| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Psst, meatrace. It's not "global warming" anymore. All the cool kids say "climate change."
Incorrect, those are two separate but linked phenomena. Global warming is, sorry to seem academic, the phenomena of the earth's atmosphere actually warming over time.
Climate change is the result of this warming, wherein we see increased incidences of drought, hurricanes, as well as an overall just shift in climate geography. Example: the UK is crazy warm for its latitude because of the jet stream and its influence on weather patterns. If that changes, it may go the way of Greenland. Which, by the way, is melting.
And now you know.
Knowing is half the battle.
All I'm saying is that it's January and it was 80 degrees out today.
Yeah yeah, and it was significantly warmer 80000000 years ago when the dinsaurs walked around. But the every time the global warming crowd held a retreat at a tropical resort, record cold temperatures followed. So, in order to avoid mockery, they changed the wording so unusually cold temperatures could be attributed to climate change, since it is kinda hard to claim global warming while wearing a parka.
All I'm saying is that it's January and it was 80 degrees out today.
It was in the 70s in Rio de Janerio today. And freezing in Indiana.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish I lived in my own little world where everything was a conspiracy.
Did you know? They did in fact fake the moon landing. However, the soundstage they did it in was built on the moon.
MOONCEPTION.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He should just move to Texas, where Rick Perry inherited an economy from Bush, and didn't cry about it like a little b&@*~.
my point was that SOCIETY DOES NOT LEGALLY ALLOW for what I was talking about, and that there is no limit to the violent force (up to and including the wide-scale use of thermonuclear weapons) that our oligarchs will use to prevent the kind of society I was talking about.
I haven't noticed anyone nuking the Amish lately.
Yeah yeah, and it was significantly warmer 80000000 years ago when the dinsaurs walked around. But the every time the global warming crowd held a retreat at a tropical resort, record cold temperatures followed. So, in order to avoid mockery, they changed the wording so unusually cold temperatures could be attributed to climate change, since it is kinda hard to claim global warming while wearing a parka.
The earth's mean temperature has risen 0.6 degrees Celsius in the last thirty years, with a 90%+ field consensus that this is due primarily to anthropogenic causes.
Global warming is happening. It is a real threat. We really caused it.
You can choose to believe otherwise, but that choice labels you a total idiot in the eyes of anyone paying attention.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah? I've seen the sun rise on nine continents (includeing Atlantis and Mu) and the moon.
Gotta love how only one person on the boards can have any kind of real world experience, and anyone else that disagrees with them must be wrong because they're sheltered.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But, but, but! It's cold outside, so therefore global warming can't possibly exist!
Alarmist propoganda, meant to benefit shadowy people I don't like in some mysterious way that I have yet to figure out, but is darn sinister, I tell you! My totally misapplied anecdotal evidence trumps your so-called 'reality!'
After all, any fool can look out the window and see that the earth is flat. Can't have 'global' warming if the earth isn't even a globe!
You can choose to believe otherwise, but that choice labels you a total idiot in the eyes of anyone paying attention.
You'll have to show me where I said I didn't believe it.
After all, given the choice between global warming and global cooling, I'll choose global warming. An ice age will cover most of the land that grows the planet's food with glaciers.
For the record, that would be a bad thing.
And while you're at it, point me to a climat change computer modle that actually functions. All the ones I find don't hold up to scrutiny. No doubt you'll have a link for me that could accurately predict the climate.
It would be great if it "predicted" the climate over the past 20 years, because we could really confirm if the model was accurate or not.
And please refrain from the insults. They are against board policy.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
absolute personal freedom never existed
that it doesn't exist now isn't a big deal
I wish I lived in my own little world where everything was a conspiracy.I wish I lived in your world, where conspiracy didn't exist.
Its easy :) You're welcome to join if you want. All you have to do is stop watching youtube videos staring people who know startlingly little about how the world works, and stop listening to rage-fueling talk radio. I live a pretty happy life without any of that. Heck, I have enough stress at work to worry about stuff that doesn't directly affect my life like that.
