Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
CODE PROJECT For Those Who Code
  • Home
  • Articles
  • FAQ
Community
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Back Room
  4. George Will - on calamaties

George Will - on calamaties

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Back Room
htmlcomquestion
32 Posts 11 Posters 1 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • J John Carson

    Mike Gaskey wrote:

    according to the U.N. World Meteorological Organization, there has been no recorded global warming for more than a decade, or one-third of the span since the global cooling scare.

    Will doesn't give a cite for this but, assuming the claim is accurate, it doesn't mean much. For short-term weather reasons (in addition to long-term climate reasons), 1998 was unusually hot, which means that any measure starting at 1998 has a bias toward cooling. The 2008 report of the U.N. World Meteorological Organization gives the following rankings for the hottest years on record (going back over 150 years to 1850): 1. 1998 2. 2005 3. 2003 4. 2002 5. 2004 6. 2006 7. 2007 8. 2001 9. 1997 10. 1995 Accordingly, I don't think there is a lot of comfort for the denialists in the record of the past decade. http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcdmp/documents/WMO1031_EN_web.pdf[^]

    John Carson

    L Offline
    L Offline
    Lost User
    wrote on last edited by
    #14

    Satellite data shows an averaged cooling trend of around 3` per century since 2003. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/18/giss-divergence-with-satellite-temperatures-since-the-start-of-2003/[^] The bronze age was a lot warmer than today, the MWP was warmer too. We had it very cold during LIA, and warming since then up to around 1930. After that due to increased data the picture is less consistent: The US, Greenland, Canada, the Arctic, and much of the rest of the far north got colder, then hotter, but no hotter than the 1930's. (Ignoring the 1998 freak year) Antartica and parts of the south have kept getting colder. And now we seem to be at the beginning of a general cooling trend. Warming? Nope. Global? Nope. Its just plain variabilty and any CO2 we produce is good for crops and should not be limited. Any other stance than that is unscientific self delusion and lies.

    Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • O oilFactotum

      Here are a couple of responses to Will's column: http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/environmentandenergy/archive/2009/02/15/can-george-will-save-the-quot-global-cooling-quot-myth-sadly-no.aspx[^] http://climateprogress.org/2009/02/15/george-will-global-cooling-warming-debunked/[^]

      L Offline
      L Offline
      Lost User
      wrote on last edited by
      #15

      The first link only attacks Wills assertion that the cooling scare of the 70s has a bearing on todays situation. (Which is arguable, depending on you position) The second uses language such that it discredits itself.

      Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • J John Carson

        Rob Graham wrote:

        Quoting from the document you linked to: "Since the beginning of the twentieth century, the global average surface temperature has risen by 0.74°C, but this increase has not been continuous. The linear warming trend over the past 50 years (0.13°C per decade) is nearly twice that for the past 100 years." That seems to contradict Will's assertion as to what the WMO is saying.

        Not necessarily. It could be true both that a linear fit to the data over the past 50 years shows a warming trend and that a linear fit to the last 10 years doesn't show a warming trend --- provided there was sufficient warming in the first 40 years. Like I suggested, if you get the hottest year on record in 1998 and then the temperature bounces around in the vicinity of that hottest year for the next decade, then a linear fit for those 10 years could show no upward trend. Nevertheless, the fact that temperature stays at near record levels is highly suggestive. If Will's claim is correct --- on which I reserve judgement --- then I strongly suspect that continued warming will show up in the data in the next 2-3 years as short-term weather effects wash out.

        John Carson

        L Offline
        L Offline
        Lost User
        wrote on last edited by
        #16

        John Carson wrote:

        Not necessarily. It could be true both that a linear fit to the data over the past 50 years shows a warming trend and that a linear fit to the last 10 years doesn't show a warming trend --- provided there was sufficient warming in the first 40 years.

        For sure. And the longer term trends all show cooling. Post MWP, post bronze age, and for the last 10,000 years. Fact is todays temperatures are many degrees off either the highs or the lows. (The rate of change isnt spectacular either).

        Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • L Lost User

          Whether the cooling period its 11 or 7 years depends on whether you accept the exceptional el-nino 1998 as the peak. If not, the GW peaked at around 2002. Either way, its a significant trend. Re the calamities thinhg though, I think its true. We always liie something to worry about. And so post cold war we had to comeup with somehting to replace the bomb and AGW was the result.

          Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

          M Offline
          M Offline
          Mike Gaskey
          wrote on last edited by
          #17

          fat_boy wrote:

          so post cold war we had to comeup with somehting to replace the bomb and AGW was the result.

          must have boogey man, repeat, must have boogey man. so, yup, I agree with you.

          Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

          O 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • J John Carson

            Rob Graham wrote:

            Quoting from the document you linked to: "Since the beginning of the twentieth century, the global average surface temperature has risen by 0.74°C, but this increase has not been continuous. The linear warming trend over the past 50 years (0.13°C per decade) is nearly twice that for the past 100 years." That seems to contradict Will's assertion as to what the WMO is saying.

            Not necessarily. It could be true both that a linear fit to the data over the past 50 years shows a warming trend and that a linear fit to the last 10 years doesn't show a warming trend --- provided there was sufficient warming in the first 40 years. Like I suggested, if you get the hottest year on record in 1998 and then the temperature bounces around in the vicinity of that hottest year for the next decade, then a linear fit for those 10 years could show no upward trend. Nevertheless, the fact that temperature stays at near record levels is highly suggestive. If Will's claim is correct --- on which I reserve judgement --- then I strongly suspect that continued warming will show up in the data in the next 2-3 years as short-term weather effects wash out.

            John Carson

            R Offline
            R Offline
            Rob Graham
            wrote on last edited by
            #18

            Although I am inclined to agree that 10 years is to short a period for a reasonable assessment, it is surprising considering that CO2 increase rates have been greater than the IPCC worst case scenarios in recent years. One wonders what factors were wrong or missing in the computer models...

            L J 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • R Rob Graham

              Although I am inclined to agree that 10 years is to short a period for a reasonable assessment, it is surprising considering that CO2 increase rates have been greater than the IPCC worst case scenarios in recent years. One wonders what factors were wrong or missing in the computer models...

              L Offline
              L Offline
              Lost User
              wrote on last edited by
              #19

              Rob Graham wrote:

              One wonders what factors were wrong or missing in the computer models

              CO2 forcing is doubled, the earth is flat, it is constant day light, clouds dont exist... As you state, CO2 has kept climbing, even more than thought, and for 7, possibly 10 years temps have fallen (in the last 7 by 3 degrees C a century). So is CO2 in the driving seat? Nope. Its somewhere in the back with the also-rans. Even the IPCC downgraded CO2s forcing from 2.4 to 1.7 w/m^2 s between the third and fourth reports. The IPC also state that 4/5ths of climate science has a "very low level of scientific understanding". Its not surprising the computer models are so wrong.

              Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

              R 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B BoneSoft

                Tim Craig wrote:

                Oh wait, they were carrying US flags, you don't salute that anymore

                Does that mean he's supporting Obama[^] now?


                Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

                O Offline
                O Offline
                Oakman
                wrote on last edited by
                #20

                BoneSoft wrote:

                Does that mean he's supporting Obama

                Nope, just that he's a self-confessed traitor. Probably an agent of a foreign government - probably Argentina.

                Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                M 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • M Mike Gaskey

                  fat_boy wrote:

                  so post cold war we had to comeup with somehting to replace the bomb and AGW was the result.

                  must have boogey man, repeat, must have boogey man. so, yup, I agree with you.

                  Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

                  O Offline
                  O Offline
                  Oakman
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #21

                  Mike Gaskey wrote:

                  must have boogey man, repeat, must have boogey man. so, yup, I agree with you

                  I feel a certain nostalgia for the USSR days.

