Originally posted by seanD
View Post
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.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Little Greta comes clean
Collapse
X
-
"I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostI agree that websites were not a successful part of their strategy, and that bribing politicians to deny climate change so that climate change became a partisan issue, worked much better. Buying politicians worked well for tobacco companies too. Here's Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, explaining how he handed out checks from tobacco companies to congressmen on the House floor, and how that was a bad look, and in future he'll only do that behind the scenes and not in public
Comment
-
Originally posted by seanD View PostI don't think the tobacco situation really works in your favor as a counter argument here. It was scientists, the bastions of truth and fact, they apparently were able to bribe to get the results they wanted.
As a whole, yes, I'd agree that scientists are bastions of truth and fact. But that's speaking as a whole. It's a statement that I would say is "very true" with regard to ~2/3rd of scientists, "more true than not" with regard to a quarter of scientists, but is not necessarily at all true of the last few percent of scientists. The vast majority of people who become scientists do so because they have a love of truth and discovering more of it, but there's a very small percentage who do get jaded over time or got into it for other reasons. It's like saying "people in the military will fight for their country", and it's true of the vast majority of people in the military, but it's also true that some military people in history have taken bribes and sold out their own, it's simply that the second is a very low percent of people compared to the first."I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
"[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostSo you're saying that she makes an excellent spokesperson for the AGW crowd and that she's a font of solid information.
Silencing Greta or mocking her does not alter the fact that our planet is in peril, as is recognized by the vast majority of scientists worldwide.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View PostOne thing that concerns me about the discussion of AGW is that the role of the Sun doesn't seem to come up. Apparently the IPCC consensus is that it's role is minimal.
But there are some views that propose a much more significant role.
Basically, there is evidence that the Sun's effect on climate is substantial, and more than just the variation in energy delivered by direct solar radiance (TSI). Several possible mechanisms are proposed and compared. Problems are that we can't really predict the future activity of the Sun (although it seems we are heading into a possibly large solar minimum), and we don't really have data for the possible range of TSI variance.
So one thing scientists can do is directly measure the difference in output across the solar spectrum of a spotless sun, and an active sun. So these differences in solar output of a sun with a lot of sunspots and a sun without spots are not mythical, they are not predicted, they are measured.
So what caused the Little Ice Age if not the reduced sunspot activity?
The old saying is correlation is not causation.
The current best theory that matches not only the when but the where (the little Ice Age was in good part a northern hemisphere phenomena) is volcanic activity the correlates better with the start and stop of the cooling and provides sufficient reduction in solar energy reaching the Earth through the high altitude aerosols of the eruptions to account for the observed temperature drop.
But another is that the lower solar output produced changes in the jet stream which created regionally lower temperatures in the winters, but NOT a global shift in temperature.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum
https://www.historicalclimatology.co...n-old-question
also
That's basically my concern - we are not putting enough effort into understanding the Sun and how it impacts our climate. We've committed to CO2 as the main factor, but it's possible that it's not. Our best efforts into reduce carbon emissions may be futile in minimising climate change, if the climate is not as sensitive to CO2 as we think, and may actually be the wrong thing (if we are heading into a cooling phase due to Sun activity).
https://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/
http://parkersolarprobe.jhuapl.edu/
There is also helioseismology, a method of studying the sun by it's oscillations (sound).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helioseismology
These are direct studies of the sun itself. But we can also study variations in sunspot activity and climate into the deeper past using proxies. The sun produces different amounts of c14 and be10 depending on how much sunspot activity there is. We can measure those changes over time in varves or ice cores, or (for c14) in living things like trees that we can validate their actual age through tree ring chronologies. Very little correlation arises there between variations in sunspot activity and global climate.
Here is a graph of temperature proxies against sunspot activity proxies for the last 10,000 or so years. Some parts of the graph, the correlation looks good. Other parts it is an inverse correlation, other parts random. Overall, there is little correlation with the major global temperature fluctuations and sunspot activity.
Sunspot_Climate_proxies.jpgLast edited by oxmixmudd; 12-18-2019, 12:12 AM.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
-
Originally posted by Tassman View Posthttps://www.nationalgeographic.com/s...limate-change/
Silencing Greta or mocking her does not alter the fact that our planet is in peril, as is recognized by the vast majority of scientists worldwide.
Comment
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostThe solar connection is interesting, but we are experiencing, and have been experiencing for two decades, a significant lull in solar activity. Indeed, this fall, as I watched and photographed the planet mercury crossing the sun, it did so before a sun with not 1 visible sunspot. It made identifying Mercury trivial. And yet we are encountering record warming, not cooling.
So one thing scientists can do is directly measure the difference in output across the solar spectrum of a spotless sun, and an active sun. So these differences in solar output of a sun with a lot of sunspots and a sun without spots are not mythical, they are not predicted, they are measured.
So what caused the Little Ice Age if not the reduced sunspot activity?
The old saying is correlation is not causation.
The current best theory that matches not only the when but the where (the little Ice Age was in good part a northern hemisphere phenomena) is volcanic activity the correlates better with the start and stop of the cooling and provides sufficient reduction in solar energy reaching the Earth through the high altitude aerosols of the eruptions to account for the observed temperature drop.
