Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"[W:1000, 1660]

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

I think that there is real world science. All kinds. Physics, biology, chemistry, climate science, etc.

They all have the same goal. Discover truth. They use a common methodology. Common tools. Each field supports other fields. Nobody competes. They all collaborate.

I have no idea what denier science is. I've never seen any anti-science before. It may a first in history.

Don't put physics, biology and other hard sciences in the same league as climate science... in physics, they are down to the point where they are working in margins of error in the pico meter range in some extremes.

In physics, you make a theory, and come up with experiments to test the theory, if the results don't match the hypothesis, then the theory needs to be refined or tossed aside.

With climate science there's the theory, and now, after about 45 years of gathering data, the results are diverging from the hypothesis.

Meaning that, if they were concerned with the scientific process, would need to adapt the theory to incorporate new data.

Btw, this whole "science denier", anti-science, or whatever other term was chosen specifically because it can be equated more easily with holocaust denial. (A claim that has been pushed before)

Science is pushed forward with data, not with concensus.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

The carbon tax IS the elegant solution.

No.

It's asinine.

AGW is real.

Yes it is, but CO2 warming is only a small part of it.

We need to study it.

Yes. We need to actually quantify the effects instead off assuming the CO2 forcing is related to the works of Kiehl, J.T. and Dickenson, R.E., 1987, A study of the radiative effects of enhanced atmospheric CO2 on early earth temperatures, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 2991-2998. This work is entirely related to correlation equals causation, and is the defining methodology of assigning forcing values to CO2.

Putting a carbon tax on fossil fuels will certainly spur r and d into projects like this, accelerating their development.

It will also line the pockets of those who put themselves in charge of such a silly tax.

It will happen eventually. This way we do it without pumping more toxins in the air, soiling it in the water, or tearing up the land.

CO2 is not a toxin. All we have to do is reduce or stop the aerosol emissions that accompany older designed power plants. We have already successfully done this here in the USA, so a carbon tax is not needed. Make it an aerosol tax, and I will agree.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

The carbon tax IS the elegant solution. AGW is real. We need to study it. Putting a carbon tax on fossil fuels will certainly spur r and d into projects like this, accelerating their development.

It will happen eventually. This way we do it without pumping more toxins in the air, soiling it in the water, or tearing up the land.

OMG it's shocking how dishonest you are, did you just decide that carbon tax was a solution, because just a couple days ago you were pretending like a carbon tax was a fabric of my imagination so that you could dodge the issue that oil companies desire this outcome.

If I remember correctly your argument was that I imagined proposed solutions so I could use them as a strawman.

Good grief.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

OMG it's shocking how dishonest you are, did you just decide that carbon tax was a solution, because just a couple days ago you were pretending like a carbon tax was a fabric of my imagination so that you could dodge the issue that oil companies desire this outcome.

If I remember correctly your argument was that I imagined proposed solutions so I could use them as a strawman.

Good grief.

That's not all the deceptions he has up his sleeve.

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

OMG it's shocking how dishonest you are, did you just decide that carbon tax was a solution, because just a couple days ago you were pretending like a carbon tax was a fabric of my imagination so that you could dodge the issue that oil companies desire this outcome.

If I remember correctly your argument was that I imagined proposed solutions so I could use them as a strawman.

Good grief.

No. You laughably said that a carbon tax would increase oil prices, leading to increased profits.

We all had a good laugh at your expense, if I recall.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

No.

It's asinine.


Yes it is, but CO2 warming is only a small part of it.


Yes. We need to actually quantify the effects instead off assuming the CO2 forcing is related to the works of Kiehl, J.T. and Dickenson, R.E., 1987, A study of the radiative effects of enhanced atmospheric CO2 on early earth temperatures, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 2991-2998. This work is entirely related to correlation equals causation, and is the defining methodology of assigning forcing values to CO2.


It will also line the pockets of those who put themselves in charge of such a silly tax.


