Climate change thought experiment.

[Lord of Planar]

But it was.

That's why I posted it.

If you know it was accurately represented, then you found the journal article. Why didn't you link the Journal article?

 

[Threegoofs]

If you know it was accurately represented, then you found the journal article. Why didn't you link the Journal article?

Because Tim has roughly a high school education.

And disembodied journal articles are not always very helpful without context.

Your context always seems to be that AGW is not really a big deal, BTW, no matter how blatantly obvious the article says the opposite!

 

[Threegoofs]

Restating something is argumentum ad nauseum.

You can quote 10000 scientists it won't matter. There will be people that think it's bologna. You can call them stupid and racist all you want. It won't change their minds. This is a political issue.

No. it's a scientific issue that has people pretending it doesn't exist because of political obstinance.

If you can't figure out a way to solve a real problem because your ideology doesn't have a solution, the answer is not to pretend the problem doesn't exist.

 

[Russell797]

Restating something is argumentum ad nauseum.

You can quote 10000 scientists it won't matter. There will be people that think it's bologna. You can call them stupid and racist all you want. It won't change their minds. This is a political issue.

People who do not accept well established science are deniers of science. If thousands of climate scientists tell you that AGW is happening and you deny it, then you are a science denier. For a technological society built upon science to abandon science is very dangerous indeed, but that is where we are. People deny biological evolution too, and they are equally as deluded as the deniers of AGW.

What is going on is a culture war. A war fought by an ideology against science. A war on education. A war on rational thought in favor of religion. It must be defeated, but it would appear that rather than being defeated it is growing in strength. A very dangerous circumstance indeed. You people abandon science to your eventual peril, or that of your descendants.

 

[CLAX1911]

No. it's a scientific issue that has people pretending it doesn't exist because of political obstinance.

If you can't figure out a way to solve a real problem because your ideology doesn't have a solution, the answer is not to pretend the problem doesn't exist.

I don't think you understand.

 

[CLAX1911]

People who do not accept well established science are deniers of science. If thousands of climate scientists tell you that AGW is happening and you deny it, then you are a science denier.

Not necessarily. science isn't correct because it is part of an establishment. That is an appeal to authority.

For a technological society built upon science to abandon science is very dangerous indeed, but that is where we are. People deny biological evolution too, and they are equally as deluded as the deniers of AGW.

Not so sure that is what is occurring here.

What is going on is a culture war. A war fought by an ideology against science. A war on education. A war on rational thought in favor of religion.

Religion? what religion?

It must be defeated, but it would appear that rather than being defeated it is growing in strength. A very dangerous circumstance indeed. You people abandon science to your eventual peril, or that of your descendants.

Who the hell is you people?

 

[Threegoofs]

I don't think you understand.

You're right.

I don't understand how people can blatantly deny scientific facts.

 

[Russell797]

Not necessarily. science isn't correct because it is part of an establishment. That is an appeal to authority. Not so sure that is what is occurring here.

Religion? what religion?

Who the hell is you people?

You people are the people who abandon and deny science.

What religion? In this country it's mostly fundamentalist Christians, but it could be any religion which contests science in favor of dogma.

What is happening is a continuation of what has been going on for a millennium. A war on knowledge, education and science by the religious. This is not new. There is a war against environmentalist, or scientists involved in understanding the environment. There is a war between corporate interests and the people who would work for them. The corporatist and the fundamentally religious tend to align on the same side against science. This is really just the history of human civilization over more than 1,000 years. It continues on to this day. I support one side, others support the other. Many people are convinced to support the side which works against their own interests. The older I get, the less hope I have for the future. We are screwed if rational thought does not win this battle.

Science may or may not be correct, but it is the science. If you deny the science then you are a science denier. The only way to make your denial useful is to do science which overturns the current understanding.

 

[CLAX1911]

You're right.

I don't understand how people can blatantly deny scientific facts.

They can't.

 

[CLAX1911]

You people are the people who abandon and deny science.

Have I denied science? if so than what?

What religion? In this country it's mostly fundamentalist Christians, but it could be any religion which contests science in favor of dogma.

This isn't about evolution.

What is happening is a continuation of what has been going on for a millennium. A war on knowledge, education and science by the religious. This is not new. There is a war against environmentalist, or scientists involved in understanding the environment.

Scientists aren't even involved in this. their work is greatly overshadowed by politics.

