Author Topic: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...  (Read 46765 times)

Nematocyst

  • New Member
  • Posts: 82
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #100 on: December 29, 2008, 02:02:06 AM »
Quote
Show me the numbers, I can handle 'em.

Check his bibliography.
(Follow the footnotes.)
The numbers are there
even if you may have to dig.
(Such is the reality of research.)

Here's a summary with (simple) numbers.

For the last 2 - 3 million years,
the "ice ages" have been quasi-cyclic.

During that time, CO2 levels were never - NEVER - as high as they are now. Not even close.
Average ice age levels: 180 ppm. Average interglacial: 280. Highest in at least 650,000 years: 300 ppm.

Now, CO2 is 380 ppm, and rising faster by nearly 30X than it has during the ice ages.

It's now not only increasing, but accelerating. It's increasing at 2 ppm per year. Even at that rate,
we'll be at 500 ppm in 60 years or less. (And it's unlikely that it'll stay at a rate of increase of 2 ppm/year for long; it will accelerate.)

The last time Earth had 500 ppm of carbon dioxide in atmosphere was the PETM 55 million years ago,
a catastrophic heating event that resulted in a mass extinction that lasted for 200,000 years.

Here's more on that hypothesis.

That's what we're about to repeat.

Buckle up, Dorothy.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2008, 02:12:27 AM by Nematocyst »
Levers, wheels & blades

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #101 on: December 29, 2008, 02:17:16 AM »
Quote
So now it's my turn to ask you to justify your beliefs.  I'd love to read a compelling argument that biological life is a prerequisite for a volatile climate.  I'd settle for a compelling argument that life "complexifies" climate by orders of magnitude.

First, the word "volatile" is yours. I didn't use it in my response to Ben.

My point is, again, adding life to a planet complexifies its climate system.

A complex system is complex by virtue of being composed of more parts with more connections than a less complex system.

The reasoning is simple. Venus and Mars have no life (again, no evidence of any on either planet). Therefore their climate is controlled entirely by the laws of physics and chemistry.

Earth, on the other hand, obviously has life on it. It's climate is thus controlled by the laws of physics, chemistry AND biology. There are far more parts to the climate system here - those organisms - and they are linked to the inorganic components of air, water and rocks in complex ways. Thus the system is more complex.

For a simple example, the main carbon dioxide removal system on Earth involves marine algae. They incorporate calcium carbonate (mineralized carbon dioxide) into their shells. When they die, the sink to the ocean bottom, building up as limestone and chalk, removing carbon from the system.

Likewise, methane is a waste product of methanogens AKA methane generating bacteria.

Both carbon dioxide and methane affect temperature of a planet.

Without living systems, climate on Earth would be much simpler.

For more on how life affects climate, read this.
(We've suggested that you do so previously. This would be a lot easier if you would just do some reading.)
Sigh.  What is it with you AGW proponents?  What makes you all assume that the only reason any of us disagree with you is because we're ignorant?

It's insulting, frankly.

I've seen Weart's website before.  I've read a lot of it, skimmed the rest of it.  It serves to reinforce my conclusion that most of the underpinnings of AGW are fatally unsupported.  It suffers from the logical fallacy of confusing plausibility with proof, and seems to ignore the scientific method whenever convenient, which is most of the time.

For example, models and theories and speculation abound as to what capacity humans may have for changing the climate, but there's no proof.  If we were scientists operating under the scientific method, then all we could say is that there are numerous hypotheses.  Each hypothesis seems to have its own biased camp of believers and supporters, but actual testing and verification of any of these hypotheses is conspicuously absent.

If that wasn't enough, basic common-sense shows that it's indeterminable (at present) whether life makes climate more complex or less complex, or has no affect on balance.  Absence of life may introduce its own set of unique complexities unknown to planets with biology.  Since we have virtually zero observation on how climate interacts on lifeless planets (and, frankly, very little understanding of how life affects climate on life bearing planets), we have no way to make a comparison.  Thus have no sound basis for concluding that life-bearing planets are any more (or less) complex.  To be technical, we lack a control group to compare against.

Quote
Quote
All we can do is hold on for the ride, to prepare and adapt as best we can.
At this point, that is correct.

