Global Darkening Threat From Environmental Degradation

[GostHacked]

It's just a dull joke.

More than dull, this is a trolling OP. A mocking if you will.

[Michael Hardner]

Today, it was pitch black around 5:00 p.m., give or take. Not 5 months ago, that happened around 9:00 p.m., or 8:00 p.m. adjusted for time change. It first started getting steadily darker, and then colder.

At the rate we're going, and probably because of human activity, we will have 24/7 darkness and a climate not unlike Franklin Island.

We need some drastic action, maybe IPCC involvement.

Help me, I'm scared.

We can play this game too.

I saw a brick fall off a tall building towards my head. I don't need to expend the energy to move, though, because who can say for sure what's going to happen in the future ?

[BubberMiley]

I find around the beginning of January to be the brightest, best time of the year with lots of glorious Winnipeg sunshine.

[Shady]

I find around the beginning of January to be the brightest, best time of the year with lots of glorious Winnipeg sunshine.

I didn't know there was sunshine in Winterpeg.

[BubberMiley]

You learn something every day. Winnipeg is second in sunniest next to Calgary, but more so really because our sky is bigger.

http://www.currentresults.com/Weather-Extremes/Canada/sunniest-cities.php

[TimG]

I saw a brick fall off a tall building towards my head. I don't need to expend the energy to move, though, because who can say for sure what's going to happen in the future ?

There are at least three choices in this scenario:

1) do nothing

2) get out of the way

3) rapidly try to build an anti-gravity device which will stop the brick in mid air.

When it comes to climate change 2) are the people calling for adaptation as necessary 3) are the people insisting on CO2 reductions.

Edited November 22, 2013 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

Right, but as per the hyperbolic anecdote I was addressing my hyperbolic anecdote at, we should clearly do 1 as you never know what can happen.

[jbg]

Yup. I didn't scrape frost off my windshield this morning....the frost came in and vacuumed my rug.

That frost by rights shouldn't have been there, as a result of global warming.

Global darkening continues. Sunrise later than yesterday. It got dark earlier yesterday than the day before and it snowed a bit.

[bleeding heart]

That frost by rights shouldn't have been there, as a result of global warming.

And if the self-described sceptics were serious about having honest discussions on the matter, they'd jump in and explain to you what's wrong with this statement.

Interestingly, they don't have any interest in doing so.

[TimG]

And if the self-described sceptics were serious about having honest discussions on the matter, they'd jump in and explain to you what's wrong with this statement.

Why do you think responding to an obvious troll constitutes a meaningful discussion?

[waldo]

Why do you think responding to an obvious troll constitutes a meaningful discussion?

it's been your position since evah! In spite of your long-standing, ad nauseum, claims to be a "real skeptic", I can't recall you ever challenging the most ridiculous claims of the ever present cadre of MLW deniers... overt deniers!

[bleeding heart]

I don't know, Waldo, I'm inclined to accept TimG's remark at face value.

Look at it this way: if someone were to post, repeatedly, that climate change was literally poised to destroy the Earth within weeks, I would think that this is an inane and false assertion...and, also, worse than useless. And I might call him on it...

....or I might think, "why bother responding to trollish lunacy?"

Edited November 24, 2013 by bleeding heart

[TimG]

Look at it this way: if someone were to post, repeatedly, that climate change was literally poised to destroy the Earth within weeks, I would think that this is an inane and false assertion...and, also, worse than useless. And I might call him on it...

I would likely give that one a pass too. I respond to false or exaggerated claims I hear made elsewhere in the media. Such a comment would not meet that criteria.

As for correcting skeptics who get the basic science wrong - I do that from time to time. It is just not a priority.

[bleeding heart]

As for correcting skeptics who get the basic science wrong - I do that from time to time. It is just not a priority.

No, and there's no need to indulge in a (faulty, in my view) premise of "balance" on all things, just to display one's sense of fairness, etc. On the other hand, "from time to time," as you put it, IS a good thing, if for no other reason than that it shows one is not an insane ideologue.

[eyeball]

There are at least three choices in this scenario:

1) do nothing

2) get out of the way

3) rapidly try to build an anti-gravity device which will stop the brick in mid air.

