Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
The Case Against Global-Warming Skepticism (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter NCCommish
- Start date
the moops
Footballguy
I actually have stopped reading your posts tim.
I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
Cliff Clavin
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
I actually have stopped reading your posts tim.
I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
I don't mean to keep repeating myself. But the problem is I haven't CONVINCED anyone yet...You're yelling at walls and trees, Tim. You assume people are coming to the FFA to learn something new or expand/refine their POVs. Wrong. People are coming here to be entertained and/or be the "LHucks" they cannot be in real life...out of fear of being disowned by family/friends or actually having to back-up their internet tough-guy schtick.I actually have stopped reading your posts tim.
I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
Or tell weirdo ghost stories that would make real life people think they're a loon.You're yelling at walls and trees, Tim. You assume people are coming to the FFA to learn something new or expand/refine their POVs. Wrong. People are coming here to be entertained and/or be the "LHucks" they cannot be in real life...out of fear of being disowned by family/friends or actually having to back-up their internet tough-guy schtick.I actually have stopped reading your posts tim.
I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
Hunterbeer
Footballguy
So you believe the "science is set" that man is responsible for global warming, Please show me that again. I have shown you the most accomplished pro-global warming scientist in the world are unable to prove this, even if they do believe it. A full 98% of their models are wrong. They have NO explanantion for the current temperature plateau. The Head of this prestigious panel, whom I bet knows more than you do, said, "This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.”I actually have stopped reading your posts tim.
I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
So Tim, you will not, and cannot, find a more prestigious panel and they have a problem proving what you claim others are ignorant about. So you are saying there is NO CHANCE this is just a cyclical event? Even though models accounting for man are being proven wrong all the time. I agree there is warming. All of these scientist insist there is warming as well. But despite their best efforts, they cannot pin it on man made CO2 emissions. Simply cannot be done at this point despite what you "think". None of their models account for this pause and only 2% can keep it in the margin of error. Do you have a better model you are hiding at home?
I suppose listening to panels of 1,000 scientists instead of you makes me "ignorant". I like to think i am open to new interpretations of events that cover a microscopic period of the planet's history.
Last edited by a moderator:
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
Congrats! You've succeeded!You're yelling at walls and trees, Tim. You assume people are coming to the FFA to learn something new or expand/refine their POVs. Wrong. People are coming here to be entertained and/or be the "LHucks" they cannot be in real life...out of fear of being disowned by family/friends or actually having to back-up their internet tough-guy schtick.I actually have stopped reading your posts tim.
I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
So based on your own statement, you're a complete fool and probably a doosh-bag on top of it. Hey...It's not an insult if it's true, right?timschochet said:What's so funny is that Strike thinks that somehow I am insulting them by calling them ignorant. It's not an insult if it's true. I wish it wasn't true. It doesn't make them stupid- in fact, what's so depressing is how many bright people believe this junk.datonn said:Aw c'mon, Tim! Let those guys just run with it. Pat each other on the back for being smarter than the rest of us. Pretty please? It's better than anything that's on TV at the moment.
timschochet
Footballguy
You're doing a lot of cherry picking here.So you believe the "science is set" that man is responsible for global warming, Please show me that again. I have shown you the most accomplished pro-global warming scientist in the world are unable to prove this, even if they do believe it. A full 98% of their models are wrong. They have NO explanantion for the current temperature plateau. The Head of this prestigious panel, whom I bet knows more than you do, said, "This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.”I actually have stopped reading your posts tim.
I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
So Tim, you will not, and cannot, find a more prestigious panel and they have a problem proving what you claim others are ignorant about. So you are saying there is NO CHANCE this is just a cyclical event? Even though models accounting for man are being proven wrong all the time. I agree there is warming. All of these scientist insist there is warming as well. But despite their best efforts, they cannot pin it on man made CO2 emissions. Simply cannot be done at this point despite what you "think". None of their models account for this pause and only 2% can keep it in the margin of error. Do you have a better model you are hiding at home?
I suppose listening to panels of 1,000 scientists instead of you makes me "ignorant". I like to think i am open to new interpretations of events that cover a microscopic period of the planet's history.
Scientists cannot explain fully to their satisfaction the reason that warming has slowed or paused since 1998. (It's important to note that 1998 was a record breaking El Nino year, so the next several years look cooler by comparison.) But since 2002, the overall long term trend of warming is unequivocal. (Please refer to the BerkeleyEarth website I linked earlier for graphs that demonstrate this.)
