still denying global warming?

jillio said:
Your words, not mine. "I do not use links to obtain information" is quite different than, "I do not use links to check information someone else has provided."

You are terribly argumentative today. Is there something on your mind?
Click to expand...

Im just bored :)

Nobody else has any promise of replying in a timely fashion :)

I'll pull up what you said earlier if you wish. Oh, found it, in this thread.
 
Despite about global warming or climate change, pollution and smogs are still bad for you and need be regulated if it is serious issue.
 
Hi all. I'm brand new to these forums so I thought this is the best time to jump right in to a fun heated argument :laugh2:

I have a few questions about AGW (these are not rhetorical. i will assume responders that make no attempt to answer these, fail to answer because they don't like the answers.):

1. Why has every climate computer simulation developed in the last twenty years by groups touting AGW (with the exception of recent simulations which cannot yet be tested) been off by at usually a fairly large factor, and always in the warming direction?

2. What is the most precise data available that would affect global warming, what is its error, what is the second most precise source of data, what is its error, and which of those data sources is used in the IPCC climate simulations?

3. Randomly pick five major federal government projects and rate their efficiency over that of the same project driven by the free market in the private sector.

4. What character and intellect drives one to pursue a career in politics, what proportion of politicians have this character and intellect, and what proportion of non-politicians?

5. Are the majority of U.N. members pro-US or anti-US, and how would this affect they're choice in appointing IPCC members?

6. Is the input data precision and the systemic chaos in climatology more like it is in psychiatry or in physics (i.e. is it a hard or soft science)? Explain.

7. Does a degree in climate science indicate a better character than the average person?

8. What proportion of the income of climate scientists comes from government grants?

9. What proportion of anti-AGW research fails to garner grant money, and what proportion of pro-AGW research fails to garner grant money? is this the case with NASA?

10. Find several predictions of arctic ice sheet size in years past, note how well they predicted the actual size, and point out any trends in those predictions.

About me: I've been a freelance consulting scientist in a wide variety of areas for the last 25 years. I know a lot about a lot of sciences, a lot about the dynamics of the industry (including personalities, the education industry, and the business side of things), a lot about the personalities involved, and a lot about international politics.

I know a great deal about simulation, information theory, classical physics, artificial intelligence, cosmology, quantum mechanics, astronomy, and a myriad of other areas, and can prove this knowledge to any and all that challenge me. Anybody want to discuss synthetic aperture radar? Or how about a pleasant conversation on quantum entanglement? I'm ready if you are.

All this bragging isn't just to inflate my head. Its to add credibility to what I am about to say about AGW. So even if you disagree with my opinion, you'll also have to address my background.
 
more vehicle grow, the more heat we have.

Hey, it's hotter than AC unit.
 
bampap said:
Hi all. I'm brand new to these forums so I thought this is the best time to jump right in to a fun heated argument :laugh2:

I have a few questions about AGW (these are not rhetorical. i will assume responders that make no attempt to answer these, fail to answer because they don't like the answers.):

1. Why has every climate computer simulation developed in the last twenty years by groups touting AGW (with the exception of recent simulations which cannot yet be tested) been off by at usually a fairly large factor, and always in the warming direction?

2. What is the most precise data available that would affect global warming, what is its error, what is the second most precise source of data, what is its error, and which of those data sources is used in the IPCC climate simulations?

3. Randomly pick five major federal government projects and rate their efficiency over that of the same project driven by the free market in the private sector.

4. What character and intellect drives one to pursue a career in politics, what proportion of politicians have this character and intellect, and what proportion of non-politicians?

5. Are the majority of U.N. members pro-US or anti-US, and how would this affect they're choice in appointing IPCC members?

6. Is the input data precision and the systemic chaos in climatology more like it is in psychiatry or in physics (i.e. is it a hard or soft science)? Explain.

7. Does a degree in climate science indicate a better character than the average person?

8. What proportion of the income of climate scientists comes from government grants?

9. What proportion of anti-AGW research fails to garner grant money, and what proportion of pro-AGW research fails to garner grant money? is this the case with NASA?

10. Find several predictions of arctic ice sheet size in years past, note how well they predicted the actual size, and point out any trends in those predictions.

