Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (8963 total)
79 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, xongsmith (3 members, 76 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Post Volume: Total: 870,986 Year: 2,734/23,288 Month: 925/1,809 Week: 44/313 Day: 0/44 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!!
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20548
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 571 of 636 (870334)
01-17-2020 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 570 by marc9000
01-15-2020 10:49 PM


another big oil pawn
Note you're not supposed to argue by bare links, and a bare video would qualify imho.

That said, your video is worthless.

Alex Epstein - Wikipedia(American_writer)

quote:
In 2015, The Guardian published an opinion piece by Jason Wilson critical of Epstein and CIP, stating, "Epstein's work has been popular and influential on the right because it is a particularly fluent, elaborate form of climate denialism. The CIP prides itself on being able to train corporate leaders to 'successfully outmessage "environmentalists"'."[5] He also criticizes Epstein for being an "ideologue" funded by petrochemical billionaires, the Koch brothers.[5]

In 2016, Epstein testified before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee at the invitation of the committee's chairman, James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who has called climate change a "hoax." Epstein suggested that rising carbon dioxide levels "benefit plants and Americans." When questioned by committee member Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) as to why Epstein, whose academic training is in philosophy, was even there, Epstein responded, "to teach you how to think clearly." Boxer replied "... you are a philosopher, not a scientist, and I don’t appreciate getting lectured by a philosopher about science."[18][19]


Not a scientist just a word pusher working for the oil industry. Inhofe is a moron that thinks winters counter global change, and that bringing a snowball into congress is an argument.

Try again with real science. You're biggest problem seems to be an inability to differentiate between real science and non-science, picking what you want to be true rather than what reality says is true.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 570 by marc9000, posted 01-15-2020 10:49 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 580 by marc9000, posted 01-26-2020 5:55 PM RAZD has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20548
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 572 of 636 (870341)
01-17-2020 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 569 by marc9000
01-15-2020 9:53 PM


Re: Moving Climate Change debate from The Right Side of the News (renamed)
I'm reminded of a graph from Percy's Message 4164;

That graph covers 10,000 years, and is only a few inches wide, so it's not really possible to accurately pinpoint just what time period those lines on that chart started rocketing up, but it looks to me like early to late 1800's, right on up to today. Just about the time fossil fuels came into being.

Now lets look at which years the world achieved an additional billion in population;

The projection is sometime between 2024 and 2030, 8 billion.

World population milestones - Wikipedia

Is it reasonable to say that there's a correlation between the rise in CO2, and the increase in world population? Undoubtedly closely related to the increase in fossil fuel use as the population increased - I'll give you that.

And also an increase in per capita fossil fuel use. Both factors increase CO2 immensely and we know that the overall increase in CO2 correlates with human fossil fuel use.

When I asked you if too many Model T's were the reason for the increased CO2 a hundred years ago, you said it was because of "Coal burning industries. Steam locomotives and ships burning coal."

Again, that's fine I'll give you that. But what we have to realize is that those coal burning industries weren't luxuries - they became accepted and necessary to provide food and warmth, and primitive lifestyles, by today's standards, to a NEW UPWARD TREND in population growth.

So we have a feed-back system that increases CO2 production exponentially.

So therefore, I only see one way to reduce CO2 back to early 1800's levels, and that would be to eliminate 6 billion people from the earth. Since I don't see anyone from the scientific community or the far political left proposing that, I'd like to know what other SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN alteration to today's societies would satisfy today's climate change alarmists.

Except that we have means to produce electricity without adding CO2 to the atmosphere, which is why the Green New Deal emphasizes alternate/renewable electrical generation.

As we see from the above figures, world population was about half what it is today when the U.S. EPA was formed in 1970. Since they're experts, they should have known what was going on in 1912, and that they had something to do. They didn't do it, did they? They aren't accountable, are they?

As I said before I know someone who was on the National Science Board when Nixon was president, ie when the EPA was formed. The scientists knew what was going on, the politicians balked at doing anything about it. They still do ... because oil/coal industry lobbyists.

My points have never been adamant disagreement with scientific findings, I'm just adamant that there's nothing humans can do about what mere human existence causes. ...

Then get out of the way and let those who think we can do something get to work.