Per Berkeley Earth, all of the 17 hottest years ever recorded on a global scale have occurred over the last 24 years. They are, in order of hottest: 2010. 2009. 1998, 2005. 2003. 2002. 2004. 2006. 2007, 2011, 2001, 1997, 2008, 1995, 1999, 1990, and 2000. If that doesn't convince you, I don't know what would.
spreagle
Footballguy
Global relative humidity has tanked over the last decade or two, at all elevations. Given than water vapor is a much more potent global warming gas, and for all the hoopla CO2 receives everyone forgets the global warming models do not assume CO2 rises in isolation ... the models TAKE CREDIT for a more moist atmosphere due to CO2, not a dryer atmosphere. I think I'd start around there if I was trying to figure out why there is no warming in the last 17 years. No extra water vapor, no warming.You're doing a lot of cherry picking here.Scientists cannot explain fully to their satisfaction the reason that warming has slowed or paused since 1998. (It's important to note that 1998 was a record breaking El Nino year, so the next several years look cooler by comparison.) But since 2002, the overall long term trend of warming is unequivocal. (Please refer to the BerkeleyEarth website I linked earlier for graphs that demonstrate this.)So you believe the "science is set" that man is responsible for global warming, Please show me that again. I have shown you the most accomplished pro-global warming scientist in the world are unable to prove this, even if they do believe it. A full 98% of their models are wrong. They have NO explanantion for the current temperature plateau. The Head of this prestigious panel, whom I bet knows more than you do, said, "This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.”So Tim, you will not, and cannot, find a more prestigious panel and they have a problem proving what you claim others are ignorant about. So you are saying there is NO CHANCE this is just a cyclical event? Even though models accounting for man are being proven wrong all the time. I agree there is warming. All of these scientist insist there is warming as well. But despite their best efforts, they cannot pin it on man made CO2 emissions. Simply cannot be done at this point despite what you "think". None of their models account for this pause and only 2% can keep it in the margin of error. Do you have a better model you are hiding at home?I actually have stopped reading your posts tim. I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
I suppose listening to panels of 1,000 scientists instead of you makes me "ignorant". I like to think i am open to new interpretations of events that cover a microscopic period of the planet's history.
Per Berkeley Earth, all of the 17 hottest years ever recorded on a global scale have occurred over the last 24 years. They are, in order of hottest: 2010. 2009. 1998, 2005. 2003. 2002. 2004. 2006. 2007, 2011, 2001, 1997, 2008, 1995, 1999, 1990, and 2000. If that doesn't convince you, I don't know what would.
Out of our 4 billion years, just how many do we have an accurate record of global temperatures for? Why talk in hyperboles?You're doing a lot of cherry picking here.Scientists cannot explain fully to their satisfaction the reason that warming has slowed or paused since 1998. (It's important to note that 1998 was a record breaking El Nino year, so the next several years look cooler by comparison.) But since 2002, the overall long term trend of warming is unequivocal. (Please refer to the BerkeleyEarth website I linked earlier for graphs that demonstrate this.)So you believe the "science is set" that man is responsible for global warming, Please show me that again. I have shown you the most accomplished pro-global warming scientist in the world are unable to prove this, even if they do believe it. A full 98% of their models are wrong. They have NO explanantion for the current temperature plateau. The Head of this prestigious panel, whom I bet knows more than you do, said, "This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.So Tim, you will not, and cannot, find a more prestigious panel and they have a problem proving what you claim others are ignorant about. So you are saying there is NO CHANCE this is just a cyclical event? Even though models accounting for man are being proven wrong all the time. I agree there is warming. All of these scientist insist there is warming as well. But despite their best efforts, they cannot pin it on man made CO2 emissions. Simply cannot be done at this point despite what you "think". None of their models account for this pause and only 2% can keep it in the margin of error. Do you have a better model you are hiding at home?I actually have stopped reading your posts tim. I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
I suppose listening to panels of 1,000 scientists instead of you makes me "ignorant". I like to think i am open to new interpretations of events that cover a microscopic period of the planet's history.
Per Berkeley Earth, all of the 17 hottest years ever recorded on a global scale have occurred over the last 24 years. They are, in order of hottest: 2010. 2009. 1998, 2005. 2003. 2002. 2004. 2006. 2007, 2011, 2001, 1997, 2008, 1995, 1999, 1990, and 2000. If that doesn't convince you, I don't know what would.
timschochet
Footballguy
Here are BerkeleyEarth's best estimates as to why the pause:
http://berkeleyearth.org/global-warming-pause
There are two essential theories:
1. A combination of more heat going into the deep oceans and downturns in multi-decadal cycles in global temperature as the primary drivers of the pause.