About me: I've been a freelance consulting scientist in a wide variety of areas for the last 25 years. I know a lot about a lot of sciences, a lot about the dynamics of the industry (including personalities, the education industry, and the business side of things), a lot about the personalities involved, and a lot about international politics.

I know a great deal about simulation, information theory, classical physics, artificial intelligence, cosmology, quantum mechanics, astronomy, and a myriad of other areas, and can prove this knowledge to any and all that challenge me. Anybody want to discuss synthetic aperture radar? Or how about a pleasant conversation on quantum entanglement? I'm ready if you are.

All this bragging isn't just to inflate my head. Its to add credibility to what I am about to say about AGW. So even if you disagree with my opinion, you'll also have to address my background.
Click to expand...

All right, pal...It's clobbering time!!!! :P
 
bampap said:
Questions and qualifications and stuff
Click to expand...
As a student of science, I know that I don't know enough to comment on the specifics of climate science. Therefore, I don't know to what extent mankind is causing global warming and what the consequences will be. As impressive as your credentials are, qualifications in radar systems, quantum mechanics, and information theory does not translate into having knowledge of climate science unless you have studied it specifically.

While I admit I don't know much about the field, I am quite distrustful of many of the scientists working in the field and the advocates pushing for policies to ostensibly deal with the problem. I could go on and on listing the reasons, but ultimately, I'm not willing to throw away the economy for a questionable solution to a questionable problem proposed by questionable people.

Anyway, I doubt you'll get anyone to answer all ten of your questions, so you might as well give us your answers.
 
netrox said:
Yeah, you're right.... the global warming isn't happening! It's just one degree hotter.... and mortality just doubles up.. no big deal.
Click to expand...
Are you responding to me? If you are, read closely. I said nothing of the sort.
 
kokonut said:
Meanwhile, more people die of climate-related deaths.

Deadly cold snap hits Argentina, Uruguay, Chile - CSMonitor.com

Record cold in San Diego this August, soon?
Will San Diego break a cool weather record? It's a matter of degree - San Diego, California Talk Radio Station - 760 KFMB AM - 760kfmb

Coolest summer in decades for San Diego.
The long, cool summer: Some like it hot, others do not - San Jose Mercury News
Click to expand...

Thanks for supporting the hypothesis with more information. Global warming is about extremes on either end of the continuum.
 
The Earth has its summer and winter at the same time based on the tilt. Winter in the northern hemisphere (that's where we are) is when the Earth's axis is tilted further away from the sun where we get less sunlight and therefore colder temperature. While at the same time in the southern hemisphere like Chile gets more sunshine. It makes no sense to discuss "global warming" as the reason for the cold snaps. Again, to actually think that CO2 causes global warming would certainly need help in the logic department.
 
We had two weeks of 100's temps... I think it was the hottest summer we've had here. It's awful.

The heat wave finally went away.
 
netrox said:
We had two weeks of 100's temps... I think it was the hottest summer we've had here. It's awful.

The heat wave finally went away.
Click to expand...

Back in Maryland around the summer of 1989 there were temperatures of 100's that lasted a few weeks as well. I remember since I was a camp counselor back then and everybody was miserable during that heat wave trying to stay cool and even get some sleep at night in very warm cabins.
 
netrox said:
We had two weeks of 100's temps... I think it was the hottest summer we've had here. It's awful.

The heat wave finally went away.
Click to expand...

1980 ring a bell? 69 days over 100 in North Texas


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_United_States_heat_wave

In Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas, high temperatures exceeded 100 °F (38 °C) a total of 69 times, including a record 42 consecutive days from June 23 to August 3. Dallas/Fort Worth reached an all-time high on June 26 and 27, when the temperature reached 113 °F (45 °C) on both days. In all the Dallas/Fort Worth area saw 29 days in which the previous record high temperature was either broken or tied. Wichita Falls, Texas would hit 117 °F (47 °C), the highest temperature ever recorded in that city to date.
Click to expand...
 
kokonut said:
It's that dang global warming!! We need to tell Chile to stop driving!!
Click to expand...

Small change. !6 of the world's largest ships cause as much pollution as all the world's cars. THAT ought to have an effect, eh?
 
Back
Top