[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

How would you mow the lawn? - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 6, 2020 - 7:43pm
 
RPeeps I miss. - oldviolin - Jun 6, 2020 - 7:42pm
 
Live Music - R_P - Jun 6, 2020 - 7:34pm
 
Trump - R_P - Jun 6, 2020 - 7:26pm
 
Regarding dogs - Antigone - Jun 6, 2020 - 5:11pm
 
Those Lovable Policemen - R_P - Jun 6, 2020 - 3:04pm
 
Things that make you go Hmmmm..... - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 6, 2020 - 2:45pm
 
Twitter's finest moment - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 6, 2020 - 2:38pm
 
Looting & vandalism isn't protest - R_P - Jun 6, 2020 - 1:49pm
 
Environment - R_P - Jun 6, 2020 - 11:38am
 
how do you feel right now? - buddy - Jun 6, 2020 - 10:05am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - sirdroseph - Jun 6, 2020 - 9:01am
 
Name My Band - Coaxial - Jun 6, 2020 - 8:57am
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - Coaxial - Jun 6, 2020 - 8:56am
 
Surfing! - Coaxial - Jun 6, 2020 - 8:14am
 
Baseball, anyone? - Coaxial - Jun 6, 2020 - 8:10am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Coaxial - Jun 6, 2020 - 8:09am
 
Graphic designers, ho! - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 6, 2020 - 6:54am
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - sirdroseph - Jun 6, 2020 - 4:35am
 
Recommended documentaries - sirdroseph - Jun 6, 2020 - 2:32am
 
Australia has Disappeared - haresfur - Jun 6, 2020 - 12:40am
 
The Obituary Page - Steely_D - Jun 6, 2020 - 12:35am
 
Oh, GOD, they're LIBERAL!!!!! - Steely_D - Jun 5, 2020 - 9:13pm
 
Outstanding Covers - miamizsun - Jun 5, 2020 - 7:59pm
 
COVID-19 - R_P - Jun 5, 2020 - 7:09pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jun 5, 2020 - 5:56pm
 
(Big) Media Watch - R_P - Jun 5, 2020 - 5:55pm
 
Things You Thought Today - kcar - Jun 5, 2020 - 5:46pm
 
3 Words for Political Zealots - Red_Dragon - Jun 5, 2020 - 3:11pm
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - miamizsun - Jun 5, 2020 - 2:10pm
 
Party planning advice - miamizsun - Jun 5, 2020 - 2:01pm
 
::odd but intriguing:: - miamizsun - Jun 5, 2020 - 1:39pm
 
Fox Spews - buddy - Jun 5, 2020 - 12:30pm
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Jun 5, 2020 - 11:11am
 
Race in America - R_P - Jun 5, 2020 - 10:33am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jun 5, 2020 - 8:12am
 
• • • Things Magicians Exclaim • • •  - black321 - Jun 5, 2020 - 8:11am
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - oldviolin - Jun 5, 2020 - 7:56am
 
RP streams in Opus - Romain98 - Jun 5, 2020 - 7:04am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jun 5, 2020 - 6:29am
 
RP Daily Trivia Challenge - maryte - Jun 5, 2020 - 5:53am
 
The Buffoonery - oldviolin - Jun 4, 2020 - 7:22pm
 
Guns - KarmaKarma - Jun 4, 2020 - 5:03pm
 
Got any of your own made up words? - kcar - Jun 4, 2020 - 4:38pm
 
Sonos - toomanyollys - Jun 4, 2020 - 2:21pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Jun 4, 2020 - 11:47am
 
Poetry Slam! - buddy - Jun 4, 2020 - 10:54am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - sirdroseph - Jun 4, 2020 - 10:11am
 
Philosophy (Meaty Metaphysical Munchables!) - miamizsun - Jun 4, 2020 - 7:35am
 
Political Humor Images - miamizsun - Jun 4, 2020 - 7:32am
 
Play the Blues - sirdroseph - Jun 4, 2020 - 7:24am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - saellig668552 - Jun 4, 2020 - 6:41am
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - ScottFromWyoming - Jun 3, 2020 - 7:39pm
 
Embedding Tweets - R_P - Jun 3, 2020 - 4:39pm
 
Amazon Echo/Alexa stream not working - Gourd - Jun 3, 2020 - 1:55pm
 
Trump Lies - hayduke2 - Jun 3, 2020 - 12:45pm
 
Fun - Proclivities - Jun 3, 2020 - 11:26am
 
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone - oldviolin - Jun 3, 2020 - 6:45am
 
Counting with Pictures - Proclivities - Jun 3, 2020 - 6:37am
 
Poetry Forum - oldviolin - Jun 2, 2020 - 7:24pm
 
In My Room - oldviolin - Jun 2, 2020 - 7:16pm
 
Favorite Quotes - oldviolin - Jun 2, 2020 - 5:03pm
 
The R_P & KarmaKarma bickering topic - R_P - Jun 2, 2020 - 4:40pm
 
Canada - haresfur - Jun 2, 2020 - 3:01pm
 
Joe Biden - R_P - Jun 2, 2020 - 2:55pm
 
Fake News*  ?  ! - kcar - Jun 2, 2020 - 1:20pm
 
RP Main Mix on TuneIn unavailable? - withdean1 - Jun 2, 2020 - 12:03pm
 
Post your favorite 'You Tube' Videos Here - black321 - Jun 2, 2020 - 11:28am
 
Epic Facebook Statuses - Coaxial - Jun 2, 2020 - 8:06am
 
Tales from the RAFT - Coaxial - Jun 2, 2020 - 6:50am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Jun 2, 2020 - 12:04am
 
