CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
Sorry about the bold, picked it up from the info posted.
Global warming strikes again...
- Thread starter CavLancer
- Start date
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Economics is entirely predicated on "putting together enough chemistry" and yet somehow chemistry is terribly not useful for understanding econ.
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
You accumulate enuf spaghetti, dinner.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Cav, for 6 years you've been telling us: "You'll see, I'll let the climate do the talking. It'll get colder, I'm telling ya"
For 6 years the climate has been telling an unambiguous tale. Record year after record year it has been warming. Still, you refuse to acknowledge that and still keep telling us: "You'll see. I'll let the climate do the talking. It'll get colder, I'm telling ya".
So my questions to you is: when are you going to let the climate do the talking and you do the listening?
Because the support for your position that during the winter, the temperature goes down look at these youtube clips of snow does not bode well.
I'm asking because:
2011: "Listen Ziggy, by this time 2012, no one will be able to deny it, since you all be freezing your arse off"
2012: "Yeah, well maybe not one year, but with a 5 year trend, the cooling trend will be impossible to deny"
2015: "The trends are quite clear but haven't played out far enough so any idiot can see them so yes, so far there is plenty of room to deny the true trend, but I have another year past this el nino.."
2016: "I expect that global warming will either be proven to skeptics such as myself or disproven to the more reasoning faithful this winter or possibly next spring. [...] On the flip side, if all these cycles going cold don't actually put us into another Maunder minimum, then I'd guess that folks like me would have to admit we're wrong. "
your track record isn't giving me a lot of confidence you will admit you're wrong.
For 6 years the climate has been telling an unambiguous tale. Record year after record year it has been warming. Still, you refuse to acknowledge that and still keep telling us: "You'll see. I'll let the climate do the talking. It'll get colder, I'm telling ya".
So my questions to you is: when are you going to let the climate do the talking and you do the listening?
Because the support for your position that during the winter, the temperature goes down look at these youtube clips of snow does not bode well.
What would it take next spring to have you admit you're wrong?
I'm asking because:
2011: "Listen Ziggy, by this time 2012, no one will be able to deny it, since you all be freezing your arse off"
2012: "Yeah, well maybe not one year, but with a 5 year trend, the cooling trend will be impossible to deny"
2015: "The trends are quite clear but haven't played out far enough so any idiot can see them so yes, so far there is plenty of room to deny the true trend, but I have another year past this el nino.."
2016: "I expect that global warming will either be proven to skeptics such as myself or disproven to the more reasoning faithful this winter or possibly next spring. [...] On the flip side, if all these cycles going cold don't actually put us into another Maunder minimum, then I'd guess that folks like me would have to admit we're wrong. "
your track record isn't giving me a lot of confidence you will admit you're wrong.
Last edited:
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
Lets see what happens. 
Its a fairly short time frame, not much longer.
Its a fairly short time frame, not much longer.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
We've been seeing what happens for 6 years. When next spring comes around, what would it take for you to admit there's no global cooling trend?Lets see what happens.
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Waves don't make a tide.
We've known since 1992 that we've had reason to act. We didn't know the timeframes very well, but we knew we needed to act. It's akin to driving through the fog. One group wants to accelerate, denying that there's a reason to be cautious. The other group thinks that slowing down, so that braking time is increased, is prudent. The scientists are trying to create fog-piercing headlights, but it's still not prudent to speed.
We don't know what the safe limit is. We won't be able to detect it with exceedingly strong signals until years after it's passed. I am not sure that doubling down on the addiction is a good idea.
We don't know what the safe limit is. We won't be able to detect it with exceedingly strong signals until years after it's passed. I am not sure that doubling down on the addiction is a good idea.
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
It warmed in the 90s, that we can agree on. El nino warmed things up in the last couple, shutting down "the pause" for a time that is now past, in my estimation. The stuff that filled the gap was fluff stories, polar bears etc. Drama. So, we shall see. If it doesn't get cold nuf to cast all into doubt, then its likely I'm wrong and will be happy to admit that. The last bit of concern for cooling I'll have will be in solar cycle 25, but I won't hold back my admitting that I'm not right in my estimate.
