Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Perd Hapley on September 29, 2013, 04:41:22 AM
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2436551/A-weatherman-breaks-tears-vows-NEVER-fly-grim-climate-change-report.html
Climate change is that bad, really. It makes grown men cry, and commit to (horrors!) never flying again.
I have to wonder how much of his tweeting was serious, and how much was just grandstanding and drama-queening.
-
What a whiny little bi*ch, but at least he is putting his
money balls where his mouth is. So to speak.
-
What a whiny little bi*ch, but at least he is putting his money balls where his mouth is. So to speak.
What balls?
-
Holthaus said he has decided not to have children in order to leave a lighter carbon footprint, and has considered having a vasectomy
He tweeted on Friday 'no children, happy to go extinct'
Hey, thanks loser! You'd definitely be doing the world a favor!
-
Hey, thanks loser! You'd definitely be doing the world a favor!
Good point. I guess Darwin is still with us.
-
Sounds like he's on hormone therapy or someone's slipping estrogens into his morning tea.
I really have a hard time with this global warming stuff. I remember seeing a long-term graph of earth's climate where a regular temperature cycle shows up every, what, 100,000 years?
It's getting harder and harder to find that graph, and yeah, that long term data can be challeneged on a number of grounds, since the temperatures were inferred from lots of other things.
But nevertheless, that cycle kept showing up through megayears (Ma), regardless of how the actual temperature data was inferred. There it was, again and again and again. It was a noisy-looking graph, with lots of short term perturbations, but every umpteen kiloyears,there was that unmistakeable spike again.
So here we are, with actual temperature readings over the last what, 200 years or so, and somebody imputed a "hockey-stick" hook showing a sudden upward trend, and that seems to cause a lot of concern, but this data is only from a very short, very recent, albeit more accurate, sample of global temperatures.
So we start hand-wringing about this short but accurate sample and seem to be ignoring two facts, (1) that the long-term but less accurate record shows a fairly regular cycle of large temperature cycles, and (2) that even these long-term cycles are pretty noisy, showing lots of irregularities superimposed on the long-term cycles.
So it seems to me that getting all panicky about recent temperature upswings is sort of silly becuase we simply don't have an adequate sample --it's too short a time.
And wasn't it only 30 or 40 years ago that climatologists, basing their thinking on that long-term sample, were predicting that we were heading into a new ice age?
Seems to me if that's the case, we ought to be pumping as much CO2 into the air as possible to warm things up a bit ahead of any new Ice Age.
So I have a hard time with all this "hockey stick" hand-wringing stuff. We may well just be in one of those upward perturbations superimposed on a real, regular, inevitable downward temperature swing.
I sure wish I could find that long-term graph again, though.
Terry
-
Sounds like he's in hormone therapy.
:laugh:
Normally I would just laugh at the guy and be on my way, but what bothers me about his statement is that his job description is "meteorologist". I'd be interested in his educational background. Far too many of the people in "90% of all climate scientists" reports that are claimed to be "climate scientists" end up being biologists or similar that study "climate effects" on whatever flora or fauna is of interest to them. Big money there. I think relatively few of the "climate scientists" in the "the world is going to end" reports have backgrounds in planetary climatology or astrophysics.
Just because someone is identified as a scientist doesn't mean they have expertise or understanding in a particular field. Regarding planetary climate, I'm more inclined to listen to Freeman Dyson than I am to somebody studying fish migration.
-
If he was really serious about saving the planet then he would recycle himself >:D
-
Went back about 30 pages in a search engine, here's the best example of that ~100,000 year major cycle that I could find.
Search term:
CLIMATE CYCLE
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fgrist.files.wordpress.com%2F2006%2F10%2Fvolstok.gif&hash=e73db851ede430a423fc62a8ce205a8d12577d52)
There's a better one out there, and this one only shows CO2 from ice, but I gave up searching. It's almost as if the graph I referred to in my other post has been purged from the climatology sites. Just eyeballing it, there seems also to be about a 9 to 11 thousand year subcycle as well, according to my well-calibrated eyeballs.
>:D
Note that in my 30-page search, almost every graph shows that "hockey stick," but that the hockey stick graphs only go back a few hundred years-ish, as opposed to this one, 410 thousand years. The other thing to note is the short-term variability in the major cycles, and that's why I "wonder" about the panic over our observed short-term temperature rise.