CO2 is not a toxin. All we have to do is reduce or stop the aerosol emissions that accompany older designed power plants. We have already successfully done this here in the USA, so a carbon tax is not needed. Make it an aerosol tax, and I will agree.

Ya, aerosols, heavy metals, we could do without the bad side of nuclear energy, etc...

But, by addressing real pollution they won't be able to get billions of dollars of research funding per year, because we all know that toxic waste is toxic.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Well, you are a strange sort of scientist. One who has never done any physics and has yet to understand what chemical energy is.

Ummm.... Scientist like I'm an astronaut?

I thought that you claimed to be a plumber?

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Goofs that is 100% the wrong answer.
Organic oil will increase in price on it's own, no help needed.
If you want to poison public perception against something, let the government prop it up.
A real solution will succeed on it's own merits.
How about allocate some of the funds being spent to study AGW, on research into converting
existing refineries, into hydrocarbon energy storage plants.
The elegance of a good solution, is when the change is transparent to the end user.

No matter what we do, the entire fleet of existing cars and trucks is obsolete and needs to be replaced. Why should we spend all of the resources to make organic fuels, then completely waste half of them?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

No matter what we do, the entire fleet of existing cars and trucks is obsolete and needs to be replaced. Why should we spend all of the resources to make organic fuels, then completely waste half of them?

LOL...

Peak oil?

LOL...

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

If we have a solution to storing energy that is carbon neutral, the need to study AGW is seriously
diminished, as there would not longer be an A in the equation.
Coercion is generally a poor method of encouragement.
The real danger to a good idea moving forward, would be people would would be willing to
pay extra for carbon neutral fuels, because it makes them "feel" better.
This would artificially inflate the prices, and delay transition.

It wouldn't "artificially" inflate anything. It would merely spread the cost of what must be done over more years. Pay it now or pay 10X later.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

LOL...

Peak oil?

LOL...

I understand that peak oil is yet another inconvenient truth. Denying it has no impact on it.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Quote Originally Posted by Tim the plumber
Well, you are a strange sort of scientist. One who has never done any physics and has yet to understand what chemical energy is.

Ummm.... Scientist like I'm an astronaut?

I thought that you claimed to be a plumber?

I am a plumber. So I'm not an astronaut. Like anyone who does not know the difference between electric power in the switch and light is not a scientist.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

I understand that peak oil is yet another inconvenient truth. Denying it has no impact on it.

LOL!! How much proven oil reserves do you think the world has today?

I'll give you a clue. When I was in school 30 years ago I was told that there was 15 years of oil left.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

If we have a solution to storing energy that is carbon neutral, the need to study AGW is seriously
diminished, as there would not longer be an A in the equation.
Coercion is generally a poor method of encouragement.
The real danger to a good idea moving forward, would be people would would be willing to
pay extra for carbon neutral fuels, because it makes them "feel" better.
This would artificially inflate the prices, and delay transition.

Why do you think that the public would would be willing to pay extra for carbon neutral fuels when they aren't willing to buy transportation that doesn't just throw away 50% of the fuel that they put in it?

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

I understand that peak oil is yet another inconvenient truth. Denying it has no impact on it.

I agree that at some point peak oil is a reality. However, ever time a time is predicted, they find more huge oil reserves.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Its the worst possible solution and represents all kinds of opportunities for corruption and manipulation by individuals and nations.



But would appear to be insignificant, its empirical effect never having been detected against natural background variation



And we have done so very expensively for decades for little return. How many more hundreds of billions more do you think will be required given the warming we are supposed to be so concerned about has stopped ?



No need for that to happen. Not squandering multibillions on currently useless renewables would be a better start



Only when it becomes economically feasible to do so but not before. And thats a long way off



I totally agree. My issue with you is why the demonization of a benign beneficial naturally occurring gas is instead your paramount environmental concern

"My issue with you is why the demonization of a benign beneficial naturally occurring gas is instead your paramount environmental concern"

Because he doesn't want to pay to rearrange civilization to accommodate it.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Yes, they call for eco-fascism on occasion (some of them at least).

Is eco-fascism your word for personal responsibility?