                  Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                  G B 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • L Lost User

                    Rob Graham wrote:

                    One wonders what factors were wrong or missing in the computer models

                    CO2 forcing is doubled, the earth is flat, it is constant day light, clouds dont exist... As you state, CO2 has kept climbing, even more than thought, and for 7, possibly 10 years temps have fallen (in the last 7 by 3 degrees C a century). So is CO2 in the driving seat? Nope. Its somewhere in the back with the also-rans. Even the IPCC downgraded CO2s forcing from 2.4 to 1.7 w/m^2 s between the third and fourth reports. The IPC also state that 4/5ths of climate science has a "very low level of scientific understanding". Its not surprising the computer models are so wrong.

                    Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

                    R Offline
                    R Offline
                    Rob Graham
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #22

                    But, but... Al said...

                    O 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • O Oakman

                      Mike Gaskey wrote:

                      must have boogey man, repeat, must have boogey man. so, yup, I agree with you

                      I feel a certain nostalgia for the USSR days.

                      Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                      G Offline
                      G Offline
                      Gary Kirkham
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #23

                      I guess there is something to be said for knowing who and where your enemy is.

                      Gary Kirkham Forever Forgiven and Alive in the Spirit "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life. Me blog, You read

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • O Oakman

                        Mike Gaskey wrote:

                        must have boogey man, repeat, must have boogey man. so, yup, I agree with you

                        I feel a certain nostalgia for the USSR days.

                        Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                        B Offline
                        B Offline
                        BoneSoft
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #24

                        Me too. Back then, people knew who the enemy was. Now they have no clue that that very enemy never went away, they just set up shop in our own back yard. Yep, it was a good time in history, when most of the pinko commies were overseas. :sigh:


                        Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • O Oakman

                          BoneSoft wrote:

                          Does that mean he's supporting Obama

                          Nope, just that he's a self-confessed traitor. Probably an agent of a foreign government - probably Argentina.

                          Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                          M Offline
                          M Offline
                          Mike Gaskey
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #25

                          Oakman wrote:

                          Probably

                          you're starting to collect as many 1's as me or Stan. better shape up dude.:beer: :badger:

                          Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

                          O 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • M Mike Gaskey

                            Oakman wrote:

                            Probably

                            you're starting to collect as many 1's as me or Stan. better shape up dude.:beer: :badger:

                            Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

                            O Offline
                            O Offline
                            Oakman
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #26

                            Mike Gaskey wrote:

                            you're starting to collect as many 1's as me or Stan. better shape up dude

                            That's: A. 'cause I keep balancing yours (and his, more often than he can imagine). B. 'cause I get them from Stan who thinks he's paying me back, AND I get them from Oily cause he thinks he's paying me back. I think the whole run-around-and-give-other-people-ones not because they made a dumb argument or shot their mouth off without thinking but because you disagree with their position, is both childish and ill-mannered. They must all be managers.

                            Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                            S 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • R Rob Graham

                              But, but... Al said...

                              O Offline
                              O Offline
                              Oakman
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #27

                              Rob Graham wrote:

                              But, but... Al said...

                              ROFL I can't imagine who one-voted you :rolleyes:

                              Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                              R 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • O Oakman

                                Rob Graham wrote:

                                But, but... Al said...

                                ROFL I can't imagine who one-voted you :rolleyes:

                                Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                                R Offline
                                R Offline
                                Rob Graham
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #28

                                Oakman wrote:

                                I can't imagine who one-voted you

                                No one I would enjoy actually knowing, I'm sure. Damn, 1-voted this one too. Must be someone who takes my posts personally. They should get a life.