It's the sample size, people.
Coffee's ready. See ya.
Terry
-
Climate change is that bad, really. It makes grown men cry, and commit to (horrors!) never flying again.
That must be his personal indulgence he's paying so that the head of his church can continue to fly around the world on a private jet.
-
There's a better one out there, and this one only shows CO2 from ice, but I gave up searching. It's almost as if it's been purged from the climatology sites. Just eyeballing it, there seems also to be about a 9 to 11 thousand year cycle as well, according to my well-calibrated eyeballs.
>:D
Note that in my 30-page search, almost every graph shows that "hockey stick," but that the hockey stick graphs only go back a few hundred years-ish, as opposed to this one, 410 thousand years.
It's the sample size, people.
Coffee's ready. See ya.
Terry
If one only looked at AGW sites, one would think Milankovitch never existed.
-
What balls?
They may be of questionable size, but he is willing to change something about himself to further his beliefs. As opposed to people like Al Gore, who have huge mansions and private jets.
-
Climates fluctuate. The attempt to paint it in hysterical terms is merely an excuse for the politicians to "Do something", all of which "somethings" will -A-make their crony's rich, and -B- institute more control over the populace.
The hockey stick chart was a bunch of bogus cherry picked data. Their data is so bad it cannot even be used retrospectively to predict the LAST 20 years of "climate change".
The earth has shown no warming trend for the last 16 years.
If they want something to worry about climate wise, try a mini ice age as the sun is now at solar maximum and it is the quietest solar max in a very long time. The cooling period in the 1300's drove the Norse out of Iceland and played havoc with the crops across Europe. Also the solar minimum in the 1700's was a tough time.
Global warming is a complete swindle, designed to promote legislation to control people and deprive them of wealth, while providing riches for researchers. These people lie, manipulate the "data" to show desired conclusions, "disappear" the data when challenged on it, and have an socialist control freak agenda.
-
Global warming is a complete swindle, designed to promote legislation to control people and deprive them of wealth, while providing riches for researchers. These people lie, manipulate the "data" to show desired conclusions, "disappear" the data when challenged on it, and have an socialist control freak agenda.
DING, DING, DING!!! And we have a WINNER! You win 1 internets!
I really have a hard time with this global warming stuff. I remember seeing a long-term graph of earth's climate where a regular temperature cycle shows up every, what, 100,000 years?
It's getting harder and harder to find that graph, and yeah, that long term data can be challeneged on a number of grounds, since the temperatures were inferred from lots of other things.
You mean the way wiki is suppressing any references to the 1000 AD warming trend that occurred? Then they will post messages about how they need $$ to keep going.
-
"Well... Bye."
-Curly Bill
-
Climates fluctuate. The attempt to paint it in hysterical terms is merely an excuse for the politicians to "Do something", all of which "somethings" will -A-make their crony's rich, and -B- institute more control over the populace.
The hockey stick chart was a bunch of bogus cherry picked data.
<snip>
Global warming is a complete swindle, designed to promote legislation to control people and deprive them of wealth, while providing riches for researchers. These people lie, manipulate the "data" to show desired conclusions, "disappear" the data when challenged on it, and have an socialist control freak agenda.
Exactly the reasoning behind my discomfort about the "global warming" panic.
Measure your house temperature at 3 AM then again at 3 PM, and your conclusion will be from this short-term trend that your house will approach 451° Fahrenheit by next week.
It's the sample size, people.
Terry, 230RN
-
I say it again. Solar Scientists are NOT seeing many, if any sunspots. That means this might be one of the coldest winters on record (The record going back maybe 150-200 years.)
Of course, that will be due to Global Warming.
-
For every tweet, a sparrow falls.
-
No children, happy to go extinct
"Well as a courtesy you might start gettin' busy on that . . ."
-
I hope we have significant snowfall this year, if I have to stay at a hotel so I can guarantee I make it in to work at 5am to clear the snow off I plan to charge overtime for every hour I'm not at home. :)
-
Deleted ---Posted on wrong thread. Sorry
-
Deleted ---Posted on wrong thread. Sorry
Well don't tease us! Where 'O' Where did it go!? =D