Climate Science 101 V2.0

[waldo]

accepting to your exaggeration, so long as ShadyPractices are adhered to... yes! So long as the ShadyOne continues with his MWP obsession, repeatedly beaking off with the same ole, same ole... yes! So long as the ShadyOne continues to ignore answers previously provided... yes! So long as the ShadyOne refuses to answer the related, relevant questions he previously acknowledged and committed to provide substantiation for his statements... yes!

Alright alright. Sorry, its just a pet peave of mine But carry on. Nothing personal at all.

BTW... dont you find it kind of embarrassing that youre trying to reason with Shady? What possible point could there be to such an endeavor? Are you like independantly super wealth with time to burn?

You might wanna give that some though

there is no reasoning with the ShadyOne... so... embarrassment? No. Having the lil' twerp on ignore isn't enough as his bile is pervasive. When I see his standard bullshit routine played out in others quotes, I reference back to past ground-hog exchanges. In this his latest reply to you he once again feigns civility and belies his purposeful trolling self... ya, ya... he simply wants to know the basis for MWP warming - notwithstanding he's been given that basis innumerable times before; notwithstanding he denigrates others repeatedly over his ignorant pompous touting - he actually believes the denier rhetoric concerning the MWP! Of course, he never bothers to actually substantiate anything... or even attempt to. That is the essence of the ongoing bookmarked quote-string I keep throwing back at him, each and every time he bellows forward with another ridiculous MWP shout-out. The quote-string he refuses to address... the quote-string concerning MWP discussion points he refuses to address.

your point is... what's the point as concerns any dialogue with the ShadyOne! The point, the only point... is to show exactly the hollowness of his denier drumbeat... is to show his pattern of deceit, disinformation, fabrication, casting doubt and outright lies. That's the point.

[WIP]

Your link suggests otherwise.

I noticed that, but did you notice the "may be" in front of the possibility that the Northwest Passage might have opened up during the Medieval Warm Period? I take that as an extremely unlikely event because as Jeff Masters later points out, you have to go back to 8,500 years ago for the most recent example where there is geologic evidence that the Arctic Coast was ice-free during the summer. If you consider how far and wide the Vikings explored during that Medieval Warming - traveling to Greenland and up and down the eastern coastline of North America, there would have been some Viking sailing along an ice-free Arctic coastline if it was possible. That, and the lack of physical evidence makes it unlikely.

Btw, what caused the Medieval Warming Period?

This period of warming (which was a regional phenomena - South Pacific was colder during that time) can be explained with circumstantial evidence, such as the lack of volcanic activity during that time.....so, what about today? In case you haven't noticed, every attempt to explain our present situation by vulcanism, solar activity, even Milankovich Cycles, has done a face-plant.

Edited January 22, 2011 by WIP

[WIP]

Not one bit. Human activity has changed the environment, but in many more ways that need immediate attention. Like the proper long term storage of nuclear waste. The landfills, the garbage patch in the ocean, along with the items you mentioned. Other toxic chemicals and pollution ect ect ect ... i've mentioned these things in other threads relating to global warming AWG climate change weather.

We do need to clean up our environment, and so long as we are focused on only one area of the problem, we will never solve it. Combating CO2 issues to me is a distraction and the extent of it way overblown.

This should be called the Bjorn Lomborg Argument now, since this argument that action to stop global warming is threatening other environmental issues seems to be his product. This is a fallback position, of someone who won't try to argue the science anymore, but just nitpick at the strategy for mostly the same effect -- keep the benefactors who are financed by oil companies happy!

But, if you need an example of how ridiculous this claim is that there are more important environmental issues than global warming, you need go no further than to consider that the rapid increase in global average temperatures coincides with the anti-pollution programs in the industrialized world that reduced auto exhausts and industrial particulate pollution. In other words, it's likely that air pollution was our first geo-engineering strategy to deal with global warming! So, now that the skies are cleaner above most of the world's cities, more sunlight is getting through and being trapped by increasing CO2 and methane gas levels!