The same way you've been taught to blow through people like Tim Ball, for a similar, but a much more dangerous reason. Free market profit margins aren't nearly as threatening as massive government takeovers of human freedoms, with no accountability.

Not surprisingly I disagree totally: unchecked capitalism is a slide back to the worst kind of feudalism, as capitalism has no moral or ethical checking system. No accountability? How are international corporations held accountable? How is Walmart held accountable for paying starvation wages with workers on public assistance for housing health and food while they rake in billions?

Maybe I missed it, but I think you missed one. Let's look at it, I'll c/p a few paragraphs from it.

The Great Global Warming Hoax - "Knowledge is power". Better-management.org has invaluable information for better decisions. | "Knowledge is power". Better-management.org has invaluable information for better decisions.

quote:
In 2020 the earth will reach the bottom of the eleven year solar cycle numbered 24, and it will start into solar cycle number 25. So the best Christmas present I can offer you is to explain why the solar cycles are so important. NASA, NOAA, the Russians and the Chinese have indicated that solar cycle 25 will be the least active for at least 100 years and many experts claim the unfolding Grand Solar Minimum will be a 200 year event.

1. The successive ice ages on earth during the 2.5 million year Pleistocene era have historically been triggered by what is known as Milankovich cycles (now generally accepted). These consist of three separate cycles referred to as “the Tilt variation of earth from the sun”, “the Obliquity of earth’s motion through space”, and “Eccentricity of earth’s orbit around the sun”. Of these three cycles the most influential is eccentricity and it takes around 100,000 years to happen. Our civilisation has only begun during the latest 10-12,000 year interglacial period we live in called the “Holocene”, which has now lasted for at least 11,500 years. A plunge into extreme glaciations is now probably due. It was alluded to by the expert climate scientists during the 1970’s when earths average temperature had cooled by about 0.4 degrees C., from 1945. No-one actually knows when it will happen.

2. Within the Holocene period, The time of maximum warmth due to natural cycles is said to have already passed and it is considered that the Minoan Warm period 3,500 years ago was when that occurred. So there is good evidence available that points to earth’s average temperatures today being some 2-3 degrees C. cooler than the Holocene temperature maximum. There are possibly two certainties that will affect us. The first is that the solar cycles with rising and falling levels of electromagnetic activity will drive the natural climate variations on planet earth as they will the climates of the other planets within our solar system since the beginning of time. The second certainty (well an extremely high probability) is that at some point the Milankovich cycles will usher in the return of a period of extensive glaciation that is similar to previous ice ages.

3. Full ice ages with extensive glaciations must be accepted as near certain extinction-level events. The significance for New Zealand is less onerous than for others, yet that may mean a progressive but effective end to agriculture in the South Island…. as and when it occurs.

4. Our recorded history of the impact of varying levels of solar activity really began with the Maunder Minimum (1645AD-1715AD) but these provided a mathematical trace back to earlier Grand Solar Minimums before the birth of Christ. Grand Solar Minimums coincide with the coldest periods of “the Little Ice Age” (which ran from about 1280AD – 1870AD). They also align well with the record of famines and the fall of dynasties in China. Both the Russian and the Chinese governments take the science behind Grand Solar Minimums very seriously and use the known cycles for their strategic planning. As a result I commend the history of Grand Solar Minimums to the attention of yourselves and your Civil Defence personnel.

5. Space exploration and remote climate monitoring only really began in about 1979. Today the probing of solar influence is a regular event and the effect of the solar cycles on earth’s weather is well-known if suppressed by the mainstream media.

6. So my Christmas present to you is to provide my personal understanding of how Grand Solar Minimums likely affect the earth’s climate

This will be extremely topical because many believe we have entered a cooling cycle that will last until 2055. Some believe it will last much longer. The data supports this conclusion. The data does not support suggestions that humans, CO2 build-up and/or CH4 build-up cause climate change. So I think this topic is well worth spending some time on.


[bolded mine]

Curiously I'm well aware of the Milankovich cycles as they are one of the validations for the ages measured by the ice cores. In Message 564 I posted a graph:

quote:
The issue of Climate Change is that it is a distinct long-term trend.

quote:
Carbon Dioxide Concentration | NASA Global Climate Change

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is an important heat-trapping (greenhouse) gas, which is released through human activities such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels, as well as natural processes such as respiration and volcanic eruptions. The first graph shows atmospheric CO2 levels measured at Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii, in recent years, with average seasonal cycle removed. The second graph shows CO2 levels during the last three glacial cycles, as reconstructed from ice cores.