Regarding warming, CO2 rise, if the warming accompanies CO2 rise in a substantial way, then that's what happens and the next question is impact not only on ocean level rise but food production. What were we discussing, the Antarctic? NASA says its been increasing...ocean level rise might be offset by increased moisture carrying to such places and falling as snow. Droughts might be offset by the opening of places which lack water. Was reading somewhere that 4000 years ago the Mideast was much more productive than it now is. Rains... Funny that folks from both sides call for more rain and snow as a result of their theories, in many places.
Lexicus
Deity
What two sides are you referring to here?
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
Oh blah. Give a rest to the debate is over and everyone believes in us. That's not science, that's the mob.
Lexicus
Deity
So you're just going to flat-out refuse to explain why you made reference to two sides? Is that because you realize what a silly characterization that is?
How about this: continuing to persist in spreading the kind of nonsense you're entertaining in this thread is not science, it's well, idiocy. There is a broad-based scientific consensus around climate change: the vast majority of all scientists whose work touches on climate change in some way agree it is happening, caused by humans, and a big problem. There are isolated cranks and crackpots who disagree with this scientific consensus but they do so on a variety of grounds and thus can't really be said to constitute a "side".
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
'More people agree with us than with you' is not scientific. Its the kind of stuff that has fueled making this discussion so divisive at times. Give it a rest why don't you?
Applepielookingperson
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2016
- Messages
- 25
Actual scientists(i.e: Not Monckton who is a liar) versus Crackpots who are funded by fossil-fuel industries.
Hmm, who should we place our faith in?
CavLancer wants to play it off as being "divisive" but i'd rather listen to the expert's consensus on the matter than the blog-post decrying climate change as being a conspiracy.
Maybe it's divisive everytime he refuses to place his faith in shamans or the healing power of crystals, maybe he should give those a try next time he breaks a leg, after all we wouldn't want to be divisive now would we?
I'm sure there are safe-spaces for you to discuss this matter in without the fear of anyone calling you out on it though. Have you tried those?
Hmm, who should we place our faith in?
CavLancer wants to play it off as being "divisive" but i'd rather listen to the expert's consensus on the matter than the blog-post decrying climate change as being a conspiracy.
Maybe it's divisive everytime he refuses to place his faith in shamans or the healing power of crystals, maybe he should give those a try next time he breaks a leg, after all we wouldn't want to be divisive now would we?
I'm sure there are safe-spaces for you to discuss this matter in without the fear of anyone calling you out on it though. Have you tried those?
Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,656
There are two sides to the Moon landing debate.
There are two sides to the Flat Earth argument.
There are two sides to Young Earth Creationism.
All sides are obviously equally valid.
There are two sides to the Flat Earth argument.
There are two sides to Young Earth Creationism.
All sides are obviously equally valid.
sophie
Break My Heart
That's exactly what science is.
Lexicus
Deity
Unless I'm misinterpreting you completely, you're trying to say that science doesn't operate by consensus - which is true. A scientific theory should not be weighed based on how many people agree with it. Evidence is the arbiter.
Of course, from there your point breaks down rather rapidly. Firstly because of course I was simply responding to your claim about "both sides", not making a point about the validity of any scientific argument or theory. Secondly because while you're technically correct you're actually using the argument to in effect deny science - by simply ignoring the huge body of evidence that has created the scientific consensus on climate change. Ignoring or misrepresenting all the relevant evidence isn't science either - in fact I'd go further and say it's actively anti-science.
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
Maybe I will be in your number after next Spring, maybe not. The excitement is building.
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
Careful, make sure your pipes are okay, can leave the water dripping in the faucet to help. When going outside just remember you won't live long without proper arctic or heavy winter gear. Make sure the car has anti-freeze and plenty of gas. Don't go out if you don't have to.
The El nino is over, "the pause" (cooling) is back. This may well be only the beginning, if I'm right.
Another all day brownout (blackout) sceduled for today, doubt I'll be around through much of the graveyard shift.
The El nino is over, "the pause" (cooling) is back. This may well be only the beginning, if I'm right.
Another all day brownout (blackout) sceduled for today, doubt I'll be around through much of the graveyard shift.
Spoiler :
Last edited:
CavLancer
This aint fertilizer
This is worth a look. Never seen anything like it. A "fog dome".
http://www.bbc.com/weather/features/38183830
http://www.bbc.com/weather/features/38183830
Similar threads
