Five Small Problems with AGW science.
in [Physics]
|
From: Sam Wormley on 22 Feb 2010 10:17 On 2/22/10 6:18 AM, AM wrote: > And yet you can't say with 100% certainty that what the AGW people think > will happen will happen. That's right--there is no 100% certainty. We could experience a super volcano that would certainly reverse current climate trends. One doesn't need a computer model to see the trends of the last century and the likelihood that these trends will continue during this century! Human contributed increase in green house gas CO2 http://www.globalchange.gov/HighResImages/1-Global-pg-13.jpg http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/10/16/0907094106 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091023163513.htm Global surface (land and sea) temperature increase http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/images/global-surface-temp-trends.gif And accompanying Sea Level Rise http://www.wildwildweather.com/forecastblog/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/700px-recent_sea_level_rise.png
From: Chris L Peterson on 22 Feb 2010 10:31 On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 07:18:14 -0500, AM <sctuser(a)comcast.net> wrote: >And yet you can't say with 100% certainty that what the AGW people think >will happen will happen. Nor do I. But the science tells us that the climate change is going to happen with something like a 95% confidence level. And history tells us that less stressful natural events have destroyed entire civilizations. I look at fragile systems like that here in the U.S. and have a high level of confidence that we would not survive something like the destruction of New York City, or the flooding of the Eastern Seaboard, with anything like our current way of operating. >If it does happen, we will adapt and >overcome. Certainly, humans will survive. That's not a concern. But surviving isn't the same as thriving. If rapid climatic change forces a couple hundred years of relatively uncivilized society, or results in democratic societies being replaced with despotic ones, I don't see that as a positive thing. We have it in our power to mitigate the effects of rapid climate change, and the good thing is that what needs to be done is inherently good for the economy- eliminating petroleum as a fuel source and developing clean renewable energy sources. If we invest in such a program, we win whether the climate change happens or not. >Nothing will happen for a long time to come... Well, it looks like we could be in an irreversible situation within a few decades. That's not long- although longer than most people are willing to look ahead. _________________________________________________ Chris L Peterson Cloudbait Observatory http://www.cloudbait.com
From: Marvin the Martian on 22 Feb 2010 11:40 On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 03:21:48 -0500, Yousuf Khan wrote: > Marvin the Martian wrote: >> Scientific experts like Al Gore and Barack Obama assure us that the >> science of AGW is settled; and it is except for a few minor details, >> those details being: >> >> 1) There isn't any warming. Even Jones admits this. 2) CO2 doesn't >> cause the greenhouse effect. Water vapor does. 3) We didn't put the CO2 >> into the atmosphere. A warmer ocean did that. 4) AGW science isn't >> science, it's bullshit and leftist propaganda. 5) If there was warming, >> it wouldn't be bad, it would be good. >> >> Gawd, Humans are a gullible species. I can't believe you fell for AGW. > > This ain't no progressive vs. conservative positional test. There's > plenty of liberals who find the whole thing to be hokum too. > > Yousuf Khan Obama's "science czar" claims to be a communist. Obama's "climate czar" is a card carrying socialist. Obama himself preached Marxism. You'd be hard pressed to find a conservative who fell for this left wing propaganda. However, AGW fits right in with the left wing religion that humans are dirty little creatures who are polluting the planet.
From: Last Post on 22 Feb 2010 14:16 On Feb 20, 1:13 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/19/10 11:56 PM, Last Post wrote: > > > ø Not so you idiot. If you read the article you > > would see where you are dead wrong. I > > phrased it so that simpletons like you might > > understand it. > > All you succeeded in was screwing it up. ø So you say, but I dare you to prove it. Forget about your links, give us the facts w data. ø The issue is really irrelevant. ⨠Nobody can control the wind Nobody can control the rain or snow Nobody (collectively) can control climate. Global temps are within natural variations Oceans heating are a prelude to glaciation ⨠Get used to it!! â â | In real science the burden of proof is always | on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far | neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one | iota of valid data for global warming nor have | they provided data that climate change is being | effected by commerce and industry, and not by
From: Last Post on 22 Feb 2010 14:26
On Feb 22, 10:17 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/22/10 6:18 AM, AM wrote: > > > And yet you can't say with 100% certainty that what the AGW people think > > will happen will happen. > >   That's right--there is no 100% certainty. We could experience a super >   volcano that would certainly reverse current climate trends. > >   One doesn't need a computer model to see the trends of the last >   century and the likelihood that these trends will continue during >   this century! > > Human contributed increase in green house gas CO2 ø LOL 3.5% over all Total increase less than 0.6% = < 14 ppm > > And accompanying Sea Level Rise > ø ZERO à the poor Worm can't get anything straight. He believes all the maybe, woulda, coulda, shoulda but he denies any real facts On Feb 20, 1:13 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/19/10 11:56 PM, Last Post wrote: > > > ø Not so you idiot. If you read the article you > > would see where you are dead wrong. I > > phrased it so that simpletons like you might > > understand it. > > All you succeeded in was screwing it up. ø So you say, but I dare you to prove it. Forget about your links, give us the facts w data. ø The issue is really irrelevant. ⨠Nobody can control the wind Nobody can control the rain or snow Nobody (collectively) can control climate. Global temps are within natural variations Oceans heating are a prelude to glaciation ⨠Get used to it!! â â | In real science the burden of proof is always | on the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far | neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one | iota of valid data for global warming nor have | they provided data that climate change is being | effected by commerce and industry, and not by | natural causes |