That goes back 400,000 years and shows regular cycles of high and low CO2 levels, and then recent levels exceeding all the historic highs.


As you can see, the Milankovich cycles indeed show that we should be entering a new ice age, as your link says, but that it is massively overwhelmed by human CO2 production.

... Can you knock this out in a couple of sentences? I'm sure you can go to google and find thousands of frantic scientists who've condensed it very nicely for you.

As you can see I have already dealt with this, as advertised.

I'd also like some references to a scientific paper or two that PROVE that political action will reverse climate change.

ROFLOL. Nice joke.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 569 by marc9000, posted 01-15-2020 9:53 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 581 by marc9000, posted 01-26-2020 6:13 PM RAZD has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 13695
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 573 of 636 (870397)
01-18-2020 3:37 PM


Kids Sue the Government Over Climate change
Heres one for the books:
Kids' Climate Case 'Reluctantly' Dismissed By Appeals Court

32 page opinion by judges


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"We, humans, are engaged in an ongoing war of ideologies. I see it in this microcosm of EvC Forum just as I see it in the governments and attitudes of people throughout the world. Take your pick: Oppression or Seduction .
"~Thugpreacha

You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo

“As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.”
? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith
"You may not like it, but the dog bites both ankles."~Tangle


Replies to this message:
 Message 574 by Phat, posted 01-25-2020 3:17 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 13695
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 574 of 636 (870864)
01-25-2020 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 573 by Phat
01-18-2020 3:37 PM


An Inconvenient Truth
As everyone knows, I am a Christian believer who actually thinks that much of the Bible is spot on in regards to predicting future global scenarios of war, human conflict, and underlying "supernatural" influence. If we take away the idea that a global leader will be possessed by the dark side and that Jesus will have to come back to stop mass extinction, what then do we have left? People behaving badly. And what does the evidence show? I continue to read articles about global migration, climate change, and the realistic impacts of this.
The climate crisis, migration, and refugees
quote:
This global challenge has and will continue to create a multitude of critical issues that the international community must confront, including:

  • Large-scale human migration due to resource scarcity, increased frequency of extreme weather events, and other factors, particularly in the developing countries in the earth’s low latitudinal band
  • Intensifying intra- and inter-state competition for food, water, and other resources, particularly in the Middle East and North Africa
  • Increased frequency and severity of disease outbreaks
  • Increased U.S. border stress due to the severe effects of climate change in parts of Central America
    All of these challenges are serious, but the scope and scale of human migration due to climate change will test the limits of national and global governance as well as international cooperation.
  • Knowing human nature as I do, particularly the insidiousness of climate change denial, I see these future challenges as basically insurmountable beyond personal necessity and a trigger for the apologetic predictions of a global conflict between good and evil.

    Note too that there are no villains and saved crusaders battling in this armageddon conflict. There are merely nations fighting other nations. God and the Demons may as well not even be involved...for the people seem bent on waging war anyway.

    Thus, adding to the practical list of future challenges, we will be faced with an ambitious human psychological makeover.


    “The only way I know to drive out evil from the country is by the constructive method of filling it with good.”lvin Coolidge
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
    “As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.”-RC Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

    - You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.
    Anne Lamott

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 573 by Phat, posted 01-18-2020 3:37 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

    Replies to this message:
     Message 575 by jar, posted 01-25-2020 5:19 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 576 by Tangle, posted 01-26-2020 3:34 AM Phat has responded

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 32165
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 575 of 636 (870886)
    01-25-2020 5:19 PM
    Reply to: Message 574 by Phat
    01-25-2020 3:17 PM


    Re: An Inconvenient Truth
    Phat writes:

    Knowing human nature as I do, particularly the insidiousness of climate change denial, I see these future challenges as basically insurmountable beyond personal necessity and a trigger for the apologetic predictions of a global conflict between good and evil.

    I am pretty sure you don't have a clue who would be the good or the evil.

    Remember, fortunately the vast majority of Americans are not CCoI and that is where you will find true evil.

    As long as the CC0I does not gain full power there is a chance; Thank God!


