Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-10 18:04:58

I do understand you yanks have to justify your politics and your moves by trying to ridiculize all this 'global warming thingie'.

But it is really happening. Maybe not in 5 years. Maybe it will take 50. This is the warmest year since scientist started to measure the temperature all over the globe.
I live in Spain (Europe, you know), but, despite what you think, my city aint warm at all. We usually are below zero by this time of the year. Guess what... We havent reach that temperatures yet... AND WE ARE IN DECEMBER!

Industry and first world countries have to realize that this world can not sustain all the polution they create. We have to find better ways to produce without filling our planet with shit. And this has nothing to see with global warming. It has to see with common sense.

I guess you dont mind.

Your grandchilds will have to deal with the problem...

Posted by CircularLogic on 2009-12-10 18:06:02

I would offer a bet here... I place 500 Euros on the outcome, that the decade 2040-2049 will have an higher global temperature average than 2000-2009. If there is no man-made global warming and temperature has peaked already and is now falling, that should be a safe bet. We even can do an inflation adjustment, if you feel 500 Euros won`t be enough.

Posted by avien on 2009-12-10 18:18:49

http://www.japantoday.com/category/commentary/view/climategate-the-fix-is-in#comment_388523

This was one of the articles linked to, quite convincing imho. It looks like a classic hoax and it is about to sink.

Posted by JanMattys on 2009-12-10 18:18:52

CircularLogic, I place 500 euros that in the next 50 years we will have some kind of nuclear winter.

So I will gladly accept your bet.
:P

Posted by Chrome_ghoul on 2009-12-10 18:22:53

50,000 Euros that niether of you actually got to a betting shop and place those bets :D

Posted by Pirog on 2009-12-10 18:26:38

This is what I love with the guys who deny the climate catastrophe we are heading into. Their own side has been busted countless times with false arguments, unethical methods etc, but since that supports you it's just been shrugged off as an individual mistake. Now it happens in the pro-climate camp and suddenly it's undeniable proof that humans have no effect whatsoever on the climate and that we can all just relax and sit back and keep over consuming.

There is a large consensus within the scientifical community that we are heading into a disaster. There is some differences of opinion about the details and theories, but only fools and politicians discuss like there is no problem at all. That an unethical professor was busted doesn't change anything and the way it pops up shortly before the climate conference in Copenhagen is a bit too convenient for the climate change denial-side to be coincidence.

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 18:27:10

Well it is not the warmest year ever if you remove the fudge factor of the computer data, which they created.

I checked the average Temp in Barcelona, dont know exactly were you live, and the average temps in Barcelona are 8C-13C average with a -3 record low and 21 record high, in december. The daily track in Barcelona is right in the average this year. So I will not accept the, It dont feel cold outside my house scientific method.

I love how you switch the topic from global warming to overpopulation and the extravagant western lifestyle argument.

That somehow they are the same argument that support each other. If global warming is a hoax we still have to worry about all these other Global issues that the "west" are creating.

My grandkids will have to fight through around 50=70 trillion in national debt to deal with...global warming is way down on the priority list at this point. But I do love hearing the, what about the kids? argument, classic.

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 18:44:33

Pirog

Ok man...You say the Climate Hoaxers crowd has been busted numerous times on false arguments, unethical methods etc...

Give me some links...I want to see this...I will read the link.

Of course with one caveat...it cannot be a article from the AGU..I will take any other link.

The one unethical proffesor argument, another classic. That one unethical scientist was in charge of the climate models that every single govt used to base all their global warming predictions on, not including all the data that was destroyed. And of course he was in charge of hundreds of scientist who backed him up and the hundreds of "green" groups that mimicked his dire warning. The entire Cophenagen summit is using his data/model for their arguments.

BTW..did you even read the article that I linked...or did you just hit it...look at the top page and close it?

At the end of the day the models that the AGU created are the scientific basis for the entire argument. The model was obviously biased in so many ways and the proof is out there now. It is not up to the skeptic to prove anything because the people who say it is true cannot actually prove it themselves, in a scientific way, they just utter platitudes and put their hands out for money. They cant prove is scientifically because their data/computer model that it is solely and completly based on is broken. Not only broken but intentionally broken so the data will produce the desired result.

Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-10 18:48:12

Dude, I am a scientist (hi there, I studied chemistry for like 5 years, thank you), and I know when its cold where I live. Barcelona is a population that is in the mediterranean sea. Living by the sea means that temperatures changes are soft or almost non existent (did you know that seas act like temperature dampeners in that cases?). Now, I live in the so called Castellan mesa. Cold winters (and I mean, shit cold) and hot summers (and I really mean shit hot). So far summer's been hot (not too hot, but, hot, as always). So far winter (by this time, we are in full winter here) is being...warm. Too warm. But nevermind. Keep your eyes closed and believe your goverment.

So far, they never lied to you.

Didnt they? :)

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 18:50:52

Come on Avien

Post a link to the basion of right wing, conservative, flat earth, crazy, and down right just bad dudes at Japan Today. :}

PS. AGU should be CRU.

Posted by pythrr on 2009-12-10 18:53:08

"global warming is way down on the priority list at this point"

So so stupid.

Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-10 18:53:37

You sound like the Pope saying that condoms are not the best method to stop the spreading of AIDS thru Africa.

Just listen to yourselves. While in other countries people are starting to use alternative ways of getting energy, you guys still live almost exclusively from oil. Oil is cheap as chips in the US compared to i.e. any other country in Europe.

Why is that?

Seriously, you sound like if you havent seen what happened when scientist started to say that the ozone layer was disappearing (HOAX) or when they said that smoking can give you a nice cancer (HOAXHOAXHOAX).

Come on. Stop looking your own beautiful garden.

And look at the fkng world.

Thank you.

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 19:03:03

Tesifonte,

Are you serious?? You want to say I'm a scientist for 5 years & that makes you an expert on the climate? This is why so many people have problems with climategate, you all want to run your mouths with unsupported data & get offended when people with brains actually ask questions, PROVE anything you just said! You are a chemist dude, period! So doesn't the field of Chemistry use scientific method, or do you all just figure if it's s%% cold or s%% hot then it must be true, give me a break.
BTW if I believed my government I would be paying an extra $1500 to $3000 a year to save the climate BS.
ALSO PainState was silly enough to leave this up where I could see it, This is Bizz49 & I think you SHEEP that have funded Soros for years should wake up & get a life!

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 19:08:04

How did the pope,condems, AIDS and africa get in this discussion?

Is Foulscumm lurking around somewhere?

Iam still waiting for someone to actually comment on the obvioulsy biased,rigged,cheated,cherrypicked,gang DPed fouled and totally bogus climate change model.

All Iam getting is plaitutdes and BS about every other subject but the one at hand.

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 19:09:23

Someone PLEASE prove me wrong on the subject of the computer model not being intentionally broken to spit out the data they need!!

Someone

Anyone

Posted by maysrill on 2009-12-10 19:22:09

I personally don't much care whether it's real or not. I live in a cold enough climate that a little global warming would be welcome. I spent 90 minutes yesterday shoveling snow and my back is killing me.

Give me a winter with 10C temps and I'll gladly put up with a little 40C weather in the summer. Get back to me in 50 years and I might be willing to look into leveling things off a bit.

Posted by Araznaroth on 2009-12-10 19:23:32

Those models are false, or bias to say the least. But ever stopped to wonder why?

Sidenote: Whats your country's debt got to do with it all?

Cuz now its like saying that your country's debt, which is its own fault, is more inportant than global enviromental issues? Real nice example for your grandchildren.:( Good example of a Texan though:)

Posted by mwilli72 on 2009-12-10 19:30:25

Tesifonte (and others),

Please don't lump all us 'yanks' in the same boat on this. I don't see any other American's backing PS up on this, nor do I actually know anyone IRL that doesn't believe global warming is real.

Just wanted to throw that out there, thanks.

mwilli

Posted by Jeffro on 2009-12-10 19:31:36

I'd like to see an article on this in something that's not biased towards Republican thinking. Seriously... let's try and find talk about this hoax in something other than an e-zine that supports Sarah Palin, eh?...