A century ago, those policies of which you speak could have prevented what is now inevitable.

Now, the system is already turning. Like a truck doing 70 on I-95, even slamming on the brakes, it will require time to stop. Too late: it'll hit the bridge abutment.

Hold on. Hope you're wearing a seat belt.

Wow, this just sums up my doubts on anthopormorphic global warming in one fell swoop.

First you say that biology has a huge impact on climate.  Humans are one of the biggest influences on biology, at least according to Weart and most AGW alarmists I've seen.  Humans must therefore have a substantial ability to change climate.

Then you say that humans can't change climate.

Then you clarify.  Well, humans 100 years ago could have changed climate.  If they'd only used their climate control abilities back then we wouldn't have any climate problems today.

It comes off as being completely subjective.  The truth is whatever you need it to be, to support whatever reasoning you're trying to use at the moment. 

So what am I to conclude?  I find most of the "science" to be lacking in actual science.  I find the conclusions drawn from the faulty science to be completely subjective, inconsistent, and fallacious.  Please, tell me, what am I to conclude from all of this? 

Seems to me that the only sensible conclusion is that nobody really knows what's going on, and that people who do claim to know are almost certainly wrong.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2008, 02:23:11 AM by Headless Thompson Gunner »

Nematocyst

  • New Member
  • Posts: 82
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #102 on: December 29, 2008, 02:22:30 AM »
Quote
I find most of the "science" to be lacking in actual science.  I find the conclusions drawn from the faulty science to be completely subjective, inconsistent, and fallacious.

Why?

Discuss. Provide sources.

This is very interesting.

May you live in interesting times.

« Last Edit: December 29, 2008, 02:28:12 AM by Nematocyst »
Levers, wheels & blades

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #103 on: December 29, 2008, 02:27:40 AM »
I just did discuss.  In a nutshell:

AGW conclusions (dire predictions of calamity) do not follow logically from the premises.  The premises (the purported science behind it all) isn't sound or scientific, it relies upon speculation that is not tested to verify or refute.

It's late and I'm tired.  I'll pick this up again tomorrow if you want.

Nematocyst

  • New Member
  • Posts: 82
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #104 on: December 29, 2008, 02:28:48 AM »
Quote
I'll pick this up again tomorrow if you want.

Yes, please do.

In particular, justify this statement:

Quote
The premises (the purported science behind it all) isn't sound or scientific, it relies upon speculation that is not tested to verify or refute.

Horse s**t.

[Added by edit: as discussed in a subsequent series of posts, I included that last statement here because originally, Headless Thompson Gunner said much the same to me in a post on page 4 (third from the bottom). He has now edited his original post, as he admits in a post on the next page. I'll leave this one intact.]
« Last Edit: December 29, 2008, 06:41:36 PM by Nematocyst »
Levers, wheels & blades

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46,439
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #105 on: December 29, 2008, 02:37:45 AM »
Quote
Ben, I'd like to read how you justify that assertion.

A few links below on things we're learning about Venus. The fact that you have an atmosphere that rotates every 4 or so days compared to over 200 for the planet itself to rotate is pretty unstable in itself. Note that I also said historically. It's quite possible Venus may have had life at one time, and our own atmosphere was in a (relatively) stable (and hostile to life as we know it) state for longer than life higher than cyanobacteria has been on Earth. And of course we know relatively little about the outer planets and their atmospheres and climates to reach any conclusions or comparisons regarding any dynamic phenomena past or present. Not that we know all that much about Venus, but probes over the last couple of decades are beginning to paint a rather interesting and chaotic picture.

Life can complicate a climate system, as it does on Earth, but we don't have a clue as to whether it's a prerequisite for complexity over other factors on planets that are not terrestrial.



http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/venus_pr.html

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008AGUFM.U23E0092P

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Venus_Express/SEMUG473R8F_0_ov.html
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

Nematocyst

  • New Member
  • Posts: 82
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #106 on: December 29, 2008, 02:40:50 AM »
And while we're discussing premises, science and other heady topics,
let's review how science works.

Step 1: observation.

Examples:

The Arctic ice is melting at rates far faster than any historical records, and even faster than the models predicted.

At that rate, the Arctic ocean will be ice free in summer in 20 years or less.

