Global Warming is a Myth, Rush Limbaugh said so!!!

Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
Only reason the guy gets laid is because he has a freakish cock. he could make big bucks doing porn if he wanted.
Click to expand...
the only reason...

why so judgmental?

how do you know he is a douche?

maybe he has a really nice personality, a good job and awesome Game?

i suspect you are feeling emasculated by his ginormous swinging hammer, and thus feel the need to impugn his character.

i suspect he is probably a Down To Earth (or at least dragging on it) fellow with a good head on his shoulders and a strong ethical and moral center.

and two guys' fair share of dong.

or is it something larger?

perhaps you secretly yearn for him to take you in his arms, stroke your hair, and gently explore your sigmoid colon deeper than any proctologist ever has before.

you fear his Mighty Wang, yet secretly crave to feel it, deep within you, throbbing, probing, wedging, fudging, until finally, in a breathlessly emotional release, you join together as one, pulses racing, as he releases his seed all up in your playdough fun factory.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
NLXSK1 said:
*sigh*

You must have misread me again.

First of all, why is it a problem again? This 1-2 degree warming? You have concluded somehow that it is a problem. But we can show that the climate has changed on a cyclical basis from the beginning of geological history. Therefore the planet has had a *problem* since it was created right?

I dont necessarily consider temperature change to be a problem considering it is a demonstrable and natural cycle on the earth.

So yes, we definitely disagree that temperature change is a *problem*

I am not sure why we have a duty to reverse it or stop it. Considering it has been happening long before we were here we cannot possibly be the cause of a majority of it.

In addition, I am not sure there is an immediate nor long term cost. None of that has been demonstrated by any scientist I have heard of up to this date.

Oceans rise and fall. Erosion happens. The earth is built up and wears down. The planet is in a constant state of change and/or flux.

Your proposal seems based on reversing or stopping the natural order of the planet.

I dont think we are capable nor knowledgeable enough to start terraforming the planet without further data.
Click to expand...
Can you demonstrate that we aren't already "terraforming"?
Can you put some muscle behind the bland assertion that we are having no effect upon the environment? (Just look at precipitation patterns subsequent to deforestation. There is proven anthropogenic impact.)
So I reject your basic premise that there is no signal (of warming) to be teased out of the admittedly noisy data.

I think it is very likely that we're headed for a global overall warming of several degrees, with a consequent sea level rise of several meters. The economic and territorial effects of that will be serious. There will be war. People will suffer by mthe many millions. I am not conditionalizing this because I am convinced that it will happen.

Part of the problem is that for the scientific outsiders, there is an erudite source who will tell you anything you want to hear across the entire spectrum ... from "Antarctica will melt!" all the way to "We can't even stay the imminent glaciation pulse!" For scientific insiders the range is narrower but still quite the smørgasbord of U-pick scenarios.

In the face of that, your positing that "the natural order of the planet" is known and out of our power is ... rather confident, i would say.
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
Can you demonstrate that we aren't already "terraforming"?
Can you put some muscle behind the bland assertion that we are having no effect upon the environment? (Just look at precipitation patterns subsequent to deforestation. There is proven anthropogenic impact.)
So I reject your basic premise that there is no signal (of warming) to be teased out of the admittedly noisy data.

I think it is very likely that we're headed for a global overall warming of several degrees, with a consequent sea level rise of several meters. The economic and territorial effects of that will be serious. There will be war. People will suffer by mthe many millions. I am not conditionalizing this because I am convinced that it will happen.

Part of the problem is that for the scientific outsiders, there is an erudite source who will tell you anything you want to hear across the entire spectrum ... from "Antarctica will melt!" all the way to "We can't even stay the imminent glaciation pulse!" For scientific insiders the range is narrower but still quite the smørgasbord of U-pick scenarios.

In the face of that, your positing that "the natural order of the planet" is known and out of our power is ... rather confident, i would say.
Click to expand...
Pot Kettle...

We all believe what we believe.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
NLXSK1 said:
Pot Kettle...

We all believe what we believe.
Click to expand...
You are mistaking a request to back what you say as an attack.
And you weaken your second statement by positioning your belief as declarative fact.
I am coming to the conclusion that your peculiar hypocrisy is seeking to maintain the appearance of seeking mature discussion, while actually wanting nothing of the sort.
Oh and good morning.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
You are mistaking a request to back what you say as an attack.
And you weaken your second statement by positioning your belief as declarative fact.
I am coming to the conclusion that your peculiar hypocrisy is seeking to maintain the appearance of seeking mature discussion, while actually wanting nothing of the sort.
Oh and good morning.
Click to expand...
And you just came to this conclusion?
 
NLXSK1

NLXSK1

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
You are mistaking a request to back what you say as an attack.
And you weaken your second statement by positioning your belief as declarative fact.
I am coming to the conclusion that your peculiar hypocrisy is seeking to maintain the appearance of seeking mature discussion, while actually wanting nothing of the sort.
Oh and good morning.
Click to expand...
To address your previous post. Yes, we are already terraforming an earth that is constantly terraforming itself. And the terraforming the earth does is far more destructive than what man has ever been able to achieve but is considered natural while man's actions are considered unnatural.

Can you show me a hypothesis backed by a working computer model that shows what global warming scientists are trying to prove??

You scoffed at another study recently that did not show correlation between CO2 and warming. In fact, the very report we are discussing has lowered the correlation in the most recent report.

I have stated repeatedly that we do not have enough data and that we need more data, and a working and proveable hypothesis.

You seem to think we have enough data and are in support of the conclusion and therefore the actions that are being taken.

So rather than go round and round with you I decided to end the conversation. I guess it is immature to realize you are not going to convince someone else.
 
C

ChesusRice

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
To address your previous post. Yes, we are already terraforming an earth that is constantly terraforming itself. And the terraforming the earth does is far more destructive than what man has ever been able to achieve but is considered natural while man's actions are considered unnatural.

Can you show me a hypothesis backed by a working computer model that shows what global warming scientists are trying to prove??

You scoffed at another study recently that did not show correlation between CO2 and warming. In fact, the very report we are discussing has lowered the correlation in the most recent report.

I have stated repeatedly that we do not have enough data and that we need more data, and a working and proveable hypothesis.

You seem to think we have enough data and are in support of the conclusion and therefore the actions that are being taken.

So rather than go round and round with you I decided to end the conversation. I guess it is immature to realize you are not going to convince someone else.
Click to expand...
https://www.google.com/search?q=computer+models+show+global+warming&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-Address&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GGHP_enUS495
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
NLXSK1 said:
To address your previous post. Yes, we are already terraforming an earth that is constantly terraforming itself. And the terraforming the earth does is far more destructive than what man has ever been able to achieve but is considered natural while man's actions are considered unnatural.

Can you show me a hypothesis backed by a working computer model that shows what global warming scientists are trying to prove??

You scoffed at another study recently that did not show correlation between CO2 and warming. In fact, the very report we are discussing has lowered the correlation in the most recent report.

I have stated repeatedly that we do not have enough data and that we need more data, and a working and proveable hypothesis.

You seem to think we have enough data and are in support of the conclusion and therefore the actions that are being taken.

So rather than go round and round with you I decided to end the conversation. I guess it is immature to realize you are not going to convince someone else.
Click to expand...
I cannot show you a "working computer model" for two reasons, one practical and the other rational.
Practical: out of my area and no access to first-line research. Paid-access websites etc., and I cast a jaundiced eye upon blog sources and other interested-party pulpits.
Rational or philosophical: Computer models are only as good as their input premises, and even the most subtle and sophisticated are stick figures next to the David of Michelangelo that represents what is really happening. I think the models will get better; they may even be at he Brancusi stage now. Once they get to the Renoir stage 9he was quite the draftsman), I think they'll be truly useful.
But in my somewhat educated opinion ... we're just not there yet. The models' power is outrunning the knowledge the researchers are putting into selecting the input premises, the run parameters.

So my emphasis is still on looking at the slowly-growing, steadily-refining corpus of "data in hand", they're beyond the authority of the modelers.

What study could decouple pCO2 from warming? Have you not seen the tight correlation of the two from the ice-core data??
 
Dr Kynes

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
cannabineer said:
I cannot show you a "working computer model" for two reasons, one practical and the other rational.
Practical: out of my area and no access to first-line research. Paid-access websites etc., and I cast a jaundiced eye upon blog sources and other interested-party pulpits.
Rational or philosophical: Computer models are only as good as their input premises, and even the most subtle and sophisticated are stick figures next to the David of Michelangelo that represents what is really happening. I think the models will get better; they may even be at he Brancusi stage now. Once they get to the Renoir stage 9he was quite the draftsman), I think they'll be truly useful.
But in my somewhat educated opinion ... we're just not there yet. The models' power is outrunning the knowledge the researchers are putting into selecting the input premises, the run parameters.

So my emphasis is still on looking at the slowly-growing, steadily-refining corpus of "data in hand", they're beyond the authority of the modelers.

What study could decouple pCO2 from warming? Have you not seen the tight correlation of the two from the ice-core data??
Click to expand...
the tight correlation is called into question by whether the higher CO2 levels are the cause, or effect of warming.

warming oceans gas off large amounts of CO2 which was previously suspended in solution
higher ambient temps increase bacterial production of CO2
higher temps kill off corals which are major sinks for CO2

and when temps drop, these processes operate in the reverse, reducing atmospheric CO2.

it is accepted that human use of fossil fuels is increasing CO2 levels, which COULD cause greater greenhouse warming, but the key is (again) How Much?

that question is treated as heresy by the Anthropogenic Climate Change faithful, as well as by the vehement "We Aint Done Nuffin" opposition
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Dr Kynes said:
the tight correlation is called into question by whether the higher CO2 levels are the cause, or effect of warming.

warming oceans gas off large amounts of CO2 which was previously suspended in solution
higher ambient temps increase bacterial production of CO2
higher temps kill off corals which are major sinks for CO2

and when temps drop, these processes operate in the reverse, reducing atmospheric CO2.

it is accepted that human use of fossil fuels is increasing CO2 levels, which COULD cause greater greenhouse warming, but the key is (again) How Much?

that question is treated as heresy by the Anthropogenic Climate Change faithful, as well as by the vehement "We Aint Done Nuffin" opposition
Click to expand...
I agree that that is currently one of the big, interesting questions.
Temperature can drive pCO2 for physically sound reasons.
pCO2 can drive temperature for different physically sound reasons.
Where the balance lies is not, to my current knowledge, known or confidently modeled.

This may be a heretical opinion, but I see one and only one honorable path here.
We have built our technical civilization on the back of cheap fossil energy, and a credible alternative isn't in sight. (Nuclear is also fossil energy. Solar doesn't have the requisite density and continuity of supply, and photovolt is, unless the rumors of photovoltaic paint are correct, a net energy sink.) So I declare from my soapbox that we should not walk away from fossil energy unless, until, we have spent some on beginning to lift part of our habitat and industry OFF this rock. We stand to benefit from seriously pursuing space as the next frontier. I cheer the Chinese on, and hope they scare us into competing for celestial real estate. I'll accept as second-best if they go unchallenged, just so long as they follow through. I'd really like for my cultural relatives and neighbors to have a founder's stake in the expansion offplanet. But I'll settle for any humans making the bg step and won't assume a jealously obstructive attitude, like the dog in the manger.
 
cannabineer

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I am being blocked from editing the above.
I meant to add this:

While the causal relationship between global average temperature and atmospheric pCO2 is an open question, the correlation is known and tight; look at the ice-core data. I would ask NL to repost the reference denying said correlation. I must examine it before forming an opinion.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
NLXSK1 said:
To address your previous post. Yes, we are already terraforming an earth that is constantly terraforming itself. And the terraforming the earth does is far more destructive than what man has ever been able to achieve but is considered natural while man's actions are considered unnatural.

Can you show me a hypothesis backed by a working computer model that shows what global warming scientists are trying to prove??

You scoffed at another study recently that did not show correlation between CO2 and warming. In fact, the very report we are discussing has lowered the correlation in the most recent report.

I have stated repeatedly that we do not have enough data and that we need more data, and a working and proveable hypothesis.

You seem to think we have enough data and are in support of the conclusion and therefore the actions that are being taken.

So rather than go round and round with you I decided to end the conversation. I guess it is immature to realize you are not going to convince someone else.
Click to expand...
why are you still here? do you simply want to embarrass yourself further?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top