Ice Age - A few of you would be interested in this

[MSimon]

MSimon, how about acid rain? That's not something to worry about?

Nope. Been debunked. The SO2 is now scrubbed out and forests are still dying from acid rain. Man may have contributed some but most is natural.

The ozone hole? That is starting to look natural too. When it was first found there was no baseline. So viola - it is all the fault of CFCs. CFC have declined and the holes are getting bigger.

My friend the witch doctor told me what to do.

We have a scare monger industry that works really well. All they have to say is "scientific" and the masses fall in line. Despite the fact that we mostly have no idea WTF is going on.

You know the drill - we make automobiles, airplanes, and nuclear reactors so we must pretty much understand everything. And it is all very complicated and we have equations and computers and we will tell you what to do. Cargo Cult Science.

We can't even predict the past climate with the models because they are very sensitive to initial conditions and we have no idea WTF they were. In fact we cant even measure current conditions close enough to predict the future. And big parts of the models are parameterized because we don't have enough computing power. So if the parameters are perfect we get an estimate and if one or more of the parameters is significantly off (say water vapor feed back which the modelers admit they are not even sure of the friggin sign) then it is all garbage.

So we make a multi hundred trillion dollar bet and the sun's output declines and we find ourselves politically locked in to doing the wrong thing i.e. making things worse. It is to cry.

But we have consensus. Except for a few Jeremiahs friggin complaining about SCIENCE which gives answers to the hardest problems.

It is to laugh.

We can't even compute plasmas in limited environments and climate is way harder.

[MSimon]

Why am I into BFRs then? Cheap energy. It looks like a good bet. The risk reward ratio looks pretty good.

Energy is the life blood of civilization.

[jmc]

Forests last decades, whose to says the acid rain that fell many years ago isn't still in the soil?

Again the CFCs remain in the atmosphere for decades aswell, its perfectly possible that they are still causing the hole to widen.

I know these are just speculations and I can't prove them to be true.

But I disagree on where the burden of proof lies. When your thinking about tampering with something that works just fine, the burden of proof lies with the tamperer. If I want to cut your foot off because I believe you'd be better off without it, the burden of proof lies with me. If I want to open up your computer and solder some random new connections onto some of the components on you circuit board the burden of proof lies with me.

And if some decides they want to release a new chemical that could wipe out vast numbers of species on the planet or release a gas that could cause massive climate damage and catastrophe, the burden of proof lies with them.

[MSimon]

jmc,

Well yeah. Burden of proof.

So we eliminate the most efficient refrigerants and then you either get more CO2 or less refrigeration space for the $. Food losses go up a little and have you actually gained on the overall "problem".

And yeah. There is always some "reason" why the models don't match reality. CFC inventory in the atmosphere (it is declining) "could" explain it.

Or in the case of CO2? Well we forgot the PDO. We'll just add it in and that will explain the difference. And BTW solar output is absolutely constant. Absolutley. Pay no attention to thise solar scientists over there. Or that nut with his cosmic ray/cloud theory. That is all unproven. And please ignore the fact that we have no clue about water vapor feed back. We are scientists and our predictions can absolutely be trusted. Why we can even predict the weather six hours in advance before we have to correct our models.

And when our climate model is in error why we will come up with an epicycle to prove we already knew what we are doing. And what we are doing is proving that what ever happens we can adjust our models to conform to what happened. Pay no attention to the fact that none of our predictions has come true. So far. But you see our computers are better. Our models are better so trust us that we know your future.

"give me four adjustable parameters, and I can fit an elephant, give me five, and I can fit the tail".

\ left out the word in bold.

[MSimon]

Forests last decades, whose to says the acid rain that fell many years ago isn't still in the soil?

The acid rain is still falling.

[MSimon]

BTW if you are going to go the burden of proof route we might as well kill off BFRs. I mean some bacteria floating in the air could get mutated and kill off all the fruit flies. Or destroy the human race.

What we need to do is preemptively kill off 99% of the humans on the planet to be sure nothing bad happens. I have some old designs for mass crematoria that need just a little updating. Any of you guys have any expertise in furnace design?

[Mike Holmes]

I guess that would be the definition of an incendiary comment. Guffaw...