The NW passage is open for the first time in history.

Permafrost is melting releasing methane.

Oceans are not only becoming hotter, but more acidic (due to increased CO2 --> carbonic acid).

Step 2: Question: Why are these things happening?

Step 3:
Hypothesis: CO2 levels are higher now than at any time in 650,000 years.
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, which traps heat in the atmosphere.

Step 4:
Prediction: Earth will continue to heat.

Step 5:
Test prediction.
(Please stand by for 20 years.)




Levers, wheels & blades

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46,439
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #107 on: December 29, 2008, 02:42:11 AM »
Also lets play nice boys and girls, or the padlock comes out.
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

Nematocyst

  • New Member
  • Posts: 82
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #108 on: December 29, 2008, 02:43:42 AM »
Quote
Life can complicate a climate system, as it does on Earth...

That's my point.

QED.
Levers, wheels & blades

Ben

  • Administrator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46,439
  • I'm an Extremist!
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #109 on: December 29, 2008, 02:46:13 AM »
Yes, but my reading of your post implied "must". I'm quite open to "can".
"I'm a foolish old man that has been drawn into a wild goose chase by a harpy in trousers and a nincompoop."

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #110 on: December 29, 2008, 02:50:22 AM »
That's my point.

QED.
You didn't assert that life can complicate climate.  You asserted that life does complicate climate, and by orders of magnitude.

I say prove it.

Nematocyst

  • New Member
  • Posts: 82
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #111 on: December 29, 2008, 03:16:27 AM »
Those who understand science and probability theory
know that "proof" is not attainable.
(It's related to those p = 0.025 outer tails.)

Only evidence is admissible.

I resubmit, knowing full well,
as indicated by Iain and Nitrogen
early in this thread, that this will not settle it.

Settling it will require 20, maybe even 30 years.

Even then, for those born 10 years earlier,
it will not be settled. They will just learn to adapt.

Ce la vi.

And tit for tat: can you "prove"
(obviously not; just provide evidence)
that life does NOT complexify climate
by orders of magnitude?
___________

My point is, again, adding life to a planet complexifies its climate system.

A complex system is complex by virtue of being composed of more parts with more connections than a less complex system.

The reasoning is simple. Venus and Mars have no life (again, no evidence of any on either planet). Therefore their climate is controlled entirely by the laws of physics and chemistry.

Earth, on the other hand, obviously has life on it. It's climate is thus controlled by the laws of physics, chemistry AND biology. There are far more parts to the climate system here - those organisms - and they are linked to the inorganic components of air, water and rocks in complex ways. Thus the system is more complex.

For a simple example, the main carbon dioxide removal system on Earth involves marine algae like coccolithophores, diatoms and actinopods. They incorporate calcium carbonate (mineralized carbon dioxide) into their shells. When they die, they sink to the ocean bottom, building up as limestone and chalk, removing carbon from the system. That effects climate by removing a greenhouse gas, which cools the planet.

(How else do you think all that CO2 from volcanoes got removed for hundreds of millions of years?)

Likewise, methane is a waste product of methanogens AKA methane generating bacteria.

Both carbon dioxide and methane effect temperature of a planet, which strongly effect its climate since climate is effectively a heat engine: heat drives weather systems.

Not to mention the presence of O2 in the atmosphere, which can ONLY be explained by the presence of photosynthesis by plants, algae and photosynthetic bacteria.

Without living systems, climate on Earth would be much simpler.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2008, 03:58:36 AM by Nematocyst »
Levers, wheels & blades

Nematocyst

  • New Member
  • Posts: 82
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #112 on: December 29, 2008, 04:50:43 AM »
Quote
You didn't assert that life can complicate climate. 
You asserted that life does complicate climate, and by orders of magnitude.

That is NOT what I wrote.

I did not use the word "complicate".

I used the word "complexify".

Those words differ in both character strings and meaning.
Levers, wheels & blades

Iain

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,490
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #113 on: December 29, 2008, 06:53:06 AM »
Sigh.  What is it with you AGW proponents?  What makes you all assume that the only reason any of us disagree with you is because we're ignorant?

It's insulting, frankly.

