Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Media Ignores Climate Alarmist’s Court Loss

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
    Just stop, CP.
    Great response to an apology. Carry on with your jackassery.
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      Great response to an apology. Carry on with your jackassery.
      I know, we're guys. It takes us a while to set up our apologies. One of the things I like best about you is that you do take that time, and then come back trying to make amends.

      You don't have to admit you were wrong ... just that you were wr ... wrwwttt .... not right!

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
        I know, we're guys. It takes us a while to set up our apologies. One of the things I like best about you is that you do take that time, and then come back trying to make amends.

        You don't have to admit you were wrong ... just that you were wr ... wrwwttt .... not right!
        I was wrong, and I admitted it.

        ETA: I see that I didn't use those exact words, but my intent was to say I was wrong. Know why? Cause I was wrong.
        Last edited by Cow Poke; 08-31-2019, 11:12 AM.
        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          He seems to flip between being considerate (like when he took the time to answer my post regarding the average temperature on the moon) and the ultra-sarcastic jerk he has been in this thread. I usually get along with him fine, but he can get on these 'rips' and then I just try to leave him be.
          Well, I'd like to take full credit for that one, because it'd make me look better, but the fact is I saw how you were being treated and how it affected you, and it offended my conscience, so I made a special effort to make sure I was considerate and courteous on that one.

          And also, credit to you because I've seen you take on new information many times in the past, and change your mind, even on things you were "invested" in. I knew it would be worth the effort.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            I was wrong, and I admitted it.

            ETA: I see that I didn't use those exact words, but my intent was to say I was wrong. Know why? Cause I was wrong.
            Umm, dude ... I liked your apology, and caught it the first time.

            [ETA: I liked that you apologized. I didn't like the, "No, I didn't call you juvenile, I called you juvenal!" ending, which is where the "Just stop" came from. Because trying to get out of trouble with strained parsings is so ... okay, I'll stop too. ]

            I was just playing on one of your posts back when where you did the "wrrrr wrrt wr wwww ... not right!" thing, using your own words as an homage, or an olive branch if you're reading it in Christian idiom.

            We're cool preacher ... but I still have to say some things you're not going to like. Trust me that I've got good intentions. I'm not trying to convince you that you are wrong, but that these attacks on scientists are wrong. Not because I want to win, but because the truth is these attacks have a history, and that history is unpleasant, enough so that it's worthwhile to push back at it.
            Last edited by Juvenal; 08-31-2019, 11:44 AM.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              The alarmists will be here shortly to answer your concerns.
              Well if you're gonna be like that, I'll just go back to playing Fallout 4.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                Well if you're gonna be like that, I'll just go back to playing Fallout 4.
                You, sir, are ALWAYS welcome!
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
                  Well if you're gonna be like that, I'll just go back to playing Fallout 4.
                  Aw. I like (and usually agree with) your posts. I honestly miss not having you around as much.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by mossrose View Post
                    This is the first I've heard of it.

                    You'd think if he had the evidence he'd have produced it. Watts up with that?
                    Following the publication of Hockey Stick, there was a lot of attack against Dr. Michael E. Mann. His name has for better or worse, in minds of a lot of Conservative thinkers become synonemous with the "Hockey Stick.", it was later reproduced independently by other institutions and research programs. But some papers such as National Review, and others like the commentaries at Forbes, and of course the climate change skeptic blog Watts Up With That? all went after Dr. Michael E. Mann specifically.

                    His work wasn't specifically about whether the temperatures recently had increased, but on creating a suitable temperature proxy for the temperatures during the medieval ages, where his conclusion was that the temperatures had remained virtually flat. Hence the result of the hockey stick. This was published back in 1999. And was controversial back then.

                    Here is an image of the original reconstruction. (1999)


                    There were other reconstructions, done independently by other teams, often with other data sources involved.

                    The National Center for Atmospheric Research (Wahl 2007)


                    Columbia University using borehole data and the HAdCrut Surface Temperature measurements (Huang 2000)


                    And several others. So the work was quite reproducible. I don't see much discussions of these independent replications in climate skeptical outlets though, mostly they focus on "The Hockey Stick", as if there was only ever one, and that reproduction has somehow been made magically impossible.

                    But since it was Dr. Michael E. Mannings work that ended up in the 2001 IPCC Report, then he became a ripe political target, especially after the emails were leaked. I'm not a politician. I don't like discussing politics, and whether it is, or isn't, a good idea to sue people who actively accuse you of deliberate fraud.

                    This probably doesn't answer your question about his work. What data can't he release? I gotta say I'm confused as well, most of the data is publically accessible in raw form. Are they talking about specific computer programs and scripts written to crunch the data? I haven't been able to get a clear answer on that. I do know that most of the data the CRU used was publically available.

                    But I'm mostly just focused on the question of whether or not human-caused climate change is happening.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      You, sir, are ALWAYS welcome!
                      Actually mostly just too busy these days to respond, also I notice a bad tendency in myself. When it's getting late you guys tend to be up, and you respond, and it tempts me to stay up and ruin my sleep cycle. So for my own sake I've dialed down how much I debate.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        well, I am sure Mann's version is using European data too since that is the only data we have from that time period (medieval warming).

                        You seem to be working overtime with the ad hom handwaving here.
                        You know, you could read Michael Mann's paper yourself. Here's the original paper, and he mentions the diverse kinds of sources he used http://www.meteo.psu.edu/holocene/pu...nium/mbh99.pdf

                        At any rate, there was still a lot of stuff to haggle over back when he published it. Back in 1999, it would have been safe to say that the "Hockey Stick" was controversial. The idea of a medieval warm period, as being a global phenomenon, rather than something confined to Northern-Europe was more widely accepted. Dr. Michael E. Mann's research really pushed for collecting temperature proxies from across the globe to avoid local bias like that.