Food - AliGator - Jun 1, 2020 - 8:48pm
 
Stupid Questions (and Answers) - haresfur - Jun 1, 2020 - 8:07pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - Antigone - Jun 1, 2020 - 6:10pm
 
Bernie Sanders - R_P - Jun 1, 2020 - 3:36pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Climate Change Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 100, 101, 102  Next
Post to this Topic
dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 11:12am

 oldviolin wrote:

My point was / is, that if we can address the realities of pollution in general, then the arguable pretensions of the effects of human attributes to climate change will be addressed. My opinion.

"Here we go round the prickly pear..."
 

What does this even mean?
oldviolin

oldviolin Avatar

Location: esse quam videri
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 11:11am

 dionysius wrote:


The two are intimately related in a whole complex of bad human behaviors that damage the natural world. Increased CO2 in the atmosphere is itself a form of pollution that (for instance) increases the acidity of the oceans, dooming coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Deforestation is not itself pollution, but is the destruction of (a) habitat for many, many animal and plant species, and (b) one of our main carbon sinks, the destruction of which makes a bad problem worse. *Etc., etc.* History will not judge us kindly if we do not act soon and act decisively to curb our bad habits.

 
My point was / is, that if we can address the realities of pollution in general, then the arguable pretensions of the effects of human attributes to climate change will be addressed. My opinion.

"Here we go round the prickly pear..."

hobiejoe

hobiejoe Avatar

Location: Still in the tunnel, looking for the light.
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:59am

 dionysius wrote:
We must do something, after all, to help save the gharial.



 
{#Idea} ! Oh, of course......{#Good-vibes}
Welly

Welly Avatar

Location: Lotusland
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:55am

 dionysius wrote: 
{#Clap}

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:54am

We must do something, after all, to help save the gharial.


dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:50am

 oldviolin wrote:
My point was / is, that if we can address the realities of pollution in general, then the arguable pretensions of the effects of human attributes to climate change will be addressed. My opinion.
 

The two are intimately related in a whole complex of bad human behaviors that damage the natural world. Increased CO2 in the atmosphere is itself a form of pollution that (for instance) increases the acidity of the oceans, dooming coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Deforestation is not itself pollution, but is the destruction of (a) habitat for many, many animal and plant species, and (b) one of our main carbon sinks, the destruction of which makes a bad problem worse. *Etc., etc.* History will not judge us kindly if we do not act soon and act decisively to curb our bad habits.


Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: Oroville, Ca
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:49am

"   c   l   i   m   a   t   e       i   s       g   e   t   t   i   n   g       w   a   r   m   e   r   "


oldviolin

oldviolin Avatar

Location: esse quam videri
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:38am

My point was / is, that if we can address the realities of pollution in general, then the arguable pretensions of the effects of human attributes to climate change will be addressed. My opinion.

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:34am

 oldviolin wrote:

Pretty cut and dried. I honor your opinion. You must be emersed in the know...


 

I honor the opinions of the scientists who make their lives' work the study of climate. The overwhelming majority of them agree on anthropogenic climate change. If you're going to disagree with this majority, you had better bring better arguments than those dealt with in the Scientific American article. Read the article!
oldviolin

oldviolin Avatar

Location: esse quam videri
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:29am

 dionysius wrote:


There is no lack of consensus, really, The denial game is to manufacture one. There is no equivalence between the two "sides" in this matter—one is right and the other simply wrong.

 
Pretty cut and dried. I honor your opinion. You must be emersed in the know...



dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:28am

 oldviolin wrote:

The extreme politics played with lack of consensus among dissenting opinions.

 

There is no lack of consensus, really, The denial game is to manufacture a seeming lack of consensus. There is no equivalence between the two "sides" in this matter—one is right and the other simply wrong.


oldviolin

oldviolin Avatar

Location: esse quam videri
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:26am

 dionysius wrote:


What do you base your opinion on?

 
The extreme politics played with lack of consensus among dissenting opinions.


dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:22am

 oldviolin wrote:
Bogus
Pollution however- very much human and serious

IMO of course...

 

What do you base your opinion on?
oldviolin

oldviolin Avatar

Location: esse quam videri
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:21am

Bogus
Pollution however- very much human and serious

IMO of course...
dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 10:20am

From Scientific American, November 30th, 2009

Seven Answers to Climate Contrarian Nonsense

Evidence for human interference with Earth's climate continues to accumulate


musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 1:18pm

 MrsHobieJoe wrote:

Flying post as I get through some domesic stuff.  Here are some reports from a couple of highly respected British newspapers at either end of the political spectrum.