I quite clearly said that my previous comments were aimed at those who threw the same old easy lazy comments in to threads over and over.

Nitrogen, myself, wacki and others can at very least take credit for the fact that in these endless threads people have stopped using charts of the composition of the atmosphere as 'proof' that global warming isn't real - "0.038% carbon dioxide, how can that do anything?" Expect that'll have to be good enough.
I do not like, when with me play, and I think that you also

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #114 on: December 29, 2008, 07:28:55 AM »
The NW passage is open for the first time in history.


no
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

RocketMan

  • Mad Rocket Scientist
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,700
  • Semper Fidelis
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #115 on: December 29, 2008, 07:39:46 AM »
Horse s**t.

That did it for me.  What was an interesting discussion turned disheartenly personal in an instant.  Too bad.
If there really was intelligent life on other planets, we'd be sending them foreign aid.

Conservatives see George Orwell's "1984" as a cautionary tale.  Progressives view it as a "how to" manual.

My wife often says to me, "You are evil and must be destroyed." She may be right.

Liberals believe one should never let reason, logic and facts get in the way of a good emotional argument.

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #116 on: December 29, 2008, 07:43:03 AM »
On September 14, 2007, the European Space Agency stated that, based on satellite images, ice loss had opened up the passage "for the first time since records began in 1978".
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #117 on: December 29, 2008, 07:45:42 AM »
http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/09/bad-reporting-about-northwest-passage.html
beral

Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Bad reporting about the Northwest Passage issue.

There is nothing that that spreads faster than a global warming scare story even when it is false. I’ve investigated several of the bogus claims here over the last year or so. Those can be found here, here, here, here and here. Now for the newest story. The famed Northwest Passage is now open, supposedly for the first time, so that a ship can actually make the journey.

The BBC dramatically reported on September 14 that: “The most direct shipping route from Europe to Asia is fully clear of ice for the first time since records began.” They are a bit dicey about when those records began or what records they are referring to. In fact it is satellite records of the passage that were started in 1978. So they mean for the first time since 1978. They leave out the date for the start of the records. Note: The report now mentions 1978, if it was there when I read it two days ago I didn't see it. However, many, many other reports have left the date out.

The first time!!!! Really? How can they say that? They actually reported on September 10, 2000 that: “A Canadian police patrol boat has completed a voyage through the fabled Northwest Passage without encountering any pack ice.”

How many “first times” are there at the BBC? Is this the environmental equivalent being a virgin, again?

National Geographic reports the Passage “is ice free for the first time since satellite records began in 1978”. Alas, the 2000 report from the BBC reports a previous first time. But at least National Geographic mentioned that the records in question only began in 1978, unlike the BBC which carefully excluded that key fact.

Slashdot announced “Impassable Northwest Passage Opens For First Time in History”. Canada.com referred to the Passage as the “historically impassable maritime shortcut”. Associated Press reported that the ice melt is “raising the possibility that the Northwest Passage that eluded famous explorers will become an open shipping lane.” Saying it eluded them is pretty clear. No one has ever been through the Northwest Passage because of heavy ice.

The Melbourne Herald-Sun called the Passage “the dreamed of yet historically impassable maritime shortcut...” The environmental site Environmental Graffiti reports that “Explorers have searched for it for centuries and failed.” The it being the Northwest Passage. But they report that now it has been discovered thanks to “our malignant little friend: global warming.” The New York Post has also told the world that until now, the Northwest Passage has “eluded explorers”. And Scientific American has called this a “historically impassable route”.

You get the drift. The world’s media is saying variations on the same theme. Google news shows almost 1,300 outlets reporting this story. The basic claim is that the Passage is passable today and this is the first time in recorded history. Some mention that the recorded history is since 1978, while others make it sound like this is the first since human history began, a much longer period and a far more dramatic claim. Either claim is false. As noted the BBC reported the exact same story in 2000.

We should also look at the claim that the ice has always been so thick that the Northwest Passage has been “historically impassable”. Most attempts by explorers to find this passage happened during the Little Ice Age. I would think they would have had great difficulty making it through the Passage under ice age conditions. But are they saying that after the Little Ice Age ended that no one has made it through the Passage? They seem to be.