    My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 574 by Phat, posted 01-25-2020 3:17 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    Tangle
    Member
    Posts: 7337
    From: UK
    Joined: 10-07-2011
    Member Rating: 2.6


    Message 576 of 636 (870896)
    01-26-2020 3:34 AM
    Reply to: Message 574 by Phat
    01-25-2020 3:17 PM


    Re: An Inconvenient Truth
    The end of the world is nigh! Doom, doom, we're all doomed!

    What is it about you fundie nutters? Everything is a bloody sign and you're so damn miserable but don't do anything about it but moan.

    Put that bloody useless book down and get a life.


    Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

    "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

    "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
    - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 574 by Phat, posted 01-25-2020 3:17 PM Phat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 577 by Phat, posted 01-26-2020 11:27 AM Tangle has responded

      
    Phat
    Member
    Posts: 13695
    From: Denver,Colorado USA
    Joined: 12-30-2003
    Member Rating: 1.2


    Message 577 of 636 (870906)
    01-26-2020 11:27 AM
    Reply to: Message 576 by Tangle
    01-26-2020 3:34 AM


    Re: An Inconvenient Truth
    OK, I get your point. We all should focus on action and optimism and throw the ancient made up warnings away, right? But what about the modern scientific ones?
    Little Greta said it first: Why is nobody doing anything? Seems to me that human nature is self-destructive.

    “The only way I know to drive out evil from the country is by the constructive method of filling it with good.”lvin Coolidge
    "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
    “As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.”-RC Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

    - You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.
    Anne Lamott

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 576 by Tangle, posted 01-26-2020 3:34 AM Tangle has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 578 by jar, posted 01-26-2020 12:13 PM Phat has responded
     Message 579 by Tangle, posted 01-26-2020 1:30 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 584 by Taq, posted 01-28-2020 4:57 PM Phat has not yet responded
     Message 586 by RAZD, posted 01-28-2020 5:31 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
     Message 587 by jar, posted 01-28-2020 6:00 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    jar
    Member
    Posts: 32165
    From: Texas!!
    Joined: 04-20-2004
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 578 of 636 (870907)
    01-26-2020 12:13 PM
    Reply to: Message 577 by Phat
    01-26-2020 11:27 AM


    Re: An Inconvenient Truth
    Phat writes:

    Little Greta said it first: Why is nobody doing anything? Seems to me that human nature is self-destructive.

    Because, particularly in the Untied States of Stupidity and Greed there is a vested interest in continuing what has always been profitable and the vast majority of voters do not want to put in the effort needed to actually be informed voters.

    It's easier to be unlearned than to learn.


    My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 577 by Phat, posted 01-26-2020 11:27 AM Phat has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 610 by Phat, posted 02-13-2020 3:42 PM jar has responded

      
    Tangle
    Member
    Posts: 7337
    From: UK
    Joined: 10-07-2011
    Member Rating: 2.6


    (1)
    Message 579 of 636 (870914)
    01-26-2020 1:30 PM
    Reply to: Message 577 by Phat
    01-26-2020 11:27 AM


    Re: An Inconvenient Truth
    Phat writes:

    OK, I get your point. We all should focus on action and optimism

    We should focus on being realistic and grounded in reality - simple-minded optimism is just as bad as doom, doom, doom.

    throw the ancient made up warnings away, right?

    Certainly, they're obvious garbage.

    Little Greta said it first: Why is nobody doing anything? Seems to me that human nature is self-destructive.

    Lots of people are doing things, millions of people. The world is turning. It's slow in some parts and fast in others. With your turd of a president it's actually trying to go backwards in your part. Whether it's fast enough to prevent a huge amount of future damage is yet to be seen.

    But this is a man-made problem and it's going to be mankind that fixes it, or doesn't. The world won't care and your god isn't going to help so there's no point you wasting your time wailing and grovelling to him. Your time would be better used campaigning to change things and doing what you can yourself.

    All this chest beating is just an excuse for doing nothing yourself.


    Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London.I am Finland. Soy Barcelona

    "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

    "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
    - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 577 by Phat, posted 01-26-2020 11:27 AM Phat has acknowledged this reply

      
    marc9000
    Member
    Posts: 1103
    From: Ky U.S.
    Joined: 12-25-2009
    Member Rating: 1.4


    Message 580 of 636 (870951)
    01-26-2020 5:55 PM
    Reply to: Message 571 by RAZD
    01-17-2020 10:31 AM


    Re: another big oil pawn
    Note you're not supposed to argue by bare links, and a bare video would qualify imho.