2. A plethora of recent small volcanoes, changes in stratospheric water vapor, and a downturn in solar energy reaching the earth may also be contributing to the plateau.
But while they're still trying to figure it out, it's important to note that very few scientists believe the pause will continue. Furthermore, despite Hunterbeer's attempt to cherry pick what the scientists actually said, you're not going to find any IPCC scientists arguing that man-made global warming is not happening or that the essential science is wrong.
http://berkeleyearth.org/global-warming-pause
There are two essential theories:
1. A combination of more heat going into the deep oceans and downturns in multi-decadal cycles in global temperature as the primary drivers of the pause.
2. A plethora of recent small volcanoes, changes in stratospheric water vapor, and a downturn in solar energy reaching the earth may also be contributing to the plateau.
But while they're still trying to figure it out, it's important to note that very few scientists believe the pause will continue. Furthermore, despite Hunterbeer's attempt to cherry pick what the scientists actually said, you're not going to find any IPCC scientists arguing that man-made global warming is not happening or that the essential science is wrong.
I hope they're right, we need to keep breaking food production records every year.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-31/corn-set-for-worst-drop-since-60-as-crop-prices-slump-on-output.html
Man, farmers worldwide producing record levels of everything. Can somebody please cool it down a little in here.
Man, farmers worldwide producing record levels of everything. Can somebody please cool it down a little in here.
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
jonessed
Footballguy
That's a good thing because the non-essential science totally ####ed their models.
Hunterbeer
Footballguy
I'm cherry picking?!?! Berkeley Earth has data since 1880. That is 133 out of 4.5 Billion years worth of data, but of course it proves everything?!?!?! So no, a sample of what,.0000000025%, does not convince me, nor any serious scientist.You're doing a lot of cherry picking here.So you believe the "science is set" that man is responsible for global warming, Please show me that again. I have shown you the most accomplished pro-global warming scientist in the world are unable to prove this, even if they do believe it. A full 98% of their models are wrong. They have NO explanantion for the current temperature plateau. The Head of this prestigious panel, whom I bet knows more than you do, said, "This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.”I actually have stopped reading your posts tim.
I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
So Tim, you will not, and cannot, find a more prestigious panel and they have a problem proving what you claim others are ignorant about. So you are saying there is NO CHANCE this is just a cyclical event? Even though models accounting for man are being proven wrong all the time. I agree there is warming. All of these scientist insist there is warming as well. But despite their best efforts, they cannot pin it on man made CO2 emissions. Simply cannot be done at this point despite what you "think". None of their models account for this pause and only 2% can keep it in the margin of error. Do you have a better model you are hiding at home?
I suppose listening to panels of 1,000 scientists instead of you makes me "ignorant". I like to think i am open to new interpretations of events that cover a microscopic period of the planet's history.
Scientists cannot explain fully to their satisfaction the reason that warming has slowed or paused since 1998. (It's important to note that 1998 was a record breaking El Nino year, so the next several years look cooler by comparison.) But since 2002, the overall long term trend of warming is unequivocal. (Please refer to the BerkeleyEarth website I linked earlier for graphs that demonstrate this.)
Per Berkeley Earth, all of the 17 hottest years ever recorded on a global scale have occurred over the last 24 years. They are, in order of hottest: 2010. 2009. 1998, 2005. 2003. 2002. 2004. 2006. 2007, 2011, 2001, 1997, 2008, 1995, 1999, 1990, and 2000. If that doesn't convince you, I don't know what would.
All of these scientist who believe as you do are scrambling to come up with some reason, some way to produce some graph to explain this pause. They have been unable to. Despite the best efforts of over 1,000 scientist failing to come up with a reason, you are able to say with 100% certainty that this warming is NOT a cyclical activity and that factors other than man may be driving it. Must be nice to have 100% certainty to belittle others, when scientist are scrambling for answers. Maybe they should just ask you. Rare indeed is the 100% term used in science, but glad you can do it here.
timschochet
Footballguy
I know all of you scientists out there believe in gravity. But you can't explain how it works. And last I checked, there were birds and all kinds of insects who fly. A mosquito just flew past my house!
Argue away, but the science is not settled.
