[ziggy]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Sapio Sapio:

The real debt comes to head at which factor is strong, is man's impact or natures. If nature is then there is nothing we can or should do, if man they we need to make some changes. We are on a nature up swing at the same time that our use of oil, coal.... etc is being used at records level, thus a natural pattern is being made worst by us. The question is can we lower our use to a level that will make any difference or should we be looking at not only how to fix the problem, but how to cope with it.

That sums up my thinking, pretty much. I think the reality is that we're looking at adaptation, whether or not the global wamring is natural or exacerbated by human emissions of greenhouse gases. It's not like China or India are going to embark on a program of restraint.

Personally, I'm more worried about the fish.

You mean the Sushi?

We can adapt Zip and cant IMO opinion change what's going to happen.Remember that volcano in Italy that was going to blow when you were heavy into the climate change on a different board? You were into the green hair and paloozaa pants and swilling beer with Ronthecivil then.
Kyoto was the talk of the day then.

Your a scientist,I do listen to what you say even if the graphs get a bit tiresome at times,there should be a law similiar to godwins when a graph gets brought up on anything regarding climate change too many times.

[Thanos]

I hope I live long enough to see the climate change theorizing debunked. As far as I'm concerned, and I base this mostly on my open opinion about those certain celebrity and political leftists who have hitched their bandwagon to it, it ought to end up in the same category of garbage as the religious-based pseudoscience of the past that had psychiatric association categorize homosexual activity between two consenting adults as mental illness. Some of the CC stuff might be true, but the way that most of it seems to get revised on a yearly basis whenever the science geeks get new computers indicates that most of it has got to be bullshit. One question for those who stand by it: what sort of quality control regimen are the computers that are making these predictions subject to? With the economy and lifestyle of an entire civilization existentially at stake here is it reasonable to ask that the computers doing the talking be subject to independent verification of correct calibration, accuracy, and precision? Just wondering.

PS: Zippy used to wear MC Hammer parachute pants? Awesome! Man, the early '90's were kinda fucked up but it was in a good way.

PPS: I miss Ron. He was a good guy to get pissed-up with. Those were good days.

[ziggy]

Zipper in his palooza pants and green hair,maybe he will post a pic as I know he has lots.

[Sapio]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Sapio Sapio:

The real debt comes to head at which factor is strong, is man's impact or natures. If nature is then there is nothing we can or should do, if man they we need to make some changes. We are on a nature up swing at the same time that our use of oil, coal.... etc is being used at records level, thus a natural pattern is being made worst by us. The question is can we lower our use to a level that will make any difference or should we be looking at not only how to fix the problem, but how to cope with it.

That sums up my thinking, pretty much. I think the reality is that we're looking at adaptation, whether or not the global wamring is natural or exacerbated by human emissions of greenhouse gases. It's not like China or India are going to embark on a program of restraint.

Personally, I'm more worried about the fish.

True, I think animals (fish being a big one) are going to be in trouble before we are.

[Biblesmasher]

scarecrowe scarecrowe:

Biblesmasher Biblesmasher:

the ridiculously long list of experts

... and the list gets longer due to $$$. A postgrad fellow I know was offered a scholarship in climate change research at a northwestern state university recently and he accepted. I asked him "why are you doing this...you have absolutely no background in atmospheric science." He said that it was all about the money. He's a smart fellow but I am sure he will have to follow the doctrine as outlined by his mentor(s).

Mmm hmm. Yes, loose anecdotes about some guy you know, who may or may not have to follow the mysterious agenda of his mustache twisting mentors. Very convincing. Im still waiting to hear what you mean by "in the realm". Ive got a medical lab technologist and a microbiologist in my immediate family, both of whom contact the "doctrine" frequently and are adamant supporters of the scientific community, its methods and its consensus of man influenced climate change. So we can go tit for tat on little stories all day.

Your "911 truther" style of argument isnt helping.