    That said, your video is worthless.

    Well, that's where I thought I'd start, to see if you, or anyone else, after a full week, would address ANYTHING in the video. I have my answer, so I'll proceed by referring to it as I further try to address the continued climate change subject.

    Presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg has plans to combat climate change;

    quote:
    his plan for clean electricity — which targets 80 percent greenhouse gas emission reductions in the power sector by 2028 “moving toward 100% as soon as possible thereafter”

    Mike Bloomberg has a plan to clean up electricity and it doesn’t need Congress

    and as I've mentioned before in the other thread, Tom Steyer has said that he'll "declare a climate change national emergency on day one of his presidency".

    Does it look to you like both of these guys are saying they'll "do anything they want"?

    Percy said in Message 4409;

    Percy writes:

    and there are no serious proposals for the government "to take over most all decisions in how energy will be produced and used."

    I don't need to be a scientist to see wildly mixed messages in what I see about solutions to climate change.

    As we know, the "Green New Deal" has "ambitious" proposals, as AOC has expertly said. You know, 100% renewable energy in 12 (now 11) years. We also know that in 11 years, wind is not going to be blowing tractor trailers down the road as they deliver food to food stores. Sunlight power isn't going to completely replace the current fossil fuel burning machinery that produces food. Some progress towards renewable energy could be made in that period, but common sense tells us it won't be much. Now back to the video, at about the 2:10 mark, Wilson referred to the common, yet largely emotional cry by the left to DO SOMETHING about climate change. It's exactly the same cry we hear after a mass shooting, or a bus accident involving death or serious injury to several students. In the case of shootings, it's always a call for one more gun control law, in the case of bus accidents, it's the call for more and more expensive safety equipment on buses. Very small, incremental things, that have no measurable affect on future shootings / bus accidents. The same thing can happen with climate change, no matter how much the government meddles, new technology for renewable energy will be negligible, but the DO SOMETHING call will be satisfied by targeting only small voting blocks. Such as the antique auto industry, or people who heat their residences completely or partially with firewood. Those kinds of small voting blocks have no political power to stop these infringements on liberty.

    So that's one disagreement I have about the video being "worthless".

    Here's another; starting at about the 2:35 mark, he starts describing several instances where past scientific predictions have been completely wrong. Was that part incorrect, or was that part just a little less than worthless? Is if fair to dismiss FACTS, just because he's accused of being trained by special interests?

    I don't automatically dismiss "facts" by the scientific community concerning some of their terrifying findings, I just dismiss that they or anyone has the ability to do the equivalent of making 6 billion human beings stop eating, breathing, or keeping warm in winter.

    Try again with real science. You're biggest problem seems to be an inability to differentiate between real science and non-science, picking what you want to be true rather than what reality says is true.

    The U.S. constitution doesn't give "real science" any more power than anyone else when it comes to making political decisions.

    Edited by marc9000, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 571 by RAZD, posted 01-17-2020 10:31 AM RAZD has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 582 by RAZD, posted 01-27-2020 11:41 AM marc9000 has responded

      
    marc9000
    Member
    Posts: 1103
    From: Ky U.S.
    Joined: 12-25-2009
    Member Rating: 1.4


    Message 581 of 636 (870953)
    01-26-2020 6:13 PM
    Reply to: Message 572 by RAZD
    01-17-2020 12:27 PM


    Re: Moving Climate Change debate from The Right Side of the News (renamed)
    marc9000 writes:

    Is it reasonable to say that there's a correlation between the rise in CO2, and the increase in world population? Undoubtedly closely related to the increase in fossil fuel use as the population increased - I'll give you that.

    And also an increase in per capita fossil fuel use.

    "Per capita", so this use by "individuals" of fossil fuels is getting increasingly unnecessary, and must be regulated?

    So we have a feed-back system that increases CO2 production exponentially.

    A feed back system? Cars are more efficient with fuel than ever before, thanks to expensive government mandates, we have more wind turbines than ever before. Are only things like people's hobbies, and overindulgence causing this feed back system?

