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

[Threegoofs]

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

I'm telling you. The 'ignore' button was made for him.

When you invest the time and effort into an explanation, only to have it dismissed for no logical reason, or when he takes a clear statement and intentionally misrepresents it (see his sig, or at least what used to be his sig), it's a sign to throw in the towel.

 

[Ouch!]

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

I'm telling you. The 'ignore' button was made for him.

You're right.

The only advantage of keeping him posting he's excellent at revealing the shabby thinking that keeps him stuck where he is. Perhaps a warning for others. Proceed at your own risk.

 

[flogger]

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

Here's what it boils down to. Climate science, it's development and experiments and data and tools and conclusions and personnel are fully documented on the web. To understand them one needs to have a background in science, and time. In fact, you probably only need two sites because they are so complete. The IPCC site and Skepticalscience.com.

Is that a fact ! :lamo

UN IPCC Report Exposed By Its Own Members as ‘a pure political process’ — ‘Scientific truth isn

Popular Technology.net: The Truth about Skeptical Science

So you are fully empowered to have all of your questions answered. In fact, I can answer the bulk of them.

So why won't you ?

What I'm not interested in is this one way street where I invest the effort and you argue politics. Playing games leads nowhere.

No you are interested in politically smearing other posters to disguise your complete inability to debate the science. You have hidden behind such political smearing every time you have gotten into difficulties, sometimes as often as 5 times in a single post. I do not argue politics on this issue because I don't need to

What I don't understand is why you frequent this thread but have some combination of inadequate background and inability to learn. If all you want to do is tell people what you wish was true, I think that there are more appropriate threads.

I can back up my contentions whereas you cannot . I can answer questions when I am tasked to do so whereas you cannot. I can respond to posters in a thread who disagree with me without attacking their intellect for doing so whereas you cannot .... etc etc

The same process is behind climate science and physics and chemistry and biology and all sciences.

On the contrary climate science is currently non empirical and highly politicized voodoo science set by the whims and necessities of the politicians and governments paying for it. Climastrology is a better word for it as it currently stands

Questioning the results of that process requires application of the process of science, not unilateral declarations of arbitrary disbelief.

I agree

If you have specific questions about documented IPCC conclusions I'd be glad to share my background in what's behind them.

I just linked their greatest hits for you above

If you want to just obfuscate and confuse others with your denier science you're on your own.

More evasive and oft repeated figments of your imagination :roll:

 

[flogger]

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

I'm telling you. The 'ignore' button was made for him.
When you invest the time and effort into an explanation, only to have it dismissed for no logical reason, or when he takes a clear statement and intentionally misrepresents it (see his sig, or at least what used to be his sig), it's a sign to throw in the towel.

Just because you've been forced to concede defeat doesn't mean he has to

My sig is a direct quote from you as well you know

 

[Lord of Planar]

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

Actually, I'm pretty sure Longview just threw the word out there to confuse. It isn't relevant.

I remember writing board questions and getting mine asking about reverse hysteresis curves thrown out as too obscure 15 years ago.... So I'm pretty familiar with the word.

LOL...

OK...

If you say so.

LOL...

 

[Lord of Planar]

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

Please illustrate for us the empirical evidence from AR5 showing how the extra 120PPM of CO2 in our atmosphere since 1850 has been responsible for the 0.7C rise in temperature since that time. I'm claiming such evidence doesn't exist and I dare you to prove me wrong ? :waiting:

But... But... But...

Doesn't Puff the Magic Dragon, who lives by the sea, get tickled by CO2, and laughs up a storm, putting more moisture in the air?

How else does that high degree of magical H2O water feedback get there?

 

[Lord of Planar]

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

You are joking right ? So much for your alleged scientific credentials then ! :lamo

Sad thing is... He's not joking.

 

[Threegoofs]

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

You're right.

The only advantage of keeping him posting he's excellent at revealing the shabby thinking that keeps him stuck where he is. Perhaps a warning for others. Proceed at your own risk.

LOL!

Reminds me of this:

 

[flogger]

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

LOL!

Reminds me of this:

Reminds me of this

'Who cares if I understand it'..... Threegoofs our resident 'scientist' :doh

 

[Ouch!]

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

But... But... But...

