BTW, Demonstrable AGW = 0. Again.

seedload · Post by **seedload** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 3:20 pm

GIThruster wrote:The fact that there is any warming at all when the sun has been in a cooling trend for 7-8 years is troubling. What do we suppose will happen when the sun goes back into a warming trend in 3-4 years?

Not sure what this means. Even AGW proponents don't claim that warming has been relatively flat recently because the sun is in a cooling trend.

seedload · Post by **seedload** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 3:35 pm

randomencounter wrote:
palladin9479 wrote:
The first indication I had that AGW was a scam was when the proponents didn't follow their own advice while asking everyone else to give them money.
This is about Al Gore actually flying in jets to go to speaking engagements, isn't it?

The confusion of thought necessary to ignore blatant facts just because somebody in the political opposition is taking advantage of them is incomprehensible to me.

Agreed, the idea that Al Gore's personal behavior has anything to do with the actual science of AGW is preposterous.

But saying that Al Gore is "taking advantage" of "blatant facts" is equally wrong. Al Gore is using extremist speculation and outright lies

Out of curiosity, what are the blatant facts?

ScottL · Post by **ScottL** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 4:51 pm

palladin9479 wrote:Absolutely nothing, nor should you attempt. Droughts happen, hurricanes happen, all sorts of sh!t happens.

I for one have no intention of myself or future generations of my offspring being part of the scrambling masses if either mechanism occurs. If anything, I'd be instructing to be ready to kill to survive.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 6:27 pm

Skipjack wrote:
My first clue that Man made global warming was utter Bullsh*t was the fact that it was being pushed by Liberals.
Now that is scientific!

More scientific than their arguments in favor of man-made global warming.

Anyone remember this bit of propaganda that backfired on them?

http://youtu.be/JfnddMpzPsM

Yup, it revealed exactly what they are. Funny that they didn't regard the blatant murder of dissidents as an objectionable thing.

seedload · Post by **seedload** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 6:32 pm

ScottL wrote:
palladin9479 wrote:Absolutely nothing, nor should you attempt. Droughts happen, hurricanes happen, all sorts of sh!t happens.
I for one have no intention of myself or future generations of my offspring being part of the scrambling masses if either mechanism occurs. If anything, I'd be instructing to be ready to kill to survive.

What "cascading drought" are you planning to turn your children into Mad Max over? Did I miss some big news? When did some droughts become "cascading"?

seedload · Post by **seedload** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 6:39 pm

Diogenes wrote:
Skipjack wrote:
My first clue that Man made global warming was utter Bullsh*t was the fact that it was being pushed by Liberals.
Now that is scientific!

More scientific than their arguments in favor of man-made global warming.

Anyone remember this bit of propaganda that backfired on them?

http://youtu.be/JfnddMpzPsM

Yup, it revealed exactly what they are. Funny that they didn't regard the blatant murder of dissidents as an objectionable thing.

Yeah, and then "they" likened the opposition to the Unibomber. Those bastards.

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/ ... -skeptics/

Oh, wait. I lost track of who "they" is?

ScottL · Post by **ScottL** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 7:02 pm

seedload wrote:
ScottL wrote:
palladin9479 wrote:Absolutely nothing, nor should you attempt. Droughts happen, hurricanes happen, all sorts of sh!t happens.
I for one have no intention of myself or future generations of my offspring being part of the scrambling masses if either mechanism occurs. If anything, I'd be instructing to be ready to kill to survive.
What "cascading drought" are you planning to turn your children into Mad Max over? Did I miss some big news? When did some droughts become "cascading"?

According to the data I'm reading, California officially came out of it's drought in 2010/11 only to enter into the current drought that stretches across the mid-west. Water for one area is now moved to another area...etc.

hanelyp · Post by **hanelyp** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 7:03 pm

Diogenes wrote:http://youtu.be/JfnddMpzPsM

Yup, it revealed exactly what they are. Funny that they didn't regard the blatant murder of dissidents as an objectionable thing.

Not just that, they didn't realize how many would find it objectionable until the backlash after they made and released the video. Seriously out of touch, that bunch of wackos.

They are in favor of any explanation which requires them to take charge of the world. That's all anyone needs to know about claims from that corner of the political spectrum.