    As I said before I know someone who was on the National Science Board when Nixon was president, ie when the EPA was formed. The scientists knew what was going on, the politicians balked at doing anything about it. They still do ... because oil/coal industry lobbyists.

    And because the politicians know they'd be voted out of office. There's a reason that specific proposals to "do something" about climate change are still a secret.

    Then get out of the way and let those who think we can do something get to work.

    "Get out of the way", and let government gobble up freedoms and money to do something that can't be measured? You're funny.

    Not surprisingly I disagree totally: unchecked capitalism is a slide back to the worst kind of feudalism, as capitalism has no moral or ethical checking system. No accountability? How are international corporations held accountable? How is Walmart held accountable for paying starvation wages with workers on public assistance for housing health and food while they rake in billions?

    Nothing is perfect, but free markets are BY FAR the best way to hold companies, big and small, accountable.

    As you can see, the Milankovich cycles indeed show that we should be entering a new ice age, as your link says, but that it is massively overwhelmed by human CO2 production.

    Overwhelmed by facts, or scientific community projections?

    marc9000 writes:

    I'd also like some references to a scientific paper or two that PROVE that political action will reverse climate change.

    ROFLOL. Nice joke.

    Yes it is, there's no way to scientifically document how political action will have any effect on climate change.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 572 by RAZD, posted 01-17-2020 12:27 PM RAZD has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 583 by RAZD, posted 01-27-2020 4:41 PM marc9000 has responded
     Message 585 by Taq, posted 01-28-2020 5:05 PM marc9000 has responded

      
    RAZD
    Member
    Posts: 20548
    From: the other end of the sidewalk
    Joined: 03-14-2004
    Member Rating: 2.9


    Message 582 of 636 (870999)
    01-27-2020 11:41 AM
    Reply to: Message 580 by marc9000
    01-26-2020 5:55 PM


    Re: another big oil pawn
    Does it look to you like both of these guys are saying they'll "do anything they want"?

    Well I see it mostly as them saying what they want to do. Neither would get far on their own ... in a pre-Trump world, but with the Senate well on their way to giving the President unlimited unchecked powers, that has changed.

    That's what the GOP is doing to the constitution.

    I don't need to be a scientist to see wildly mixed messages in what I see about solutions to climate change.

    So that's one disagreement I have about the video being "worthless".

    From what you have (sort of) quoted I don't see anything of value, mostly regurgitated anti-renewable energy talking points paid for by big oil. Look at the oil companies admitting that they knew about their business being detrimental to the climate but continuing anyway, because profits. You claim there is a lot of money on the renewable energy side, but you're looking in the wrong direction.

    Yes there are many possible ways to reduce CO2 and Methane emissions. Yes transportation requires a way to get to point B without dependence on recharging batteries for long distance travel and trucking, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't invest in renewable energy at all, or even as much as possible.

    And a lot of people are doing things on their own. I have solar panels, and I have not paid an electrical bill since august 2015. That means they have already paid for themselves.

    Here's another; starting at about the 2:35 mark, he starts describing several instances where past scientific predictions have been completely wrong. Was that part incorrect, or was that part just a little less than worthless? Is if fair to dismiss FACTS, just because he's accused of being trained by special interests?

    Creationist types love when science is wrong, because they think it makes all science wrong and untrustworthy. However scientists also love when science is wrong, because it is an opportunity to correct their models to make better predictions. The models now accurately model the past data and make stronger predictions about the future as a result of these changes.

    So yeah, dwelling on past failures and not looking at current success makes the video worthless. It's typical for cherry-picking information and presenting a misleading or false representation of the current science.

    I don't automatically dismiss "facts" by the scientific community concerning some of their terrifying findings, I just dismiss that they or anyone has the ability to do the equivalent of making 6 billion human beings stop eating, breathing, or keeping warm in winter.

    And that is politics, not science, isn't it? So we should welcome the people that are making the public more aware of the situation and the danger of doing nothing. Conversely, the danger of making the world a better, cleaner place to live, if say the climate change science happens to be totally wrong (which is highly unlikely), and making industry more accountable and eco-friendly, is what?

    The U.S. constitution doesn't give "real science" any more power than anyone else when it comes to making political decisions.

    True, it allows absolutely stupid, self centered people an equal vote with informed people. So the issue is to make more people informed.

    Curiously, I seem to remember that the founding fathers were big on having an educated public that could make cogent decisions.

