Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationist = Anti-Environmentalist?
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 29 of 111 (426191)
10-05-2007 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Kitsune
10-05-2007 3:53 PM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
Instead of forcing ourselves into a position where we have to pick and choose which parts of science it's "safe" to ignore and which we ignore at our peril, why don't we just recognize that belief in poltergeists and denial of global warming stem from precisely the same mental habits, and that those habits are - potentially dangerously - inconsistent with a rigorous, accurate investigation into the natural world?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Kitsune, posted 10-05-2007 3:53 PM Kitsune has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 39 of 111 (426239)
10-05-2007 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Hyroglyphx
10-05-2007 5:59 PM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
Yes, meteorologists and climatologists who actively work in that field were predicting this new ice age.
A few were, yes, for some pretty good reasons - atmospheric particulates had skyrocketed, and we know they reflect sunlight back into space, cooling the Earth.
Nobody at the time knew precisely how much reflection, and nobody knew how intense the "greenhouse effect" was, and so a few people in the media predicted an ice age, a few people in Hollywood predicted global warming (see "Soylent Green"), all from a couple of papers that essentially said "it could get warmer, it could get colder, we don't know for sure because we haven't developed any good models yet."
Now, some 30 years later, we have more than 10 models that are consistent with more than 1600 years of inferred climate data as well as with each other, and every single one has successfully predicted the warming trend that we're in the middle of.
The reality of the history of global warming is nothing like you describe. There was maybe one article in Newsweek that "predicted an ice age." There was no consensus on the issue, then.
There is one, now, based on reams and reams of data and computation.
When people say there is no global warming, I suspect they mean that the earth isn't heating up because of anything humans have done.
Sure. It's all just coincidence that the Earth is warming at the exact same time that human CO2 production exceeds multiple Mt. Pinatubo eruptions every single year, and at the exact same time that the sun is in a decade-long period of cooling.
Yes, and my point is that the Left is willingly to blindly follow theirs.
That's actually not true. Bob Altemeyer has done extensive work on the right-wing authoritarian personality, and his work abundantly proves that America's right wing is typified by followers who prize obedience and strength, collectivism and national identity, and authoritarian aggression over individualism and individual conscience (which are more associated with the left.)
It's not to say that you couldn't find someone who was a "left-wing authoritarian" in the United States, but it's instructive to note that while Altemeyer based his research on interviews with hundreds of persons, many of whom were identified as right-wing authoritarians, a single example of a left-wing authoritarian has never, to my knowledge, been found.
The government sides with Israel because its a flourishing Democracy, proven to be an ally.
I was just thinking about this today. Theoretically America's relationship with Israel is so relentlessly pro-Israel so that we can have a democratic ally in the Middle East.
What, exactly, do we stand to gain by that? We're already staging our operations out of Germany, not Israel. Israel supplied absolutely zero troops in any function as part of our actions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
So it's not entirely clear what we gain by our support of Israel, particularly now that Iraq is practically the 51st state (containing the largest US embassy ever built). The idea that our support comes purely from the converging interests of the American Jewish Israel lobby and American Christians is not at all far-fetched, as far as I can see. There's certainly no secular justification.
I believe the majority of it is part of a natural cycle.
What cycle?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-05-2007 5:59 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by petrophysics1, posted 10-05-2007 6:39 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 47 by petrophysics1, posted 10-05-2007 8:16 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 61 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-05-2007 10:59 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 49 of 111 (426264)
10-05-2007 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by petrophysics1
10-05-2007 8:16 PM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
How about Joe Stalin, or Mao, or Pol Pot
Not left-wingers according to the American system, nor are they authoritarian followers, but rather leaders, obviously. Also, they've never sat down for Altemeyer's test, now have they?
Were you paying attention to context? Or did you think you'd just pop in your ignorant rant without checking to see what we were talking about?
Now, thank God, you're an atheist who goes around telling everyone about how enlightened you are now and have everything figured out.
I have no idea what you're talking about, and neither do you. Did you read Altemeyer's research?
Or does this personal rant simply flow from a deep vein of ignorance?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by petrophysics1, posted 10-05-2007 8:16 PM petrophysics1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by petrophysics1, posted 10-05-2007 9:13 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 50 of 111 (426265)
10-05-2007 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by petrophysics1
10-05-2007 6:39 PM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
Crashfrog, I need an exact reference which verifies each part of this statement.
