Science Global Warming / Climate Change

[Ormorof]

Indeed the fight against climate change scientists are being led by a plucky gang of underdogs such as the koch brothers, other billionaires, fossil fuel giant corporations and donald trump

Oil companies in particular would never fund research that would put millions of lives in danger and they certainly are above finding scientists willing to day anything for a pile of cash

I mean they were so honest about the effects of leaded petroleum... we would be fools not to trust them!

/sarcasm

 

[DaGaffer]

Over population is the number one problem, not sure whether that has a bearing on this thread but it's the truth.

Of course it is, but you know how you stabilise and even reduce population? Improve prosperity. Poor Africans are having four kids because they expect two of them to die in childhood, just like we did 100 years ago. Rich countries have declining birth rates because it costs more to raise kids and you don't need to have as many. The problem with a lot of Green politics is that its ideology is predicated on all of us being poor, forever, which isn't the way to go.

 

[Raven]

They also have them because they are poorly educated and not taught that religion is a whole crock of bollocks so refuse to rubber up.

 

[Moriath]

Like I said @Big G - don't follow the press or the tin-foil hatters. Especially the ones around here

Cause @Scouse opinion is much more valid than anyone elses.

 

[Tom]

Edit - I will repeat that @Tom has changed his tune somewhat since he got rid of his TVR

I'd have another TVR tbh. I still drive a 3.2 litre petrol 4x4 so I'm no hippy. I really want to get the Porsche 928 thing out of my system. But aren't I allowed to change my mind? I'm not embarrassed to do so.

 

[Moriath]

I'd have another TVR tbh. I still drive a 3.2 litre petrol 4x4 so I'm no hippy. I really want to get the Porsche 928 thing out of my system. But aren't I allowed to change my mind? I'm not embarrassed to do so.

Everyones entitled to change their mind imo. Just as long as they acknowledge as such. Like you did.

 

[Scouse]

Cause @Scouse opinion is much more valid than anyone elses.

You seem to be totally unable to grasp basic arguments Moriath old bean. Where have I said my opinion is much more valid than anyone elses? I've said don't read the press (or take your opinions from the forum) and subscribe to a reputable information source if you want to form a solid opinion - that is the only advice I've given @Big G.


Tho, to rise to your repeated bait I can, however, provide evidence why my opinion is more informed than yours in particular

 

[Job]

Looks like those Paris pie in the sky binding agreements, that will have no effect WHATSOEVER on climate change, might effect.some real bottomlines, so they'll be kicked into the long grass within a year.
Why do they even bother with the charade, Africa is growing at 1 million a week....help them with renewables?.
Who the fuck is kidding who, more likely we will be fighting them for the last lump of coal.

 

[Trem]

I'd have another TVR tbh. I still drive a 3.2 litre petrol 4x4 so I'm no hippy. I really want to get the Porsche 928 thing out of my system. But aren't I allowed to change my mind? I'm not embarrassed to do so.

Of course you are. But change your mind on how the earth works? That the cycles it goes through is no longer a valid point when it was not long ago? Not having a dig here and I reckon I'm just pissed off you sold the TVR.

 

[Moriath]

You seem to be totally unable to grasp basic arguments Moriath old bean. Where have I said my opinion is much more valid than anyone elses? I've said don't read the press (or take your opinions from the forum) and subscribe to a reputable information source if you want to form a solid opinion - that is the only advice I've given @Big G.


Tho, to rise to your repeated bait I can, however, provide evidence why my opinion is more informed than yours in particular

By saying ignore everyone else. And use the same sources as you. As i said at the beginning im not giving my opinion in this thread cause i dont want the same discussions. But @Bodhi etc al have been doing a good job.

 

[DaGaffer]

I still drive a 3.2 litre petrol 4x4 so I'm no hippy.

*cough* hybrid *cough*

 

[Bodhi]

No, the kind of people I am disagreeing with are the kind of people who have had books written about them called

The kind of people whose view you don't agree with are the same ones who design your computer, your car, the systems that deliver energy to your home, that will fix the carotid arteries you'll eventually develop or the cancerous cells in your body.

The kind of people who think anthropogenic climate change is a myth? Donald Trump.