    BTW

    quote:
    The World’s Oceans Were The Hottest In Recorded History In 2019

    The planet’s oceans were the warmest in recorded history in 2019, according to a new analysis published Monday.

    An international team of researchers analysed temperature data from sources around the globe and issued a dramatic warning that climate change is already deeply affecting what’s seen as the storage facility for any excess heat generated by a warming world. Hotter oceans are threatening marine biodiversity and the planet’s fisheries. They’re melting land and sea ice at a breakneck pace and fueling more severe storms and flooding.

    “It is critical to understand how fast things are changing,” John Abraham, a professor at the University of St. Thomas and a co-author of the paper, said in a news release Monday. “The key to answering this question is in the oceans — that’s where the vast majority of heat ends up. If you want to understand global warming, you have to measure ocean warming.”

    The study was published in the journal Advances in Atmospheric Sciences.

    The news follows a string of troubling environmental news: Last week, European researchers said 2019 was the second-hottest year on record, and the 2010s had officially become the hottest decade ever recorded. And in September, the United Nations’ climate change body found that the planet’s oceans and ice sheets were changing in “unprecedented” and shocking ways that could soon affect hundreds of millions of people living in low-lying or coastal areas.

    The latest research relies heavily on a state-of-the-art network of more than 3,800 floats that measure sea temperatures, a project known as Argo. The devices are deployed around the globe.


    Note that several of the failed predictions were due to inadequate modeling of the ocean's role.

    Enjoy


    we are limited in our ability to understand
    by our ability to understand
    Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
    ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
    to share.


    Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 580 by marc9000, posted 01-26-2020 5:55 PM marc9000 has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 588 by marc9000, posted 02-02-2020 8:58 PM RAZD has responded

      
    RAZD
    Member
    Posts: 20548
    From: the other end of the sidewalk
    Joined: 03-14-2004
    Member Rating: 2.9


    Message 583 of 636 (871057)
    01-27-2020 4:41 PM
    Reply to: Message 581 by marc9000
    01-26-2020 6:13 PM


    Climate Change becomes more evident every year.
    "Per capita", so this use by "individuals" of fossil fuels is getting increasingly unnecessary, and must be regulated?

    Increasingly dangerous to life on earth in general and human survival in particular. For that reason it needs to be curtailed.

    A feed back system? Cars are more efficient with fuel than ever before, thanks to expensive government mandates, we have more wind turbines than ever before. Are only things like people's hobbies, and overindulgence causing this feed back system?

    Not much more efficient. I had a car in the 70’s that got 40 mpg. What we see now are bigger vehicles that use more energy, their efficiency compared to earlier vehicles of same weight doesn’t mean much when every one is buying bigger heavier vehicles.

    There are also increased use of energy for more and more appliances etc, and when we consider human population around the world, not just in the US this amounts to higher use of fossil fuels.

    And because the politicians know they'd be voted out of office. There's a reason that specific proposals to "do something" about climate change are still a secret.

    Which is why democrats are running on climate change action ... as you pointed out. Can’t have it both ways.

    "Get out of the way", and let government gobble up freedoms and money to do something that can't be measured? You're funny

    Government doing what most of the population wants to do, democratically.

    Nothing is perfect, but free markets are BY FAR the best way to hold companies, big and small, accountable.

    Except that it has never worked.

    Overwhelmed by facts, or scientific community projections?

    Both. If you look at the chart the data for 1950 is above the Millankovich cycle level, so it is a fact that it has already been overwhelmed. The future projections don’t get any better.

    Yes it is, there's no way to scientifically document how political action will have any effect on climate change.

    Wrong. Levels are being measured constantly, and anything with a positive effect will show up.

    Btw

    quote:
    ‘There’s no doubt left’ about scientific consensus on global warming anymore

    The scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming is likely to have passed 99 percent, according to the lead author of the most authoritative study on the subject, and could rise further after separate research that clears up some of the remaining doubts.

    Three studies published in Nature and Nature Geoscience use extensive historical data to show there has never been a period in the last 2,000 years when temperature changes have been as fast and extensive as in recent decades.

    It had previously been thought that similarly dramatic peaks and troughs might have occurred in the past, including in periods dubbed the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Climate Anomaly. But the three studies use reconstructions based on 700 proxy records of temperature change, such as trees, ice, and sediment, from all continents that indicate none of these shifts took place in more than half the globe at any one time.