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

Don't put physics, biology and other hard sciences in the same league as climate science... in physics, they are down to the point where they are working in margins of error in the pico meter range in some extremes.

In physics, you make a theory, and come up with experiments to test the theory, if the results don't match the hypothesis, then the theory needs to be refined or tossed aside.

With climate science there's the theory, and now, after about 45 years of gathering data, the results are diverging from the hypothesis.

Meaning that, if they were concerned with the scientific process, would need to adapt the theory to incorporate new data.

Btw, this whole "science denier", anti-science, or whatever other term was chosen specifically because it can be equated more easily with holocaust denial. (A claim that has been pushed before)

Science is pushed forward with data, not with concensus.

"Don't put physics, biology and other hard sciences in the same league as climate science"

This is where and why you lose. They are the same except for the phenomena under study.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

No.

It's asinine.


Yes it is, but CO2 warming is only a small part of it.


Yes. We need to actually quantify the effects instead off assuming the CO2 forcing is related to the works of Kiehl, J.T. and Dickenson, R.E., 1987, A study of the radiative effects of enhanced atmospheric CO2 on early earth temperatures, J. Geophys. Res., 92, 2991-2998. This work is entirely related to correlation equals causation, and is the defining methodology of assigning forcing values to CO2.


It will also line the pockets of those who put themselves in charge of such a silly tax.


CO2 is not a toxin. All we have to do is reduce or stop the aerosol emissions that accompany older designed power plants. We have already successfully done this here in the USA, so a carbon tax is not needed. Make it an aerosol tax, and I will agree.

"CO2 is not a toxin"

True. It's the green house gas whose atmospheric concentration we are changing, which is, in turn, changing our climate to one that we have to re-adapt to.

It's only a matter of trillions of dollars and decades of global instability.

 

[Threegoofs]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

"Don't put physics, biology and other hard sciences in the same league as climate science"

This is where and why you lose. They are the same except for the phenomena under study.

Hey- BMan took some 300 level undergrad courses. He must know what he's talking about.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

"Don't put physics, biology and other hard sciences in the same league as climate science"

This is where and why you lose. They are the same except for the phenomena under study.

And the lack of any difficult qualifications to get onto the course.

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

I am a plumber. So I'm not an astronaut. Like anyone who does not know the difference between electric power in the switch and light is not a scientist.

I agree that you are not a scientist.

You have yet to tell us how electricity is different than infinite wave length EM radiation.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

True. It's the green house gas whose atmospheric concentration we are changing, which is, in turn, changing our climate to one that we have to re-adapt to.

Please read the study that is the root source, that quantifies the forcing vs. concentration. You will see it was based on the assumption CO2 is the primary forcing of temperature changes, and is correlation equaling causation. That is why the number keeps getting revised. It stops fitting as CO2 levels increase.

There is no properly quantified study under controlled condition! If you can find one, I will defer to your superior intellect.

See: J. T. Kiehl and R. E. Dickinson, “A Study of the Radiative Effects of Enhanced Atmospheric CO2 and CH4 on Early Earth Surface,” Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 92, 1987, pp. 2991-2998.

There is no free link to the study that I can find.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

I agree that you are not a scientist.

You have yet to tell us how electricity is different than infinite wave length EM radiation.

Fantastic!! LOL!!!!

I will post this on the quiz thread!!

 

[Ouch!]

Re: Science: Effect of man on climate is "highly uncertain"

LOL!! How much proven oil reserves do you think the world has today?

I'll give you a clue. When I was in school 30 years ago I was told that there was 15 years of oil left.

How irrelevant is what you were told in school?

The only thing that will extend the supply of oil beyond 100 years is rapidly rising price as demand exceeds supply. And those prices will make every alternative being explored today a bargain in comparison. Prepared countries will reap the benefit of their responsible planning and action. Including being able to afford adaptation to the worlds new climate. Unprepared countries will go energy broke. And will just abandon the parts of civilization rendered unfit by higher sea levels and rearranged precipitation patterns.