How about you look up Mt. Pinatubo's 1991 eruption, and then compare that with the total yearly contribution of CO2 by human activity and see which is bigger. Now, I'm no math expert, but I'm pretty sure that 24 billion is greater than 20 million.
Solar output data can be found at nearly any solar observatory.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by petrophysics1, posted 10-05-2007 6:39 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 54 of 111 (426272)
10-05-2007 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by petrophysics1
10-05-2007 9:13 PM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
You just traded one belief system for another.
I traded faith for evidence.
A trade-up, in my opinion. I'm sorry you don't see it that way.
Did you have a point, aside from spewing personal attacks? (We had a whole thread for that, it just closed this week. You should really have blown your load there instead of here.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by petrophysics1, posted 10-05-2007 9:13 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 56 of 111 (426275)
10-05-2007 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Hyroglyphx
10-05-2007 9:21 PM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
Cripes, Al Gore spends more on fuel in his lier jet, traveling to seminars so he can chastise us! Hey, how about leading us by example buddy?
Actually, that's exactly what he did, by being one of the first to offset his carbon emissions from travel with purchased offset credits, and paying a premium price for his home-office to be powered by strictly carbon-neutral electricity.
I guess in your mind, Al Gore is supposed to advocate for the issue without traveling anywhere, except perhaps by astral projection.
My biggest issue is that the biggest loudmouth's about how to conserve energy do no such thing.
So, you're saying that it's totally fine to waste gas, oil, and power with inefficient vehicles and homes just as long as you're also working as hard as you can to deny the reality of global warming, and opposing any effort by the government to reign in energy use?
I really don't understand how it works in conservative-land anymore.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-05-2007 9:21 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 59 of 111 (426284)
10-05-2007 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by petrophysics1
10-05-2007 9:43 PM


Re: Where's the beef
I am still waiting for someone to supply me with a scientific study showing YECs have no environmental concerns/want to trash the earth.
Did you follow any of the links I've posted? The one that outlines Altemeyer's research is at least partially probative in this regard.
We can, and have, supplied you with all the research you could want. If you refuse to go an take a look at it, there's no power we possess to cram it down your throat. If you're not willing to be educated, then you will remain ignorant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by petrophysics1, posted 10-05-2007 9:43 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 62 of 111 (426299)
10-05-2007 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Hyroglyphx
10-05-2007 10:59 PM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
Crash, this whole debate has been going on a lot longer than Soylent Green.
I'm aware of that. I'm simply rebutting your assertion that the entire history of climate science has been a monolithic consensus of impending ice ages totally reversing itself to a monolithic consensus of global warming.
That's not what happened at all. Like most scientific issues, positions were staked out, early, across the spectrum of conjecture - "There'll be cooling." "There'll be warming." "Nothing will happen." "We don't know what will happen."
As time went on, and evidence was uncovered and models were developed, people abandoned some of those positions. Other positions were strengthened. As all but one position was disconfirmed by the evidence, a consensus developed.
In the 70's there was no climatological consensus. Some thought it would warm. Some, cool. Most people said that there wasn't enough evidence to decide.
Now, in 2007, the vast weight of evidence supports a single scientific consensus - human industry, specifically the burning of fossil fuels for energy, has drastically increased atmospheric greenhouse gases and caused a distinct warming trend.
Of course, Malthus neglected to predict the enormous impact that the Industrial Revolution had on agrigulture.
It had nothing to do with the Industrial Revolution - indeed, the vast majority of crop production around the world is still done with Neolithic methods like hand weeding, ditch irrigation, etc. - and everything to do with Norman Borlaug's Green Revolution. Were it not for Borlaug everything Malthus predicted would have come true. Was about to come true. Instead Borlaug saved, nearly single-handedly, more than 1.5 billion human lives.
Don't confuse dodging the bullet for firing blanks.
Can I see these ten models?