    The Little Ice Age, for example, reached its extreme point in the 15th century in the Pacific Ocean, the 17th century in Europe, and the 19th century elsewhere, says one of the studies. This localization is markedly different from the trend since the late 20th century when records are being broken year after year over almost the entire globe, including this summer’s European heat wave.

    Major temperature shifts in the distant past are also likely to have been primarily caused by volcanic eruptions, according to another of the studies, which helps to explain the strong global fluctuations in the first half of the 18th century as the world started to move from a volcanically cooled era to a climate warmed by human emissions. This has become particularly pronounced since the late 20th century, when temperature rises over two decades or longer have been the most rapid in the past two millennia, notes the third.

    The authors say this highlights how unusual warming has become in recent years as a result of industrial emissions.

    “There is no doubt left — as has been shown extensively in many other studies addressing many different aspects of the climate system using different methods and data sets,” said Stefan Brönnimann, from the University of Bern and the Pages 2K consortium of climate scientists.

    Commenting on the study, other scientists said it was an important breakthrough in the “fingerprinting” task of proving how human responsibility has changed the climate in ways not seen in the past.


    Looks like the case keeps getting stronger, and you keep getting wronger.

    Enjoy

    Edited by RAZD, : .


    we are limited in our ability to understand
    by our ability to understand
    Rebel•American•Zen•Deist
    ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
    to share.


    Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 581 by marc9000, posted 01-26-2020 6:13 PM marc9000 has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 589 by marc9000, posted 02-02-2020 9:13 PM RAZD has responded

      
    Taq
    Member
    Posts: 8229
    Joined: 03-06-2009
    Member Rating: 4.1


    Message 584 of 636 (871096)
    01-28-2020 4:57 PM
    Reply to: Message 577 by Phat
    01-26-2020 11:27 AM


    Re: An Inconvenient Truth
    Thugpreacha writes:

    Why is nobody doing anything? Seems to me that human nature is self-destructive.

    Humans are short sighted and selfish, not necessarily self destructive. Fossil fuels are cheap and easy to use, so we use them. It takes a lot of spending and infrastructure to switch, so we don't. We don't see any change in the climate or threat to our way of life in the very short term, so we don't worry about it.

    The 2008 housing crisis is a perfect example of how this flawed human attitude leads to disaster. There are several documentaries on the whole fiasco, but I can't think of the titles offhand. However, a google search should find them, and I think they are available on a few streaming services. If you want, watch those documentaries and try to understand the human psychology that was in play, and then apply that to climate change. The parallels are quite amazing, IMHO.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 577 by Phat, posted 01-26-2020 11:27 AM Phat has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 590 by marc9000, posted 02-02-2020 9:16 PM Taq has responded

      
    Taq
    Member
    Posts: 8229
    Joined: 03-06-2009
    Member Rating: 4.1


    (4)
    Message 585 of 636 (871098)
    01-28-2020 5:05 PM
    Reply to: Message 581 by marc9000
    01-26-2020 6:13 PM


    Re: Moving Climate Change debate from The Right Side of the News (renamed)
    marc9000 writes:

    A feed back system? Cars are more efficient with fuel than ever before, thanks to expensive government mandates, we have more wind turbines than ever before. Are only things like people's hobbies, and overindulgence causing this feed back system?

    There are 3rd world nations making the transition to industrialized nations, and their fossil fuel consumption has shot through the roof. As more and more Indians and Chinese get cars when they didn't have them before, guess what happens? Also, there are feedback systems that continue to release CO2 from ocean stores.

    "Get out of the way", and let government gobble up freedoms and money to do something that can't be measured? You're funny.

    It is measurable.

    Nothing is perfect, but free markets are BY FAR the best way to hold companies, big and small, accountable.

    Ummm, no. There is a reason we have labor laws, the FDA, the EPA, anti-trust laws, and banking regulations. It's because free markets can't police themselves, nor have they in the past. We already tried it your way, and it didn't work.

    Overwhelmed by facts, or scientific community projections?

    By actual CO2.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 581 by marc9000, posted 01-26-2020 6:13 PM marc9000 has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 591 by marc9000, posted 02-02-2020 9:37 PM Taq has responded

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020