[Zipperfish]

Thanos Thanos:

I hope I live long enough to see the climate change theorizing debunked. As far as I'm concerned, and I base this mostly on my open opinion about those certain celebrity and political leftists who have hitched their bandwagon to it, it ought to end up in the same category of garbage as the religious-based pseudoscience of the past that had psychiatric association categorize homosexual activity between two consenting adults as mental illness. Some of the CC stuff might be true, but the way that most of it seems to get revised on a yearly basis whenever the science geeks get new computers indicates that most of it has got to be bullshit. One question for those who stand by it: what sort of quality control regimen are the computers that are making these predictions subject to? With the economy and lifestyle of an entire civilization existentially at stake here is it reasonable to ask that the computers doing the talking be subject to independent verification of correct calibration, accuracy, and precision? Just wondering.

PS: Zippy used to wear MC Hammer parachute pants? Awesome! Man, the early '90's were kinda fucked up but it was in a good way.

PPS: I miss Ron. He was a good guy to get pissed-up with. Those were good days.

I haven't seen Ron in forever. He wasa school mate of mine. And yes, that's why you should never post your picture on the internet. I had apic of me standing in the middle of teh road in Hyder, Alaska, right after I got Hyderized (a shot of Everclear, straight alcohol). I had the palooza pants and teh mullet. And ziggy--or paleo as he was known then--never forgets. Bastard!

[ziggy]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Thanos Thanos:

I hope I live long enough to see the climate change theorizing debunked. As far as I'm concerned, and I base this mostly on my open opinion about those certain celebrity and political leftists who have hitched their bandwagon to it, it ought to end up in the same category of garbage as the religious-based pseudoscience of the past that had psychiatric association categorize homosexual activity between two consenting adults as mental illness. Some of the CC stuff might be true, but the way that most of it seems to get revised on a yearly basis whenever the science geeks get new computers indicates that most of it has got to be bullshit. One question for those who stand by it: what sort of quality control regimen are the computers that are making these predictions subject to? With the economy and lifestyle of an entire civilization existentially at stake here is it reasonable to ask that the computers doing the talking be subject to independent verification of correct calibration, accuracy, and precision? Just wondering.

PS: Zippy used to wear MC Hammer parachute pants? Awesome! Man, the early '90's were kinda fucked up but it was in a good way.

PPS: I miss Ron. He was a good guy to get pissed-up with. Those were good days.

I haven't seen Ron in forever. He wasa school mate of mine. And yes, that's why you should never post your picture on the internet. I had apic of me standing in the middle of teh road in Hyder, Alaska, right after I got Hyderized (a shot of Everclear, straight alcohol). I had the palooza pants and teh mullet. And ziggy--or paleo as he was known then--never forgets. Bastard!

That was back in your pro kyoto days.

[Biblesmasher]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Did you hear about this one?

Bravo New Zealand

The New Zealand government has suggested a "possible review of the science behind climate change". The green lobby is up in arms, because they think this interprets into global warming doctrine being challenged.

I think stories like this one (and there's lots of them) show which side is curious about the science, and which side is purely political.

All the NZ government is saying is let's look at the totality of the science.

LOL. A prime minister who in 2005 claimed that even IF climate change was a problem it wouldnt affect us till 2096, decides to "review the science" of climate change. WOW! proof that right wingers love science!

Tell me, which 'side' often claims that the earth is 6000 yrs old and that I should pray to an invisible super jesus? Curious about science? BAHAHAHAHA. Thats some funny shit.

[N_Fiddledog]

Biblesmasher Biblesmasher:

LOL. A prime minister who in 2005 claimed that even IF climate change was a problem it wouldnt affect us till 2096, decides to "review the science" of climate change. WOW! proof that right wingers love science!

No, he doesn't want to review the science himself, which is what you imply. He wants an impartial scientific investigation of all the evidence. That's reasonable, and I don't see why there would be an argument about it.

You might say such evidence doesn't exist, or it's fringe science, because that's what the mainstream media tells you. You'd be wrong. I could give you a lot of support for that but here's my favorite.

Ten of the Best Climate Research Papers

$1:

Tell me, which 'side' often claims that the earth is 6000 yrs old and that I should pray to an invisible super jesus?