The problem is that ships have sailed through the Northwest Passage before today and long before a police patrol did it in 2000. It has happened several times. The historically impassable route has been passed through numerous times for over a century now.

Here is a photo of the St. Roch. It’s a wooden ship, not some massive, metallic icebreaker. According to the Vancouver Maritime Museum web site, this 104 foot wooden ship sailed through the Northwest Passage from 1940 to 1942, that was from west to east. In 1944 it did it again from from east to west. King George VI awarded Captain Henry Larsen, and the crew, the Polar Medal for making the 1944 voyage.

The Maritime Museum also includes a little information about the Northwest Passage as well. And they specifically mention that the famed Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen “became the first person to sail the entire Passage from east to west” and that was in 1906.

Remember that police patrol boat that went through the Passage on the other “first” time in 2000? It was actually named the St. Roch II. It sailed the same route as the first St. Roch as a fund raiser to help preserve the original ship. They were re-enacting the previous voyage from 60 years earlier.

The USS Storis made the journey in 1957 as this US Coast Guard history of the ship mentions. They do claim, falsely, that this trip “ended a 450-year search for the Northwest Passage” neglecting to mention the St. Roch did it twice before them and Amundsen did so as well. Here is a photo of the Storis during its 1957 trip through the Northwest Passage.

A Dutch businessman, Willy de Roos, 56, made a solo voyage through the Northwest Passage in 1977 and you can see a Canadian Broadcasting Network clip on the journey here. They have another report on the S.S. Manhattan making the trip through the Passage in 1969

I shouldn’t neglect to mention that a couple of Canadians, Mike Beedell and Jeffrey MacInnis, sailed through the Northwest Passage using a catamaran with wind power only. That was in 1988. And in 1985 there was a diplomatic row between the US and Canada because the ship, the Polar Sea, was setting sail through the Northwest Passage and hadn’t asked Canadian permission. The US argued it was international waters and Canada said it wasn’t.

Even tourists on the M.V. Lindblad, a Swedish ship, have traveled through the Northwest Passage. They did it with luxurious food and in comfort. The trip was a 40 day trip from Newfoundland to Japan via the Passage and cost the tourists $16,000 to $22,000 in 1984! You can even hear the captain being interviewed by Canadian radio saying that the ice is in retreat and the water is open. That was back during the time when the panic mongers were pushing the global cooling theory. The Lindblad made a second trip through the Passage in 1988.

In 1977 another Canadian ship, with four Canadians, made the trip through the Passage as well. At one point of their trip they sailed together with the Dutch businessman who was making the solo trip. So you had two different ships traveling through the “historically impassable” Passage at the same time. I guess that is the Passage’s equivalent of a rush hour.

With just a few minutes of research I have been able to compile twelve cases of vessels traveling through the Northwest Passage. Yet major media outlets from around the world are pretending that such trips have never been possible until this year. The BBC didn’t even check their own web site.

Once “global warming” is mentioned all critical faculties are shut down in the media. They don’t verify facts. They just repeat the claims that are made.

We simply don’t know if the Northwest Passage has been relatively ice free before the 1978 satellite data started being collected. But we do have two different BBC reports, in two different years, each claiming the Passage was ice free “for the first time”. Before 1978 we don’t know. It is pure guesswork. But given that the planet has been much warmer than today, in the past, it is likely the Passage has been ice free on many occasions.

Regardless of that, the history of ships traveling through the Northwest Passage has been well documented. This is not conjecture or guessing. It is a historical fact. We’ve had small wooden ships do it, luxury tourist boats, a solo voyage, and numerous other incidents, all of which I have documented here.

The only reason I can think of that explains why journalists, who repeated the false claims of this story, didn’t bother to do any research is because these claims have been linked to global warming. They don’t want to be called “deniers” by the warming alarmists. Global warming to the Left is what “terrorism” is to the Right. It is an issue that is meant to be so scary that one is supposed to close down their mind, repeat the slogans, and obey.
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #118 on: December 29, 2008, 07:50:01 AM »
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/08/29/northwest.passage/

this lil story shows how accurate the agw folks are
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #119 on: December 29, 2008, 08:00:53 AM »
http://nwpi.krc.karelia.ru/climas/Ice/Ice_no_sat/XX_Arctic.htm

what was going on in the 20's?  when ice levels were similar to today?
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

