Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

happyjack27
Posts: 1439
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by happyjack27 »

If any one hasn't caught on yet, my responses fit a very predictable pattern:

* they have already taken x into account, here's x:...

* you are welcome to provide empirical evidence to support your claim.

Let these two patterns be recognized and help guide discussion towards a more productive end.

Diogenes
Posts: 6967
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by Diogenes »

happyjack27 wrote:
Diogenes wrote:
happyjack27 wrote: pbeter, scientists account for all of these things.


No they don't, and can you not think for yourself? You need to look up the fallacies of "Argumentum Ad Verecundiam", and "Argumentum ad Populum". You are falling victim to both of these means of misleading people.
Actually I'm just saying scientists already take therse things into account. You can look at the research yourself, it's publicly available.

Your statement "no they don't" is easily disproven by all the publicly available data and research in which they do.

(Speaking of falsifiability!)

I have no doubt that they proclaim to the highest rooftops that they accurately model water vapor. But without Water's negative feedback ability, the planet would be a hot house inferno, but with it, the influence of C02 is negligible.


The fact still remains that water vapor is far more prevalent, far better at absorbing and releasing energy, and far more dominant at affecting planetary temperature than is C02.


It's negative and positive feedback loops balance at an equilibrium temperature, and *THAT* is mostly what controls the planet's thermostat. The system is self regulating within a range. It is a controlled feedback system. Whatever forcing C02 can manage will be overwhelmed by the negative portion of the feedback loop known as Water.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

happyjack27
Posts: 1439
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by happyjack27 »

Diogenes wrote:
happyjack27 wrote:
Diogenes wrote:


No they don't, and can you not think for yourself? You need to look up the fallacies of "Argumentum Ad Verecundiam", and "Argumentum ad Populum". You are falling victim to both of these means of misleading people.
Actually I'm just saying scientists already take therse things into account. You can look at the research yourself, it's publicly available.

Your statement "no they don't" is easily disproven by all the publicly available data and research in which they do.

(Speaking of falsifiability!)

I have no doubt that they proclaim to the highest rooftops that they accurately model water vapor. But without Water's negative feedback ability, the planet would be a hot house inferno, but with it, the influence of C02 is negligible.


The fact still remains that water vapor is far more prevalent, far better at absorbing and releasing energy, and far more dominant at affecting planetary temperature than is C02.


It's negative and positive feedback loops balance at an equilibrium temperature, and *THAT* is mostly what controls the planet's thermostat. The system is self regulating within a range. It is a controlled feedback system. Whatever forcing C02 can manage will be overwhelmed by the negative portion of the feedback loop known as Water.

Again, you are welcome to submit your own research to a reputable peer reviewed journal.

Bear in mind that you need to publish your method and data to the extent that other people can verify your results.

Also, among other things you'll have to explain, is how Venus's atmosphere got destroyed by a runaway greenhouse effect.

Or didn't, according to your logic.

happyjack27
Posts: 1439
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by happyjack27 »

Diogenes wrote:
happyjack27 wrote:right... i don't think that climatologists failed to take into account the physics of water in their climate models! :lol:

I don't think they failed, I think they deliberately ignored it so they could make their models demonstrate warming.

You missed my point entirely: the first thing about climate is water - precipitation, condensation, clouds, "the rain cycle"...

If there was anything a climatologist would NOT miss, it would be water!

If you're going to figure anything out there, you probably got that one!

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Carl White
Posts: 476
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by Carl White »

happyjack27 wrote: Also, among other things you'll have to explain, is how Venus's atmosphere got destroyed by a runaway greenhouse effect.
To which the obvious reply would be that Venus receives twice as much sunlight as does the Earth, which could mean the system was pushed beyond the point at which negative feedback could regulate the temperature. Also, we don't know whether Venus ever had life which could absorb carbon from the atmosphere, so not only did it receive more sunlight, but CO2 was less possibly restrained from building up as well. A lot of CO2 was absorbed by plants on the Earth and then buried (thus oil); this must have had an effect.