Neither, or both, depending on what your talking about exactly. Neither side has the copyright on religious lunacy though. I lost the link, but I remember a story about some Christian sect shutting down an airport in England, with a protest based on the fear global warming was going to bring about Armageddon.

The head of the IPCC Rajendra Pachauri is a Hindu who believes in Reincarnation, and wants the world to go vegetarian.

Some say environmentalism itself is a religion.

French physicist Dr. Serge Galam says, "The degree of hostility used to mull any dissonance voice demonstrates that the current debate has acquired a quasi-religious nature. Scientists are behaving as priests in their will "to save the planet". We are facing a dangerous social phenomenon, which must be addressed from the social point of view. The current unanimity of citizens, scientists, journalists, intellectuals and politicians is intrinsically worrying. The calls to sacrifice our way of life to calm down the upset nature is an emotional ancestral reminiscence of archaic fears, which should be analyzed as such".

Michael Crichton, shared that belief.



Others have written about it.

BTW I was going to leave that consensus nonsense alone, but since you want to resort to arrogance and condescension let's deal with that chimera.

First of all there's the oft mentioned fact consensus doesn't matter in science, but seeing as there is no actual scientific, smoking guy evidence for catastrophic, man-made global warming, and what support that does exist is continually proven suspect by real world evidence, consensus seems to be the only thing you guys have left. So let's deal with it.

This consensus of actual scientist with relevant expertise doesn't exist, or at least it doesn't exist in any way that can be proven.

If the IPCC is produced as support for the notion, there's nothing you can say about the scientists included in the 2500 number often falsely given for that document which you can't say about 32,000 scientists who signed the new oregon petition. (it was redone). Well you can say 32,000 is much larger than 2,500.

A consensus of scientific organizations is often mentioned, but that's deceptive. In actuality it's a consensus of policy makers who govern such bodies. Richard Lindzen wrote a recent paper exposing where such policies come from. Here's some clips.

$1:

the primary spokesman for the American Meteorological Society in Washington is Anthony Socci who is neither an elected official of the AMS nor a contributor to climate science. Rather, he is a former staffer for Al Gore.

$1:

Returning to the matter of scientific organizations, we find a variety of patterns of influence.

The most obvious to recognize (though frequently kept from public view), consists in prominent individuals within the environmental movement simultaneously holding and using influential positions within the scientific organization. Thus, John Firor long served as administrative director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado. This position was purely administrative, and Firor did not claim any scientific credentials in the atmospheric sciences at the time I was on the staff of NCAR. However, I noticed that beginning in the 1980's, Firor was frequently speaking on the dangers of global warming as an expert from NCAR. When Firor died last November, his obituary noted that he had also been Board Chairman at Environmental Defense– a major environmental advocacy group – from 1975-1980.

$1:

The UK Meteorological Office also has a board, and its chairman, Robert Napier, was previously the Chief Executive for World Wildlife Fund - UK.

$1:

Bill Hare, a lawyer and Campaign Director for Greenpeace, frequently speaks as a ‘scientist’ representing the Potsdam Institute, Germany’s main global warming research center. John Holdren, whose primary affiliation is the Woods Hole Research Center (an environmental advocacy center whose name is designed to confuse it with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, a research center), is also a professor in Harvard’s Government Department, and has served as president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and of Sigma Xi (the science counterpart of the honorary scholarship organization, Phi Beta Kappa). He was the Clinton-Gore Administration spokesman on global warming.

$1:

One could go on at some length with such examples, but a more common form of infiltration consists in simply getting a couple of seats on the council of an organization (or on the advisory panels of government agencies). This is sufficient to veto any statements or decisions that they are opposed to. Eventually, this enables the production of statements supporting their position – if only as a quid pro quo for permitting other business to get done. Sometimes, as in the production of the 1993 report of the NAS, Policy Implications of Global Warming, the environmental activists, having largely gotten their way in the preparation of the report where they were strongly represented as ‘stake holders,’ decided, nonetheless, to issue a minority statement suggesting that the NAS report had not gone ‘far enough.’ The influence of the environmental movement has effectively made support for global warming, not only a core element of political correctness, but also a requirement for the numerous prizes and awards given
to scientists. That said, when it comes to professional societies, there is often no need at all for overt infiltration since issues like global warming have become a part of both political correctness and (in the US) partisan politics, and there will usually be council members who are committed in this manner.