My point, btw, was that an individual has no choice about being a part of our society, whether he wants to or not. Yes, yes, we are all "social animals"...does that genetic predisposition preclude individual choice? In other words, the question is: Am I obligated to something that I fundamentally disagree with by dint of the fact that I exist? Is it morally and ethically correct that society has offered me only two choices: Conform ("conform", in this case, has nothing to do with dress or appearance or skin colour or even religious or socio-economic creed..."conform", in this instance, means, "accept that the current socio-economic paradigm is the only model that is allowed to exist without being met by lethal force"), or die?
Because those are my choices. Changing the socio-economic paradigm isn't even an option, for reasons that I should not have to discuss here.
You sound so melencholy...I think you're confusing "compromising my needs so that I may be protected by others like me" with "nobody let's me do anything I want"
And I think you're being a little dramatic with the whole "do it or die" thing - yes, you break one of our laws, and we'll punish you...but it isn't like you live in Soviet Russia, my friend. We have it far too good here for me to suffer complaints like this. Do you know what I do? I go to work, and I go home, and sometimes I go out. I get left alone. I've never been approached by "the man" and told, at gunpoint, how to live my life. Maybe I'm lucky. Or maybe I stay out of the conspiracy theories and just go about my business, enjoying what I have.
That's the problem with left and right ideologies...the left wants you to think that we're all actually equal and that life could be peaches and cream if we all share, but we all know that that's silly and its not that easy.
The right is bloody well afraid of everything. "Der gonna take yer guns!" "der gonna take yer jebs!" "NEW WERLD ERDER ERMAHGEWD". Seriously, they've been crying about this stuff forever. When is the new world order going to take over? Where are the black helecoptors? When are gay people going to rule the world and corrupt your children and make them one of us? MY PEOPLE HAVE DESTROYED YOUR NUCLEAR FAMILY YOUR GOVERNMENT IS NEXT.
If there is going to be a new cultural revolution, I look forward to it; we're about due for one. Maybe when it hits, we can get rid of the hipsters, scene kids, and hippies. And the kids running into shelves in my store texting on facebook all the time.
I'm going to tell you something Glenn Beck won't because he wants you to buy his new fear-mongering book...you're going to be fine. You're ok. You're just dealing with living in the world power and you're scared because there isn't anything to be afraid of.
If you've really "been around" you'd see we have it WAY better in the US. You mention Japan...don't get me started on how much better we have it here compared to there.
absolute personal freedom never existed
that it doesn't exist now isn't a big dealYou can provide evidence of this? You have documentary evidence that clearly and irrefutably shows that the human race never had individual freedom?
Since the preponderance of historical evidence shows clearly that this is not the case, you might want to consider educating yourself before making blanket statements.
Do you have documents and proof of the new world order?
...I thought not.
EDIT:
There is always an oppressive ruling class. You want to talk historical evidence? Show me a congregation of people who don't fit that bill.
This is something I tried to get through to my ex-best friend, a raging social justice warrior. Someone is always ruled by another; its how our species, and many others operate (alpha male pack leaders with wolves, lionesses, etc). Some of us are followers, some of us are leaders, and some of us are jealous wingnuts who hate the ruling class only because they secretly wish they were the ruling class. Lenin hated the leaders before him, Stalin hated the leaders before him, Guevara hated the leaders before him. They hate being oppressed, overthrow their leaders, and then complete the cycle of oppression. Humans.
absolute personal freedom never existed
that it doesn't exist now isn't a big dealYou can provide evidence of this? You have documentary evidence that clearly and irrefutably shows that the human race never had individual freedom?
Since the preponderance of historical evidence shows clearly that this is not the case, you might want to consider educating yourself before making blanket statements.
*facepalm*
What evidence are you speaking of?
Define free. Free of government? Is tribal leadership a form of government? Free of tyranny? Isn't everyone else's absolute freedom to kill you with impunity tyranny?
*yawn*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Might want to read this.
This isn't a climatologist workshop. Neither is this a statistics class at a university.
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
So, I read through it. I want to see your breakdown of it, because at the moment I'm guessing you don't see the fundamental flaw in their argument.
That's where I keep my cult of yeti's.
And while you're at it, point me to a climat change computer modle that actually functions. All the ones I find don't hold up to scrutiny.
Your scrutiny? As a doctorate-holding researcher in the fields of climatology, physical geography, atmospheric science, oceanography, or biogeochemistry, I'm assuming.
Might want to read this.