This is a perfect example. We can do tests and verify the results to get reproduceable results regarding gravity. That's how science works. That is currently not possible with climate change. I know you think you're being clever here but you're really just showing yourself as being either a condescending doosh or ignorant. Take your choice.
Mario Kart
Footballguy
tommyboy
Footballguy
Actually, its just science. Theories hold up over time through testing against observable data. When testing is rigorous and results match expectations repeatedly you tend to consider that theory pretty solid, scientifically. When the opposite occurs you revise the theory, or scrap it and come up with a new theory.
5 years ago the science predicted we'd have virtually no sea ice in 2013 and yet we have tons of sea ice,much of it multiyear sea ice. So the science was wrong.
There are many examples of the models predictions being wrong you can read some here
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/04/2013-was-not-a-good-year-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-climate-warming-change-disruption-wierding-ocean-acidification-extreme-weather-etc/#more-100435
5 years ago the science predicted we'd have virtually no sea ice in 2013 and yet we have tons of sea ice,much of it multiyear sea ice. So the science was wrong.
There are many examples of the models predictions being wrong you can read some here
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/04/2013-was-not-a-good-year-for-catastrophic-anthropogenic-global-climate-warming-change-disruption-wierding-ocean-acidification-extreme-weather-etc/#more-100435
jonessed
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Man, you and Strike have such nasty demeanors. I mean, all you guys ever do is come in here and make nasty comments.I get that the truth about global warming frustrates you. But hey, don't take it out on me, or the scientists either. I'm not to blame and neither are they. Neither are the oil or coal companies, or the public for that matter. Fossil fuels have been wonderful for human society, and I don't feel bad at all about using them. I'm no environmentalist. What happened happened. Now we have to find a way to solve it, and we could do that a lot easier without all of these silly denials.
timschochet
Footballguy
That website is hilarious.
No responsible scientist that I've read is going to predict exact years and occurrences. What they will tell you is that the amounts of sea ice is shrinking, and at some point in the future it will be gone. The fact that it hasn't happened yet is a wonderful thing, but your inference that we should therefore reject all of the science is simply nonsensical IMO.
Every effect that was predicted is absent. But they're scientists, so we know this new batch of guesses will be better.
You do realize we are coming from a mini ice age and have been warming for thousands of years. The fact that we are at highs from recent history is not only not alarming, it is expected.You're doing a lot of cherry picking here.Scientists cannot explain fully to their satisfaction the reason that warming has slowed or paused since 1998. (It's important to note that 1998 was a record breaking El Nino year, so the next several years look cooler by comparison.) But since 2002, the overall long term trend of warming is unequivocal. (Please refer to the BerkeleyEarth website I linked earlier for graphs that demonstrate this.)So you believe the "science is set" that man is responsible for global warming, Please show me that again. I have shown you the most accomplished pro-global warming scientist in the world are unable to prove this, even if they do believe it. A full 98% of their models are wrong. They have NO explanantion for the current temperature plateau. The Head of this prestigious panel, whom I bet knows more than you do, said, "This is a serious scientific problem that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will have to confront when it presents its next Assessment Report late next year.So Tim, you will not, and cannot, find a more prestigious panel and they have a problem proving what you claim others are ignorant about. So you are saying there is NO CHANCE this is just a cyclical event? Even though models accounting for man are being proven wrong all the time. I agree there is warming. All of these scientist insist there is warming as well. But despite their best efforts, they cannot pin it on man made CO2 emissions. Simply cannot be done at this point despite what you "think". None of their models account for this pause and only 2% can keep it in the margin of error. Do you have a better model you are hiding at home?I actually have stopped reading your posts tim. I find you to be a genuine guy. I think I may even like you. But after your first 50,000 posts, everyone knows your opinion on every subject imaginable. You leave nothing to our imaginations. You bore me now.
I suppose listening to panels of 1,000 scientists instead of you makes me "ignorant". I like to think i am open to new interpretations of events that cover a microscopic period of the planet's history.
Per Berkeley Earth, all of the 17 hottest years ever recorded on a global scale have occurred over the last 24 years. They are, in order of hottest: 2010. 2009. 1998, 2005. 2003. 2002. 2004. 2006. 2007, 2011, 2001, 1997, 2008, 1995, 1999, 1990, and 2000. If that doesn't convince you, I don't know what would.
Sand
Footballguy
How many articles are there in the literature these days about the effects of gravity? Very few to none.
How many about climate change? Thousands.