Nitrogen

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,755
  • Who could it be?
    • @c0t0d0s2 / Twitter.
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #120 on: December 29, 2008, 10:56:07 AM »
Ad Hominem Tu Quoque fallacy.
יזכר לא עד פעם
Remember. Never Again.
What does it mean to be an American?  Have you forgotten? | http://youtu.be/0w03tJ3IkrM

cassandra and sara's daddy

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20,781
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #121 on: December 29, 2008, 11:13:28 AM »
how so?
It is much more powerful to seek Truth for one's self.  Seeing and hearing that others seem to have found it can be a motivation.  With me, I was drawn because of much error and bad judgment on my part. Confronting one's own errors and bad judgment is a very life altering situation.  Confronting the errors and bad judgment of others is usually hypocrisy.


by someone older and wiser than I

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #122 on: December 29, 2008, 01:03:33 PM »
Quote
Sigh.  What is it with you AGW proponents?  What makes you all assume that the only reason any of us disagree with you is because we're ignorant?

It's insulting, frankly.
I quite clearly said that my previous comments were aimed at those who threw the same old easy lazy comments in to threads over and over.

Nitrogen, myself, wacki and others can at very least take credit for the fact that in these endless threads people have stopped using charts of the composition of the atmosphere as 'proof' that global warming isn't real - "0.038% carbon dioxide, how can that do anything?" Expect that'll have to be good enough.
Sorry, Iain, I didn't mean to snub you.  Those comments of mine were directed at Nematocyst and the other AGW proponents (not necessarily here on APS) who take the attitude I described.

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #123 on: December 29, 2008, 01:09:50 PM »
That is NOT what I wrote.

I did not use the word "complicate".

I used the word "complexify".

Those words differ in both character strings and meaning.
You do realize that "complicate" and "complexify" mean much the same thing, right?

Complicate - to make or become complex
Complexify - to make complex

But if we're going to start quibbling over dictionary definitions of synonyms, then I'm out.  Been there, done that, not going to repeat it with you.

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: 'cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming'...
« Reply #124 on: December 29, 2008, 01:38:44 PM »
Those who understand science and probability theory
know that "proof" is not attainable.
(It's related to those p = 0.025 outer tails.)

Only evidence is admissible.

I resubmit, knowing full well,
as indicated by Iain and Nitrogen
early in this thread, that this will not settle it.

Settling it will require 20, maybe even 30 years.

Even then, for those born 10 years earlier,
it will not be settled. They will just learn to adapt.

Ce la vi.

And tit for tat: can you "prove"
(obviously not; just provide evidence)
that life does NOT complexify climate
by orders of magnitude?

I believe you're catching on. 

Global warming hypotheses mostly cannot be tested.  If I remember correctly, the overarching IPCC hypothesis is that the planet will experience 4 to 8 *C of warming and X feet of seal level rise over the next century.  How do you propose that you or I test that hypothesis?  Shall we invent a time machine an travel one century into the future to make measurements?  Hopefully by then they'll know how to accurately measure these quantities.

Do you not see how an untested and untestable hypothesis does not amount to scientific proof?  Do you not see that piling yet more untestable hypotheses on top of this one don't alter the fundamental problem? The problem is that these hypotheses are nothing more than speculation, supported by other speculation, supported by yet more speculation, all of it untested and probably untestable.  Such a mess is NOT a sound basis for acquiring knowledge.

Now, science can be proven.  We have ample proof of scientific laws, and we have a myriad of theories (theories in the context of the scientific method) that we know to be true as far as they go.  So it's not that science cannot be proven.  It's that AGW isn't proven, at least not at the current time. 

Maybe some day AGW will be proven.  Or, maybe some day AGW will be revealed as nothing more than hubris.  Only time will tell. 

Until then, I'll oppose anyone who claims that AGW is fact.  I'll especially oppose anyone who claims that we need to give up our standard of living and our liberties in order to fight AGW.  That's the only sensible position I can see.

Since we're now at the point of repeating what we've said earlier, and of quibbling over two things that mean the same thing, I'm done.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2008, 01:42:11 PM by Headless Thompson Gunner »