits, including this September 2003 email from Edward Cook of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, N.Y., to East Anglia's Keith Briffa:

"Without trying to prejudice this work, but also because of what I almost think I know to be the case, the results of this study will show that we can probably say a fair bit about <100 year extra-tropical NH [Northern Hemisphere] temperature variability (at least as far as we believe the proxy estimates), but honestly know f***-all about what the >100 year variability was like with any certainty (i.e. we know with certainty that we know f***-all)."

"We know with certainty that we know f***-all." That pretty well sums up the state of climate science after the East Anglia revelations.

Well, at least one climate scientist almost thinks he knows he's honest.

[BiPoLaR]

just checking..................... ........................ nope not dead yet