Global warming

[UncleBuck]

volcanoes and fraud and bad science, oh my!

yep, it's all a decades in the making hoax involving thousands of scientists in dozens of countries and hundreds of organizations, all uncovered by birchers who took time off from their busy schedule of denouncing multiculturalism and cracking the fluoride conspiracy.

makes perfect sense.

 

[NoDrama]

volcanoes and fraud and bad science, oh my!

yep, it's all a decades in the making hoax involving thousands of scientists in dozens of countries and hundreds of organizations, all uncovered by birchers who took time off from their busy schedule of denouncing multiculturalism and cracking the fluoride conspiracy.

makes perfect sense.

Thousands of scientists? Appeal to Authority and argumentum ad populum all rolled into 1 post, how quaint.
Thousands, nay MILLIONS of people knew that the prices of real estate would never go down, after all, it had never happened before. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve even told us it would never go down.

Did real estate prices go down?

I suppose if I get 20,000 nuclear physicists to all say that the moon is made of cheese your gonna believe them? I mean you would have to believe them, after all there are so many and each one has more education in his little pinky finger than you have in your entire body, so they MUST be right.

 

[cannabineer]

PERHAPS the mauna loa site selection was simply for convenience, but i doubt it. as to the exact correlation with other sources, i still have doubts about the impartiality of the global climate wonks, as they have demonstrated a willingness to alter data to suit their agenda.

That's a difference between you and me. You view global warming as the Enemy to be taken down. Your motive isn't to find out what's happening so much as to bloody the noses of the opponents. I otoh am seeing which facts I can trust, and to build from there.

if i wanted to find CO2 i could, and if i wanted to create the appearance of correlation among many sites it would be simple to change the numbers to suit my desires. weather stations that dont report increases in temperature get shut down, with no comment from the people who should be watching for shenanigans, the russian temp data was deliberately altered to show temps the russians never reported, the indian glacial measurements were deliberately altered to show shrinkage far in excess of measured reductions in those areas where a reduction was noted, and those glaciers which were shown to be advancing were re-imagined as shrinking or stable.

Can you provide links demonstrating this? Links of a higher quality than the ones regarding Himalayan glaciers; Ginja has already filleted those.

see im not even suggesting that it's poorly exectued science im saying FRAUD on a massive scale is what probably going on. the global warming community has become a religion, and non-believers are cast out, while those who make wild unsupportable claims are embraced as heroes.

does it make sense to YOU that CO2 measurements should be done on the side of an active volcano?

What I would look for is any sign that the volcano's activity is upsetting the data. There should be spikes when the volcano is being more or very active. I see none in the data and accept that as prima facie evidence of the suitability of gathering data at the site.
Mauna Loa has much to recommend it. It's far away from industry and the exuberant give&take of large forested areas. It's at altitude and above most weather. being not far from the equator, it experiences good mixing of air from other latitudes.

Note that the pulsing and slope of the rise on CO2 from the four reporting stations ... the others of which provide a good control for the goodness of the Mauna Loa site and data, match. So I accept the data as sound. The other element of this is that CO2 can be monitored and recorded using universally available tech. Don't believe the numbers? For not much money you can have your own instrument.

or that other locations which are NOT on the side of a volcano should show the same numbers? either mauna loa is correct and CO2 is increasing to almost 3% globally, and the volcano is unique in that it's the only active volcano in the world that doesnt release CO2, or perhaps the other reports are indulging in the already established preference to "Hide The Decline".

you cant sniff for CO2 in the middle of the northwest forests and get 3%, then sniff at the tailpipe of a running automobile and get the same number without something being wrong someplace.

between fear of exile from the academic establishment, the drive to publish or perish, the need for funding, and the abject terror of being declared a "climate denier" theres plenty of reasons to fake results.

You'll have to demonstrate to me that that is a problem. The key to demonstrating it is to show that it not only occurs, but routinely, for a significant percentage of submissions. If you can't, I have every privilege to counter your claim of BS with a claim that you're subscribing to a colossal conspiracy concept. (I won't sully the word "theory" here, even if the popularizers have misused it for decades now.)

if your latest paper becomes the hot new topic in the media, you might even guest segment on the view or a cushy job as a government advisor, if your latest paper casts doubts on the global climate change model, then youll be teaching remedial chemistry at a community college in oxnard. if youre lucky.

I consider that a catchy idea, a typical "wedge" for rumor, but I implore you: substantiate, or retract. Stop feeding the hype machine that I see operating in the denier camp. cn

 

[Dr Kynes]

volcanoes and fraud and bad science, oh my!

yep, it's all a decades in the making hoax involving thousands of scientists in dozens of countries and hundreds of organizations, all uncovered by birchers who took time off from their busy schedule of denouncing multiculturalism and cracking the fluoride conspiracy.

makes perfect sense.