When it comes to climate change 2) are the people calling for adaptation as necessary 3) are the people insisting on CO2 reductions.

Both, but more importantly most people are asking that authorities simply start taking climate change seriously in the 1st place and start listening to the vast vast vast majority of scientists who for years and years and years now have been consistently saying it is a serious issue that needs addressing.

[Michael Hardner]

That frost by rights shouldn't have been there, as a result of global warming.

Global darkening continues. Sunrise later than yesterday. It got dark earlier yesterday than the day before and it snowed a bit.

Ridiculous analogies like this are just noise on the serious discussion happening...

[TimG]

Both, but more importantly most people are asking that authorities simply start taking climate change seriously in the 1st place and start listening to the vast vast vast majority of scientists who for years and years and years now have been consistently saying it is a serious issue that needs addressing.

Please explain why scientists have any qualifications to make suggestions on what to do about climate change? They know nothing of economics or engineering or power generation. They live entirely in a world of computer models and dubious data that can be manipulated as needed to produce the results that conform to their preconceptions. Their opinions on such things is worthless.

Also please show me some evidence that vast majority of people want anything more than lip service. It seems like every time politicians try to do something that affects the majority of voters they get voted out of office.

Edited November 24, 2013 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

Please explain why scientists have any qualifications to make suggestions on what to do about climate change?

Are they really making a lot of suggestions ? Are they just saying do something about it ?

[TimG]

Are they really making a lot of suggestions ? Are they just saying do something about it ?

'wait and see' as an valid response to the science. Any scientist that rejects this answer and says politicians must 'do something' is pushing for policies even though they have no qualifications that would allow them to determine if 'doing something' is the best response. Edited November 24, 2013 by TimG

[eyeball]

Also please show me some evidence that vast majority of people want anything more than lip service. It seems like every time politicians try to do something that affects the majority of voters they get voted out of office.

You missed the thread about support for action?

Please explain why scientists have any qualifications to make suggestions on what to do about climate change?

They're just saying address the issue, or ignore it at our peril.

They know nothing of economics or engineering or power generation. They live entirely in a world of computer models and dubious data that can manipulated as needed to produce the results that conform to their preconceptions.

So I should ignore the references to economic alarmists that you routinely cite?

Okay, if you say so.

Edited November 24, 2013 by eyeball

[waldo]

Are they really making a lot of suggestions ? Are they just saying do something about it ?

TimG wants adaptation only suggestions... those coming from poli-sci types like Lomborg, Pielke, et al... those coming from his favoured type economists like Tol... those coming from his multitude of "fake skeptic blog scientists", you know... the type of "scientists" that have TimG's kind of favoured expertise!

[Michael Hardner]

'wait and see' as an valid response to the science. Any scientist that rejects this answer and says politicians must 'do something' is pushing for policies even though they have no qualifications that would allow them to determine if 'doing something' is the best response.

'do something' is an entirely valid response to the situation - to urge politicians to at least look at the problem and examine it...

[TimG]

'do something' is an entirely valid response to the situation - to urge politicians to at least look at the problem and examine it...

I am not saying it is not a valid response. I am saying that climate scientists have no qualifications that should make us care about their opinion. They are simply speaking as a citizen which means their opinion has no more relevance than a post on an internet discussion board. Edited November 24, 2013 by TimG

[waldo]

I am not saying it is not a valid response. I am saying that climate scientists have no qualifications that should make us care about their opinion. They are simply speaking as a citizen which means their opinion has no more relevance than a post on an internet discussion board.

Michael... you're simply falling into another standard TimG strawman! As has been done many times in the past, asking TimG to provide examples of the type of climate scientist "suggestion, policy directive" he so broadly and generally rails against, typically results in his going mute!

[eyeball]

Tim, it is the vast vast vast majority of scientists including economists who are telling us to pay more attention to this issue.

You're suggesting that ordinary people, non-scientists that is, should just ignore that vast vast vast majority citing their lack of qualifications while insisting we should only pay heed to the very small tiny minuscule minority of scientists you subscribe to.

It's just plain nuts.