Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Good info for all you climate deniers & even the rest of us

True Peach





Posts: 10262
(10261 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/17/2014 at 07:44 PM
http://climate.nasa.gov

 

____________________

 
Replies:

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8395
(8396 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 02:04 AM
I was doing a little project in my shop the other day, and a thought struck me: is it even possible to be a climate scientist and not push for the whole "sky is falling, we must take trillions out of the world's economies to fund expensive and unproductive solutions" agenda?

I mean, consider the options as a "climate scientist". There are only two. Either you feel that the planet is following it's normal processes, which have been in flux and changing since creation, and are driven mostly by massive forces like the sun, ocean currents, volcanology, etc. Or, you believe that despite the enormity of the forces impacting earth's ever-changing climate, it is now man who holds the biggest stick in that equation.

Here's the problem. If you believe the former, then you've reached a dead end. The planet is doing what it's always done, and will continue to do in it's cyclical way. This conclusion puts you out of a career, as there is zero potential jobs or funding associated with such a belief. Your degree is worthless, and unless you want to be the wacky TV weatherman, you now have nothing to do.

However, if you align with the latter scenario, the world might be your oyster. You have politicians looking to use your observations to expand their control, and you'll get a cut of that action if they succeed. International agencies are paying for research to formulate future schemes. Your opinions are sought out, and you're more popular at parties. Your theories align with a worldwide group of fellow climate thinkers, producing that warm self-satisfaction of being part of a group reinforcing their own belief system. Feels good, doesn't it? Especially considering the money and power being amassed behind that agenda.

So it begs the question: is it even possible to work in that field and not be rooting for man-made global warming? And if that's remotely the case, then what is the value of the oft-stated rationale underpinning the whole belief system: that a consensus of ___% (pick your number) believe that climate change is real, and more importantly this time, man-caused?

How many times have we seen that rationalization on these pages? What meaning can it possibly have if the vast majority of practitioners all think the same?

Consensus is not science, especially in a field where to be a doubter probably means you don't even exist in the first place.


[Edited on 3/18/2014 by Fujirich]

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 17361
(17416 all sites)
Registered: 9/9/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 05:42 AM
If there were an exchange of nuclear weapons do you think the resulting mount of debris thrown into the atmosphere could chang the climate? Would that be man made? Now consider the amount of "greenhouse gases" we have been putting into the atmosphere for over a hundred years. Do you think there is even the possibility that this could change our climate?

 

____________________
Ask not for whom the bell tolls

 

Peach Master



Karma:
Posts: 540
(585 all sites)
Registered: 9/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 07:00 AM
How can anyone not see the agenda that was made (un report agenda 21, club off rome reports from 92) and then the "science" plugged to support the pre made conclusion. And even if you are of the opinion that global warming (or climate change I think is now the sell) isman made, do you really think its caused by joe public and not things like HARP (facility in Alaska to heat the ionosphere), spraying chemicals over our heads ( just look I the sky...claims to help with global warming. I know if feeds peoples ego but come on. Common sense people. China bragged about moving clouds to keep it from raining during the Olympics. Can man control and effect the climate? Sure large businesses and government are always playing with it. Do people day to day activities have any effect compared to these things.? No way in hell.

Recycling was a great propaganda program and very successful and profitable. You used to get paid for your recycling since it is raw materials used for production. Has coke become cheaper since we provide the materials for packaging? Of course not. More profitable? Hmmm

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8395
(8396 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 07:15 AM
There were thousands of nuclear tests in the open Pacific by us, the French, and others during the 50's and 60's. I've never heard a claim that climate changed because of that, have you?

A massive exchange of weapons could of course bring about the predictions of nuclear winter. But then again, volcanic activity has altered temperatures for periods of time over human existence, and we managed.

I'm not saying our actions don't contribute something. I'm not saying we shouldn't act in reasonable ways to protect the environment. But are our actions the principle driver? Can heroic, hugely expensive changes alter that trajectory on a global scale? I'm not ready to just accept that from a group of people who's entire livelihood and future is based on everyone saying "yes" to that proposal.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 17361
(17416 all sites)
Registered: 9/9/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 08:01 AM
I hear what you are saying Rich, and I agree that our actions are probably more on the order of contributors than causes, and that we should act in a responsible manner. I also believe that without the cooperation of the entire world and agreement on what "responsible manner" means any impacts we are making on our environment are not likely to change. The earth will continue on regardless.