                        Since then, as I've shown in the post, others have verified his results using other data sets, and it appears that the medieval warming period was just a local phenomenon.

                        As for Tim Ball's temperature graph, he cherry-picks a lot. He exclusively uses temperature proxies that show the medieval warming period and ignores all the rest. I'll leave it up to you to judge, whether that's sound science.
                        Last edited by Leonhard; 09-02-2019, 05:31 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Juvenal View Post
                          Well, I'd like to take full credit for that one, because it'd make me look better, but the fact is I saw how you were being treated and how it affected you, and it offended my conscience, so I made a special effort to make sure I was considerate and courteous on that one.

                          And also, credit to you because I've seen you take on new information many times in the past, and change your mind, even on things you were "invested" in. I knew it would be worth the effort.
                          Due to Lurch, I now believe that climate change is likely real and is due at least in part to us. I am still under the impression that it is not nearly as bad as everyone makes out, especially the politicians who like to scream doom and gloom in order to push through their agendas. The world isn't going to end or be beyond redemption in a dozen years. Maybe in a couple of hundred. But I think our technology will change faster than that. We will switch to electric cars, probably perfect fusion reactors and stop our reliance on fossil fuels within 30 years. Not because of the politicians and doomsayers, but because that is the natural progression that technology is going. Electric cars, if they get the infrastructure in place and fast charging, will naturally replace gas cars. If they can get fusion power generation going, it will replace nuclear and most other power generation methods (allowing of course that the tree huggers don't find a reason to kill fusion by calling it dangerous)

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            Due to Lurch, I now believe that climate change is likely real and is due at least in part to us. I am still under the impression that it is not nearly as bad as everyone makes out, especially the politicians who like to scream doom and gloom in order to push through their agendas. The world isn't going to end or be beyond redemption in a dozen years. Maybe in a couple of hundred. But I think our technology will change faster than that. We will switch to electric cars, probably perfect fusion reactors and stop our reliance on fossil fuels within 30 years. Not because of the politicians and doomsayers, but because that is the natural progression that technology is going. Electric cars, if they get the infrastructure in place and fast charging, will naturally replace gas cars. If they can get fusion power generation going, it will replace nuclear and most other power generation methods (allowing of course that the tree huggers don't find a reason to kill fusion by calling it dangerous)
                            hey - we are almost on the same page now -

                            fusion is an odd bird. We are making progress, but there are a lot of problems, not the least of which are neutron production that damages the containment structure and produces radioactive waste, and the fact most fusion we will be capable of in the near future uses tritium, which does not occur in any useful quantity in nature and so it must be produced either by the fusion reactor itself or ancillary fission reactors (which IIRC is where the fuel for the currrent experiments is currently produced.) Deuterium is plentiful and if we ever got to the point we don't need any tritium, we'd have plenty of energy for a long time, but it 'ignites' a lot hotter and so is a more difficult to solve problem.

                            https://www.euro-fusion.org/faq/top-...um-d-t-fusion/

                            Source: above

                            JET, so far the only operational fusion experiment capable of producing fusion energy, is routinely operated with Deuterium only, for a number of reasons. This minimises activation (from D-T neutrons and from Tritium retention in walls etc.), enabling to upgrade JET easily and minimising decommissioning issues at the end of JETs operational life. They operate in Deuterium only to investigate the feasibility of D-D fusion – very much concentrating on D-T fusion in ITER and the first true power plants.

                            Why then not get D-D fusion occurring at high levels in JET ? Because D-D needs much higher temperatures of 400 – 500 million degrees C than can normally be achieved. Already – plasma temperatures of 150 – 200 million degrees C will enables lots of D-T fusion – but not very much D-D fusion.

                            © Copyright Original Source




                            Jim
                            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                              hey - we are almost on the same page now -

                              fusion is an odd bird. We are making progress, but there are a lot of problems, not the least of which are neutron production that damages the containment structure and produces radioactive waste, and the fact most fusion we will be capable of in the near future uses tritium, which does not occur in any useful quantity in nature and so it must be produced either by the fusion reactor itself or ancillary fission reactors (which IIRC is where the fuel for the currrent experiments is currently produced.) Deuterium is plentiful and if we ever got to the point we don't need any tritium, we'd have plenty of energy for a long time, but it 'ignites' a lot hotter and so is a more difficult to solve problem.

                              https://www.euro-fusion.org/faq/top-...um-d-t-fusion/

                              Source: above

                              JET, so far the only operational fusion experiment capable of producing fusion energy, is routinely operated with Deuterium only, for a number of reasons. This minimises activation (from D-T neutrons and from Tritium retention in walls etc.), enabling to upgrade JET easily and minimising decommissioning issues at the end of JETs operational life. They operate in Deuterium only to investigate the feasibility of D-D fusion – very much concentrating on D-T fusion in ITER and the first true power plants.

                              Why then not get D-D fusion occurring at high levels in JET ? Because D-D needs much higher temperatures of 400 – 500 million degrees C than can normally be achieved. Already – plasma temperatures of 150 – 200 million degrees C will enables lots of D-T fusion – but not very much D-D fusion.

                              © Copyright Original Source




                              Jim
                              ScreenHunter_.jpg

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                The joke has always been that its twenty years away, and always will be. Still, they're inching closer to a practical reactor.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                155 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                399 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                373 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X