The Problem With Science: It's Not Credible

[Nephi Inspired]

I now believe that the collective minds of enough of humanity

 

CAN BE EXTREMELY POWERFUL!!!

 

It's DANGEROUS for millions of Christians to blindly believe the Anti-Christ must come

and do all the things written in the Biblical Book of Revelation.

All their combined Intent may make it happen when it would not have!

 

It would be in the best interests of all humanity for EVERYONE to envision

the global warming problem correcting itself naturally instead of blindly believing pro and con science.

Since others do not see the value in this I am left to envision global warming not affecting my life

in any adverse way. After I'm dead...you're on your own!

[pogi]

I did answer your easy questions in post 562.

 

 

I told you I didn't have a lot of time, but I did answer later in post 562. 

 

No, your post 562 was in response to my comments (not questions) in post 559.  My questions are in post 542, I have asked the exact same questions several times throughout this thread, and you guys dodge them every single time, so I am tired of playing this game.  You never addressed my questions other than by saying this: 

 

You can ask any climate scientist, they will answer your question, try 

 

 

Again, I haven not further interest in speaking with you on this topic.  Just wanted to make that clear so you don't waste anymore time trying to engage me. 

[Nephi Inspired]

"Again, I haven not further interest in speaking with you on this topic.  Just wanted to make that clear so you don't waste anymore time trying to engage me."

 

MY COMMENT:

 

On his knee offering you a ring, eh?

I've heard of guys like that 

[thesometimesaint]

Science proves something it true then proves it to be a fraud

Why should you blindly believe ANYTHING science currently says?

Tomorrow science may prove it to be untrue.

 

I used to be brainwashed to blindly believe mainstream science.

My days of such gullibility are OVER

 

If you want to blindly believe all that information about global warming

go right ahead! I don't intend to even try to stop you

 

As for me: Maybe it's true and maybe it isn't

What I do know is there is no indication that the overall temperature

is any different than it usually is in my area of the world

May it always stay moderate no matter what science may say!

 

Science can't prove anything to be true. What it can do is disprove an idea by presenting physical evidence.

 

You don't have to believe anything anyone says. Test it for yourself. But be aware that it really is a waste of your time to constantly re-invent the wheel. But it is your time to waste.

 

Yep that is the nature of science. Newton was correct until he wasn't. Laplace was correct until he wasn't. Einstein was correct until he wasn't. Quantum Mechanics is correct until/if it no longer is.

 

I've never suggested that you accept anything concerning our natural world on blind faith. Such is religion not science.

 

Science doesn't care what you believe. Only what can be demonstrated.

 

Just present physical evidence that disproves AGW. I'm not trying to stop you from believing anything you want. All I ask is if you want to convince me that it doesn't exist you need more than just your beliefs.

 

Maybe it is true, maybe it isn't. The science so far presented demonstrates that it is real.

 

That is patently false.

SEE https://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KIo9dgJiRVKjcAd5EsnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByZWc0dGJtBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQDBGdwb3MDMQ--?p=bad+badder+best&vid=73b81bb178417daa2eebf08b4200398f&l=7%3A28&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DWN.v2f7Vuy%252brlYB7qrHHIKLkA%26pid%3D15.1&rurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DtciQts-8Cxo&***=Bad%2C+Badder%2C+BEST&c=0&sigr=11boljur6&sigt=10ha5qmo2&sigi=121e6v5n6&age=1319547789&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Av&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=mozilla&tt=b

 

You do know the difference between weather and climate don't you?

[thesometimesaint]

I now believe that the collective minds of enough of humanity

 

CAN BE EXTREMELY POWERFUL!!!

 

It's DANGEROUS for millions of Christians to blindly believe the Anti-Christ must come

and do all the things written in the Biblical Book of Revelation.

All their combined Intent may make it happen when it would not have!

 

It would be in the best interests of all humanity for EVERYONE to envision

the global warming problem correcting itself naturally instead of blindly believing pro and con science.