                                modified on Monday, February 16, 2009 4:42 PM

                                J 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • O Oakman

                                  Mike Gaskey wrote:

                                  you're starting to collect as many 1's as me or Stan. better shape up dude

                                  That's: A. 'cause I keep balancing yours (and his, more often than he can imagine). B. 'cause I get them from Stan who thinks he's paying me back, AND I get them from Oily cause he thinks he's paying me back. I think the whole run-around-and-give-other-people-ones not because they made a dumb argument or shot their mouth off without thinking but because you disagree with their position, is both childish and ill-mannered. They must all be managers.

                                  Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.

                                  S Offline
                                  S Offline
                                  Stan Shannon
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #29

                                  Oakman wrote:

                                  B. 'cause I get them from Stan who thinks he's paying me back, AND I get them from Oily cause he thinks he's paying me back.

                                  I don't believe I've ever given you a one . In fact, I gave you a five not too long ago for something I agreed with (can't remember what it was now) I hardly ever vote on anyone - except oily.

                                  Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                  S 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • R Rob Graham

                                    Although I am inclined to agree that 10 years is to short a period for a reasonable assessment, it is surprising considering that CO2 increase rates have been greater than the IPCC worst case scenarios in recent years. One wonders what factors were wrong or missing in the computer models...

                                    J Offline
                                    J Offline
                                    John Carson
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #30

                                    Rob Graham wrote:

                                    Although I am inclined to agree that 10 years is to short a period for a reasonable assessment, it is surprising considering that CO2 increase rates have been greater than the IPCC worst case scenarios in recent years. One wonders what factors were wrong or missing in the computer models...

                                    My understanding is that computer simulations do not typically predict a steady increase in temperature. Due to the non-linearities and complex interactions, they normally show fluctuations. It is also my understanding that there are quite a number of different models and that, while there is a broad agreement on a trend to warming, there are significant differences between them in the detail of their predictions. I think people freely admit that a lot of stuff is left out of the models or imperfectly modelled. Nevertheless, they would argue that their models can broadly capture the trends over the last 150 years and that no model that omits a significant role for human-generated greenhouse gases can do so.

                                    John Carson

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • R Rob Graham

                                      Oakman wrote:

                                      I can't imagine who one-voted you

                                      No one I would enjoy actually knowing, I'm sure. Damn, 1-voted this one too. Must be someone who takes my posts personally. They should get a life.

                                      modified on Monday, February 16, 2009 4:42 PM

                                      J Offline
                                      J Offline
                                      John Carson
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #31

                                      Rob Graham wrote:

                                      No one I would enjoy actually knowing, I'm sure. Damn, 1-voted this one too. Must be someone who takes my posts personally. They should get a life.

                                      I've noticed that lately my posts attract a 1 vote regardless of what I say. It has only been happening the last month or two.

                                      John Carson

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • S Stan Shannon

                                        Oakman wrote:

                                        B. 'cause I get them from Stan who thinks he's paying me back, AND I get them from Oily cause he thinks he's paying me back.

                                        I don't believe I've ever given you a one . In fact, I gave you a five not too long ago for something I agreed with (can't remember what it was now) I hardly ever vote on anyone - except oily.

                                        Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

                                        S Offline
                                        S Offline
                                        Synaptrik
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #32

                                        Stan Shannon wrote:

                                        In fact, I gave you a five not too long ago for something I agreed with

                                        Well, that's acceptable. Agreeable votes are at least not...

                                        Jon wrote:

                                        but because you disagree with their position, is both childish and ill-mannered.

                                        ...disagreeable votes. :laugh: I wonder how often he digests his own self-righteousness. I mean one-votes shouldn't be because someone disagrees with the post, and surely, they can only be stalking-haters. :laugh:

                                        This statement is false

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        Reply
                                        • Reply as topic
                                        Log in to reply
                                        • Oldest to Newest
                                        • Newest to Oldest
                                        • Most Votes


                                        • Login

                                        • Don't have an account? Register

                                        • Login or register to search.
                                        • First post
                                          Last post
                                        0
                                        • Categories
                                        • Recent
                                        • Tags
                                        • Popular
                                        • World
                                        • Users
                                        • Groups