Stuff Republicans say.

[Guy Threepwood]

What we know about global warming is actually more reliable than what we know about quantum mechanics, the Big Bang, relativity, the behavior of photons, etc. To me, it's clear you've bought into a right-wing political agenda that's anti-science, as we've seen with a fair number of others here at RF.

BTW, I did not call you a "fool" but was merely using a commonly heard expression about people trying to operate out of an area that they ain't that familiar with, so sorry if you thought I was calling you names.

if you have any substantive counter arguments, I'd be genuinely interested to hear them- I could likewise just accuse you of buying into a liberal agenda, but that doesn't support or refute anything, it's just more ad hominem mud slinging which apart from anything else is boring.

I'm still curious to find out what YOUR understanding of the science is.

-40F here last night, all time record, not just for the date. an enhanced greenhouse warming effect caused this? Along with record Antarctic sea ice extent and global snow cover?

If all of these observations fit the theory, along with every drought, flood, heatwave, light drizzle, mist, average weather, then the theory is simply unfalsifiable

 

[metis]

if you have any substantive counter arguments, I'd be genuinely interested to hear them- I could likewise just accuse you of buying into a liberal agenda, but that doesn't support or refute anything, it's just more ad hominem mud slinging which apart from anything else is boring.

I'm still curious to find out what YOUR understanding of the science is.

-40F here last night, all time record, not just for the date. an enhanced greenhouse warming effect caused this? Along with record Antarctic sea ice extent and global snow cover?

If all of these observations fit the theory, along with every drought, flood, heatwave, light drizzle, mist, average weather, then the theory is simply unfalsifiable

I've told you where you can get information from various scientific sources, you don't provide a single link where you supposedly get your "information" from, so why should I waste any more of my time? Plus you post your observations, like with the above, while ignoring the tons of research observations that clearly prove beyond any shadow of doubt that we're in a stretch of global warming.

Frankly, at this point, I really don't care what you believe.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

I've told you where you can get information from various scientific sources, you don't provide a single link where you supposedly get your "information" from, so why should I waste any more of my time? Plus you post your observations, like with the above, while ignoring the tons of research observations that clearly prove beyond any shadow of doubt that we're in a stretch of global warming.

Frankly, at this point, I really don't care what you believe.

well forget debating me then, but if you are interested in developing your own impartial understanding- I urge you to research this for yourself, whenever people start posting links it just exacerbates ad hominem attacks -for the choice of sources

the UAH satellite data is a good place to start, yes it will appear on many skeptic sites, but there is a good reason for that, the data itself is not disputed.
pro-warming sites invariably prefer land data which is far more malleable- particularly Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies which is quite telling in itself

also look at the direct forcing of 1 or 2 molecules in 10000 of CO2, very modest in relation to the simulated forcing which relies on hypothetical feedback loop algorithms.

Bottom line, the entire essence of the theory- significantly deleterious disruption from trace amounts of CO2, is entirely theoretical- like Hawking's field of cosmology we discussed, it is inherently removed from direct observation. Nothing has actually been empirically discovered, only simulated.

beyond any shadow of doubt that we're in a stretch of global warming.

You could argue this assertion with many 'scientific' sources- and I'm only quoting pro-warmers

The recent pause in warming - Met Office


The IPCC draws the following conclusion:
In summary, the observed recent warming hiatus, [] is attributable in roughly equal measure to a cooling contribution from internal variability and a reduced trend in external forcing.

 

[metis]

Well:

Levels of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose at a record-shattering pace last year, a new report shows, a surge that surprised scientists and spurred fears of an accelerated warming of the planet in decades to come.

Concentrations of nearly all the major greenhouse gases reached historic highs in 2013, reflecting ever-rising emissions from automobiles and smokestacks but also, scientists believe, a diminishing ability of the world’s oceans and plant life to soak up the excess carbon put into the atmosphere by humans, according to data released early Tuesday by the United Nations’ meteorological advisory body.

The latest figures from the World Meteorological Organization’smonitoring network are considered particularly significant because they reflect not only the amount of carbon pumped into the air by humans, but also the complex interaction between man-made gases and the natural world. Historically, about half of the pollution from human sources has been absorbed by the oceans and by terrestrial plants, preventing temperatures from rising as quickly as they otherwise would, scientists say.

“If the oceans and the biosphere cannot absorb as much carbon, the effect on the atmosphere could be much worse,” said Oksana Tarasova, a scientist and chief of the WMO’s Global Atmospheric Watch program, which collects data from 125 monitoring stations worldwide. The monitoring network is regarded as the most reliable window on the health of Earth’s atmosphere, drawing on air samples collected near the poles, over the oceans, and in other locations far from cities and other major sources of pollution.

