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

260,000 Posts in one thread? - Red_Dragon - Aug 7, 2020 - 9:20pm
 
Trump - R_P - Aug 7, 2020 - 6:51pm
 
Two questions. That's it. I promise. - oldviolin - Aug 7, 2020 - 5:22pm
 
Name My Band - Kajukenbo - Aug 7, 2020 - 5:16pm
 
Florida - westslope - Aug 7, 2020 - 5:03pm
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Antigone - Aug 7, 2020 - 4:22pm
 
COVID-19 - R_P - Aug 7, 2020 - 4:20pm
 
Poetry Forum - oldviolin - Aug 7, 2020 - 4:18pm
 
Private messages in a public forum - kcar - Aug 7, 2020 - 4:02pm
 
Breaking News - kcar - Aug 7, 2020 - 3:39pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - oldviolin - Aug 7, 2020 - 3:00pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - miamizsun - Aug 7, 2020 - 2:53pm
 
New Music - buddy - Aug 7, 2020 - 2:42pm
 
HELP! Sound Cutting out problem - michael16 - Aug 7, 2020 - 2:14pm
 
A little smooth jazz never hurt anyone - rhahl - Aug 7, 2020 - 1:51pm
 
2020 Elections - R_P - Aug 7, 2020 - 1:02pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Aug 7, 2020 - 12:39pm
 
It seemed like a good idea at the time - Proclivities - Aug 7, 2020 - 11:54am
 
Race in America - R_P - Aug 7, 2020 - 10:32am
 
songs that ROCK! - sirdroseph - Aug 7, 2020 - 10:02am
 
What did you have for lunch? - miamizsun - Aug 7, 2020 - 8:55am
 
American Justice - miamizsun - Aug 7, 2020 - 8:40am
 
Music Videos - black321 - Aug 7, 2020 - 7:30am
 
Our tolerance for opposing views - Coaxial - Aug 7, 2020 - 7:30am
 
New Song Submissions system - Hastur_T - Aug 7, 2020 - 7:12am
 
Republican Party - Proclivities - Aug 7, 2020 - 6:33am
 
Fake News*  ?  ! - miamizsun - Aug 7, 2020 - 5:57am
 
Your favorite artist - miamizsun - Aug 7, 2020 - 5:44am
 
Reinstock '05 Link Repository - Red_Dragon - Aug 7, 2020 - 5:38am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - Aug 7, 2020 - 5:38am
 
China - R_P - Aug 6, 2020 - 9:01pm
 
True Confessions - oldviolin - Aug 6, 2020 - 7:42pm
 
Solar / Wind / Geothermal / Efficiency Energy - R_P - Aug 6, 2020 - 7:41pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Aug 6, 2020 - 5:34pm
 
TV shows you watch - westslope - Aug 6, 2020 - 2:44pm
 
kurtster's quiet vinyl - kurtster - Aug 6, 2020 - 2:42pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - rgio - Aug 6, 2020 - 2:25pm
 
Offset between Music and Song/Interpret Text, Silence... - nicolas65 - Aug 6, 2020 - 11:23am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - nicolas65 - Aug 6, 2020 - 10:18am
 
Derplahoma Questions and Points of Interest - Red_Dragon - Aug 6, 2020 - 10:03am
 
Artists You Miss - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Aug 6, 2020 - 8:30am
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Aug 6, 2020 - 7:53am
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - Proclivities - Aug 6, 2020 - 5:34am
 
Yellowstone is in Wyoming Meetup • Aug. 11 2007 • YEA... - sunybuny - Aug 6, 2020 - 5:31am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Aug 6, 2020 - 5:14am
 
Outstanding Covers - miamizsun - Aug 6, 2020 - 4:42am
 
What Are You Going To Do Today? - Steely_D - Aug 5, 2020 - 4:56pm
 
Capital Punishment - R_P - Aug 5, 2020 - 4:05pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Aug 5, 2020 - 3:48pm
 
Better Together - MarcsRadio - Aug 5, 2020 - 1:13pm
 
Auto-skip songs I rate poorly - MrPeebles - Aug 5, 2020 - 10:12am
 
Things that make you go Hmmmm..... - KarmaKarma - Aug 5, 2020 - 10:09am
 
Looting & vandalism isn't protest - R_P - Aug 5, 2020 - 9:58am
 
Little known information...maybe even facts - miamizsun - Aug 5, 2020 - 9:24am
 
Two Things - oldviolin - Aug 5, 2020 - 7:18am
 
NASA & other news from space - Coaxial - Aug 5, 2020 - 4:45am
 
RP Streaming Keeps Stopping - jarro - Aug 5, 2020 - 2:41am
 
Amazon Products (May Contain Spam) - westslope - Aug 4, 2020 - 6:20pm
 
• • • What Makes You Happy? • • •  - Antigone - Aug 4, 2020 - 4:05pm
 
RightWingNutZ - kcar - Aug 4, 2020 - 2:19pm
 
Band Suggestion - toddpthayer - Aug 4, 2020 - 2:13pm
 
Neil Young - buddy - Aug 4, 2020 - 1:01pm
 
People who never came to Gilligan's Island - Proclivities - Aug 4, 2020 - 8:02am
 
Economix - rexi - Aug 4, 2020 - 2:32am
 
Celebrity Deaths - Proclivities - Aug 3, 2020 - 11:49am
 
Reccomended System or Powered Speakers - Ohmsen - Aug 3, 2020 - 10:42am
 
BACK TO THE 80's - Ohmsen - Aug 3, 2020 - 9:40am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Aug 3, 2020 - 9:01am
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - oldviolin - Aug 3, 2020 - 8:59am
 