File:2000 Year Temperature Comparison.png - Wikipedia
quote:
Reconstructions
The reconstructions used, in order from oldest to most recent publication are:
1. (dark blue 1000-1991): P.D. Jones, K.R. Briffa, T.P. Barnett, and S.F.B. Tett (1998). "High-resolution Palaeoclimatic Records for the last Millennium: Interpretation, Integration and Comparison with General Circulation Model Control-run Temperatures". The Holocene 8: 455-471. doi:10.1191/095968398667194956
2. (blue 1000-1980): M.E. Mann, R.S. Bradley, and M.K. Hughes (1999). "Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties, and Limitations". Geophysical Research Letters 26 (6): 759-762. doi:10.1029/1999GL900070 (pre-print)
3. (light blue 1000-1965): Crowley and Lowery (2000). "Northern Hemisphere Temperature Reconstruction". Ambio 29: 51-54. Modified as published in Crowley (2000). "Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years". Science 289: 270-277. doi:10.1126/science.289.5477.270 (data available from NCDC : [2])
4. (lightest blue 1402-1960): K.R. Briffa, T.J. Osborn, F.H. Schweingruber, I.C. Harris, P.D. Jones, S.G. Shiyatov, S.G. and E.A. Vaganov (2001). "Low-frequency temperature variations from a northern tree-ring density network". J. Geophys. Res. 106: 2929-2941. doi:10.1029/2000JD900617
5. (light green 831-1992): J. Esper, E.R. Cook, and F.H. Schweingruber (2002). "Low-Frequency Signals in Long Tree-Ring Chronologies for Reconstructing Past Temperature Variability". Science 295 (5563): 2250-2253. doi:10.1126/science.1066208
6. (yellow 200-1980): M.E. Mann and P.D. Jones (2003). "Global Surface Temperatures over the Past Two Millennia". Geophysical Research Letters 30 (15): 1820. doi:10.1029/2003GL017814.
7. (orange 200-1995): P.D. Jones and M.E. Mann (2004). "Climate Over Past Millennia". Reviews of Geophysics 42: RG2002. doi:10.1029/2003RG000143
8. (red-orange 1500-1980): S. Huang (2004). "Merging Information from Different Resources for New Insights into Climate Change in the Past and Future". Geophys. Res Lett. 31: L13205. doi:10.1029/2004GL019781
9. (red 1-1979): A. Moberg, D.M. Sonechkin, K. Holmgren, N.M. Datsenko and W. Karlén (2005). "Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data". Nature 443: 613-617. doi:10.1038/nature03265
10. (dark red 1600-1990): J.H. Oerlemans (2005). "Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records". Science 308: 675-677. doi:10.1126/science.1107046
11. (black 1856-2004): Instrumental data was jointly compiled by the Climatic Research Unit and the UK Meteorological Office Hadley Centre. Global Annual Average data set TaveGL2v [3] was used.
Documentation for the most recent update of the CRU/Hadley instrumental data set appears in: P.D. Jones and A. Moberg (2003). "Hemispheric and large-scale surface air temperature variations: An extensive revision and an update to 2001". Journal of Climate 16: 206-223. DOI:10.1175/1520-0442(2003)0162.0.CO;2
I suppose you'd blame the last ice age on humans too if you could.
Greenhouse gas emissions by human beings during the last ice age - nearly ten thousand years before the discovery and analysis of petroleum - were, I think it is safe to say, negligible. I'm not sure what on Earth you're talking about, here.
I'm sure it killed many, many species-- yet, it was entirely a natural phenomenon.
Yes, obviously. Additionally, we know that the cause of the last ice age, and the interglacial period we find ourselves in, was not human industry. Similarly, we know that human industry is the cause of the current warming trend we find ourselves in. That's the conclusion supported by the vast weight of data.
Look, NJ, if 24 billion tons of CO2 emitted by humans every single year isn't up there causing warming, what is it doing? Where does it go? Does it just disappear, by magic? And then where is all the warming coming from? The sun is in a cooling period, so the "warming sun" model can't explain it. That Russian guy's lunacy about cosmic rays doesn't hold up from the data.
What does an authoritarian have to do with it?
That's what you were talking about. Authoritarianism. Rigid, lockstep following. Did you read the link?
Look at the kids drooling over MTV, Crash.
I'll take Bob Altemeyer's decades of research into the phenomenon of authoritarian thinking over your anecdotal examples, thanks. Did you read the link?
Not for lack of desire on their part, I'm sure.
You're sure? Based on what?
We plead with them not to get involved-- even as SCUD's rain down on their cities.
So, you're admitting that we get nothing from all the help we give them. Leaving only the religious explanation. Which was what I was saying all along.
The natural cycle that has been a part of the earth's climatological history.