I am not qualified to judge the validity of climatology studies in any capacity. When the field's consensus shifts to a view that anthropogenic factors do not represent a primary cause of global warming and global climate change, so too will my view shift.
Just a reminder: the goblins shall inherit the earth.
Global climate change? Running out of oil? Everybody getting sick from tar sands?
Hee hee! Keep it up, pinkskins, keep it up!
Also, the moderators shut down the latest gun thread, so, please forgive me for recycling links:
Amen.
Well, anyway, perhaps a few words about the development of the Free NH Goblin Resistance is in order.
So, I think it was Comrade Jeff somewhere who mentioned conservation tax easements, blah blah blah whatever they're called, and we've got one of those, so, alas, we can't build barracks or a general store on the compound, but we did run electiricity out to the barn. And we've installed a forge and anvil. That's pretty cool, I think.
On the food angle, the compound has seen huge defeats, I'm afraid. The goblin who was really into agriculture had a nervous breakdown (or an epiphany--your call) and decided that living on a commune wasn't enough, so he took it a step further and became a homeless Buddhist monk. Fortunately, we recouped a bit from the loss the old fashioned way: we made an alliance with another goblin clan and took one of their daughters for concubinage and gardening. Us useless males do help out, but Citizen Irontruth won't be surprised to hear that on the Free NH Goblin Resistance compound, females do 70% of the work necessary to produce food. We all take turns cooking, though. Except me. I can't cook worth a f@%!.
What else? Oh yeah, the female goblin also brought with her a Skill Focus in Handle Animal, and our pack of vicious wargs has risen to three.
And, of course, we still have our gun range where we fire off our AR-15s and Taurus Judges. Live free or die!!
|
Let me write this down:
1)Al gore is a hypocrite.
2)?????
3)Therefore global warming is a myth.Could you go over point 2 again guys? I didn't quite get it in my scramble to scribble these nuggets of wisdom.
Who claimed global warming is a myth?
It may or may not be caused by man but stuff is changing. The problem is all of the "green" trash making a profit or crushing freedom in the name of hysterics over it.
The goal should ALWAYS be to maximize freedom. That was what america was based on. Freedom should never be taken without damn good reason and "i don't like him doing that!!!" Is NOT a good reason.
There are several points in American history that would disagree with your statement.
Let me write this down:
1)Al gore is a hypocrite.
2)?????
3)Therefore global warming is a myth.Could you go over point 2 again guys? I didn't quite get it in my scramble to scribble these nuggets of wisdom.
Who claimed global warming is a myth?
It may or may not be caused by man but stuff is changing. The problem is all of the "green" trash making a profit or crushing freedom in the name of hysterics over it.
Ah, so you also hate oil companies, like BP. They're making a ton of money, but through their ineptitude were able to help destroy the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of hard working Americans.
I also really like it when my rivers don't spontaneously combust, is that something that makes a region more attractive to you?
Man this stuff is flying fast and furious!
Can't we just consolidate all the polititroll threads? Cuz it's really hard to keep people's claims/positions straight across multiple threads (especially when they change...)
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
Tell that to them, not to me. I didn't write it. That's like blaming Steve Jobs because the Microsoft Windows operating manual is indecipherable.
And while you're at it, point me to a climat change computer modle that actually functions. All the ones I find don't hold up to scrutiny.Your scrutiny? As a doctorate-holding researcher in the fields of climatology, physical geography, atmospheric science, oceanography, or biogeochemistry, I'm assuming.
Might want to read this.I am not qualified to judge the validity of climatology studies in any capacity. When the field's consensus shifts to a view that anthropogenic factors do not represent a primary cause of global warming and global climate change, so too will my view shift.
Yep, my scrutiny. Being able to accurately reflect real climate changes against the model. There isn't one model that can accurately show what happened the past 10 years.
As for "consensus" . . .
The consensus was that the Earth was the center of the universe.
The consensus, in the 70s, was that we faced massive global cooling.
The consensus in the 80s/90s was that global warming would contribute 4-5 deg C over a century.
The consensus today is that global warming will contribute 1 deg C over a century.
Scientific search for truth doesn't operate by consensus.
You might want to start investigating people who have a less "Chicken Little" approach. I suggest Anthony Watts. And no, he's not a denier.