The new figures for carbon dioxide were particularly surprising, showing the biggest year-over-year increase since detailed records were first compiled in the 1980s, Tarasova said in an interview. The jump of nearly three parts per million over 2012 levels was twice as large as the average increase in carbon levels in recent decades, she said...

The WMO’s data for 2013 shows the global average level of atmospheric carbon at just under 400 parts per million, about 40 percent higher than in pre-industrial times and higher than in any other period in at least 800,000 years. The symbolically important threshold of 400 parts per million — described by scientists as the level at which more dramatic climactic impacts become likely — will probably be crossed in the next two years, the report said... -- CO2 levels in atmosphere rising at dramatically faster rate, U.N. report warns - The Washington Post [underlining is mine]

 

[Midnight Rain]

if you have any substantive counter arguments, I'd be genuinely interested to hear them- I could likewise just accuse you of buying into a liberal agenda, but that doesn't support or refute anything, it's just more ad hominem mud slinging which apart from anything else is boring.

I'm still curious to find out what YOUR understanding of the science is.

-40F here last night, all time record, not just for the date. an enhanced greenhouse warming effect caused this? Along with record Antarctic sea ice extent and global snow cover?

If all of these observations fit the theory, along with every drought, flood, heatwave, light drizzle, mist, average weather, then the theory is simply unfalsifiable

I've already explained several points with my own understanding of the science but you didn't respond.

 

[sun rise]

I've already explained several points with my own understanding of the science but you didn't respond.

He did not respond to me either.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

the temp here last night was -40F. That's a record, not just for the day, that's the coldest temperature ever recorded. and at a high latitude at night in winter. This is the exact opposite of evidence for global warming. there is no way around that.

How is it the "exact opposite of evidence" for global warming when global warming predicts it? Carbon emissions trap solar system, the planet warms, polar caps melt, ocean streams are cooled, jet streams are thrown off, and because our weather is very sensitive to those, our weather is, overall, getting worse at both ends because the things that regulate them are being thrown off balance because the planet is getting warmer because over the past two hundred years we have put out way too much carbon for the planet to handle.
We have also seen a mass imigration of both land and aquatic life moving from the Earth's northern regions to areas further south than what they are normally found. Many new hybrid breeds have been observed as a result of this immigration. And, as global warming predicted, the weather at both ends is getting worse.

 

[esmith]

So, in reference to the current discussion (which should probably be in a thread of its own) what would you have the United States do to?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So, in reference to the current discussion (which should probably be in a thread of its own) what would you have the United States do to?

Wake up and realize we are dealing with a looming and imminent problem, and get very serious about researching sustainable energy, costs be damned, because the cost of an economic and social lock-up from running out and having no more will be even greater. Also realize we must consider future generations. We are dumping all of this on them, and it isn't right that we do so.

 

[sun rise]

So, in reference to the current discussion (which should probably be in a thread of its own) what would you have the United States do to?

I agree it really could be the subject of another thread and might already have been.

But what I would do is to encourage and support market based solutions as preferable to large command-and-control bureaucracies. I'm not doctrinaire about economic measures - sometimes one works better and sometimes another but in this case I think it's clear that market based is the way to go.

My #1 thing to do is to stop the extremes of "the sky is falling" and "head in the sand denial". This means acknowledging that climate change is real, that there are reasonable things we can do about it and some measures we have to take to mitigate it because we don't control what goes on in China, India and elsewhere. So I really want the US to lead here.

One measure is cap and trade which was a conservative system for using the market to achieve desirable ends until conservatives renounced market based systems. I much prefer it to command and control rigid government bureaucracies. And it worked quite nicely for acid rain abatement.

Another is to stop crony capitalism favoring those whose interests are in continuing to pollute. Government should act in the interests of people not in the interests of K street. This is one of those situations where left and right agree quite a bit albeit from different perspectives.

Adopt and support additional mitigation measures and research on such measures as outlined Fifth Assessment Report - Mitigation of Climate Change outlines. There are many many that can be considered from planting trees, through encouraging industry best practices to new technologies.

 

[sun rise]

Anyway, back in the real world, the plutocrats are buying not only legislators but also scientists showing that right wing cronyism with business is a deep threat to America and is in point of fact anti-American in its very nature because it weakens this country. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for conservatives who are against cronyism to denounce the corrupting influence of money in cases like this.

The biggest point to me was that he concealed who he was getting money from and thus violating ethical standards.