Not that I'm taking any position on the idea, but it's interesting. I wonder whether the acidification of Earth's oceans is self-correcting in the long run, in that the HCO3 might tend to combine with minerals more quickly the more acidic conditions are.

happyjack27
Posts: 1439
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:27 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by happyjack27 »

Carl White wrote:
happyjack27 wrote: Also, among other things you'll have to explain, is how Venus's atmosphere got destroyed by a runaway greenhouse effect.
To which the obvious reply would be that Venus receives twice as much sunlight as does the Earth, which could mean the system was pushed beyond the point at which negative feedback could regulate the temperature. Also, we don't know whether Venus ever had life which could absorb carbon from the atmosphere, so not only did it receive more sunlight, but CO2 was less possibly restrained from building up as well. A lot of CO2 was absorbed by plants on the Earth and then buried (thus oil); this must have had an effect.

Not that I'm taking any position on the idea, but it's interesting. I wonder whether the acidification of Earth's oceans is self-correcting in the long run, in that the HCO3 might tend to combine with minerals more quickly the more acidic conditions are.

This explanation wouldn't pass peer review.

These considerations about CO2 on Venus are all well researched and you'd has to have a much more detailed and specific response on these matters, citing other sources. Any speculation would get your paper rejected.

This is all assuming that the earlier considerations (publishing your data and methods) are passed. If they aren't, well, it wouldn't even get that far.

As had been mentioned before, science is cutthroat. If you don't have all your bases covered, don't expect to be taken seriously.

Maui
Posts: 586
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:10 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by Maui »

hanelyp wrote:I'll be explicit in stating I believe there's a global conspiracy to hoist "climate change" bunk on us. And while the motive isn't the same for all conspirators, it's not hard to find. For some it is a means to expand government power or destroy the free market. This is not mere conspiracy theory, but conspiracy fact, supported by seldom mentioned comments by the conspirators. See Club of Rome et all. For the "scientists" the motive is government funding, a crisis demanding action being a far more powerful means of extracting money than the reverse.
How the frick have they succeeded in brainwashing people with this shit? Is this real? What the actual frick. I'm out.

P.S. RERT, this is what I'm talking about. You can accuse me of not wanting to "discuss" the issue, but I'm sorry-- I simply find it impossible to have a rational discussion with someone who believes the most obvious path to commies taking over the world is by organizing a massive world-wide conspiracy in which a vast majority of scientists across the world the world are subverted and forced to make up data that forces governments to implement carbon caps. It's like trying to argue with someone about what they dreamt about. How is that possibly worthwhile? I wish you luck on finding a more sane climate change debate to partake in. Peace.

NotAPhysicist
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2015 9:51 am

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by NotAPhysicist »

Well quite. I don't know how to reasonably respond to the suggestion that thousands of scientists, journalists, funding agencies and so on are somehow participating in a massive international conspiracy to make up climate change for some sort of multi-faceted nebulous benefit for themselves. Heck if we could get that sort of cooperation it'd be amazing and we should really harness that for other purposes.

Scientists are people, they certainly have room for error, bias and even corruption but the suggestion that pretty much the entire enterprise of (at least) climate science is staffed pretty well entirely by people trying to hoodwink everyone else is frankly ridiculous. In the end reality is the final arbiter and reality seems to be telling us to get it together or we are in for a rough ride. Maybe we're not, heck, fingers crossed because the amount of difficulty in getting people to do something or even believe we should do something seems pretty well insurmountable.

In the end this seems more ideological than anything else, not anti-science (though certainly anti-scientist), but anti the proffered solutions and if you don't like the solutions well, goodness, perhaps the problem doesn't exist in the first place. You simply can't argue against that. In fact my understanding is that even trying probably makes the problem worse, people dig in. Still, we should probably try, the alternative doesn't seem a great idea either..

RERT
Posts: 271
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2014 9:10 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by RERT »

Maui - dammit, I just lost 90 minutes worth of typing a response! I'm sorry but I don't have time to repeat it (might be a good thing)!

So, short this time: rise above it. State your position and disengage if the discussion is impossible. Avoid insults and attacks.

