George Will - on calamaties

Lost User

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

Lost User

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

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.

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...

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

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.

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.

Rob Graham

But, but... Al said...

Gary Kirkham

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

BoneSoft

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

John Carson

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

John Carson · modified on Monday, February 16, 2009 4:42 PM

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

Synaptrik

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