Since others do not see the value in this I am left to envision global warming not affecting my life

in any adverse way. After I'm dead...you're on your own!

 

WOW. That is probably one the most misanthropic statements I've ever heard.

Edited April 7, 2015 by thesometimesaint

[TheSkepticChristian]

 

No, your post 562 was in response to my comments (not questions) in post 559.  My questions are in post 542, I have asked the exact same questions several times throughout this thread, and you guys dodge them every single time, so I am tired of playing this game.  You never addressed my questions other than by saying this: 

 

I told you I didn't have enough time to respond, so I didn't look at the graphs carefully. 

I already responded to your first graph. 

 

Your second graph "GISP2 Ice core last 10 000 years inter-glacial temperature"  uses temperatures from the top of the Greenland ice sheet. This data ends in 1855, long before modern global warming began. The first data point in the file is at 95 years BP. This would make 95 years BP 1855 — a full 155 years ago. The claim that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present is not accurate for central Greenland, let alone the global record.  

 

 

The overall trend is downward cooling. Am I wrong?

 

How many graphs do I have to show you? I already showed data that proves the modern global warming is accelerating 10 times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming. 

 

Again, I haven not further interest in speaking with you on this topic.  Just wanted to make that clear so you don't waste anymore time trying to engage me. 

 

Sure, 

 

What I empirically know is the Earth is pretty flat where I live.

 

Nice parody  

Edited April 7, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Nephi Inspired]

WOW. That is probably one the most misanthropic statements I've ever heard.

 

How is envisioning the global warming problem correcting itself naturally misanthropic?

[Nephi Inspired]

Science can't prove anything to be true. What it can do is disprove an idea by presenting physical evidence.

 

You don't have to believe anything anyone says. Test it for yourself. But be aware that it really is a waste of your time to constantly re-invent the wheel. But it is your time to waste.

 

Yep that is the nature of science. Newton was correct until he wasn't. Laplace was correct until he wasn't. Einstein was correct until he wasn't. Quantum Mechanics is correct until/if it no longer is.

 

I've never suggested that you accept anything concerning our natural world on blind faith. Such is religion not science.

 

Science doesn't care what you believe. Only what can be demonstrated.

 

Just present physical evidence that disproves AGW. I'm not trying to stop you from believing anything you want. All I ask is if you want to convince me that it doesn't exist you need more than just your beliefs.

 

Maybe it is true, maybe it isn't. The science so far presented demonstrates that it is real.

 

That is patently false.

SEE https://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KIo9dgJiRVKjcAd5EsnIlQ;_ylu=X3oDMTByZWc0dGJtBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQDBGdwb3MDMQ--?p=bad+badder+best&vid=73b81bb178417daa2eebf08b4200398f&l=7%3A28&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DWN.v2f7Vuy%252brlYB7qrHHIKLkA%26pid%3D15.1&rurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DtciQts-8Cxo&***=Bad%2C+Badder%2C+BEST&c=0&sigr=11boljur6&sigt=10ha5qmo2&sigi=121e6v5n6&age=1319547789&fr2=p%3As%2Cv%3Av&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=mozilla&tt=b

 

You do know the difference between weather and climate don't you?

 

What goes on in other parts of the world, WHERE I CANNOT VERIFY IT FOR MYSELF, is suspect to me.

What I do know is the overall climate in my area of the world is still moderate and I am grateful for that.

I suggest you envision the global warming situation correcting itself naturally...

 

NO MATTER WHAT SCIENCE MAY SAY!!

[Nephi Inspired]

Atheist scientists interpret the evidence in a way that supports Darwinian evolution

 

Scientific proponents of Intelligent Design interpret the same evidence differently

 

Are YOU the one we are supposed to blindly trust as to which interpretation is correct

on this or any other matter pertaining to scientific evidence?

[TheSkepticChristian]

I suggest you learn from the Piltdown Man scandal

 

Creationists (in the early 20th century) assumed that it was a deformed human or simply ignored it, but scientists discovered that it was a hoax, not the creationists. I am not sure if you are making parodies.

Edited April 7, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

 

No, your post 562 was in response to my comments (not questions) in post 559.  My questions are in post 542, I have asked the exact same questions several times throughout this thread, and you guys dodge them every single time, so I am tired of playing this game.  You never addressed my questions other than by saying this: 

 

 

Again, I haven not further interest in speaking with you on this topic.  Just wanted to make that clear so you don't waste anymore time trying to engage me. 

 

This is pretty much what happens every time these threads come up. Our questions never get answered. And it always ends up the same. "Go ask a scientist". 

[TheSkepticChristian]

This is pretty much what happens every time these threads come up. Our questions never get answered. And it always ends up the same. "Go ask a scientist". 

 

I just answered it in post 631

Edited April 7, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[TheSkepticChristian]

 

 

Let,s zoom in on the last 10,000 years (above) and see what kind of general temperature trend has started:

From this point of view, is the earth warming or cooling? Does the current climb in temperature look that scary?  Not in comparison to the climb around 8100 years ago - No comparison!!!  

 

Your graph "GISP2 Ice core last 10 000 years inter-glacial temperature"  uses temperatures from the top of the Greenland ice sheet. This data ends in 1855, long before modern global warming began. The first data point in the file is at 95 years BP. This would make 95 years BP 1855 — a full 155 years ago. The claim that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present is not accurate for central Greenland, let alone the global record.  

 

I already showed data that proves the modern global warming is accelerating 10 times faster than the average rate of ice-age-recovery warming. 

 

Edited April 7, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[bcuzbcuz]

 

 

People blindly believe the Earth is round

for the VERY SAME REASON they once believed the Earth was flat!!

 

SCIENCE SHOULD NEVER BE BLINDLY TRUSTED!

 

Flat earth? That´s more a concept BLINDLY added to American textbooks that try to give a simplified history about Columbus. Actually a dumbing down of history.

Learned scholars (those that could read, the average man on the street could not) not only knew the concept but calculated the circumference of the earth more than 2100 years ago. Check out Eratosthenes, a Greek scholar living in Egypt 200 years before the birth of Christ. He even got the tilt of the earth correct. Pythagorus, Aristotle and Plato all believed in the concept of a sperical earth.

[Nephi Inspired]

Creationists (in the early 20th century) assumed that it was a deformed human or simply ignored it, but scientists discovered that it was a hoax, not the creationists. I am not sure if you are making parodies.

 

BUT IT WAS IN SCIENCE TEXTBOOKS AS A FACT FOR 40 YEARS!!!

 

ARE YOU EVEN 40 YEARS OLD???

[Nephi Inspired]

You science brainwashed people don't want to realize that in the near past

if you were to tell mainstream science that atoms are made of mostly empty space

and are not actually sold at all...

 

THEY WOULD HAVE LAUGHED YOU OUT OF THE ROOM

 

...calling you crazy and in need of mental help!

 

You science blind don't realize this because those who control

the educational BRAINWASHING PROCESS DO NOT WANT YOU TO THINK

outside of the proverbial 'box' they have your little minds in.

 

THEY DO NOT WANT CRITICAL THINKERS!!

 

THEY WANT BLIND FAITH BELIEVERS

 

Those who dare to critically think about what is being taught

are asking to fail. How many times did our teachers encourage us

to critically think about what we were being taught?

I don't know about you, but NEVER is my answer!

 

I suggest you keep this in mind before you blindly believe

all sorts of fancy graphs and scientific information.

It may ALL eventually be proven wrong!!!

 

There is quite a bit of evidence that

mainstream science's precious "Lucy"

is the new Piltdown Man

 

It's amazing the lengths science will go to

in order to perpetuate a scam:

 

https://youtu.be/yJ5VPmCHM0o

 

Do you blindly believe 'Lucy' is Darwin's precious

missing link? Really??