 

____________________
Ask not for whom the bell tolls

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5822
(5827 all sites)
Registered: 7/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 09:03 AM
More of the same old stuff from tired worn outdated so called evidence, do we as humans contribute to our climate?
Of course we do, did the dinosaurs contribute? you bet they did they put more methane into the air than you can ever imagine..... do all the animals on this planet contribute? yep again..... why BECAUSE THE EARTH IS A LIVING BREATHING CHANGING PLANET! . by earth standards it is not even warm yet you must remember there was NO ICE on the poles at one time and the whole planet was warm, so get over it and just be glad we have a place to live.

 

____________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the
Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." -Henry Ford

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 69197
(69558 all sites)
Registered: 11/28/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 09:06 AM
quote:
I was doing a little project in my shop the other day, and a thought struck me: is it even possible to be a climate scientist and not push for the whole "sky is falling, we must take trillions out of the world's economies to fund expensive and unproductive solutions" agenda?

I mean, consider the options as a "climate scientist". There are only two. Either you feel that the planet is following it's normal processes, which have been in flux and changing since creation, and are driven mostly by massive forces like the sun, ocean currents, volcanology, etc. Or, you believe that despite the enormity of the forces impacting earth's ever-changing climate, it is now man who holds the biggest stick in that equation.

Here's the problem. If you believe the former, then you've reached a dead end. The planet is doing what it's always done, and will continue to do in it's cyclical way. This conclusion puts you out of a career, as there is zero potential jobs or funding associated with such a belief. Your degree is worthless, and unless you want to be the wacky TV weatherman, you now have nothing to do.

However, if you align with the latter scenario, the world might be your oyster. You have politicians looking to use your observations to expand their control, and you'll get a cut of that action if they succeed. International agencies are paying for research to formulate future schemes. Your opinions are sought out, and you're more popular at parties. Your theories align with a worldwide group of fellow climate thinkers, producing that warm self-satisfaction of being part of a group reinforcing their own belief system. Feels good, doesn't it? Especially considering the money and power being amassed behind that agenda.

So it begs the question: is it even possible to work in that field and not be rooting for man-made global warming? And if that's remotely the case, then what is the value of the oft-stated rationale underpinning the whole belief system: that a consensus of ___% (pick your number) believe that climate change is real, and more importantly this time, man-caused?

How many times have we seen that rationalization on these pages? What meaning can it possibly have if the vast majority of practitioners all think the same?

Consensus is not science, especially in a field where to be a doubter probably means you don't even exist in the first place.


[Edited on 3/18/2014 by Fujirich]



Great logic. Not. How many climate scientists 'push for the whole "sky is falling, we must take trillions out of the world's economies to fund expensive and unproductive solutions" agenda?' That's what the politicians are doing, but climate scientists study the facts.

97% of climate change deniers like you have a consensus that man has little or no impact - so what is your agenda? You must have one, according to your 'logic'.

The fact that you think they could only be a weatherman again explains people that don't know the difference between weather and climate.

I guess most professions have reached a dead end now, according to you..... I don't know why people even get out of bed anymore, let alone study for professions that are now moot......

Bill Maher had a great statement in his Face the Press interview -

"People never used to argue that much about science,” Maher said. “We might argue about how we take these facts and more forward in a different direction, but we don’t argue about the facts themselves. That’s not true anymore.”

“Facts themselves. Come on, Harry, how much do we really know about facts?”

 

____________________

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4772
(4786 all sites)
Registered: 12/5/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 10:55 AM
The scientific method is responsible for every advancement in science, technology and medicine that has occurred in the last 400 years. Some people just don't get it. Some people just don't care to get it. Nothing you can do to help them.
 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8395
(8396 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 04:36 PM
Seems like those who use references to the scientific method in their attempts to negatively characterize others would at least understand how it works. Apparently not.

There is a wide difference between science fact and science theory. Science fact is a result that can be reproduced and/or observed by numerous people and in numerous locations following specified guidelines. That H2O can be split into it's component elements via electrolysis is an example of a science fact.

