Page 68 of 85 FirstFirst ... 1858666768697078 ... LastLast
Results 671 to 680 of 850

Thread: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

  1. #671
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

    Quote Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
    Actually, its more like writing a paper on covalent bonding and finding 97% of chemists agree covalent bonding happens in a specified manner. And Bman along with some fringe chemists disagree strongly.

    I would tend to give the short shrift to Bman and his clueless chemists. But thats just what the 97% of us who dont buy into nutty conspiracies do.
    Wow, most delusional statement of the day.

    They looked at papers by climate scientists to determine a percentage of them that were convinced by the ipcc versus unconvinced... CLIMATE scientists.

    God damn, trying to tell us the paper says something it does not say to make a point.

  2. #672
    Quantum sufficit

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,527

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Wow, most delusional statement of the day.

    They looked at papers by climate scientists to determine a percentage of them that were convinced by the ipcc versus unconvinced... CLIMATE scientists.

    God damn, trying to tell us the paper says something it does not say to make a point.

    Right. So when you do a review and find 97% of oncologists recommend Chemo and radiation regimen #1 for glioblastoma multiformae, do you scoff it off because they are a bunch of cancer doctors and what do you EXPECT them to say about cancer?

    Actually, now that I think about it.... you probably would.
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

  3. #673
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

    Quote Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
    Right. So when you do a review and find 97% of oncologists recommend Chemo and radiation regimen #1 for glioblastoma multiformae, do you scoff it off because they are a bunch of cancer doctors and what do you EXPECT them to say about cancer?

    Actually, now that I think about it.... you probably would.
    Yes, you WOULD expect most doctors to agree on treatments to specific ailments.

    However, if the doctors had a track record of consistent failures, and patients dying left and right, then this "consensus" would mean much less than if the treatments were regularly successful. Regardless, it's just a framework for an appeal to authority, an appeal yo authority is only valid inasmuch as the authority is trustworthy.

    Climate scientists gave a LENGTHY TRACK RECORD that belies them as bring a trustworthy authority, therefore, a consensus of criminals does nothing for the argument.

  4. #674
    Quantum sufficit

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,527

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Yes, you WOULD expect most doctors to agree on treatments to specific ailments.

    However, if the doctors had a track record of consistent failures, and patients dying left and right, then this "consensus" would mean much less than if the treatments were regularly successful. Regardless, it's just a framework for an appeal to authority, an appeal yo authority is only valid inasmuch as the authority is trustworthy.

    Climate scientists gave a LENGTHY TRACK RECORD that belies them as bring a trustworthy authority, therefore, a consensus of criminals does nothing for the argument.
    It's an appeal to authorities who are...authorities.

    And you're whining about their track record (which you constantly represent) is as valid as the snake oil guy saying that medicine is hiding health secrets.

    It s getting embarrassing. You probably should stay in the CT section.
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

  5. #675
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

    Quote Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
    It's an appeal to authorities who are...authorities.

    And you're whining about their track record (which you constantly represent) is as valid as the snake oil guy saying that medicine is hiding health secrets.

    It s getting embarrassing. You probably should stay in the CT section.
    You should be embarrassed... Your argument does not even make logical sense.

    Why? Because there are 30 years worth of models and they are wrong more often than they are right... No matter how you slice it; total trend, actual temperatures, change in temperatures, etc...

  6. #676
    Quantum sufficit

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,527

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    You should be embarrassed... Your argument does not even make logical sense.

    Why? Because there are 30 years worth of models and they are wrong more often than they are right... No matter how you slice it; total trend, actual temperatures, change in temperatures, etc...
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

  7. #677
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    01-03-16 @ 02:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,761

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

    Quote Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
    Cute picture, what is it based on?

  8. #678
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    14,312

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Profit has not always brought out the best. Cheaper at a high price has been more dominate. So, a new technology that might be expensive for a long while versus a cheap technology will almost always win the profit battle.

    Scientists do have papers and publications detailing their work. Most of those are not free often hard to produce here. But doing a search you can find that they exist. Just can't copy and paste them for free.
    Thankfully fuels are not clothing accessories, or cars, where people place
    artificial subjective values on them.
    Also we are not asking the oil refineries to make a moral decision, it will strictly be the numbers.
    When it becomes less expensive (for the refinery) to make their own feedstock, rather than pay
    to get it out of the ground, they will switch. The change will not occur all at once, as they pay
    different prices for their supplies, based on it's source.