[pogi]

Your graph "GISP2 Ice core last 10 000 years inter-glacial temperature"  uses temperatures from the top of the Greenland ice sheet. This data ends in 1855, long before modern global warming began. The first data point in the file is at 95 years BP. This would make 95 years BP 1855 — a full 155 years ago. The claim that most of the past 10,000 years have been warmer than the present is not accurate for central Greenland, let alone the global record.  

 

Ok, have to correct this false information before I bow out.  The data in the graph ends at the year "2000 AD" not 1855 as you suggest.  The 95 years BP is the beginning of the "modern warm period" (the part of graph in red, 1905-2000).  The second graph I posted (which you conveniently left out), made this point evidently clear.  Once again, you have demonstrated that I am indeed speaking with the wrong person. 

 

It IS absolutely accurate that most of the past 10,000 years Greenland has been warmer than present day Greenland.  In fact, just 1,000 years ago it was 32.9 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than present day of the chart.  But that requires an ability to read graphs and convert Celsius to Fahrenheit to decipher this fact. 

[ERayR]

Ok, have to correct this false information before I bow out.  The data in the graph ends at the year "2000 AD" not 1855 as you suggest.  The 95 years BP is the beginning of the "modern warm period" (the part of graph in red, 1905-2000).  The second graph I posted (which you conveniently left out), made this point evidently clear.  Once again, you have demonstrated that I am indeed speaking with the wrong person. 

 

It IS absolutely accurate that most of the past 10,000 years Greenland has been warmer than present day Greenland.  In fact, just 1,000 years ago it was 32.9 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than present day of the chart.  But that requires an ability to read graphs and convert Celsius to Fahrenheit to decipher this fact. 

 

Insert something here about doing the same thing and expecting different results.

[TheSkepticChristian]

Ok, have to correct this false information before I bow out.  The data in the graph ends at the year "2000 AD" not 1855 as you suggest.  The 95 years BP is the beginning of the "modern warm period" (the part of graph in red, 1905-2000).  The second graph I posted (which you conveniently left out), made this point evidently clear.  Once again, you have demonstrated that I am indeed speaking with the wrong person. 

 

Please read about BP so you can know what it means. The part in red ends at 95 yrs Before the Present, how can it be 2000 AD?  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Before_Present

Please read 

http://hot-topic.co.nz/easterbrooks-wrong-again/

 

As for the other graphs

 What caught my eye was that Dr. Humlum makes the same mistake that everyone else seems to make.  They append the modern instrumental record on the end of the GISP2 data to suggest that current warming is nothing out of the ordinary.  But as I've previously pointed out in Crux of a Core Part 1 and Part 2 this is in error.  This is comparing one high latitude local proxy (GISP2) with the modern global record.

Fig 1 - GISP2 temperature data and EPICA Dome C CO2 data from Climate4you.com

When I located this diagram on his website I wrote a short email to Dr. Humlum pointing out the error of conflating a local record with the global instrumental record and pointed him to Dr. Jason Box's website where Dr. Box shows that the temperature since at the Greenland summit has risen over 2C since the termination of the GISP2 data.

Dr. Humlum kindly responded:

In response Dr. Humlum has, apparently, updated the chart but only to reflect ~1.0C, the lowest estimation contained in Box et al 2009 Greenland Ice Sheet Surface Air Temperature Variability: 1840–2007.  With all due respect to Dr. Humlum, I need to put some shoulder behind this boulder and point out that Dr. Box has an additional 3 years of data past 2007 represented on his website that pushes the average temperature change up closer to 2.0C.  

Dear Rob

You are entirely correct; my error. I will change it in a short while.

Thank you very much for pointing this out.

All the best,

Ole

The Greenland temperature anomaly for 2010 is 3C above 1855 but the average for the past decade has been 2C above 1855.