"As the late Stephen Schneider, Stanford University Professor who had been one of the leading advocates of the dangers of global cooling in the 1970s, and then, as the lead author for the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was one of the leading advocates of global warming, explained in an interview with Discover magazine:

"And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means both."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2011/07/25/the-goal-is-power-the-global-warming-conspiracy/

​

yep. its all bircher conspiracy nuts and anti-communist propaganda.

in 70 years every beach in california will be under water, and youll need a canoe if you plan on hitting the venice beach boardwalk or the santa monica pier.

2 meters of sea level rise is what's predicted. and when that happens, then ill become a believer.

i used to live in vallejo ca, a city that has now gone bankrupt, but in the middle of the financial crisis, the city dropped several million for a study on the possible ramifications of global warming and seal level rise. the results:

by 2099 vallejo calif will see 18 feet of sea level rise, and thats without the tides, which is pure bullshit. the fearmongers conned a city out of 3 million they didnt have and couldnt afford so they could plan for a sea level rise that will NOT be happening, not even over 100 years.

global warming is the latest scam for flim flam artists, just like the "garbage crisis" of the 80's, the new ice age of the 70's and the nuclear holocaust of the 60's. fear sells more crap than concern, scientific study or reasoned planning.

 

[squarepush3r]

The Atlantic Sea driven by the North Atlantic Drift...1,000's of square miles of "usable space".

it is extremely expensive

 

[fdd2blk]

if the sea rises, back up.

problem solved.

we need new jobs. how about the rebuilding of all the flooded cities? we built this country once already. how hard would it be to do it again?

OH MY GOD!!!! i'm scared.

 

[Dr Kynes]

That's a difference between you and me. You view global warming as the Enemy to be taken down. Your motive isn't to find out what's happening so much as to bloody the noses of the opponents. I otoh am seeing which facts I can trust, and to build from there.

not quite, i can see some logic in the reports, and reasonable measures are warranted, i despise the fearmongering, absolute declarations and lies of the global warming/climate change hucksters, just as i despise the keyensian economics hucksters and fools who claim the coming rapture will usher in a paradise for the faithful. hating liars doesnt mean i hate science or reject a hypothesis because i dont want to see the truth. i reject the claims from the hucksters because they lied, many times.

Can you provide links demonstrating this? Links of a higher quality than the ones regarding Himalayan glaciers; Ginja has already filleted those.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-01-21/india/28148647_1_climate-change-glaciers-r-k-pachauri
http://reason.com/archives/2012/06/24/glacier-scare
http://www.globalclimatescam.com/category/ice/page/2/

and the reports which take the iaapc's position throw around words like "arrogance", "deniers", and "controversial" like they are going out of style. india is pissed.

What I would look for is any sign that the volcano's activity is upsetting the data. There should be spikes when the volcano is being more or very active. I see none in the data and accept that as prima facie evidence of the suitability of gathering data at the site.
Mauna Loa has much to recommend it. It's far away from industry and the exuberant give&take of large forested areas. It's at altitude and above most weather. being not far from the equator, it experiences good mixing of air from other latitudes.

after much bothersome digging (done because YOU said i should) i can accept that the controls on the data at mauna loa are good, and their data is accurate enough for getting on with, but noaa's not selling global warming, the shysters at the iaapc are. even their own website defers to the iaapc when it comes down to the question of global warming, and they are far more cautious about the claims than the reckless global warming enthusiasts like al gore. the best noaa is willing to say about global warming is:
"Separating out the impact of human activity from natural climate variation is extremely difficult. Nonetheless, the IPCC concluded there is a 'discernible human influence' on climate. This means the observed global warming is unlikely to be the result of natural variability alone and that human activities are at least partially responsible." which is far different from the doomsday scenarios being foisted by the proponents of man caused global climate change. when noaa say aww fuck, we're screwed, ill listen, since they dont try to "hide the decline" or offer up nightmare level worst case scenarios to try and foist their agenda on the mush brains in washington.

Note that the pulsing and slope of the rise on CO2 from the four reporting stations ... the others of which provide a good control for the goodness of the Mauna Loa site and data, match. So I accept the data as sound. The other element of this is that CO2 can be monitored and recorded using universally available tech. Don't believe the numbers? For not much money you can have your own instrument. You'll have to demonstrate to me that that is a problem. The key to demonstrating it is to show that it not only occurs, but routinely, for a significant percentage of submissions. If you can't, I have every privilege to counter your claim of BS with a claim that you're subscribing to a colossal conspiracy concept. (I won't sully the word "theory" here, even if the popularizers have misused it for decades now.)

http://wattsupwiththat.com/climategate/

i would value your opinion on this websites claims. it looks pretty fucked up to me.