Science theory is an idea, estimate, or prediction that has not yet been proven and/or reproduced enough times to become a science fact. Einstein's theories about gravity warping spacetime were theories for many years until observers could produce proof in the form of negatives taken during eclipses that showed light being bent around a large gravitational object. Likewise, room-temperature or cold fusion remains a theory, as some have claimed to achieve it, but insufficient numbers have been able to reproduce the claimed result.

Global warming (let's dispense with the politically motivated 'climate change' moniker for now) is science theory in it's present state, nothing more. It contains factual data, but processes that through complicated mathematical models filled with modifiers in order to calculate an estimate of future conditions. Those modification factors are estimates of what researchers guess the conditions should or might be. Slight changes in them can produce widely varying results.

30-40 years ago, scientists were predicting another ice age. This winter notwithstanding, we're still waiting. Until we get to a similar point in the future and look back, we're not going to know if the current batch of estimates is any better than the last. None of this is science fact yet by any definition used by proper scientists adhering to the scientific method. Those claiming otherwise may have other motivations worth considering.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 04:56 PM
quote:
The fact that you think they could only be a weatherman again explains people that don't know the difference between weather and climate.

Winner, winner, chicken dinner!

[Edited on 3/18/2014 by gondicar]

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46807
(46808 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 04:58 PM
quote:
30-40 years ago, scientists were predicting another ice age. This winter notwithstanding, we're still waiting.


How does a harsh winter in central North America account for what goes on all over the globe?

Using the phrase "global warming," and all...

Algore.

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3070
(3075 all sites)
Registered: 5/30/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 05:46 PM
My problem with whole debate is that anyone that holds contrarian views to global warming is then subjected to the most vicious ad hominem attacks. One of the most recent vituperative railings that I have heard was the 'Holocaust Denier' analogy. This argumentum ad hominem in the form of tu quoque is absurd and poisons all concerned. The truth has no fear of investigation!

[Edited on 3/18/2014 by ScottyVII]

 

____________________
"What we do in life echoes in eternity."




 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8395
(8396 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 05:51 PM
quote:
quote:
30-40 years ago, scientists were predicting another ice age. This winter notwithstanding, we're still waiting.
How does a harsh winter in central North America account for what goes on all over the globe?
Me suggests that the use of the word "notwithstanding" is key to understanding that I'm not claiming any connection.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46807
(46808 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/18/2014 at 08:14 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
30-40 years ago, scientists were predicting another ice age. This winter notwithstanding, we're still waiting.
How does a harsh winter in central North America account for what goes on all over the globe?
Me suggests that the use of the word "notwithstanding" is key to understanding that I'm not claiming any connection.


Bah.

Algore.

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/19/2014 at 07:00 AM
Scientists tell Americans: This climate change thing really is a big deal

One of the world’s largest and most influential science organizations is launching a new campaign to cut through the noise of climate denialism and help the public understand the threat of climate change.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science kicked things off on Monday by publishing a 20-page report entitled What We Know. The gist: We know that global warming is real, risky, and demands a serious response — “the three Rs of climate change.”

“We’re trying to provide a voice for the scientific community on this issue so that we can help the country, help the world move this issue forward,” AAAS CEO Alan Leshner said during a call with reporters on Tuesday morning. “If we don’t move now we are at tremendous risk for some very high impact consequences, many of which are laid out in the report.”

The AAAS has also assembled a panel of a 13 leading scientists who will make public presentations and try to spread climate smarts far and wide.

Link to actual report: http://whatweknow.aaas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/AAAS-What-We-Know.pdf

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/19/2014 at 07:24 AM
quote:
Wearing willful ignorance like a badge of honor, no wonder this country has fallen so far behind in science and engineering.

It is shocking how many people don't have even a rudimentary grasp on the most basic science (actually not that shocking based on some of what gets posted here).

For example, 1 in 4 Americans think the sun revolves around the earth. That's according to the annual survey report of the National Science Board says. And in Europe the percentage is even higher!

Q: Does the Earth go around the Sun, or does the Sun go around the Earth?
Correct answer: Earth around Sun

Percentage of respondents with correct answer:


More:
What Americans Don't Know About Science

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4772
(4786 all sites)
Registered: 12/5/2001
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/19/2014 at 02:29 PM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
30-40 years ago, scientists were predicting another ice age. This winter notwithstanding, we're still waiting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----

So I guess your premise is there have been no advancements in technology/computer modeling/climate science in the last 30-40 years.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/24/2014 at 07:31 PM
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
30-40 years ago, scientists were predicting another ice age. This winter notwithstanding, we're still waiting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----

So I guess your premise is there have been no advancements in technology/computer modeling/climate science in the last 30-40 years.