Doesn't Puff the Magic Dragon, who lives by the sea, get tickled by CO2, and laughs up a storm, putting more moisture in the air?

How else does that high degree of magical H2O water feedback get there?

Ahhh. Finally. The source of denier science.

Puff the magic dragon.

 

[flogger]

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

Ahhh. Finally. The source of denier science.

Puff the magic dragon.

Is this 'denier science' analogous to back in the Third Reich when they had Aryan and non Aryan science ? Only one kind being deemed acceptable ?

In that respect you could perhaps call it Envirofascism then ?

 

[Ouch!]

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

Is this 'denier science' analogous to back in the Third Reich when they had Aryan and non Aryan science ? Only one kind being deemed acceptable ?

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.

 

[flogger]

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

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

Maybe its just a figment of your imagination to be trotted out by you when you need to evade answering questions

 

[Ouch!]

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

Maybe its just a figment of your imagination to be trotted out by you when you need to evade answering questions

If you are correct about that, what are all you people posting about about?

There's climate science, and there is what you people post about. They seem to be in conflict. What conflicts with science, which is the discovery of truth? It can only be denier science.

 

[flogger]

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

If you are correct about that, what are all you people posting about about?

People who would try and impose their particular worldview upon the rest of us using sham environmental concern as a conduit for doing so

There's climate science, and there is what you people post about. They seem to be in conflict.

Nope there is only science which either stacks up or it doesn't

What conflicts with science

Currently the AGW hypothesis and the climate modelling it is so dependent on given its reliance on a swathe of non empirical assumptions

, which is the discovery of truth? It can only be denier science.

There is only science ....again :roll:

 

[Ouch!]

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

People who would try and impose their particular worldview upon the rest of us using sham environmental concern as a conduit for doing so



Nope there is only science which either stacks up or it doesn't



Currently the AGW hypothesis given its dependence on a swathe of non empirical assumptions



There is only science ....again :roll:

I see that you have nothing to offer but current science.

 

[flogger]

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

I see that you have nothing to offer but current science.

Why ? What alternative kind do you use ?

 

[Lord of Planar]

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

Ahhh. Finally. The source of denier science.

Puff the magic dragon.

I see you don't comprehend whet I was describing. Doesn't surprise me.

 

[Tim the plumber]

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

Quote Originally Posted by Tim the plumber
I am not a scientist. Neither are you.

I am.

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?

 

[longview]

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

A, for sure. B, for sure, if stored as a liquid.

Changing to a gaseous state fuel I would think would require an entirely additional system in parallel to our existing gaseous state system.

Of course the other storage technology might be pumped hydro combined with the grid. At least in places with vertical terrain assets.

I think that the final answer will be all of the above, depending on circumstances.

I have been following this technology for a few years, it started in Fraunhofer University in Stuttgart.
Storing green electricity as natural gas - Press Release May 5 2010
The plan all along in Germany has been to used the natural gas grid as storage.
https://www.audi-mediaservices.com/...eilungen/2013/06/25/world_premiere__audi.html
Audi, already has permission to use the grid.

Customers can order a quota of e-gas when they purchase the car. This enables them to take part in an accounting process that ensures that the amount of gas that they put in their vehicle at the natural gas filling station is supplied to the grid by the Audi e-gas plant. Payment and billing is handled via the Audi e-gas refueling card.

Fueling the Fleet, Navy Looks to the Seas - U.S. Naval Research Laboratory
And the Naval Research labs, have solved the complex hydrocarbon assembly to make liquid fuels.
I am not a petro Engineer, but know a little about refinery processing.
They have been making one hydrocarbon into others for decades, to improve the yield from a barrel of oil.

 

[longview]

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

Good idea. Let's accelerate the development of it by something like...a carbon tax.

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.

 

[Threegoofs]

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.

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.

 

[longview]

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.

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.

 

[flogger]

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

The carbon tax IS the elegant solution.

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

AGW is real.

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

We need to study it.

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 ?

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

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

It will happen eventually.

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

This way we do it without pumping more toxins in the air, soiling it in the water, or tearing up the land

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

 

[BmanMcfly]

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

Is this 'denier science' analogous to back in the Third Reich when they had Aryan and non Aryan science ? Only one kind being deemed acceptable ?

In that respect you could perhaps call it Envirofascism then ?

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