I consider that a catchy idea, a typical "wedge" for rumor, but I implore you: substantiate, or retract. Stop feeding the hype machine that I see operating in the denier camp. cn

again, im not a denier.
i remember when acid rain was a concern, and REASONED measured and successful programs were instituted to stop the problem.

back in the 80's LA's smog was a nightmare, now it's a lot better, some days you cant even see the "air", but fixing that problem did not require a massive new tax on every exhalation, they never got around to fitting methane traps on the asses of cattle (yes. that was one of the proposals) or eliminating 2/3 of the earth's population.

after Silent Spring, The Population Bomb, Earth in the Balance, and the "garbage crisis" were all proven to be nothying more than hoaxes and fearmongering i have little trust left in me for the jackasses who sell their agenda based on fear, unreasoning terror and bullshit hollwood movies designed to cause panic at the expense of reason. too many reputable scientists have too many doubts for me to jump on board with al gore, and go all H D Throeau, and live in a cabin on the shores of walden pond.

ginja THINKS he has this shit all figured out, but he also thinks theres no forests left in britain and western europe, and stone age man engaged in wholesale forest clearances for farmland. some dingbats are even claiming the little ice age was caused by the black plague. cuz europe's pandemic was GLOBAL in it's reach.

it's that kind of hyperbole that drives doubt deeper into my mind.

 

[cannabineer]

Dr, I clicked on your link but could not find a "start here". Anything specific you'd like me to inspect?

Also, I am finding from a scan of the link titles that this is more about journalism (politics) than science. I'm maybe not the best guy to take a pitchfork to the political side of this controversy. cn

 

[Kervork]

There is only one organization powerfull enough to perpetuate the myth of global warming....

The Illuminati!

 

[Dr Kynes]

Dr, I clicked on your link but could not find a "start here". Anything specific you'd like me to inspect?

Also, I am finding from a scan of the link titles that this is more about journalism (politics) than science. I'm maybe not the best guy to take a pitchfork to the political side of this controversy. cn

this website has the actual data from the climate gate emails and the hidden prgrams they used to shift the numbers around to make shit look dire as fuck.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/climategate-hide-the-decline-codified/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/when-results-go-bad/

just for starters.

but rememebr im not a scientist, im a plowboy, so i didnt go digging for the raw data. i used to believe the global warming hype before i started looking harder at the crazy shit after i saw al gore's wacky movie and i was shocked, not by the claims he made, but by how he could make them with a straight face.

 

[UncleBuck]

this website has the actual data from the climate gate emails

exonerated, bircher boy.

 

[iiKode]

That last part made me laugh, and im not even high!

 

[Doer]

The Atlantic Sea driven by the North Atlantic Drift...1,000's of square miles of "usable space".

Well, viability has to to with depth and distance. Location, Location, Location. So, practical, viable, usable space? The main thing is labor. The deeper it is, the farther out, the higher the winds, etc, all mean labor. Not just to build them. But, to keep them going.

Once you can figure out the cost benefit, then your tax dollars cover the deficit. As far as I know, wind farms are not actually break even.

They require too much parts and labor. Light wind or wind too high, they don't turn. The are locked until the wind is right for producing viable power.

So, in the USA, every mill has a tax credit attached. You can own one or 100 and lease back to the company that has 1000s. But, it's all about the the tax credit to make it work.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Well, viability has to to with depth and distance. Location, Location, Location. So, practical, viable, usable space? The main thing is labor. The deeper it is, the farther out, the higher the winds, etc, all mean labor. Not just to build them. But, to keep them going.

Once you can figure out the cost benefit, then your tax dollars cover the deficit. As far as I know, wind farms are not actually break even.

They require too much parts and labor. Light wind or wind too high, they don't turn. The are locked until the wind is right for producing viable power.

So, in the USA, every mill has a tax credit attached. You can own one or 100 and lease back to the company that has 1000s. But, it's all about the the tax credit to make it work.

bah, windmills are currently considered worse than coal, except when coal is worse, or when windmills are worser still. according to our econaut buddies windmills are:

Dangerous Ice Catapaults that will slay us all with 1/2 tonne ice boulders thrown for miles across the countryside until they land in your baby's nursery at 3 am. and presumably explode?
Siezure Inducing Shadow Flicker Machines which will cause everyone who passes near one to contract a contagious form of epilepsy and spread it to their neighbors.
Deadly Subsonic Wave Generators which create unhealthy "Vibrations" which will misalign our chakras and cause depression despair suicide and psychosis
Lethal Sonic Disruptors which will slowly murder us all through a fatal overexposure to the sound of their gears and blades turning, which can be heard by deaf people 3 miles away, no really, they operate at 1000000000 decibels!
Wobbly Teetering Towers made from playing cards popsicle sticks and snot. they fall down so regularly that NOBODY has ever been killed by one, and they INVARIABLY fall on schoolbusses and churches and hospitals.
Incendiary Time Bombs that explode all the time for nor reason!
Insidious Bird Murder Devices because a few windmills in a group is invisible to birds, so they fly right into the blades, but many windmills are even more invisible to birds so they fly into the blades, but a single windmill is even MORE invisible to birds...
Destructive to the Natural Wind Patterns since they rob the wind of it's natural energy they could cause tornadoes and shit... or something...