There is no global conspiracy, but the well funded establishment is supported by very well organised people working in what they see as a noble cause. People's livelihoods are threatened for holding the wrong views. Wikipedia is a green publication. Look at the climategate emails to see what they think of the peer review process. It may not be a conspiracy, but it is a steamroller that tries to crush dissent, as here when I was insulted and told there was no debate.

(Edit: I meant to add that if you think the world us going to end, this might be considered a sensible response.)

Nobody has addressed, much less refuted, my original reasons for being more sanguine about timescales. There is plenty of scope for a range of views. Just lets discuss policy without trading insults, and we can get there.

Now I really do have to wrap presents. Merry Christmas!

TDPerk
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Northern Shen. Valley, VA
Contact:

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by TDPerk »

happyjack27 wrote: That was a very strongly opposed statement. Do you have any evidence to support it?

I invite you to gather evidence in support of your claim and submit it to a reputable peer reviewed journal.
Yes. The satellites which broadcast the temperature of the atmosphere planet wide, providing a genuine average temperature which the AGW fraudsters cannot suppress, prior to their adjusting the data to agree with their theory. It is the decline they need to hide.

http://www.climatedepot.com/2016/01/12/ ... -8-months/

And then after the Warmist Fraudsters get a hold of the data.

http://phys.org/news/2016-03-revamped-s ... lobal.html

For an example already given,

http://realclimatescience.com/2016/05/n ... e-a-farce/

Fraudulent adjustments to the satellite record are based on bullshit adjustments to the ground station record.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria

TDPerk
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Northern Shen. Valley, VA
Contact:

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by TDPerk »

happyjack27 wrote:If any one hasn't caught on yet, my responses fit a very predictable pattern:

* they have already taken x into account, here's x:...
But you don't provide evidence x was taken into account, and as with the NOAA UHI related link I've provided, they haven't taken it into account.
happyjack27 wrote: you are welcome to provide empirical evidence to support your claim.

Let these two patterns be recognized and help guide discussion towards a more productive end.
That empirical evidence is found in many places, among others in the NOAA UHI related link I reference.

You are making the extraordinary claim, you prove it.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria

TDPerk
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Northern Shen. Valley, VA
Contact:

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by TDPerk »

happyjack27 wrote:would be simple enough to just take a plane to antartic, drill an ice core, and look at it yourself, and see that the ice layers don't correspond to the official record.
It is already an established fact the fossil record does not have the resolution to resolve such climatic effects over only a few decades time, and that over the period of several centuries it can resolve, that it solely supports the concept that rising CO2 is a lagging indicator of a warming climate.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria

TDPerk
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Northern Shen. Valley, VA
Contact:

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by TDPerk »

happyjack27 wrote:Again, you are welcome to submit your own research to a reputable peer reviewed journal.

Bear in mind that you need to publish your method and data to the extent that other people can verify your results.
It's already been done. The warmists ignore it.

It's the warmists who seem unable to produce data and method simultaneously.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria

TDPerk
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Northern Shen. Valley, VA
Contact:

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by TDPerk »

RERT wrote: Avoid insults and attacks.
Why? The AGW fraudsters are at best complicit in, and at worst avidly support, a baseless scientific concept already disproven by measurement--where if the implications of the concept were adopted in law, that would bring about the prompt deaths of hundreds of millions of people by creating a rate of global energy availability which can do no other.
RERT wrote:There is no global conspiracy
On the part of some of them, located worldwide, it is just that. A covert effort made by a cabal of like minded people to suppress dissent in the scientific community with their pet theory.

This is seen in the ClimateGate emails you reference where they boast to themselves of their success in removing journal editors who so much as permit the publication of papers questioning AGW theory.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria

TDPerk
Posts: 976
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Northern Shen. Valley, VA
Contact:

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by TDPerk »

NotAPhysicist wrote:the suggestion that pretty much the entire enterprise of (at least) climate science is staffed pretty well entirely by people trying to hoodwink everyone else is frankly ridiculous
Yet it is supported by the actual evidence.
molon labe
montani semper liberi
para fides paternae patria

Post Reply