Work of prominent climate change denier was funded by energy industry

A prominent academic and climate change denier’s work was funded almost entirely by the energy industry, receiving more than $1.2m from companies, lobby groups and oil billionaires over more than a decade, newly released documents show.
...
According to the documents, the biggest single funder was Southern Company, one of the country’s biggest electricity providers that relies heavily on coal.
...
The Center for Astrophysics does not require scientists to disclose their funding sources. But Pulliam acknowleged that Soon had failed to meet disclosure requirements of some of the journals that published his research. “Soon should have followed those policies,” she said.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Public schools are teaching meaningless liberal crap so we must abolish the Department of Education and make education a for profit initiative.....Hey I didn't say it. It was something stupid a Republican said....on Fox.

Fox News host: Cut AP history to stop ‘meaningless liberal crap’ from ‘trickling down to our kids’

 

[sun rise]

Publicense schools are teaching meaningless liberal crap so we must abolish the Department of Education and make education a for profit initiative.....Hey I didn't say it. It was something stupid a Republican said....on Fox.

Fox News host: Cut AP history to stop ‘meaningless liberal crap’ from ‘trickling down to our kids’

Yup. Education, being a knowledgeable citizen as the founders wanted is "liberal crap". And if people are poor and can't afford education, tough. They can be put in prison or be servants on the estates of their "betters"

Right now I can't see any essential difference in mindset between them and ISIL. Of course, ISIL are bloodthirsty murdering terrorists, but the general disdain for knowledge including science and wanting to impose their world view on everyone is basically the same.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Public schools are teaching meaningless liberal crap so we must abolish the Department of Education and make education a for profit initiative.....Hey I didn't say it. It was something stupid a Republican said....on Fox.

Fox News host: Cut AP history to stop ‘meaningless liberal crap’ from ‘trickling down to our kids’

Being somewhat of a history buff, and having looked over the new AP standards, I really didn't find anything to object to. The standards looked pretty much just like the 100-level US history class I took at college. Any history lesson will be biased, but what the Republicans are wanting in place of the AP standards is so biased it turns history into feeding students a mountain of bullcrap.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Republicans in Kansas, like others around the country, are enacting more Theocratic style legislation. So what's the difference between Christian theocratic authoritarian style legislation and Sharia Law. IMHO....not that much.

Kansas bill would reward foster parents who are married, faithful, alcohol-free | The Wichita Eagle The Wichita Eagle

 

[sun rise]

I don't know if Scott Walker secretly might be supporting Muslim terrorists or not. Or maybe a closet atheist who'se really a supporter of communism? Who can be sure about these things?

Gov. Scott Walker: ‘I don’t know’ whether Obama is a Christian

 

[sun rise]

Republicans in Kansas, like others around the country, are enacting more Theocratic style legislation. So what's the difference between Christian theocratic authoritarian style legislation and Sharia Law. IMHO....not that much.

Kansas bill would reward foster parents who are married, faithful, alcohol-free | The Wichita Eagle The Wichita Eagle

Alcohol free - they must be supporting Muslims.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Alcohol free - they must be supporting Muslims.

Supposedly Indiana is supposed to be working on making it legal for us adults to buy alcohol on Sunday. But, then again, they were supposed to update the penal codes to reduce sentencing for many offensive, including pot, but what ended up happening was many punishments became harsher. And they're trying to push this "done in four" bull with college where they would expect everyone to be done in four years.

 

[sun rise]

Supposedly Indiana is supposed to be working on making it legal for us adults to buy alcohol on Sunday. But, then again, they were supposed to update the penal codes to reduce sentencing for many offensive, including pot, but what ended up happening was many punishments became harsher. And they're trying to push this "done in four" bull with college where they would expect everyone to be done in four years.

Supporting an inflexible bureaucratic rule? I thought they were against bureaucracy and in favor of individual choice and liberty.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Supporting an inflexible bureaucratic rule? I thought they were against bureaucracy and in favor of individual choice and liberty.

Indiana claims to be all about right-wing economics, but really it's nothing but a bunch of zealous pro-business morns who lack anything that we would call foresight and keep giving to the short term gains. With the universities Indiana has, there is no reason why the state should not be able to retain college graduates or promote sustainable energies. But rather the state, despite Purdue, Notre Dame, IU, and Butler, it keeps giving to corporations and loosing students who are educated enough to do anything most states would find appealing, and these students leave Indiana for other places, which is the current trend here.. Even Ball State has an incredible reputation for what it does, but the state does not take advantage of that.