From our newspaper or choice- The Guardian, which is left leaning, sandal wearing etc.

From the right wing Daily Telegraph (known as the "Torygraph" in our household).
 

MrsHobie,
Thanks for the links. The Guardian one was instructive: on the one hand, the emails were obtained illegally. Fair. But not a reasonable defense if the emails show a pattern of deception in order to massage data agreeable to preferred outcomes. Again, no defense in the scientific community can be offered if data is fudged or manipulated. On the other hand, The Guardian, or I should say the author of the article, points to the 3, perhaps 4, scientists caught up in a potentially explosive scam and ponders if that is the extent of this charade within the community that declares global warming an absolute. What is bothersome is that the lab where the deceit may have taken hold is one of the labs The UN leans on for guidance on the matter. From that guidance, come announcements of dread and doom: you have less than two hours before your skin's sloughing accelerates to an uncontrollable pace *I always snickered at the drop dead certainty of such tight time limits...40 days or 6 months or whatever time was set with such specificity* And then, no matter how or why the emails were obtained, we have a serious question on the 'hockey stick curve' the 'curve' Al Gore trumpets in his 'An Inconvenient Truth' as the last-brick-in-place that solidifies the certainty of global warming and by his endless and monotonous droning, ends the discussion and shoos away all skeptics or naysayers. Seems to me the emails now present an inconvenient moment.
mk


dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 1:15pm

 MrsHobieJoe wrote:

Flying post as I get through some domesic stuff.  Here are some reports from a couple of highly respected British newspapers at either end of the political spectrum.

From our newspaper of choice- The Guardian, which is left leaning, sandal wearing etc. We actually pay for it unlike some RP posters!!

From the right wing Daily Telegraph (known as the "Torygraph" in our household).
 

From this here Torygraph: "The overwhelming majority of scientists believe the global warming is real and the result of human activity, but a vocal majority maintains that the science is not proven."

Two majorities? This...mistake...is FOXNoose-worthy. Almost missed it, because the brain reads the correct "minority" in passing. And, as we know, only minorities are vocal.

MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 1:07pm

 musik_knut wrote:


This can only be seen as extremely damaging. It is from two British Labs that much of the certainty, a word used advisedly, on global warming, is drawn. Those two labs, as I understand it, are 2 of the 4 labs from which The UN makes an endless series of the  sky-is-falling declarations on the matter.

 
Flying post as I get through some domesic stuff.  Here are some reports from a couple of highly respected British newspapers at either end of the political spectrum.

From our newspaper of choice- The Guardian, which is left leaning, sandal wearing etc. We actually pay for it unlike some RP posters!!

From the right wing Daily Telegraph (known as the "Torygraph" in our household).

musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:46pm

 MrsHobieJoe wrote:


I did read some of the info this morning.  I said one email EXPOSE (ie the University of East Anglia expose).  I know you are a scientist.  I studied some of the scientific papers on climate change 20 years ago (only it was identified solely as rising sea level at that point) when I was taking my degree in Geography.  There is some discussion of events over the last few days in one of the global warming threads.  I agree that the information is damaging and very poor behaviour on the part of the scientists involved and some information has been discredited but you can't just take out the whole shooting match on that basis.

In fairness HJ will be better placed to discuss this later when he is around as I don't keep as up to date as he does and I don't get time to read as much information as him these days so I haven't followed every blow in the saga.

 

This can only be seen as extremely damaging. It is from two British Labs that much of the certainty, a word used advisedly, on global warming, is drawn. Those two labs, as I understand it, are 2 of the 4 labs from which The UN makes an endless series of the  sky-is-falling declarations on the matter.
musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:43pm

Manipulation of evidence:

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) amd from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline.

Private doubts about whether the world really is heating up:

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. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.

Suppression of evidence:

Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?

Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment - minor family crisis.

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.

Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:

Next
time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I'll be tempted to beat
the crap out of him. Very tempted.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP):

......Phil and I have recently submitted a paper using about a dozen NH records that fit this category, and many of which are available nearly 2K back-I think that trying to adopt a timeframe of 2K, rather than the usual 1K, addresses a good earlier point that Peck made w/ regard to the memo, that 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....

And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority.

"This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the "peer-reviewed literature". Obviously, they found a solution to that-take over a journal! So what do we do about this? 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...What do others think?"

"I will be emailing the journal to tell them I'm having nothing more to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor.""It results from this journal having a number of editors. The responsible one for this is a well-known skeptic in NZ. He has let a few papers through by Michaels and Gray in the past. I've had words with Hans von Storch about this, but got nowhere. Another thing to discuss in Nice !"

 ~~~~~~~~~~~
Two that really caught my attention: the attempt to disguise the MWP, a period of considerably greater global temperatures than exist today. Since that period was well before the Industrial Revolution and with considerably fewer humans inhabiting Earth, we can't have that getting in the way. No, that would raise too many questions, which of course, it does. And then, to discuss how to circumvent peer review. An absolute NO NO in the science community. That is a real NO NO, not ever, ever, ever.


Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 100, 101, 102  Next