Fig 2 - Climate4you chart updated with current data for the Greenland summit

You can see now that the rise in temperature, comparing local record with local record, shows that there has been a marked increase in temperature at the summit on a scale beyond any other change in the Greenland record except for the known 8.2k year event.  

 

The Mythology Continues

Like any great Greek tragedy the story just keeps going.  You'll notice that I've left theEPICA Dome C data in each of these charts, because Dr. Humlum is contrasting the two.  Being that CO2 is a well mixed gas in the atmosphere I would suggest that this is also an act of conflating a global record with a local record.

My response is to merely add in the modern record for CO2 concentrations on the EPICAdata.  Heck, if we're going to add the modern temperature data should we not also be adding the modern CO2 data?  It only seems logical.

Fig 3 - Climate4you chart with modern CO2 data added

I would venture to guess that the modern record was not added here because, given the scale, it doesn't fit.  If we merely rescaled the CO2 data to match the known directradiative forcing of 1C for a doubling of CO2 (to match the GISP2 chart above it) then theEPICA data through the Holocene would look pretty much like a straight line with a nice little hockey tip at the end.

Fig 4 - Adjusted EPICA Dome C data with modern CO2 record appended.

 

My Hubris...

In the story of Sisyphus he is banished to his task by Zeus for Sisyphus' hubris in his belief that he was more clever than Zeus.  Maybe this is my own hubris in taking on each of these presentations of GISP2.  In Albert Camus' 1942 essay titled The Myth of Sisyphus he suggests that, actually, Sisyphus is quite happy in his eternal task.  Sisyphus, he says, represents the eternal spirit of the human heart.

If you want to know where I am, among other things, you can bet I'm happily browsing the internet looking for another boulder.

Edited April 8, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[TheSkepticChristian]

  The second graph I posted (which you conveniently left out),

 

See above, post 644 

 

 

Edited April 8, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[TheSkepticChristian]

Pogi,

 

I did your homework, I researched all your graphs, and I just gave you all the answers, see post 644

 

Now you give me some answers, how do you explain the graphs below? 

 

 

Figure 7: Anthropogenic plus natural vs. just natural radiative forcing temperature change vs. observed global surface temperature increase (Meehl 2004)

 

Edited April 8, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[thesometimesaint]

How is envisioning the global warming problem correcting itself naturally misanthropic?

 

It was your comment that you will be dead so you don't care.

 

What goes on in other parts of the world, WHERE I CANNOT VERIFY IT FOR MYSELF, is suspect to me.

What I do know is the overall climate in my area of the world is still moderate and I am grateful for that.

I suggest you envision the global warming situation correcting itself naturally...

 

NO MATTER WHAT SCIENCE MAY SAY!!

 

Yes you can just get off our lazy butt and do the work.

 

You know what, the temperature is still moderate all over the world. If it weren't moderate we wouldn't be here.  The whole world has experienced about a 1-1/2 degree C temperature rise over the last 50 or so years. That is Global Warming. I would love to envision it. Very little would maker me happier. Unfortunately that just isn't what we see happening.

 

That is perhaps the silliest thing you've said so far. Galileo would be impressed.

Edited April 8, 2015 by thesometimesaint

[pogi]

I just gave you all the answers

 

 

Now you give me some answers

 

My answer to you is - I hope that you keep posting as Skeptic, I got really tired of your annoying videos as MFT.  Now if you could just get rid of the crap blogs...

[TheSkepticChristian]

 

Keep laughing, but at least I am not blind, I can see that your own graph ends at 95 BP

 

 

 Now if you could just get rid of the crap blogs...

 

Well, I can quote the climate researchers and cite important scientific papers, but you don't like them. 

Edited April 9, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[ERayR]

 

 

My answer to you is - I hope that you keep posting as Skeptic, I got really tired of your annoying videos as MFT.  Now if you could just get rid of the crap blogs...

 

You noticed too.