Nobody, not even a team of the best scientists on the planet can predict the future yet that's what they're trying to sell. Predicting the future is just as difficult today as it was 30-40 years ago, and will still be impossible 30-40 years from now.

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/24/2014 at 10:09 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
30-40 years ago, scientists were predicting another ice age. This winter notwithstanding, we're still waiting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----

So I guess your premise is there have been no advancements in technology/computer modeling/climate science in the last 30-40 years.


Nobody, not even a team of the best scientists on the planet can predict the future yet that's what they're trying to sell. Predicting the future is just as difficult today as it was 30-40 years ago, and will still be impossible 30-40 years from now.


What Americans Don't Know About Science

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 10:31 AM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
30-40 years ago, scientists were predicting another ice age. This winter notwithstanding, we're still waiting.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----

So I guess your premise is there have been no advancements in technology/computer modeling/climate science in the last 30-40 years.


Nobody, not even a team of the best scientists on the planet can predict the future yet that's what they're trying to sell. Predicting the future is just as difficult today as it was 30-40 years ago, and will still be impossible 30-40 years from now.


What Americans Don't Know About Science


Not one question about the ability of science to predict the future.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 17361
(17416 all sites)
Registered: 9/9/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 10:55 AM
quote:
Not one question about the ability of science to predict the future.

But science does predict the future, starting with knowledge about the movement of the stars across the sky to predict when the seasons would change and the best times to plant, harvest, etc. That's what science is all about; making predictions about what will happen based on observations, experiments, collecting and analyzing of data, and applying that information to the world around us. Science tells us Halle's Comet will come around every 76 years, and from what direction and what angle. It tells us the planets revolve around the sun, gravity bends light, on and on. The earth is getting warmer, there is no question about that. Whether this is being influenced by human actions is the question. To reject the possibility of this being true seems shortsighted to me, especially in light of what science has predicted will happen.

 

____________________
Ask not for whom the bell tolls

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16027
(16019 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 11:01 AM
Why have they missed on so many predictions?

Science cannot predict the future, not accurately.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 17361
(17416 all sites)
Registered: 9/9/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 11:05 AM
quote:
Why have they missed on so many predictions?

Science cannot predict the future, not accurately.

Yes it can, but not 100% of the time. Science has obviously predicted a huge assortment of things accurately, from the behavior of atoms to the effects of gravity of celestial objects. To not acknowledge this hurts the credibility of any argument you might make.

 

____________________
Ask not for whom the bell tolls

 

True Peach



Karma:
Posts: 12503
(12493 all sites)
Registered: 4/4/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 3/25/2014 at 11:11 AM
quote:
quote:
Why have they missed on so many predictions?

Science cannot predict the future, not accurately.

Yes it can, but not 100% of the time. Science has obviously predicted a huge assortment of things accurately, from the behavior of atoms to the effects of gravity of celestial objects. To not acknowledge this hurts the credibility of any argument you might make.

+1


pre·dic·tion /pri?dikSH?n/
noun: prediction; plural noun: predictions
1. a thing predicted; a forecast.

From Wiki:
quote:
A prediction (Latin præ-, "before," and dicere, "to say") or forecast is a statement about the way things will happen in the future, often but not always based on experience or knowledge. While there is much overlap between prediction and forecast, a prediction may be a statement that some outcome is expected, while a forecast is more specific, and may cover a range of possible outcomes.

Although guaranteed information about the future is in many cases impossible, prediction is necessary to allow plans to be made about possible developments; Howard H. Stevenson writes that prediction in business "... is at least two things: Important and hard."


Science can do a very good job of predicting certain things about the future. But science also typically assigns some probability variable to predictions because predictions, by definition, are not absolute.



[Edited on 3/25/2014 by gondicar]

 

____________________
I pledge and support the elimination of the derogatory use of the r-word from everyday speech and promote the acceptance and inclusion of people with intellectual disabilities. http://www.r-word.org/

 
<<  1    2    3  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com