On the downside, for future consideration of geo-engineering schemes -- the air pollution gave us acid rain and respiratory problems; not to mention the fact that whether or not the temps increase, increasing CO2 levels means more carbon absorbed by the world's oceans and thereby increasing ocean acidification....which may be just as deadly for our longterm prospects as rising air temps.

The Lomborg Strategy is a subterfuge, designed to achieve the same results as the hardline global warming deniers....preserve the fossil fuel-dominated world economy as long as possible....even if it means extinction of the human race in a few, short generations.

[WIP]

Alright alright. Sorry, its just a pet peave of mine But carry on. Nothing personal at all.

BTW... dont you find it kind of embarrassing that youre trying to reason with Shady? What possible point could there be to such an endeavor? Are you like independantly super wealth with time to burn?

You might wanna give that some though

I don't see anything wrong with trying to reason with people; but there's nothing to accomplish by going at them on a personal level. I reserve my wrath for people who intend to profit in some way from maintaining the status quo. I don't consider anti-climate change experts, think tank operators, and supporting media and political hacks to be any different than the greedy bastards who took the money from the cigarette companies when they created the strategy that the oil companies are now using. The rank and file conservatives and libertarians are blinded by their adherence to ideology, not horrible cretins.

When my thinking was on the right, I resisted evidence of global warming for a long time myself, even though I was always a science fan. Several years ago, I went first to Cato, Michael Profumo's Junk Science blog, and other sources to find the anti-global warming evidence, even before I read anything by James Hansen or Michael Mann. I was sure that global warming was a money scheme by Al Gore and Maurice Strong.....well, actually I still think that Gore, Maurice Strong, Goldman Sachs, and other investors have created this carbon credits and cap and trade strategies as a way for them to profit from a shift away from fossil fuels -- but just because there's carpetbaggers waiting in the wings, doesn't mean the science is wrong! And it's foolish to place political and economic ideology (capitalism and the threat of world government) ahead of doing what's necessary for our future generations.

[WIP]

your point is... what's the point as concerns any dialogue with the ShadyOne! The point, the only point... is to show exactly the hollowness of his denier drumbeat... is to show his pattern of deceit, disinformation, fabrication, casting doubt and outright lies. That's the point.

But you're arguing with a true believer in a cause....which happens to be the exact opposite cause that we believe in. Unless I find that Shady is collecting money from some oil company front group, I am going to assume that he has wrapped opposition to the AGW argument up with his political beliefs.....which is exactly what the strategists who started working for the oil lobby intended back in the early 90's.

But, as stated previously, once someone reacts emotionally...like when their personal integrity is attacked, the door will be closed to any sort of dialogue.

[wyly]

But you're arguing with a true believer in a cause....which happens to be the exact opposite cause that we believe in. Unless I find that Shady is collecting money from some oil company front group, I am going to assume that he has wrapped opposition to the AGW argument up with his political beliefs.....which is exactly what the strategists who started working for the oil lobby intended back in the early 90's.

But, as stated previously, once someone reacts emotionally...like when their personal integrity is attacked, the door will be closed to any sort of dialogue.

you're right...the give away to these people is when they bring political slurs into the discussion, "socialists, pinko's, tree huggers, lefties, commies" etc....I go into scientific discussions without an opinion of the other persons political leanings, it's irrelevant to the topic...not long ago I was in a heated discussion with several forum members in regards to early migration patterns to N America, not once did anyone make inference to political leanings of their debate opponents, it was just about the science...

[wyly]

so, what about today? In case you haven't noticed, every attempt to explain our present situation by vulcanism, solar activity, even Milankovich Cycles, has done a face-plant.

when there is a dead body with stab wounds in a locked room and one other person covered in blood standing over the body with a knife in his hand he's the most likely suspect...it's normal to cover your bases and ask all the right questions but when all other suspects are ruled out chances are the guilty party is the one with the knife in his hand...

the denier world insist on looking other suspects even after they've been ruled out...