In one the science is settled, the other it is not. I'll let you choose which one. Like I said, all this is irrelevant, though.
jonessed
Footballguy
You are such a hypocrite
In the last 3000 years, there have been two periods which were either as warm or warmer than today. The only constant is that the climate is always changing. Trying to say we know that the majority of the change is from man-made CO2 is asinine.
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
For the record, I don't believe in gravity.
timschochet
Footballguy
Neither does Jon
Tells me we don't spend enough money researching gravity. I think the need a few lobbyists.
timschochet
Footballguy
If the theory of gravity were a threat to the oil companies, there would be tons of articles and misinformation about it, and conservatives would come in here and post that the science wasn't settled.
Do you realize how much easier it would be for the oil companies to extract oil if gravity wasn't a factor?
timschochet
Footballguy
Is this supposed to be a serious rebuttal?
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
I avoid this topic here because the discussion seems sophomoric compared to other sites, and I felt Shining Path expressed my thinking. I'm posting because I'm the rarity who has changed his mind.
My work with greenhouses gave me indirect daily association with the topic. Drought, renewable energy, sustainable growing practices, desertification, changing temperatures -- these are topics the big brains I dealt with dealt with daily. There's some idiocy in this thread regarding CO2 and plants, btw.
My dad was a meteorologist, Department of Defense, China Lake Naval Weapons Center, Research Department, Division of Sciences, Code 60 Weather Modification (badass stuff they could have called weather weaponization). His work was top secret until Carter declassified it. Cool for me because I have it, but thankfully the juicy stuff was reclassified by Reagan. Dad was brilliant, but not as brilliant as his boss.
For me the turning point on the warming debate was seeing my dad's old boss's name and his genius son's name on a long list of scientists opposing the alarmist claims coming from the United Nations and associates. At first I figured their conservative military backgrounds had them choosing sides ideologically like so many do. But I knew these men. I knew they were wicked smart. I doubted they would sign something they didn't believe. So I talked to the son who graduated HS with me. He had a calm screed on the topic that lasted about three minutes. I took mental notes and started thinking for myself instead of being wooed by bad science. I think Shining Path was wrong. I think had he stayed with us, he would have eventually arrived at the same. This is already tldr, but I've gone from thinking some were near heroic to sound the alarm a decade+ ago to thinking DrJ, tommyboy, Jnmx pretty much have it right. So I guess it does happen, internet blowhards change their minds. And I thought I should at least let them know it isn't futile but it takes a lot of information and probably is a waste of time.
My work with greenhouses gave me indirect daily association with the topic. Drought, renewable energy, sustainable growing practices, desertification, changing temperatures -- these are topics the big brains I dealt with dealt with daily. There's some idiocy in this thread regarding CO2 and plants, btw.
My dad was a meteorologist, Department of Defense, China Lake Naval Weapons Center, Research Department, Division of Sciences, Code 60 Weather Modification (badass stuff they could have called weather weaponization). His work was top secret until Carter declassified it. Cool for me because I have it, but thankfully the juicy stuff was reclassified by Reagan. Dad was brilliant, but not as brilliant as his boss.
For me the turning point on the warming debate was seeing my dad's old boss's name and his genius son's name on a long list of scientists opposing the alarmist claims coming from the United Nations and associates. At first I figured their conservative military backgrounds had them choosing sides ideologically like so many do. But I knew these men. I knew they were wicked smart. I doubted they would sign something they didn't believe. So I talked to the son who graduated HS with me. He had a calm screed on the topic that lasted about three minutes. I took mental notes and started thinking for myself instead of being wooed by bad science. I think Shining Path was wrong. I think had he stayed with us, he would have eventually arrived at the same. This is already tldr, but I've gone from thinking some were near heroic to sound the alarm a decade+ ago to thinking DrJ, tommyboy, Jnmx pretty much have it right. So I guess it does happen, internet blowhards change their minds. And I thought I should at least let them know it isn't futile but it takes a lot of information and probably is a waste of time.
timschochet
Footballguy
Shining Path was a guy who understood the science much better than I do and was also one of those rare people who was able to explain things in laymans terms and was patient enough to respond to every challenge in detail no matter how ludicrous. I highly doubt that SP would have changed his essential thinking on this issue due to a temporary pause and/or some insignificant inconsistencies in predictions. I can't think of any scientist who has.
avoiding injuries
Footballguy
Well, this thread has taken a turn. A few pages ago people were being ridiculed, insulted, mocked and laughed at for speaking against global warming.