Uh, you really like to argue, don't you? I mean I don't think you really disagree with me. You just like to find some angle of the discussion with which you disagree so you can keep on arguing. You might consider actually addressing the point of somebody's post, rather than trying to take brundage with examples that are, well, examples.

But I get it, anybody who disagrees with you, or even agrees with you in a way you don't like, is a raving lunatic liberal who needs to be put in their place.

Oh... wait... have I attacked a straw man? Perhaps I was provoked. I thought you might have learned something from the thread with Skipjack and drugs. Wherin you also attacked my arguments when I was on your side.

I guess I'll think twice about trying to reasonably support your cases when I agree with you. You obviously are too intelligent a person to require any help. Sorry for the hyperbole.

Mike

[seedload]

I find it so interesting how our climate is so similar to our economy.

I find it so compelling how our reactions to climate cycles are so similar to our reactions to economic cycles.

If the economy shows a sign of weakness, some people panic, assume we did something wrong to make it happen, and attempt to fix it. The fix is usually more destructive than letting the economy figure itself out.

If our climate experiences some perceived negative change, some people panic, assume we did something wrong to make it happen, and want to fix it. The fix is usually more destructive than letting it fun its course.

I think our reactions, whether let-it-be or the-sky-is-falling, has something more to do with ourselves than it has to do with anything else. We are either logical or emotional beings, left sided or right sided.

Those of us who are left sided, logical people know that cycles happen and we can usually come to grips with the fact that there is probably not a problem that we can fix. If there is anything we can do, it should be done cautiously.

Those of us who are right sided should probably just finger paint.

[djolds1]

BTW you can just consider man to be a large series of volcanic eruptions.

Blaming ourselves is... perversely... comforting.

If something is our fault, we can fix it. Contra, if something is a massive natural process that we can barely influence, we are then but captives of fate and our destiny is not ours to chart.

Duane

[Mike Holmes]

Seedload. That's an amazingly right-brained speculation. As somebody who is almost retardedly left-brained, I can assure you.

The notion that everyone you disagree with must be irrational is as irrational as the assumption that we can fix everything.

The discussions here used to be science-based. The dialog has gone rapidly south. Can we get past the "I suspect you have a bias, so that must be why you're wrong" level of debate?

Mike

[MSimon]

I was a debater in high school. It is in my blood. Pity I chose engineering over lawyering eh?

[MSimon]

Mike,

I said that only half in jest. Some enviros are actually proposing getting rid of 80% of the human race so the rest can live "sustainable" lifestyles. The Pol Pot solution.

[KitemanSA]

Forests last decades, whose to says the acid rain that fell many years ago isn't still in the soil?

Climax evergreen forests render the soil highly acidic. Such acidic soil exists whether there is a source of "acid rain" or not. For the north eastern US, the pattern was:

• 1800s........................Chop down the evergreen forests (forestry you know)
  late1800-mid1900.....plant crops and orchards, seed lakes with non-native fishes (great fishing you know)
  mid1900....................Replant evergreen forests. (Need the wood products you know)
  bit later ....................Fishes die!
  bit later ....................Scream "ACID RAIN"

I do agree with the desire to stop using high sulfer coal, but then I would vastly prefer to use no coal at all. Lets Polywell!

[KitemanSA]

So we eliminate the most efficient refrigerants and then you either get more CO2 or less refrigeration space for the $. Food losses go up a little and have you actually gained on the overall "problem".

You know, I find it interesting that hemp became illegal in the 30s just about the time DuPont patented the process to extract fiber from wood pulp, and the CFC/Ozone scare happened at just the time DuPont's patents on Freon were running out. And who owns the patents on most of the replacement refrigerants? Take a wild guess.

[MSimon]

So we eliminate the most efficient refrigerants and then you either get more CO2 or less refrigeration space for the $. Food losses go up a little and have you actually gained on the overall "problem".

You know, I find it interesting that hemp became illegal in the 30s just about the time DuPont patented the process to extract fiber from wood pulp, and the CFC/Ozone scare happened at just the time DuPont's patents on Freon were running out. And who owns the patents on most of the replacement refrigerants? Take a wild guess.

I'm familiar with the hemp story. Thanks for reminding me about CFC patents. I'd forgotten that one.