Yup. In contrast, some of us hold the position that those calling for intrusive government action should hold the burden of proof. More so when the action called for is easily demonstrated as doing great harm itself.

<Cue MSimon drug rant.>

The warmists have not just failed to prove their case, they have attacked the skeptics like they have something to hide.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 9:04 pm

seedload wrote:
Diogenes wrote:
Skipjack wrote: Now that is scientific!

More scientific than their arguments in favor of man-made global warming.

Anyone remember this bit of propaganda that backfired on them?

http://youtu.be/JfnddMpzPsM

Yup, it revealed exactly what they are. Funny that they didn't regard the blatant murder of dissidents as an objectionable thing.
Yeah, and then "they" likened the opposition to the Unibomber. Those bastards.

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/ ... -skeptics/

Oh, wait. I lost track of who "they" is?

It has been my experience that one leftist loon is much like another. They are all sanity challenged in my opinion, else they wouldn't be leftists. Those capable of rational thinking give up leftism after a few years. Milton Friedman, Roger Simon, and Charlton Heston come to mind.

While you may see no distinction between advocating the murders of many people with whom you disagree and the comparing of the class of green loons with a specific green loon, most people would hardly regard them as being similar.

On a separate but related point, I don't suppose you know what is a tu quoque argument ?

ScottL · Post by **ScottL** » Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:29 am

Diogenes wrote:
Then I saw the spectra-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and I realized, "Yup. Liberals are idiots. They are wrong about this too."

Look up the Spectral-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and tell me why we aren't an 800 degree inferno, like Venus.

Looking at anything beyond water vapor is a waste of time.

I agree, we have to look at the water vapor. The levels of water vapor being injected into the stratosphere due to irregularly strong thunderstorms over the past few years actually converts stable chlorine and bromine into free radicals capable of transforming ozone molecules into oxygen.

Diogenes · Post by **Diogenes** » Thu Aug 02, 2012 12:53 am

ScottL wrote:
Diogenes wrote:
Then I saw the spectra-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and I realized, "Yup. Liberals are idiots. They are wrong about this too."

Look up the Spectral-graphic absorption characteristics of Water Vapor and tell me why we aren't an 800 degree inferno, like Venus.

Looking at anything beyond water vapor is a waste of time.
I agree, we have to look at the water vapor. The levels of water vapor being injected into the stratosphere due to irregularly strong thunderstorms over the past few years actually converts stable chlorine and bromine into free radicals capable of transforming ozone molecules into oxygen.

If this is indeed an effect, it is a side effect related to water's role in stabilizing the planets temperature. I regard an argument about Ozone depletion to be a very different argument from that of man caused global warming.

You may have a point, but it seems to me that it is mostly not germane to the focus of the topic.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Thu Aug 02, 2012 1:03 am

Yeah, so 99.99% of climate scientists of the world are completely wrong, but a few untrained republicans have all the answers.
Hmm...

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Thu Aug 02, 2012 1:08 am

People fall off the fence both ways. If you look at the data, you can't make an intelligent decision because the data is all hokus pokus. We don't have adequate climate models to tell if the doom saying is correct or not. That hasn't stopped the emotionally disturbed adolescents from declaring the end of the world is at hand and it's their parent's fault, nor stopped life's degenerate tricksters from trying to bank a billion by investing in green tech and then pushing the political machine to support his investments.

If the planet is getting warmer while the sun is getting colder, there are reasons to consider the carbon claims. The problem is, that politics and psychology have become so involved that there's almost no room left for real science.

I'd say that's a real problem all on its own.

GIThruster · Post by **GIThruster** » Thu Aug 02, 2012 1:10 am

Skippy, there is no such thing as a "climate scientist". There is not, nor has ever been a single climate model that has worked even at 1% veracity. How could there possibly be such a thing as a "climate scientist"?

The 99.99% you're talking about are all PRETENDERS and you are gullible enough to believe them.

Skipjack · Post by **Skipjack** » Thu Aug 02, 2012 1:15 am

Look, I am not on the side of the doom sayers either, but it is pretty clear that it has been getting warmer and that pretty quickly. It is hard to deny that looking at the way the glaciers and the ice shelfs at the poles have been declining. I am not 100% sure that it is manmade, but it certainly is not a good thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatology
Now, I might be wrong but that sounds like "climate scientist" to me.