That doesn't answer my question. What cycle? How long is the period of this cycle? What is its amplitude? What causes the cycle?
There is cyclical warming and cooling of the Earth, to be sure. The CO2 concentrations that we're experiencing now is clearly above and beyond that normal cycle, as you can see here:
File:Carbon Dioxide 400kyr-2.png - Wikipedia
Come the fuck on, NJ. The science is bulletproof on this.
Edited by crashfrog, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-05-2007 10:59 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-07-2007 1:01 PM crashfrog has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 66 of 111 (426318)
10-06-2007 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Hyroglyphx
10-06-2007 1:24 AM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
We'll start with just one name. Give me one name in order to keep this thread going.
Becky Fischer, director of Kids in Ministry International, as featured in the documentary Jesus Camp.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-06-2007 1:24 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Nuggin, posted 10-06-2007 11:54 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 70 of 111 (426392)
10-06-2007 1:24 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Hyroglyphx
10-06-2007 11:58 AM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
Why do you suppose that climatologists know it all know, just because they more than they did in the past?
It's not just more, it's many orders of magnitude more.
Certainly, there's more we could learn. But to say that we can't know anything until we know everything is to have a paralyzing obsession with certainty.
It's simply a double standard on your part. You're perfectly willing to support the policies you wish to be enacted on the basis of imperfect, or even nonexistent, evidence; but because you oppose the very idea of trying to get a handle on human carbon emissions, you demand absolutely perfect, infinite data - which you know is an impossibility.
You asked for the data, it's been presented. It's hard to imagine, NJ, any circumstance that could result in thousands of temperature measurements across the globe for decades being not only wrong, but all wrong in exactly the same way. Thermometer gnomes, is that it?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-06-2007 11:58 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 72 of 111 (426552)
10-07-2007 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by Hyroglyphx
10-07-2007 1:01 PM


Re: Creationists on the plunder
NJ, did you have a specific response to the data that I've presented?
Do you see how the sun can't be responsible for warming when its been in a decades-long period of general cooling?
I have just started a book, entitled, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 years,
Ah, by Fred Singer, the guy who was paid handsomely by oil companies to conduct "research" against the scientific consensus, and then lied about it. I'm sure he's a source you can trust.
Additionally, they add to the mix the reasons why climatology has become a cottage industry with huge political ties.
Being one of the top-paid denialist guns-for-hire, he'd know, wouldn't he?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-07-2007 1:01 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 94 of 111 (426890)
10-09-2007 1:23 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Hyroglyphx
10-08-2007 11:03 PM


Re: Re:
How on earth would my cynicism of anthropogenically caused global warming mean that I'm anti-environmentalist?
You know, the co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, has basically renounced his affiliation with Greenpeace because of how politicized they have become, and how little they actually care about the environmentalism. Its just a stage for these people. Its just something to relieve their angsty, dejected feelings.
I have to say that I find this almost completely irrelevant - not to mention, boring. Who gives a crap what those fruits on their boat are doing? What on Earth does that have to do with the science?
It's a trend with you, NJ. I think you're much more interested in demonizing and attacking people - finding which side has the most odious members - than in evaluating the evidence to come to the right conclusion.
Don't you think? Why is it that, in every single discussion where a point of fact is being disputed - is there anthropogenic climate change, is Mumia guilty of shooting a cop - you immediately highlight some perceived fault or funny business on the side you oppose as thought it makes any sort of difference?
Pat Moore jumping off the ship doesn't, as far as I can tell, take any CO2 out of the atmosphere. It doesn't lower global temperatures by even a tenth of a degree. I think you only think its relevant because you're a slothful thinker who assumes that organizations that contain bad people must themselves be bad, and therefore wrong in everything they do, and lying with every statement they make.
Nearly every single argument you've ever made proceeds from that assumption of bad faith. Of course, god forbid that the same technique be used against you - you're completely blind to any fault of any organization you support, particularly any uniformed authority figure.
Incidentally - all of the above is completely consistent with Altemeyer's Right-Wing Authoritarian Follower personality type. Just a heads-up.
Your answers are completely insufficient, as you dance around the subject.
How did you find my answers? I notice they've gone completely ignored. I especially liked how you asked for "just one name", and then when I came up with one, you started acting like you had never asked any such thing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-08-2007 11:03 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024