BillyGee's Greatest Segues - ScottFromWyoming - Aug 3, 2020 - 8:43am
 
Those Lovable Policemen - R_P - Aug 2, 2020 - 8:46pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - Antigone - Aug 2, 2020 - 4:42pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - Antigone - Aug 2, 2020 - 2:46pm
 
Hot Dog... it's Summer! - miamizsun - Aug 2, 2020 - 12:42pm
 
Little Feat tour - Ohmsen - Aug 2, 2020 - 9:51am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Climate Change Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 101, 102, 103  Next
Post to this Topic
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.


MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:39pm

 musik_knut wrote:


One email? Scores upon scores of emails. Some of them show concern that the climate is not acting as their fraudulent models and software predict. One email? Scores...
But don't take my word on this. I'm just making it up as I go along...not. That's not my way of reporting anything in the sciences...
If you read the emails (EMAILS as in scores), you find that the fraudulent attempts to phony up the data were well coordinated with political measures in mind.
As a scientist, I understand the severity of fudged data, or the manipulation of data to coax a predetermined outcome. Such activities are damned in the science community. As well they must be.

 

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.


musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:33pm

 MrsHobieJoe wrote:

Oh FFS.  One email expose does not "bust" over twenty years of scientific research.  You really need to see the politics and the science separately.
 

One email? Scores upon scores of emails. Some of them show concern that the climate is not acting as their fraudulent models and software predict. One email? Scores...
But don't take my word on this. I'm just making it up as I go along...not. That's not my way of reporting anything in the sciences...
If you read the emails (EMAILS as in scores), you find that the fraudulent attempts to phony up the data were well coordinated with political measures in mind.
As a scientist, I understand the severity of fudged data, or the manipulation of data to coax a predetermined outcome. Such activities are damned in the science community. As well they must be.
HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:29pm

Following Bills advice I will just,,,  {#Smile}climate change image
Growing populations and rising living standards helped drive emissions ever upwards during the second half of the 20th century. In the first years of the new century, China's emissions overtook those of the US.


MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:27pm

 musik_knut wrote:
Busted! If you have not read the emails from one to another on climate change, where in many of the emails, there is a conspiracy to doctor the data, then you should. The whole climate change data base being used by, notably, The UN, in the various declarations of woe and doom, as from the ever babbling Al Gore, is a fraud of science. For Mr. Gore, user of the now infamous 'hockey stick curve' to demonstrate rapid warming, an independent researcher found that no matter what data was entered into the program that gave rise to the 'hockey stick curve' , the 'stick' acted the same. The program itself is a piece of fraudulent science. This scientific voodoo with plans to dump emails in order to avoid a paper trail in the conspiracy, with doctored data and programs designed to yield desired results/data, is being hailed as one of the greatest acts of science fraud in history.
Busted!

 
Oh FFS.  One email expose does not "bust" over twenty years of scientific research.  You really need to see the politics and the science separately.

musik_knut

musik_knut Avatar

Location: Third Stone From The Sun
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 12:23pm

Busted! If you have not read the emails from one to another on climate change, where in many of the emails, there is a conspiracy to doctor the data, then you should. The whole climate change data base being used by, notably, The UN, in the various declarations of woe and doom, as from the ever babbling Al Gore, is a fraud of science. For Mr. Gore, user of the now infamous 'hockey stick curve' to demonstrate rapid warming, an independent researcher found that no matter what data was entered into the program that gave rise to the 'hockey stick curve' , the 'stick' acted the same. The program itself is a piece of fraudulent science. This scientific voodoo with plans to dump emails in order to avoid a paper trail in the conspiracy, with doctored data and programs designed to yield desired results/data, is being hailed as one of the greatest acts of science fraud in history.
Busted!
HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 24, 2009 - 11:26am

Sea level rise could cost port cities $28 trillion

CNN

Zep

Zep Avatar



Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 3:58pm

 Rod wrote:
Do you know anything about this one? It sounds very promising. Not temperature driven, but it uses slow water currents to create energy. I originally posetd this in the Solar/WindGeothermal...thread.
 
Vivace Energy Technology Harnesses Vortex Hydro-Energy
 
A lot of work is being done on currents, but there are significant technological hurdles to overcome.  The most significant is getting the energy back along the grid to land.  These sites typically need to be in deep water in order to avail themselves of a good current flow, and that gets farther away from shore. Still, it's very cool. 
 
Rod

Rod Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 23, 2009 - 12:45pm

 Zep wrote:


Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion?

I did a master's thesis on it.

 
Do you know anything about this one? It sounds very promising. Not temperature driven, but it uses slow water currents to create energy. I originally posetd this in the Solar/WindGeothermal...thread.
 
Vivace Energy Technology Harnesses Vortex Hydro-Energy



Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 101, 102, 103  Next