There is a war between corporate interests and the people who would work for them. The corporatist and the fundamentally religious tend to align on the same side against science. This is really just the history of human civilization over more than 1,000 years. It continues on to this day. I support one side, others support the other. Many people are convinced to support the side which works against their own interests. The older I get, the less hope I have for the future. We are screwed if rational thought does not win this battle.

See you are arguing about nothing but politics. the only time you even mention science is to say it agrees with your side.

Science may or may not be correct, but it is the science. If you deny the science then you are a science denier. The only way to make your denial useful is to do science which overturns the current understanding.

I haven't denied science.

 

[Russell797]

Have I denied science? if so than what?

This isn't about evolution.

Scientists aren't even involved in this. their work is greatly overshadowed by politics.

See you are arguing about nothing but politics. the only time you even mention science is to say it agrees with your side.

I haven't denied science.

Then I am not talking about you.

Scientists aren't involved? It's all about science. The EPA is informed by science. Congress is informed by science and the National Academy of Sciences. Environmentalists are informed by science. Science does not agree with "my side", my side listens to science. No offense intended but if that's what you think then you have no idea.

Astronomy, meteorology, oceanography, glaciology, geology, chemistry, physics, biology and more all combine to formulate our understanding of climate change. The scientists come from all over the world everywhere those sciences are studied.

 

[longview]

Then I am not talking about you.

Scientists aren't involved? It's all about science. The EPA is informed by science. Congress is informed by science and the National Academy of Sciences. Environmentalists are informed by science. Science does not agree with "my side", my side listens to science. No offense intended but if that's what you think then you have no idea.

Astronomy, meteorology, oceanography, glaciology, geology, chemistry, physics, biology and more all combine to formulate our understanding of climate change. The scientists come from all over the world everywhere those sciences are studied.

Again, there is a contrast between saying AGW is real, and accepting the full suite of catastrophic predictions of the IPCC.
Is AGW real? absolutely, doubling the CO2 level would likely result in average warming about 1.1 C
(This is based on the the 1.2 C was from when they thought the energy imbalance would be 4 Wm-2 in 2001,
now that the estimate of the energy imbalance is down to 3.71 Wm-2, the direct response should drop also.)
Humans are causing the CO2 level to rise, ergo AGW is real, not threatening, but real.
The research that tries to evaluate the total of the feedbacks, based on observational evidence, come out with much lower
estimates of ECS than the research based on models,(which are based on assumptions, which we do not know all the variables).
All of the predictions are predicated on the idea that we are actually capable of doubling the CO2 level,
which may itself be questionable.

 

[CLAX1911]

Then I am not talking about you.

You did say you people.

Scientists aren't involved? It's all about science. The EPA is informed by science.

The EPA is a political agency.

Congress is informed by science and the National Academy of Sciences. Environmentalists are informed by science. Science does not agree with "my side", my side listens to science. No offense intended but if that's what you think then you have no idea.

"Your side" only listens to science that supports it's politics. That is why it's a side. You have picked sides based on other political issues not science.

Astronomy, meteorology, oceanography, glaciology, geology, chemistry, physics, biology and more all combine to formulate our understanding of climate change. The scientists come from all over the world everywhere those sciences are studied.

That doesn't make them correct.

 

[Tim the plumber]

People who do not accept well established science are deniers of science. If thousands of climate scientists tell you that AGW is happening and you deny it, then you are a science denier. For a technological society built upon science to abandon science is very dangerous indeed, but that is where we are. People deny biological evolution too, and they are equally as deluded as the deniers of AGW.

What is going on is a culture war. A war fought by an ideology against science. A war on education. A war on rational thought in favor of religion. It must be defeated, but it would appear that rather than being defeated it is growing in strength. A very dangerous circumstance indeed. You people abandon science to your eventual peril, or that of your descendants.

Who here has denied that the cliamte is changing and that humans have a warming influence on it?

I understand that it is difficult for some people to grasp that an argument may be nuanced. You would like all things to be a zero or one choice. That there are people about the place who are clearly more clever than that must be very frustrating for you.

 

[Tim the plumber]

You're right.

I don't understand how people can blatantly deny scientific facts.

You manage to deny that the results of a survay of Greenland's ice sheet by the US Corps of Engineers withh loads of strong supporting evidence because your prefered scripture says otherwise.

I constantly challenge you to produce evidence and you post scriture/articles. Occaisionally you go as far as citing a paper but on those rare moments you will then run as fast as possible to avoid talking about the mechanism used to get their numbers and never will you consider the other much more basic and testable evidence.

The war against science is on. You are on the side of anti-reason and good thinking.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
You're right.

I don't understand how people can blatantly deny scientific facts.