I was reading about Benjamin Franklin the other day. I didn't know that he was the first to plot and codify the Gulfstream. His recommendations were completely ignored, for years, by the British. When they eventually took note, sailing times between London and the US were reduced by two weeks. I suppose the British thought it was bad advice to listen to the words of an intelligent man who designed the first lightning rod.

There are plenty of people on both sides of the debate, from Trump on one extreme to Leonardo Di Caprio (who does very nicely out of it), Al Gore (who believes in rising sea levels so much he spent millions on a beachfront property), and King Creationist himself the Pope. There are also plenty of scientists out there who flat out reject the alarmist nonsense to come out of NASA/NOAA etc - 32,000 in the US alone, so there is far from the consensus you are led to believe.

 

[Bodhi]

Indeed the fight against climate change scientists are being led by a plucky gang of underdogs such as the koch brothers, other billionaires, fossil fuel giant corporations and donald trump

Oil companies in particular would never fund research that would put millions of lives in danger and they certainly are above finding scientists willing to day anything for a pile of cash

I mean they were so honest about the effects of leaded petroleum... we would be fools not to trust them!

/sarcasm

Aw bless, I assume you're still referring to the poor underfunded climate scientists, taking on the might on the fossil fuel lobby - conveniently ignoring the fact that Climate Change is worth $1.5 trillion a year and growing, from the subsidies dished out to the ultimate exercise in money for old rope - carbon credits and trading. And what's more plenty of oil and gas companies are involved in this as well - presumable to hedge their bets for when the catastrophe doesn't happen. Such as:

Shell: http://www.shell.co.uk/sustainability/environment/climate-change-at-shell.html

BP: http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/sustainability.html

Total: http://www.total.uk/en/making-energy-better

I could go on but you get the picture - plenty of the evil Oil and Gas companies are investing in this area now, so I would say whichever way the science goes, they will be able to cope.

However I must admit, funding isn't really my main concern about the whole issue itself - my concern is the science behind it, and the absolute torture and rape of the scientific method to get to the results they have. 10 minutes looking through some of the ClimateGate emails should start to raise a few eyebrows from a scientific perspective, then just look at how much the data they are relying on has been tortured to get the result they want, for example http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/06/...mpt-to-create-warming-by-adjusting-past-data/

There is still so much about the climate system that we don't understand, and frankly I don't see how we can say that man is the dominant influence in the climate when a) the data doesn't back that up and b) we don't even understand all the natural components of climate change yet to distinguish what is natural and what is us. To me that isn't the sort of scientific work we should be basing policy on - especially policy that could quite easily plunge half of the world's population back into poverty that fossil fuels has helped drag them out of.

 

[Moriath]

No, the kind of people I am disagreeing with are the kind of people who have had books written about them called


There are plenty of people on both sides of the debate, from Trump on one extreme to Leonardo Di Caprio (who does very nicely out of it), Al Gore (who believes in rising sea levels so much he spent millions on a beachfront property), and King Creationist himself the Pope. There are also plenty of scientists out there who flat out reject the alarmist nonsense to come out of NASA/NOAA etc - 32,000 in the US alone, so there is far from the consensus you are led to believe.

Except scouse seems to think his is to only credible opinion

 

[Scouse]

Except scouse seems to think his is to only credible opinion

You're such a weirdo Moriath.

Genuinely strange.

 

[Moriath]

You're such a weirdo Moriath.

Genuinely strange.

Glad you think so. I would hate to be normal.

 

[Ormorof]

I never claimed climate research was underfunded

Im pointing out that the people actively fighting to continue pumping shit into the air and sea are not exactly your classic hard done by minority

 

[Scouse]

Glad you think so. I would hate to be normal.

Not good weird.

Why do you keep repeating the same things, even when A) they've been directly refuted in the thread and B) you made them up in the first place? I know you're aspergers, and make allowances for that, but the other stuff is just so strange it beggars belief. Mental.

 

[Bodhi]

CO2 isn't shit though - it's one of the most basic building blocks of life. All the other crap that is a result of burning fossil fuels I fully agree with, but we're making massive strides to reduce these and it's only misguided meddling like the dash for diesel that's set us back in these areas.

If all the focus was on air quality and reducing local pollution I would be fully onboard, and certainly do what I can to help in these areas (recycle, ditched the dirty diesel for a much cleaner petrol), but instead trying to tell us that if we don't repent we'll turn the Earth into another Venus? Get fucked thx.