so, no windmills allowed, we must use hydro-electric, but only large dams, except those are worse for the environment than smaller dams, which are even WORSE for the environment that large dams, which are even WORSER than small dams...

so no dams. we gotta use solar power, but you cant set up solar arrays in the desert since that brings artificial "Shade Pollution" to the desert (really, i shit you not) which will destabilize the delicate eco-balance of the deserts... and you cant set up solar arrays in the mountains cuz mountains are protected ecospheres... and solar arrays on roofs are dangerous to birds and passing aircraft which might be blinded by reflections...

so no solar panels, we gotta use nuclear power but....

youll think im shitting you but EACH if these claims has been made by the sierra clubs in california. every last one of them.

 

[NoDrama]

if us geeks were so incredibly right about the electoral college, what are the chances we might also be right about anthropogenic climate change?

that's just silly. a bircher told me so.

I dunno, have you ever tried to get a job as a global warming scientist using that as your credentials? Might be worth a try.

 

[cannabineer]

bah, windmills are currently considered worse than coal, except when coal is worse, or when windmills are worser still. according to our econaut buddies windmills are:

Dangerous Ice Catapaults that will slay us all with 1/2 tonne ice boulders thrown for miles across the countryside until they land in your baby's nursery at 3 am. and presumably explode?
Siezure Inducing Shadow Flicker Machines which will cause everyone who passes near one to contract a contagious form of epilepsy and spread it to their neighbors.
Deadly Subsonic Wave Generators which create unhealthy "Vibrations" which will misalign our chakras and cause depression despair suicide and psychosis
Lethal Sonic Disruptors which will slowly murder us all through a fatal overexposure to the sound of their gears and blades turning, which can be heard by deaf people 3 miles away, no really, they operate at 1000000000 decibels!
Wobbly Teetering Towers made from playing cards popsicle sticks and snot. they fall down so regularly that NOBODY has ever been killed by one, and they INVARIABLY fall on schoolbusses and churches and hospitals.
Incendiary Time Bombs that explode all the time for nor reason!
Insidious Bird Murder Devices because a few windmills in a group is invisible to birds, so they fly right into the blades, but many windmills are even more invisible to birds so they fly into the blades, but a single windmill is even MORE invisible to birds...
Destructive to the Natural Wind Patterns since they rob the wind of it's natural energy they could cause tornadoes and shit... or something...

so, no windmills allowed, we must use hydro-electric, but only large dams, except those are worse for the environment than smaller dams, which are even WORSE for the environment that large dams, which are even WORSER than small dams...

so no dams. we gotta use solar power, but you cant set up solar arrays in the desert since that brings artificial "Shade Pollution" to the desert (really, i shit you not) which will destabilize the delicate eco-balance of the deserts... and you cant set up solar arrays in the mountains cuz mountains are protected ecospheres... and solar arrays on roofs are dangerous to birds and passing aircraft which might be blinded by reflections...

so no solar panels, we gotta use nuclear power but....

youll think im shitting you but EACH if these claims has been made by the sierra clubs in california. every last one of them.

You left out the most damning one, Dr ... "return less energy than was used in production, emplacement and maintenance". cn

 

[UncleBuck]

I dunno, have you ever tried to get a job as a global warming scientist using that as your credentials? Might be worth a try.

a background in statistical analysis could be handy in interpreting raw data. a background in parroting right wing blogs? not so much.

 

[Harrekin]

You left out the most damning one, Dr ... "return less energy than was used in production, emplacement and maintenance". cn

That's the most awesome thing of all, China use their power and production materials and we pay them in US dollars!

So my country gets 100% of the return

 

[NoDrama]

a background in statistical analysis could be handy in interpreting raw data. a background in parroting right wing blogs? not so much.

You would make a great Parrot!

Run a regression on that and see what you come up with.

 

[Dr Kynes]

You left out the most damning one, Dr ... "return less energy than was used in production, emplacement and maintenance". cn

that one is irrelevant to the sierra club's interests.

those were all THIER specious reasons why we cant have any energy production in california. the sierra clubs' stance is similar to that of earth first, overpopulation is destroying the earth and humans should "voluntarily" reduce their own numbers for the sake of the planet.

or the government will have to do it for us.