Or, for further reading, here's one.
And this one is fun.
This is entertaining.
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.Tell that to them, not to me. I didn't write it. That's like blaming Steve Jobs because the Microsoft Windows operating manual is indecipherable.
I'm sorry, you misunderstood me.
You're linking a very technical paper. I'm actually curious how well you understand that paper. I know it's difficult for me to understand, in fact large parts of it I probably don't. So break it down, simplify it. I would actually guess that most people who link that paper as proof probably don't understand it very well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The goal should ALWAYS be to maximize freedom.
No, it shouldn't. The maximum of freedom would require the absence of a government, and would provide, among other things, the freedom to murder without fear of prosecution.
You don't want absolute freedom. You just want a specific set of freedoms.
The RAH RAH FREEDOM stuff is getting a little out of hand.
Yep, my scrutiny.
Again, your scrutiny as a doctorate-holding researcher?
Or your scrutiny as some guy on the internet with too many inflamed opinions?
As for "consensus" . . .
The consensus was that the Earth was the center of the universe.
Yes, because of the dark ages, we can't trust science. That makes perfect sense.
The consensus, in the 70s, was that we faced massive global cooling.
The consensus in the 80s/90s was that global warming would contribute 4-5 deg C over a century.
The consensus today is that global warming will contribute 1 deg C over a century.
That is not the consensus. The 2007 AR4 climate change projections indicated a change over the next century of between 1.1 degrees Celsius and 6.4 degrees Celsius, depending on the scenario used (scenarios take into account changes in environmental policy that may favorably or unfavorably impact the mean surface temperature change).
Scientific search for truth doesn't operate by consensus.
Scientific understanding does.
|
|
The goal should ALWAYS be to maximize freedom. That was what america was based on. Freedom should never be taken without damn good reason and "i don't like him doing that!!!" Is NOT a good reason.There are several points in American history that would disagree with your statement.
I never said this nation (especially not anyone in power) have always stuck to that very well but freedom was the goal of this nation's birth
I'm sorry, you misunderstood me.
Normally, if things are related, there is a very strong mathematical relationship between them. For example, smokers generally have more health problems. This paper examines the same principle as applied to human-caused global warming.
They didn't find a linear response between greenhouse gas increases and temperature increases. (A linear response would be smoking 1 pack a day meant a 10% increase in health problems, smoking 2 packs meant a 20% increase, etc.)
They didn't find a non-linear response between greenhouse gas increases and temperature increases. (Non linear could be smoking 1 pack a day meant a 10% increase in health problems, smoking 2 packs a day meant a 40% increase, and 3 packs a day meant a 90% increase).
However, they used temperature data from Michael Mann's research (he's a climatologist who massaged his data enough to give him the result he wanted.) And, in regards to the non-linear result, they couldn't find any data currently published reflecting a non-linear response of global warming (it's not getting more warmer faster as time goes on). This may or may not be accurate, because, gosh darn it, climate stuff is complicated. They also didn't take into account water vapor issues, since that is a pretty linear relationship, and would therefore affect all the data equally. Of course, water vapor is a major contributor to warming. There might also be a multiplier effect between variables that we can't account for. For example, if solar radiation increases, it may increase the interaction between ozone and water vapor in ways that hasn't been discovered yet.
We believe there is a temporary effect of humans on temperature, for which the earth corrects itself over time (for example, decades, but we're not really certain).
This doesn't mean that human-caused global warming doesn't exist. It also doesn't mean we are correct; we could be wrong, but we don't think so. By the way, climate stuff is hard, so don't sue us if we're incorrect.
Does that cover the basics? Sure there's more, but you wanted simple. I think I covered it. I'm sure I missed something, because my son is demanding attention and he's far more important than this article.
I'm pointing out that other research exists besides the "Al Gore's Everyone Is Going to Die Horribly from Massive Flooding and Hurricanes and Why Aren't You People Listening to Me!" position. And I would rather have global warming than global cooling. Scott seems to be an expert on lots of stuff, so I figured he'd be open minded enough to look at an interesting article. If you find the information kinda neat, awesome. If not, that's fine.
Now y'all can continue your demonization of Glenn Beck. Because it's okay to attack people with whom we have divergent opinions.