They can't.

We don't deny scientific facts.

That's the alarmist side doing that.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Because Tim has roughly a high school education.

And disembodied journal articles are not always very helpful without context.

Your context always seems to be that AGW is not really a big deal, BTW, no matter how blatantly obvious the article says the opposite!

Excuses excuses.

I call your bluff on it accurately being represented. It is extremely rare for you to back up anything you clam.

This is no different. All talk, no substance.

 

[Lord of Planar]

People who do not accept well established science are deniers of science.

OK, you claim it is well established. That is a very gray area and you are wrong.

You are actually one of the deniers of science, because you don't see he holes in the science and just how wrong the presumptions can be.

That's why I call you guys religious zealots. You have a deep faith in what the preachers/pundits say.

If thousands of climate scientists tell you that AGW is happening and you deny it, then you are a science denier.

Nobody here is denying that AGW is occurring. Why can't you, Deuce, Goofs, etc. get that right?

For a technological society built upon science to abandon science is very dangerous indeed, but that is where we are. People deny biological evolution too, and they are equally as deluded as the deniers of AGW.

Nobody is abandoning science except those who say "the science is settled."

What is going on is a culture war. A war fought by an ideology against science.

Yes, but tha is by the warmers, the alarists, and yu us.

Science is a field of skepticism. When you try t bully the skeptics out of science, yo are guilty of something every bit as bad as a culture war.

A war on education. A war on rational thought in favor of religion.

You have it backwards again.

The education is flawed. The faithful beliefs like religion are on your side. Not mine.

It must be defeated, but it would appear that rather than being defeated it is growing in strength. A very dangerous circumstance indeed. You people abandon science to your eventual peril, or that of your descendants.

The truth can only be silenced for so long.

You are trying to defeat science. You are the denier of science.

 

[Lord of Planar]

You're right.

I don't understand how people can blatantly deny scientific facts.

So why do you?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Science may or may not be correct, but it is the science. If you deny the science then you are a science denier. The only way to make your denial useful is to do science which overturns the current understanding.

If it might be incorrect, then why is voicing that concern class one as a denier?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Then I am not talking about you.

Scientists aren't involved? It's all about science. The EPA is informed by science. Congress is informed by science and the National Academy of Sciences. Environmentalists are informed by science. Science does not agree with "my side", my side listens to science. No offense intended but if that's what you think then you have no idea.

Astronomy, meteorology, oceanography, glaciology, geology, chemistry, physics, biology and more all combine to formulate our understanding of climate change. The scientists come from all over the world everywhere those sciences are studied.

You put way to much faith in political players.

 

[Russell797]

If it might be incorrect, then why is voicing that concern class one as a denier?

Because just attacking the science with words fails to make the case. When deniers do science which overturns the paradigm then they can talk. When deniers do science which forces the National Academy of Sciences to change it's stance then they will have made meaning progress. Otherwise nothing but doubt, lies and distortions.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Because just attacking the science with words fails to make the case. When deniers do science which overturns the paradigm then they can talk. When deniers do science which forces the National Academy of Sciences to change it's stance then they will have made meaning progress. Otherwise nothing but doubt, lies and distortions.

There are no deniers here.

I am one who will try to run the deniers out!

You have a serious comprehension issue if you can't distinguish between deniers, and those of us with reservations of what the alarmists say.

 

[Threegoofs]

You manage to deny that the results of a survay of Greenland's ice sheet by the US Corps of Engineers withh loads of strong supporting evidence because your prefered scripture says otherwise.

I constantly challenge you to produce evidence and you post scriture/articles. Occaisionally you go as far as citing a paper but on those rare moments you will then run as fast as possible to avoid talking about the mechanism used to get their numbers and never will you consider the other much more basic and testable evidence.

The war against science is on. You are on the side of anti-reason and good thinking.

You've posted anecdotes. You also have some mysterious ACOE reference that seems to exist in your head.

I've posted the science.

Here's some more.

A high-resolution record of Greenland mass balance - McMillan - 2016 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

404 - File or directory not found.

On that page they quote the ice loss in Greenland to be 380 GT/yr.


In fact, it's such a defined phenomenon, one of the more prominent experts has set up a webpage called...

GREENLAND MELTING - Main forum

 

[Threegoofs]

Excuses excuses.

I call your bluff on it accurately being represented. It is extremely rare for you to back up anything you clam.

This is no different. All talk, no substance.

Sure. As opposed to the guy who knows more than all the experts combined because, despite no training in the field, he reads a journal in his armchair.