Oh. Here's one - but there's nothing about a hoax.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/topic.cfm?id=global-warming-and-climate-change

Posted by Jeffro on 2009-12-10 19:33:07

(It's like... I don't need to watch anything other than Fox News, cuz it's balanced AND fair.... look! It says it right there! ;)

Posted by valkalis on 2009-12-10 19:34:43

Frankly, it doesn't matter whether or not man-made global warming is an actuality. Regardless, there is little that can be done to stop it. Collective action difficulties make it virtually impossible for a unified global effort to be undertaken to relieve the problem.

In other words, worry about making it through the day. Let the powers that be worry about climate change :)

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 19:42:21

The Debt in the Unites Sates was brought up by the first post.

That my grandchildren will have to worry about Global warming because I did not try to stop it. And I just pointed out it was way down on the priority list of things. I think Jobs, the national debt and the current health care debate are the issues of the day in the United States. Global Warming barely makes it into the top #20 issues currently in the United States.

Well my grandchildren just inherited around 50-70 trillion in debt in the last year when you throw in medicare/medicade/social security.

I would rather have my kids flush with money and cold or hot depending on the current thesis of climate change...Than cold, no money and living as serfs to the United States Government.

I have stoped wondering why....Iam posting links to why the model is flawed because I think they are right about why the models are false and biased...Its all about redistibution of wealth.

And yes Iam a Texan and my values do not vibe in the least bit with about 99% of the Fumbbl community. and around 42% of Americans think Iam a nut job on the latest polling data. But those numbers are down and keep plummiting...so things are looking really good over here. November of 2010 will be the beggining of the end for those currently in power.

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 19:46:25

Thanks Jeffro from the great state of Minnesota with that elogant and very convincing argumet for Global warming. ITS ALL FOX NEWS!!!

Got out from under that latest "killer" snow storm that ravaged the upper midwest?

Now I got a soft spot for Minneosta, my wife is from there and my family is from North Dakota.


And as a side note. I dont watch Fox, not because I dont want to. I cant...Since my twin boys were born 3 years ago I think I have gotten in about 12 hours total of TV watching time that was not Dallas Cowboy related.

Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-10 19:46:47

To Painstate:
Do you know what a comparison is? I dont think so.

And you also dont know shit about science. If you ever read a book about it you should know it takes years to prove and accept scientific facts.

But dont worry, the Elephant will save the day.

Just keep bombing Irak and fighting the terrorism all over the world!

When the shit hit the proverbial fan its gonna be the laughs.


To Maysrill:

I personally don't much care whether it's real or not. I live in a cold enough climate that a little global warming would be welcome. I spent 90 minutes yesterday shoveling snow and my back is killing me. << Life's so hard. :)

Give me a winter with 10C temps and I'll gladly put up with a little 40C weather in the summer. Get back to me in 50 years and I might be willing to look into leveling things off a bit.<< You dont know shit about climate, do you? Global warming does not mean its gonna be warmer in your place. Maybe its gonna be even colder. You ever heard about the influences of the Gulf Air Stream? Honestly mate, think twice about what you say. Because 10ºC more may mean polar ices to melt... That can be fun for you according to where you live.

Posted by Purplegoo on 2009-12-10 19:55:55

I'm cold. :(

Posted by ryanfitz on 2009-12-10 20:03:21

Just curious, PainState, can you confirm or deny that you actually understand and have read the code posted in the link you provided, or are you just using it to promote your side,

I admit to personally not knowing the actual 'facts' from either side. I have heard arguments from both sides and have seen data (manipulated i assume) from both sides. I do worry about the future for my children, I believe that we waste far too much of every resource worldwide, and the U.S. has been one of the worlds waste leaders for decades.

However, I am willing to guess that while you like and believe the post you linked to you can't say that for a fact you know what it says to be accurate and true and you have checked their math, code and theories any better than you have the theories of the 'global warming nuts'.

Until you can do your own research, or back up research on your own, I would lump you in as a fanatic. 'Global warming nuts' (Al Gore, etc.) and your 'right wing, conservative, flat earth, crazy' (Fox News, etc.) not a real big difference between you. Just crazy, shouting heads with an opinion that they believe EVERYONE else is stupid to disagree with them.

Posted by Arktoris on 2009-12-10 20:04:21

thanks Painstate for keeping us on top of this. I have not fully looked at all the models but based on what I've seen, there's about a 90% anthro-global warming is an unethical hoax and I'm glad people are talking about imprisoning these shysters.

And since we're on the subject of credentials (cough...testifonte...cough) I've been in chemistry since 1989. That makes me a 20 year veteran specializing in analytical chemistry. I currently have 8 PhD chemists that call me "sir". More over, my late father-in-law was an atmospheric chemist in the 70s and determined the greatest "polluting" source of atmospheric carbon was....(drum roll)...the ocean.

I also go on record saying that scientists work for money...not discovering the truth. What brings in the grant dollars, what makes a publication worthy for a higher impact factor journal is often paramount. Fudging data is a common practice and *all* scientists do it to present a better paper. When fudging becomes lying is the gray area. If an organic chemist does a new reaction three times in his lab and gets an 88% yield, 84% yield, and a 65% yield. He will not report the product yield as an average with std dev range....he'll say, reaction works with an 88% yield. He wants to look better and "sell" his new reaction. Conflicting data is routinely omitted in publications as well. When I critique an article, if an obvious experiment is missing from the data, I assume it was done..but omitted due to "not fitting in with the rest of the story". I don't believe global warming scientists are going to be an exception to this. If saying "yes, fossil fuels are the leading cause of global warming" brings in millions of dollars and allows government to create new carbon taxes and generate new laws and revenue, but saying "global warming is due to the sun" dries up funds...what do you think these guys are going to say? Global warming is big business...at your and your children's expense. Also, the science field is becoming a field of bullies. Don't think the way we do...and you're fired. Most of my incoming post-docs will tell you that they need to keep their mouth shut and follow along with their advisor's opinions, or suffer the consequences. The film "expelled, no intelligence allowed" exposes this (though not on global warming, but on intelligent design). As a result, there is no credibility to statements like "all the experts in the field agree that....". No....we don't. Just some of us would like to keep feeding our families thank you.

That being said. Yes, i understand polar ice caps are melting. Most likely source of warming? The sun, which has been putting out a higher output in recent years.

Should we invest in alternative energy? Absolutely. George W Bush was a major proponent for this. Reason? it weans us off foreign oil dependency. Good enough reason for me.

Arktoris

Posted by Arktoris on 2009-12-10 20:05:04

oh yeah, I forgot. Circular, are you taking multiple bets?

if so, put me down for 500 euros that you're wrong.

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 20:05:52

LOL this is getting good now!!!

WERE are my fellow "REAL" Americans to back me up?


And dont call me a YANK, thats mwilli and his crowd! Iam a Texan and sticking to my guns!

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-10 20:09:22

Here comes the Cavalry!!! Way to go Arktoris.


Arktoris VS Testifonte in a heads up chemistry debate? I take Arktoris side every time.

Arktoris 1 Testifonte 0

Posted by Purplegoo on 2009-12-10 20:12:18

Hehe, are we playing Chemistry credentials? I'm a Chemist too. :D

A cold Chemist with no opinion.

I wins you all. :D

Posted by James_Probert on 2009-12-10 20:27:23

Hehe, if we're playing scientific credentials, then I get to piss on you all, I'm a physicist.

http://xkcd.com/435/

then again I hope we have a few mathematicians on here!!

Posted by Purplegoo on 2009-12-10 20:28:10

Bah, you're like a Chemist but with none of the fun.

Us > You :D

Best blog response evah, btw.

Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-10 20:28:18

Hi PainState. Can you read and write my name properly?

Thank you.

Arktoris. Last time we chatted about something like this you told me that you were a engineer in biochemistry.

Glad you are so polyvalent.

Posted by mwilli72 on 2009-12-10 20:29:26

My computer doesn't have this new TesticleFont, anyone know where I can download it?

Posted by f_alk on 2009-12-10 20:29:38

Physics PhD.

And of course in the 70s Carbon was emitted from the Oceans. Now the Oceans have a higher pH value than before: means, they have taken up a lot of CO2 and formed acid out of it. How can that happen? Only when somehow the atmosphere now has a higher concentration of carbon than the ocean - so that the situation reversed to the situation of the 70s.

Posted by Purplegoo on 2009-12-10 20:34:39

Shall we just all drop our pants and compare co... erm PhD's, chaps? :D

Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-10 20:35:27

Hush you goddamned physician! You dont know jack about chemistry! :p

Posted by Purplegoo on 2009-12-10 20:37:20

./Physical chemist.

I KNOW ALL!

:D

Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-10 20:42:24

./bends to his Purpaloo Majesty.

Posted by Purplegoo on 2009-12-10 20:45:00

About time.

At this rate, most... Blog responses... Evah!

Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2009-12-10 21:16:10

I don't believe in global warming... so why should I believe in man made global warming?

Posted by IntrepidFool on 2009-12-10 21:33:09

PainState -

I'm all for intellectual debate. But, posting inflammatory topics - "global warming nuts are running for cover" and using a politically driven, conservative-agenda article as "proof" doesn't cut it. Why don't you post three or four articles from various sources - with varying motivations - and then we can discuss & debate intellectually?

Emotionally driven posts are 'meh' at best and flame wars - like here - at worst.

Cheers!

Posted by CircularLogic on 2009-12-10 22:10:21

So.. I actually went ahead and read the article - not in depth, but enough to see what the author is getting at. Let me recoup:
There is a line in the code of some reknown climate research group (which I don`t know), that generates the drastic warming for the past decades. The author claims to have found this in code being used by above climate researches and also claims, that the original data has been destroyed and replaced by the fake data. He the proceeds to show data from New Zealand and claims that there is no warming whatsoever.

This got me wondering:
a) How credible is it, to say 'I broke into their system and that codeline was there - I swear!'. Isn`t that like saying "I broke into PainState`s home last night and saw him make out with his underaged babystter!"? Would you go on and treat me like a hero for bringing down PainState with a simple statement or would you start asking questions?
b) So this guy claims there is no warming. Mr. Arktoris claims there is warming, but it`s the sun. What is it? At least the sun-theory explains, while the icecaps are melting, why the local flora/fauna moves north and is replaced by species adapted to warmer climate (yes, I`m a biologist by training). So I`m really inclined to believe, that there a climate change. Which makes the cited article completely bogus, as it denies, that there is change at all, but claims it`s all generated by data manipulation.
c) I understand, that it`s really hard to have your lifestyle attacked. But even without the climate change, you still have to change! Just look at the waterconsumption of cities like Las Vegas and what is has done to the water levels of the colorado river. The amounts of water being fed into the river are falling due to climate change (whatever the source is), the amounts of water being take out of it are rising (due to rising consumption and other sources falling dry). Even now, you are taking more water, that you are allowed to according to a treaty with Mexico (and the Mexicans are quite pissed about that). I believe, that Mr. PainState from Texas is 1) all for sticking to signed treaties and 2) all for the colorado river not drying out, so that even more illegal Mexicans can enter the US. That`s just one of many examples, why you have to make adjustments, even if the climate change isn`t man-made. Because it`s exactly the same changes, the 'global warming nuts' are demanding. If you do it to prevent the climate change or if you do it to adjust to the 'god given' (sun caused) climate change - what`s the difference?

Posted by PhrollikK on 2009-12-10 22:21:46

+1 Arktoris.

Although all this "chemists are on top of climate change" crap is really laughable :D (I am an inorganic/biotech chemist myself). There is no one scientific discipline that can sort this all out so not worth the ink on paper to try.

@f_alk: Sure CO2 is turned into among other things acids in the ocean ergo lower pH. But it doesn't necessarily have to do with higher CO2 output. Temperature, biomass etc etc all play a part in this complex issue. I read somewhere that the total CO2 content of the atmosphere (according to arctic core drilling samples) has gone up something like 5% in human times. That is to say, it is questionable how much of this is due to anthropogenic activity.

Posted by pythrr on 2009-12-10 23:55:26

epic fael thread

Posted by pythrr on 2009-12-10 23:56:42

why? cos you know what they say about arguing in the interwebz....

Posted by Hogshine on 2009-12-11 00:44:54

That it's full of win?

Posted by PurpleChest on 2009-12-11 01:18:01

Climate change is real. there are about 50 americans that dont believe it, and the rest of us laughing at them, and despairing at their profligate ways.

But even if it isnt.

Oil, gas and coal are limited resources and unless, like my in-laws, you believe God is going to ensure the finite resources of the earth are always going to be renewed through prayer (yes really!!) then it MUST concern you that we are running out of these limited resources.

Surely changing to less resource intensive lifestyle, with the bonus that it will help if the 99% of scientists that agree with climate change are right, makes sense.

But Flat Earthers like painstate are unlikely to cede even that point. He/They will continue to read only material that agrees with them, and dismiss anything that doesnt.

Posted by PurpleChest on 2009-12-11 01:19:31

Annoyingly, by the time th Flat Earthers are proven wrong, it will be too late, and ultimately they will win.

As they tend to be the ones with the bunkers, and the guns.

Posted by fly on 2009-12-11 02:15:20

epic blog vote needed! this one has my vote.

Posted by Arktoris on 2009-12-11 02:18:15

testifonte, when you reach 20 years experience you too will be "polyvalent". If you want to be employed in the business world, you better diversify. Additionally, most science today is interdisciplinary. Pigeonhole yourself into one specialty and you'll miss the big picture...and supervisors (ie those that make the $$$) need to see the big picture.

I don't claim to be a world reknown expert in atmospheric chemistry/physics.

I do claim to be an expert in the economics and politics of research.

I've sat in on enough meetings to discuss how to "display" the data best to fit the story and what to conveniently throw out. I've seen the elites blacklist junior scientists that have open minds...which pose a "conflict of interest" to their work.

I guarantee you those guys bias their data in favor for CO2 influencing climate...too much money is riding on the line.

Posted by Pirog on 2009-12-11 02:50:59

"when you reach 20 years experience you too will be "polyvalent". If you want to be employed in the business world, you better diversify. Additionally, most science today is interdisciplinary."

You're using a lot of big words to not really say anything there mister.

Posted by Jeffro on 2009-12-11 06:35:47

Hear, hear, PC...

[as I put m index finger on the tip of my nose]

"Annoyingly, by the time th Flat Earthers are proven wrong, it will be too late, and ultimately they will win.

As they tend to be the ones with the bunkers, and the guns."

Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-11 10:01:22

I dont know why, but, seems that people that does not agree with me can't write my name properly, while the ones that do, or dont want to share their thoughts, can.

Interesting, but if you want to know more...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ctesiphon

This is the origin of my name.

Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2009-12-11 10:31:59

Tesi that's because no one gives a shit about you! :D

Posted by Calcium on 2009-12-11 15:34:17

This thread RULES. But I need to know, is there such a thing as 'Global warming' or not?

Posted by Hero164 on 2009-12-11 16:39:47

Really this should be settled on the pitch.

We should have a tourney to decide.

I guess the fumbbl RGN will then be the most accurate of climate predicters.

Posted by Meech on 2009-12-11 16:43:20

Dear Tesiphontay,

You are a noob!

I think at one point Circular Logic kinda hit the nail on the head. As much as people would love a black and white world, be in Painstate's liberal Al Gore boogeyman or if it is the Ultra Right Wing gun wielding American out to shoot PC in the face, the fact remains that the TRUTH!!!! lies in the middle.

Yes, Al Gore is an ass hat. Yes, some scientists are making gobs of money on this. In order to maintain life on this planet, changes will need to be made. Common sense, minor "sacrifice" would go a long way. Vilifying people is fun, but in the end it really won't help a lot.

Unless it is the Germans
or the Italians (Nice court system asshats, DNA evidence, ever heard of it?)

Vilify them.

Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2009-12-11 16:45:59

Meech, why must you always hate? :(

Posted by Meech on 2009-12-11 16:55:32

Foulscumm,

You taught me to hate... and to love...

Posted by Tesifonte on 2009-12-11 17:15:34

And to love hating too!

Posted by Purplegoo on 2009-12-11 17:32:49

Still going?

AWESOME!!!111One.

<3

Posted by pythrr on 2009-12-11 18:06:59

Meech, the trollope did it.

Posted by pythrr on 2009-12-11 18:07:46

:)

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-12 00:58:36

EPIC! gone one day and this thing as blown up.

Once I digest the 40+ entries since I last looked at it I will post my response.

I would like to thank all of the participants for a most enjoyable back and forth.

There are a bunch of Topics to discuss.

Posted by Synn on 2009-12-12 05:03:49

This looks fun!

To presume that one group of scientists said "lets roughen our data so the entire global system will pay us money" is kinda retarded and a little overdramatic. As Arktoris points out, there is lots of money to be made by Scientists. What he ignores is that the money gets made by both sides (who do you think funded junk science in the 90's against global warming).

No matter how much carbon we pump into the environment, we will not destroy this planet. Rest assured, it will destroy us before we ever get to that point.

Now on to something new:
-Only two things come from Texas, and I don't see horns on PainState's head.... :D

__Synn
**Full disclosure: I worked in Texas for an oil company last summer and am a big fan of that industry

Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2009-12-12 09:46:48

Synn, why must you always hate :(

Posted by Mr_Foulscumm on 2009-12-12 09:51:15

Also anything Synn says is tainted by the fact that he is the devil!

Posted by Enar on 2009-12-12 14:47:15

This thread makes me hot!

Local warming is no lie!!!!!!

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-12 17:06:26

Tesifonte come on man you fell for it.

I used the time honored tradition of reverting to simple name calling by manipulating your name to imply a sexual or crude funny name.

Perfected by Synn and mastered by Spoonybard.

You need to grow a thicker skin.

Being called a flat earther just bounces off my iron shod skin. Plus that term is so overused it has lost all meaning, just like being called a Nazi.

*********

I did not know that Blog responses after so many would drop off because the sight cannot handle the # of responses to a single Blog. It looks like the first 20+ responses have all gone away from response overload.

Posted by pythrr on 2009-12-12 19:00:50

"It looks like the first 20+ responses have all gone away"

Surely such message editing invalidates the entire thread, and by extension, all blog threads ever made...

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-12 19:11:27

that is "deep" pythrr.

I will retreat to my cone of silence and contemplate its true meaning.

My brain hurts now. :}

Posted by CircularLogic on 2009-12-12 19:26:40

We still don`t know.. do you claim the climate is getting warmer (like Arktoris) or the climate is stable (like the article you linked)?

I mean I can take getting ignored as victory (as in you don`t know what to say), but it feels abit lame..

Posted by PainState on 2009-12-12 22:19:49

Dont worry circularLogic my response is coming.

Iam at work and actually have to work! BAH!

I will get back to you with my full blown response on monday.

***

Posted by CircularLogic on 2009-12-14 18:15:50

Next thing to remember:
The global warming is not the only effect of rising carbon dioxide levels. The acidification of the oceans is another. The president of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration calls for action to limit the acidification of the seas. More acidic water means that lifeforms with lime shells such as zooplancton (the base of the food chain for most of the marine life) cannot grow. That in turn would mean a drastic reduction in fishing yields. According to estimates from the Plymouth Marine Laboratory, the turning point at which there will be a massive damage to the marine ecosystem is around 400-420ppm carbon dioxide. We are above 380ppm already, starting out at below 280ppm before industrialization.

You cannot raise enough cattle to substitute the loss of fish and for billions of people fish provides more than half of their protein.

Posted by f_alk on 2009-12-14 20:25:57

Another "sceptic" who has no clue what he is talking of has posted this nice piece of history:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv-bzqPVLng

So, if you then follow the link given by the poster, you will see that that sceptic has evidence that we (in 1973 already) have "entered the downward phase" of temperatures, "This conclusion is being confirmed by some evidence of glaciers, and temperature and rainfall records".

So, it's been more than 35 years now that we know what is happening. We don't have another 35 to wait before we act.

Posted by Arktoris on 2009-12-22 01:59:03

what I love about this global warming thing is where's the actual science? modeling and trends etc aren't experiments and prove nothing. Where's the actual simulation experiment?

Take a building like Walmart. Put an energy emitter with constant output equal to the magnitude and spectra of the sun. Flood 70% of the giant room with salt water, other areas with vegetation, and pave about 7% of the land. Control the room with 80% nitrogen, 20% oxygen and 330ppm CO2. Let the temperature come to equilibrium.

While at steady state, keep everything constant. Make only one change. A small "puff" of CO2 released into the room to raise the CO2 an extra 8 parts per million.

Record the new temperature.

How many here think it'll be 0.4 C hotter?

When I see that experiment showing a half degree increase...I'll believe in global warming. Considering all the $$$ we're spending on this, it should be easy to do.