But another is that the lower solar output produced changes in the jet stream which created regionally lower temperatures in the winters, but NOT a global shift in temperature.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum
https://www.historicalclimatology.co...n-old-question
Originally posted by oxmixmuddI was always curious about the solar connection myself. But it is untrue that we are not putting effort into understanding the sun: we are studying the Sun, learning more about it as we go. The Parker Solar Probe will be giving us a much better understanding of the solar atmosphere. Stereo gives us 3-d (stereo) images of the sun.
https://stereo.gsfc.nasa.gov/
http://parkersolarprobe.jhuapl.edu/
There is also helioseismology, a method of studying the sun buy it's oscillations (sound).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helioseismology
We can also study variations in sunspot activity and climate into the deep past using proxies. The sun produces different amounts of c14 and be10 depending on how much sunspot activity there is. We can measure those changes over time in varves or (for c14) in living things like trees that we can validate their actual age through tree ring chronologies. Very little correlation arises there between variations in sunspot activity and global climate.
Here is a graph of temperature proxies against sunspot activity proxies for the last 10,000 or so years. Some parts of the graph, the correlation looks good. Other parts it is an inverse correlation, other parts random. Overall, there is little correlation with the major global temperature fluctuations and sunspot activity.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]41481[/ATTACH]
and the rest makes me wonder if you read the article. I think you haven't, and are just trying to educate me on the science of the Sun.
At least you haven't implied that I'm stupid, or morally irresponsible. Yet.
I can wait for that......>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Starlight View PostAll of what you said is irrelevant and untrue because in practice 99.99% of people don't read 99.99% of published articles. Your idea that the general public is hyper-aware of absolutely everything any part of the media has ever said and has been carefully measuring it for factual accurate over decades, is laughable.
I'm glad you find your strawmen so amusing.
Originally posted by StarlightInstead, what has actually happened is simple:
1. Scientists discovered climate change was happening.
2. Big oil and gas companies who have been some of the biggest and most profitable companies in the world for the last century, spotted that governments taking action to mitigate climate change might be a threat to their profits.
3. So big oil and gas companies payed a few people to muddy the waters and produce a few crank websites denying climate change, payed some radio talk show hosts to claim its false, got some commentators on TV to question it, and bribed some politicians into denying its real.
4. They make up absurd arguments like you posted above, trying to use the fact that somewhere sometime someone in the history of media published a hyperbolic article that pretty much nobody at the time read or took seriously and which didn't come true, as if that confirmed the anti-climate-change views you've chosen to hold for other reasons.
Oh, and "payed"...>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View Posthttps://www.nationalgeographic.com/s...limate-change/
Silencing Greta or mocking her does not alter the fact that our planet is in peril, as is recognized by the vast majority of scientists worldwide.
So there is a real danger than even if we stop putting CO2 into the atmosphere, we could be looking at major changes in sea level over several centuries.
https://thinkprogress.org/carbon-dio...-b435497e1266/
https://e360.yale.edu/features/how-t...why-it-matters
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...-above-400ppm/Last edited by oxmixmudd; 12-18-2019, 12:40 AM.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
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View Post
At least you haven't implied that I'm stupid, or morally irresponsible. Yet.
I can wait for that...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
-
Can't follow your point Pix.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
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View PostWhy would I do that - this is a perfectly reasonable, intelligent discussion. And I thank you for it.
One thing I found interesting from the article is that the Sun's activity may affect cloud formation and thus how much of an affect the Sun has on temperatures. The IPCC view seems to be that the Sun's activity has a minimal effect, but the article makes a case that this is wrong.
The history of climate altering temperature changes in our long-term history seems to correlate with what we know of the Sun's activity, so it just being volcanic activity or something else seems improbable....>>> Witty remark or snarky quote of another poster goes here <<<...
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View PostThe bolded makes me think that you didn't read the article (I know it's long).
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxVel View PostI think you're barking up the wrong tree completely. SeanD's comments are about media outlet reporting (which the media outlets should correct).
Scientists may or may not push for corrections to false reports, some may not because they have jobs and funding to consider; others because they don't have enough influence, others because they don't want to push back against the popular narrative - 'consensus' vs 'deniers'.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostHe said that "what she is saying is well substantiated and supported by the vast majority of scientists." That does not mean that her "concerns" are well-grounded in science but what she "is saying" is well-grounded in science."
So the question remains, is she or isn't she "a font of solid information?
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Ronson, Today, 08:45 AM
|
5 responses
50 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Ronson
Today, 03:01 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 05-03-2024, 01:19 PM
|
26 responses
205 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 03:06 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-03-2024, 12:23 PM
|
100 responses
422 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by alaskazimm
Today, 10:09 PM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, 05-03-2024, 11:46 AM
|
21 responses
138 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Yesterday, 06:52 AM
|
||
Started by seer, 05-03-2024, 04:37 AM
|
23 responses
115 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
05-03-2024, 02:49 PM
|
Comment