The situation with America’s National Academy of Science is somewhat more complicated. The Academy is divided into many disciplinary sections whose primary task is the nomination of candidates for membership in the Academy. Typically, support by more than 85% of the membership of any section is needed for nomination. However, once a candidate is elected, the candidate is free to affiliate with any section. The vetting procedure is generally rigorous, but for over 20 years, there was a Temporary Nominating Group for the Global Environment to provide a back door for the election of candidates who were environmental activists, bypassing the conventional vetting procedure. Members, so elected, proceeded to join existing sections where they hold a veto power over the election of any scientists unsympathetic to their position.

Moreover, they are almost immediately appointed to positions on the executive council, and other influential bodies within the Academy. One of the members elected via the Temporary Nominating Group, Ralph Cicerone, is now president of the National Academy. Prior to that, he was on the nominating committee for the presidency. It should be added that there is generally only a single candidate for president. Others elected to the NAS via this route include Paul Ehrlich, James Hansen, Steven Schneider, John Holdren and Susan Solomon.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.3762.pdf

The point being, there's good reason to suspect it's politics not science creating those policy statements we hear come out of scientific organizations.

There is much evidence suggesting the opinions of the actual scientists holding memberships to those organizations differs from those policy statements. Go ahead. Ask me for it.

[PluggyRug]

Biblesmasher Biblesmasher:

LOL. A prime minister who in 2005 claimed that even IF climate change was a problem it wouldnt affect us till 2096, decides to "review the science" of climate change. WOW! proof that right wingers love science!

Tell me, which 'side' often claims that the earth is 6000 yrs old and that I should pray to an invisible super jesus? Curious about science? BAHAHAHAHA. Thats some funny shit.

That insane post is just as silly as saying, "all left wingers pray to the Gods of flawed science."

Oh and...jesus is not invisible, he wears a mustache and goes under the pseudonym "Jack"

[Biblesmasher]

PluggyRug PluggyRug:

Biblesmasher Biblesmasher:

LOL. A prime minister who in 2005 claimed that even IF climate change was a problem it wouldnt affect us till 2096, decides to "review the science" of climate change. WOW! proof that right wingers love science!

Tell me, which 'side' often claims that the earth is 6000 yrs old and that I should pray to an invisible super jesus? Curious about science? BAHAHAHAHA. Thats some funny shit.

That insane post is just as silly as saying, "all left wingers pray to the Gods of flawed science."

Oh and...jesus is not invisible, he wears a mustache and goes under the pseudonym "Jack"

False. As silly as your post would be: "ALL right wingers are superchristy nutjobs". Used the word "often" deliberately friend. Slow down when you read.

And Im not sure why you think that shifty salesman is Jesus. But hey, freedom of religion etc.

[Thanos]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

PS: Zippy used to wear MC Hammer parachute pants? Awesome! Man, the early '90's were kinda fucked up but it was in a good way.

PPS: I miss Ron. He was a good guy to get pissed-up with. Those were good days.

$1:

I haven't seen Ron in forever. He wasa school mate of mine. And yes, that's why you should never post your picture on the internet. I had apic of me standing in the middle of teh road in Hyder, Alaska, right after I got Hyderized (a shot of Everclear, straight alcohol). I had the palooza pants and teh mullet. And ziggy--or paleo as he was known then--never forgets. Bastard!

Everclear?!?!!! Now that's some evil hillbilly shit right there. No wonder the crackers that first started brewing it are all inbred now. I'm amazed you're alive if you played with that stuff. I knew a guy who drank half a bottle of it one night and then spent the next sixteen hours throwing up all over himself in the bathtub.

[ziggy]

Last I heard,Ronthecivil was creating gridlock on the west coasts larger city's....but that was 3 years ago,Zippy probably drove him to the nuthouse with his graphs.