    I have read quite a few of the technical papers related to AGW, I originally thought
    the AGW crowd was saying the additional forcing was an unknown artifact of CO2,
    Which was very unlikely.
    Peeling away the layers, it became clear that the additional forcing was a collection
    of predicted open loop feedback, that they believed would happen.
    None of these feedbacks had actually been quantified, but they could happen.
    From Baede et al,
    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/pdf/tar-01.pdf
    If the amount of carbon dioxide were doubled instantaneously,
    with everything else remaining the same, the outgoing infrared
    radiation would be reduced by about 4 Wm−2. In other words, the
    radiative forcing corresponding to a doubling of the CO2 concentration
    would be 4 Wm−2. To counteract this imbalance, the
    temperature of the surface-troposphere system would have to
    increase by 1.2°C (with an accuracy of ±10%), in the absence of
    other changes. In reality, due to feedbacks, the response of the
    climate system is much more complex. It is believed that the
    overall effect of the feedbacks amplifies the temperature increase
    to 1.5 to 4.5°C. A significant part of this uncertainty range arises
    from our limited knowledge of clouds and their interactions with
    radiation.
    FYI, this paper is where the IPCC gets it's range, and is cited in IPCC 5.
    When we look at the instrument evidence for these feedback that
    amplify CO2's response, they are small to nonexistent.
    there is no extra energy hiding in the deep ocean, or elsewhere,
    the energy was not delayed in leaving earth, because the predicted
    additional feedback failed to materialize, as a major factor.
    We will likely exceed Baede's low range number, but the mid to high range
    does not look probable at this point.
    Like the curve shows, we have seen about 51% of the direct response of
    doubling CO2. Temperatures have increased by .8 °C.
    According to the IPCC's key cited source,(and accepted Physics),
    that 51% should equal .6 °C of warming. (51% of 1.2°C).
    If the additional feedbacks exists, they must be within the remaining .2°C.
    no alarm, no panic, warming and sea levels increases,
    like humans has been seeing for over 2000 years.

  9. #679
    Quantum sufficit

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,527

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says[W:46]

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanMcfly View Post
    Cute picture, what is it based on?
    Well, if you had a nominal understanding of the issue, you'd know it's connecting the IPCC predictions with actual observations in different datasets and displaying the margins of error for each.
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

  10. #680
    Quantum sufficit

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,527

    Re: Climate change is here and action needed now, new White House report says

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    Thankfully fuels are not clothing accessories, or cars, where people place
    artificial subjective values on them.
    Also we are not asking the oil refineries to make a moral decision, it will strictly be the numbers.
    When it becomes less expensive (for the refinery) to make their own feedstock, rather than pay
    to get it out of the ground, they will switch. The change will not occur all at once, as they pay
    different prices for their supplies, based on it's source.

    I have read quite a few of the technical papers related to AGW, I originally thought
    the AGW crowd was saying the additional forcing was an unknown artifact of CO2,
    Which was very unlikely.
    Peeling away the layers, it became clear that the additional forcing was a collection
    of predicted open loop feedback, that they believed would happen.
    None of these feedbacks had actually been quantified, but they could happen.
    From Baede et al,
    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/pdf/tar-01.pdf

    FYI, this paper is where the IPCC gets it's range, and is cited in IPCC 5.
    When we look at the instrument evidence for these feedback that
    amplify CO2's response, they are small to nonexistent.
    there is no extra energy hiding in the deep ocean, or elsewhere,
    the energy was not delayed in leaving earth, because the predicted
    additional feedback failed to materialize, as a major factor.
    We will likely exceed Baede's low range number, but the mid to high range
    does not look probable at this point.
    Like the curve shows, we have seen about 51% of the direct response of
    doubling CO2. Temperatures have increased by .8 °C.
    According to the IPCC's key cited source,(and accepted Physics),
    that 51% should equal .6 °C of warming. (51% of 1.2°C).
    If the additional feedbacks exists, they must be within the remaining .2°C.
    no alarm, no panic, warming and sea levels increases,
    like humans has been seeing for over 2000 years.
    You keep presenting this paper as something separate from the IPCC. It's very odd. It's almost like you don't know this....but I've seen you cite this source a dozen times and you never refer to it as the IPCC report.

    This paper, which you refer to as Baede, is chapter 1 of the IPCC WG1.
    http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/index.php?idp=38

    And they have quantified the feedbacks later in the report.

    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

Page 68 of 85 FirstFirst ... 1858666768697078 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •