Cancun sun speeds decay of global warming charade

[blueblood]

So new pros and cons list.

Pros

Less water requirement

Cons

Decreased crop yields

Pests grow faster

Weeds crow faster

Pesticides don't work as well

Less nutritious (IE you have to eat more to get the same amount of vitamins)

So a 33% yield increase in my Wheat and a 50% yield increase in my Canola is a figment of my imagination because some dude from Stanford said so? If that was the case then I shouldn't have doubled my grain storage, if yields are going to come down.

[Guest TrueMetis]

So a 33% yield increase in my Wheat and a 50% yield increase in my Canola is a figment of my imagination because some dude from Stanford said so? If that was the case then I shouldn't have doubled my grain storage, if yields are going to come down.

No but it is pretty useless when you're talking about a global phenomenon. Congratulations your one of the very few people who may actually benefit from increased CO2. The vast majority of people won't be so lucky.

[jbg]

Strike-throughs are hilarious. I too only have four jokes that I use over and over.

Word-search my use of the word "vacationer".I actually do most of my strikethroughs (not this one though) to emphasize positive traits. When I put a strikethrough through "terrorist" or "traitor" to describe Barack Obama I'm doing so to emphasize that he is a patriotic, loyal American and an efficient, skilled, thorough leader.

[TimG]

No but it is pretty useless when you're talking about a global phenomenon. Congratulations your one of the very few people who may actually benefit from increased CO2. The vast majority of people won't be so lucky.

Complete BS. Farmers are not idiots. They have been adapting to changing conditions for mellinia. They will continue to do so. The only problem are people like you who think a few artificial studies can capture the true behavoir of the systems farmers deal with on a daily basis.

Lastly, temperatures are going up and CO2 levels are going and there is not a damn thing anyone can do about. So whatever happens we are just going to have to deal with it.

Edited December 9, 2010 by TimG

[Guest TrueMetis]

Complete BS. Farmers are not idiots. They have been adapting to changing conditions for mellinia. They will continue to do so. The only problem are people like you who think a few artificial studies can capture the true behavoir of the systems farmers deal with on a daily basis.

Before the invention of modern science and modern agriculture science famine was a common thing forgive me if I don't put huge trust into farmers. All of the modern advances you see on a farm, the machinery the pesticides, even the crops themselves, were created by scientists. I'll trust an agricultural scientist over a farmer every time. In any event this point isn't relevant blueblood's experience is entirely anecdotal I shouldn't have to explain what that means.

Lastly, temperatures are going up and CO2 levels are going and there is not a damn thing anyone can do about. So whatever happens we are just going to have to deal with it.

Now this is BS, we have the technology to put satellites in orbit controlling CO2 is not out of our reach.

[bloodyminded]

They used the same word in a sentence,therefore,they must the same person!!!

I really don't understand how you can't see that???

Ah!

The pristine logic of politicized fundamentalists has always thrown me for a bit of a loop, I confess. My bad.

I guess I have to dumb down my intellect--which I never considered profoundly high in the first place--to even comprehend their point of view.

[bloodyminded]

No but it is pretty useless when you're talking about a global phenomenon. Congratulations your one of the very few people who may actually benefit from increased CO2. The vast majority of people won't be so lucky.

I admire your patience with these ingenious arguments:

"The weather outside my window tells a different story!"

"How come my crop yields are so good recently?"

"Al Gore!"

"The Left!"

[Saipan]

What else is there except record Winter in the Auntumn?

[bush_cheney2004]

...I guess I have to dumb down my intellect--which I never considered profoundly high in the first place--to even comprehend their point of view.

No, the opposite is required here....as long as the argument and energy remains focused on symptoms, any "charade" actions will be delayed. Pretty smart.....

[bloodyminded]

No, the opposite is required here....as long as the argument and energy remains focused on symptoms, any "charade" actions will be delayed. Pretty smart.....

All right then! Win-win.

[waldo]

Humans cause warming. That's what the science says.

Also trite and not helpful. The science says humans affect the climate in a many ways and at different scales (local, continental and global). The net human effect appears to be about about 0.3-0.5 degC increase in GMST since 1800 (50-75% of the increase since 1950), however, this nothing but a best guess based on computer modelling studies. The other 0.5-0.7degC of warming in 1800 was caused by natural factors.

Not sure where you got your numbers from, but isn't it odd that humans and some unknown factor starting affecting the earth at the same time?

My numbers are guesses based on the IPCC statement:

that most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid twentieth century is very likely due to the increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations

It was unhelpful because you left out the context and uncertainty which meant your statement implied things that are not true. Most importantly, you left out the fact that 50% or more of the warming since 1800 is purely natural and that the attribution to humans is a hypothetical exercise which could easily turn out to be wrong because of flaws in the computer models.

I know it is a pain but reducing complex science to slogans hinders communication because the 'slogans' are invariably wrong. This is a criticism that applies to both sides.

interesting... you repeatedly denigrate the IPCC and call down others for referencing "the IPCC bible", yet you continue to reference it for your own purposes... repeatedly reference it. In any case, you advise your numbers are, as you state, "guesses", drawing substantiation from a simple IPCC likelihood probability statement... care to expound on your substantiation - obviously, there's certainly nothing in that particular likelihood probability statement, as quoted, that would lend itself to your numbers (guesses, or otherwise). Your specificity would help here - hey?

notwithstanding, of course, it's a bit unclear how you acknowledge the 0.7°C rise (since 1800) and then proceed to split it as 0.3-0.5°C anthropogenic versus 0.5-0.7°C natural... while at the same time dropping the "TimG factoid" that, "50% or more of the warming since 1800 is purely natural". TimG numbers should really support a TimG factoid - hey?

of course, you shift into high-gear with a statement about anthropogenic attribution being subject to computer model flaws. Would you care to describe what variability you're attributing the natural warming to... more pointedly, what natural aspects and associated radiative forcing are you using to substantiate your number guesses? Are you maintaining radiative forcing is purely based upon computer models?

[Michael Hardner]

interesting... you ...

Who is "you" ? That's some nasty nesting happening in your post !

[waldo]

I have a feeling wyly and waldo are the same person, if not joined at the hip.

Waldo(wyly), why don't you move to the socialist paradise, China?

Have another stimulating night of sitting in front of your monitor wyly(waldo). It must be a real hoot.

I think you're absolutely right about Waldo and Wyly being the same person. It's pretty sad that Waldo needs an imaginary poster to pseudo-agree with him.

this is a most serious accusation. It's one thing to suggest a current MLW member is a previous (departed) member... a few overt examples were alluded to by others. Those kinds of situations do occur and typically revolve around an attempted return after a banning or someone simply desiring to reinvent their board persona. However, what you're doing is accusing someone of holding two active posting handles at the same time. The major forum software providers all include admin tools... easy to use/run admin tools... designed to identify like network particulars that might associate to someone with multiple concurrent handles. Skirting around those tools, particularly on a national/international type forum, over the protracted period involved, would be... an exercise. Alternatively, you're simply extending your delusion to suggest the MLW board admins don't care about the integrity of their board... and don't bother to regularly run the admin tool scripts... to properly administer the board. Which is it? How far are you willing to take your accusation... have you contacted the board admins to express your concerns over their board administration?

on edit: include additional quote advising the most serious accusation is being made by more than one MLW member.

Edited December 9, 2010 by waldo

[jbg]

However, what you're doing is accusing someone of holding two active posting handles at the same time. The major forum software providers all include admin tools... easy to use/run admin tools... designed to identify like network particulars that might associate to someone with multiple concurrent handles.

Interesting, Waldo.

But what happens if, say, my wife decides she wants to become an MLW poster, and/or my 14 year old son? Far more likely in his case.

How would "administrative tools" deal with that contingency?

And yes, I did join in Lukin's thoughts but I'm not vociferous on the issue.

[waldo]

Interesting, Waldo.

But what happens if, say, my wife decides she wants to become an MLW poster, and/or my 14 year old son? Far more likely in his case.

How would "administrative tools" deal with that contingency?

And yes, I did join in Lukin's thoughts but I'm not vociferous on the issue.

generalizations... depending on the board software; for example, your scenario might be detected to identify multiple accounts from the same machine/address - the capability extends to allows the administrators to contact the person(s) involved, confirm circumstances and, effectively, allow customized privileges for recognized multiple registrants.

[waldo]

WOW!!!! waldo...one minute after my post you strike back, one whole minute it took you to respond. You love your computer! You must just sit at your computer....vibrating.....waiting to make your next post.

You just know he sits there constantly hitting refresh!

Also, we were talking about his one minute response time. He's the one minute man. Which is also applicable to something else!

hey brainiacs! ... it's called watching a thread by email subscription... instantaneous email notification after posts are submitted by other members. You should really give it try - of course, it presumes you know how to multi-task

[waldo]

These kinds jabs are a direct result of alarmists who run around claiming that events like the Russia heatwave or the Pakistan floods are evidence of climate change. The weather is not climate mantra only works if it is not ignored when convenient.

you failed on your previous attempts claiming "no evidence" existed to support claims of climate change extreme event associations for (1) hurricane intensity and (2) droughts. In the face of that actual supplied evidence having been provided to you... perhaps you could step-up and provide substantiation on this claim, your latest claim that the recent Russian heatwave and/or Pakistan flood can't be attributed to climate change.

[waldo]

And what unknown factor caused the medieval warming? Don't you think that's important to know? Or do you just want to ignore the previous 6 million years and take a snap shot of a hundred and pretend that it encompasses history?

wheeee... the return of the missing-in-action SMWP - Shady Medieval Warming Period... still waiting, buddy... still waiting on your March 15th advisement that, "it will take some time to process"

the MWP related questions Shady continues to ignore... refuses to answer... while he continues to bluster about the MWP. Yes, most certainly... Shady <=> intellectually dishonest

And regarding timestamps, in my universe,

March 15 2010 - 9:47 AM

is earlier than

March 15 2010 - 10:40 AM

. So again, I first asked you specific questions about the MWP. Please answer them. The reasons for the MWP. The contributions of those reasons might be having today, and why the MWP, according to Dr. Jones, may have actually been warmer.

in your best anal parsing, you fail to acknowledge you're not asking questions. You're making statements and asking for confirmation of those statements.

-

you stated

: And yet during the medieval period several hundred years ago, temperatures were even warmer!

-

you asked:

can you tell us why?

-

you stated

: And surely they must be able to tell us that whatever it was isn't the reason any warming may be occuring today

-

you asked:

Right?

-

you stated

: Even though it's statistically insignificant warming.

-

you stated

: And even though the medieval period was actually statistically significant.

so... in your world... you're asking 2 questions: (1) Can you tell us why? & (2) Right?... both of which, as I stated, are simply asking for confirmation of your preceding statements. Shady, back-peddler extraordinaire. C'mon, Shady... you said you've been accumulating, as you said, "a vault of information".

Here's gentle reminder #4 for you:

And yet during the medieval period several hundred years ago, temperatures were even warmer! Can you tell us why? Surely you must know. Surely your AGW heros should know as well. And surely they must be able to tell us that whatever it was isn't the reason any warming may be occuring today. Right? Even though it's statistically insignificant warming. And even though the medieval period was actually statistically significant.

- care to substantiate your claims that the MWP temperatures were warmer than today?

- care to substantiate your claims (your inference) that the MWP temperatures were not a regional phenomenon - that the MWP was global in nature?

- care to provide your premise that accounts for the current warming of today... regardless of your misunderstandings and misinformation concerning the MWP?

- care to state why you continue to hold fast to your intellectually dishonest claims that today`s warming is statistically insignificant... why you continue to act like an icehole concerning a single statement from a single scientist relative to only one of the assortment of surface temperature records available, notwithstanding corroborations from radiosondes, satellite, etc.

- care to substantiate your premise that the MWP period, regardless of your misunderstandings and misinformation concerning the MWP, presents statistically significant warming?

I definitely will. However, that will take some time to process.

[waldo]

The only problem are people like you who think a few artificial studies can capture the true behavior of the systems farmers deal with on a daily basis.

sorry... couldn't pass this one up - I won't bother to link your past posts where you reference hood enclosure or small greenhouse type growing scenarios/studies as conclusive proof of "this or that"... damn! Look at them tamatees grow!!!

[TimG]

your latest claim that the recent Russian heatwave and/or Pakistan flood can't be attributed to climate change.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/csi/moscow2010/

Despite this strong evidence for a warming planet, greenhouse gas forcing fails to explain the 2010 heat wave over western Russia. The natural process of atmospheric blocking, and the climate impacts induced by such blocking, are the principal cause for this heat wave. It is not known whether, or to what exent, greenhouse gas emissions may affect the frequency or intensity of blocking during summer. It is important to note that observations reveal no trend in a daily frequency of July blocking over the period since 1948, nor is there an appreciable trend in the absolute values of upper tropospheric summertime heights over western Russia for the period since 1900.

The indications are that the current blocking event is intrinsic to the natural variability of summer climate in this region (Figure 11), a region which has a climatological vulnerability to blocking and associated heat waves (e.g., 1960, 1972, 1988). A high index value for blocking days is not a necessary condition for high July surface temperature over western Russia—the warm summers of 1981, 1999, 2001, and 2002 did not experience an unusual number of blocking days.

The same blocking event brought record rains to Pakistan.

Frankly, I am sick and tired of alarmist hypocrites whining when someone claims that a cold snap means there is no global warming when they run around screaming that every example of hot/exteme weather is evidence of climate change.

Edited December 9, 2010 by TimG

[waldo]

I admire your patience with these ingenious arguments:

"The weather outside my window tells a different story!"

"How come my crop yields are so good recently?"

"Al Gore!"

"The Left!"

whaaa! Al Gore..... he's fat!!!!!

[lukin]

this is a most serious accusation. It's one thing to suggest a current MLW member is a previous (departed) member... a few overt examples were alluded to by others. Those kinds of situations do occur and typically revolve around an attempted return after a banning or someone simply desiring to reinvent their board persona. However, what you're doing is accusing someone of holding two active posting handles at the same time. The major forum software providers all include admin tools... easy to use/run admin tools... designed to identify like network particulars that might associate to someone with multiple concurrent handles. Skirting around those tools, particularly on a national/international type forum, over the protracted period involved, would be... an exercise. Alternatively, you're simply extending your delusion to suggest the MLW board admins don't care about the integrity of their board... and don't bother to regularly run the admin tool scripts... to properly administer the board. Which is it? How far are you willing to take your accusation... have you contacted the board admins to express your concerns over their board administration?

on edit: include additional quote advising the most serious accusation is being made by more than one MLW member.

This forum really is your life.....isn't it?

[Jack Weber]

wheeee... the return of the missing-in-action SMWP - Shady Medieval Warming Period... still waiting, buddy... still waiting on your March 15th advisement that, "it will take some time to process"

[/indent][/indent][/indent]

Long live Professor Kitzel...

And his processing capabilities!!!!

[waldo]

This forum really is your life.....isn't it?

are you prepared to withdraw your accusation of multiple account handles - or have you identified your concerns to the board administrators? Please advise on how I should proceed in approaching MLW board administration - thanks in advance.

[Jack Weber]

are you prepared to withdraw your accusation of multiple account handles - or have you identified your concerns to the board administrators? Please advise on how I should proceed in approaching MLW board administration - thanks in advance.

Oh,this will be interesting....

Ya' see..Luky will now either:

1.Admit he's been talking out of his anal orifice

2.I suspect we'll see the usual "duck and dodge".

What's your guess?