 

[Moriath]

Not good weird.

Why do you keep repeating the same things, even when A) they've been directly refuted in the thread and B) you made them up in the first place? I know you're aspergers, and make allowances for that, but the other stuff is just so strange it beggars belief. Mental.

Cause i refuted your refute before. Oh and any weird is good to me. Just because you dont like it i am happy with it

 

[Job]

Heres a few facts about co2, firstly it is a tiny greenhouse gas, by itself it couldn't warm the planet...also at around 300ppm it is pretty eell saturated as far as warming potential goes...whack it up to 600 and you only get a small increase.
It all relies on triggers, algae, methane deposits, snow coverage..all of these factors get put into a climate model, they adjust the co2, make educated guesses' real measurements and complete guesses into the mix...they haven't been right once..not even close...Paul the octopus could do better.
Why are people sceptical?
Because they adjust the models after the event, how the fuck can they keep a straight face when doing that, Physcics have more credibility.

 

[Scouse]

they adjust the models after the event

*sigh*

for the billionth time, that's how modelling science works.

In an incredibly easy to understand 5-step explanation I'll lay it out for you:

1) You make a hypothesis
2) You build a model based on your hypothesis
3) You make a prediction based on that model
4) You then go and experimentally verify how accurate your model's predictions were by measuring your predictions against real-world results
5) You then decide to either: A) scrap your model because it's turned out to be bullshit and go back to the drawing board, B) announce your model is perfect! or C) use the results to figure out how your model could be improved, incorporate those improvements and then start from step 1) again.

Mostly A or C happens at step 5.

It's very very simple, very very clever and if anyone can't grasp this concept immediately and incorporate this knowledge and it's implications into all of your future thinking then you should remove your brain because your spinal column does all the thinking your utterly retarded and pointless body will ever need. Or, preferably, submit yourself to be turned into dog-food, because you ain't no use to the human race.

 

[Bodhi]

Adjusting the models yes, fair play, that is how models work. However if you were to evaluate the climate models against real world results, it wouldn't look too good for the models, and they would be scrapped and it would be back to the drawing board.

Adjusting observed data after the fact - that is grotesquely unscientific, and if you can't see any issues with doing that, I would suggest you were next in the queue to become dog food (as you so eloquently put it).

 

[Tom]

Hmmm, who should I believe? Scientists who studied for years to gain their qualifications and who are experts in their respective fields? Or Job, who reads the Daily Mail?

It's a tough one.

 

[Shagrat]

Adjusting the models yes, fair play, that is how models work. However if you were to evaluate the climate models against real world results, it wouldn't look too good for the models, and they would be scrapped and it would be back to the drawing board.

Adjusting observed data after the fact - that is grotesquely unscientific, and if you can't see any issues with doing that, I would suggest you were next in the queue to become dog food (as you so eloquently put it).

the issue is also that these deeply flawed models are being used to set policy now, rather than the science being finished first.

 

[Moriath]

Yay three face palms from scouse from three posts . 100% sucess rate

 

[Tom]

frankly I don't see how we can say that man is the dominant influence in the climate when

Absolutely nobody of note says this.

 

[Tom]

*cough* hybrid *cough*

Its hybrid aspect is more for power and acceleration than anything else. You can't actually drive it normally in purely electric mode unless you have a feather as a right foot. It's pretty good in stop-start traffic though as it isn't chucking anything out the exhaust.

 

[Trem]

Its hybrid aspect is more for power and acceleration than anything else. You can't actually drive it normally in purely electric mode unless you have a feather as a right foot. It's pretty good in stop-start traffic though as it isn't chucking anything out the exhaust.

Lexus?

 

[Scouse]

the issue is also that these deeply flawed models are being used to set policy now, rather than the science being finished first.

I see two obvious killer problems with that argument.

1) The idea of the science being "finished" is a bit silly as it's a process of continual improvement. But models have been in the offing for a long time now. And some are good.

However, having said that:
2) I agree that they've got issues, and because of complexity may never get to the level of accuracy that humans desire. However, that's not an argument for inaction. In fact it's exactly the opposite - it's an argument for more urgent action as we're dealing with uncertain risks and the precautionary principle should take precedence.

It's simply a question of sound risk management...