jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 I just proved that the stuff you present is flawed, why don't your respond to that? Given that he apparently doesn't read what is posted or linked, that shouldn't be a surprise.
pogi Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Wow, I wouldn't have predicted this thread would end up on global warming. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all Lol...I actually predicted it. When I saw the title of the thread I thought that sometimesaint and SkepticChristian would surely be involved. I honestly asked myself, "I wonder how many pages before this turns into a debate about global warming." I started laughing out loud when I opened the link!
Zakuska Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 I just proved that the stuff you present is flawed, why don't your respond to that? No more flawed than the stuff you presented.
Zakuska Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Lol...I actually predicted it. When I saw the title of the thread I thought that sometimesaint and SkepticChristian would surely be involved. I honestly asked myself, "I wonder how many pages before this turns into a debate about global warming." I started laughing out loud when I opened the link! Since many threads eventually turn into this. The mods should just dedicate a section to it.
jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Since many threads eventually turn into this. The mods should just dedicate a section to it. I'm just curious why you think urban heating is a greater factor than is carbon dioxide, given that the Berkeley study controlled for urban vs. rural temperatures.
TheSkepticChristian Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) No more flawed than the stuff you presented. See 2:20 to 2:50 Edited August 6, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
pogi Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Moreover, it appears likely that essentially all of this increase results from the human emission of greenhouse gases. This just in: "It has been reported by scientists at NASA that human flatulance is primarily responsible for global warming. Beans and broccoli are being banned in countries worldwide in effort to curb the warming effects. It has just been reported that Beano is now being added to city water supplies." NASA is 38% confident with their conclusions. 2
jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 This just in: "It has been reported by scientists at NASA that human flatulance is primarily responsible for global warming. Beans and broccoli are being banned in countries worldwide in effort to curb the warming effects. It has just been reported that Beano is now being added to city water supplies." NASA is 38% confident with their conclusions. Hmmm. Which should I accept? A 3-year review of all the statistical data and models, or Internet sarcasm? I wonder ...
Zakuska Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 I'm just curious why you think urban heating is a greater factor than is carbon dioxide, given that the Berkeley study controlled for urban vs. rural temperatures.When one looks at the percentages of CO2 in the Atmosphere compared to other Green house gases one realises its neglegable. Water vapor is by far the most important Green house gas. (Even Skeptic was arguing that a few pages back) I will have to look up and read the berkley study and if you have got a link to the new dataset of land & ocean it would be appreciated.
jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 When one looks at the percentages of CO2 in the Atmosphere compared to other Green house gases one realises its neglegable. Water vapor is by far the most important Green house gas. (Even Skeptic was arguing that a few pages back) I will have to look up and read the berkley study and if you have got a link to the new dataset of land & ocean it would be appreciated. Now I know you didn't read the article, as there are several links to the data in it. But, just 'cause I'm a nice guy, here it is. http://berkeleyearth.org/
jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 This is from Berkeley Earth's web page: From 2010-2012, Berkeley Earth systematically addressed the five major concerns that global warming skeptics had identified, and did so in a systematic and objective manner. The first four were potential biases from data selection, data adjustment, poor station quality, and the urban heat island effect.Our analysis showed that these issues did not unduly bias the record. The fifth concern related to the over reliance on large and complex global climate models by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the attribution of the recent temperature increase to anthropogenic forcings. We obtained a long and accurate record, spanning 250 years and showed that it could be well-fit with a simple model that included a volcanic term and, as an anthropogenic proxy, CO2 concentration. We concluded that the record could be reproduced by just these two contributions, and that inclusion of direct variations in solar intensity did not contribute to the fit.
TheSkepticChristian Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) When one looks at the percentages of CO2 in the Atmosphere compared to other Green house gases one realises its neglegable. Water vapor is by far the most important Green house gas. (Even Skeptic was arguing that a few pages back) I said, "CO2 warming causes more water vapor, a greenhouse gas which amplifies warming, but water vapor is relatively short-lived." and Urban and rural regions show the same warming trend.https://www.skepticalscience.com/urban-heat-island-effect.htm This just in: "It has been reported by scientists at NASA that human flatulance is primarily responsible for global warming. Beans and broccoli are being banned in countries worldwide in effort to curb the warming effects. It has just been reported that Beano is now being added to city water supplies." You still believe no warming since 1997? Edited August 6, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
thesometimesaint Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 As have been suggested back to the original OP. Entropy works, and nothing we've found so far can reverse it.
ERayR Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Hmmm. Which should I accept? A 3-year review of all the statistical data and models, or Internet sarcasm? I wonder ... Follow the money.
jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Follow the money. Which money? Big environmental, or big energy and business? The study I cited was funded by the Koch foundation and the federal government, so I'm not sure which money I'm supposed to follow.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Hmmm. Which should I accept? A 3-year review of all the statistical data and models, or Internet sarcasm? I wonder ...Models are not data John. You might as well throw them out. They are false.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Which money? Big environmental, or big energy and business? The study I cited was funded by the Koch foundation and the federal government, so I'm not sure which money I'm supposed to follow.Yup it is always the Koch brothers. BTW the correct answer is always the government which funds crony capitalism.
jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Models are not data John. You might as well throw them out. They are false. Actually, you check models against the data, which is what happened in this case.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 When one looks at the percentages of CO2 in the Atmosphere compared to other Green house gases one realises its neglegable. Water vapor is by far the most important Green house gas. (Even Skeptic was arguing that a few pages back) I will have to look up and read the berkley study and if you have got a link to the new dataset of land & ocean it would be appreciated.At it's highest amount it is .04%. That is still a trace gas. Doom and gloom I tell you.
jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Yup it is always the Koch brothers. BTW the correct answer is always the government which funds crony capitalism. No, I have nothing against the Koch brothers (I used to work in the oil business, after all). I mentioned them because of the weird hatred and fear so many people on the left have of them. At the same time, a lot of anti-environmentalists feel the federal government is slanted in the other direction. Don't the two kind of cancel each other out?
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Actually, you check models against the data, which is what happened in this case. Yeah and those models predicted 18 years of non heating? 1
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 No, I have nothing against the Koch brothers (I used to work in the oil business, after all). I mentioned them because of the weird hatred and fear so many people on the left have of them. At the same time, a lot of anti-environmentalists feel the federal government is slanted in the other direction. Don't the two kind of cancel each other out?No. John you make me laugh though. Right now the in thing is to have the government supplant your business.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Lol...I actually predicted it. When I saw the title of the thread I thought that sometimesaint and SkepticChristian would surely be involved. I honestly asked myself, "I wonder how many pages before this turns into a debate about global warming." I started laughing out loud when I opened the link! I think you should stick around. The last conversation was great. I could go for more of that.
jkwilliams Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 Yeah and those models predicted 18 years of non heating? Go look at the research. What have you got to lose?
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 6, 2015 Posted August 6, 2015 (edited) Go look at the research. What have you got to lose?I have looked at it. I know right now that there is not a very high chance (38%) that 1998 was the hottest year. And since then there has been no heating or warming. Do you dispute that? Edited August 6, 2015 by Mola Ram Suda Ram
Recommended Posts