As long as there are republicans claiming a hoax
As long as there are republicans denying any warming
there can be no science debate.
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Steven Mosher
↧
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by PA
“It is a major difference in climate, comparable with entering a different geological period if we get to 600-700 ppm by 2100 as would be expected with continued emission per capita growth on top of population growth. ”
If you assume gravity is zero or a zero inertia (light speed) cannon you could hit the moon with a baseball. But those aren’t good assumptions, and your’s aren’t either.
Old energy is about $10/barrel to extract, new energy is about $50/barrel. Coal prices are steadily increasing.
If statements about projected alternate energy source costs are even half-witted we aren’t going to be increasing fossil fuel use for the majority of the century. More than 3/4ths of fossil fuel emissions come from countries with a flat/declining emissions growth rate or massive nuclear programs.
The following chart shows the situation (except for China – the Chinese projection is just daft in view of their nuclear program and agreements)
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Steven Mosher
Lamb was wrong
“But it is easy to notice the common assumption that mans science and modern industry and technology are now so powerful that any change of climate or the environnment must be due to us.”
1. there is no common assumption or consensus that ANY change is due to us.
2. There is an occasional skeptic who ASSERTS that climate science claims this. But the science actually doesnt.
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by ordvic
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Lucifer
↧
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by PA
ERSST V4 increased the SST trend over ERSST v3b about 0.02°C per decade.
That is an warming adjustment of about 0.003°C per decade per year. Applying the simple math that they have been doing this for 14 years and altering 10 decades of temperature – the effect is 0.003*14*10 or about 0.42°C of warming is generated by computer.
If the adjusters and versioners quit adjusting historic temperatures we might take them more seriously.
Half of AGW is CGAGW (computer generated anthropomorphic global warming).
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by John Smith (it's my real name)
Steven Mosher
“skeptics deny that it is getting warmer”
jeez, nobody says that
everyone acknowledges the hiatus is the flattening of a general trend
even me, and I’m a Luke Skydragon
it’s just that the end of the world is not near
thanks for explaining your statement though
I’ll need a few minutes to untangle my brain
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Jim D
PA, you have to remember that China and the other countries, US and EU, are only going to be motivated to reduce per capita CO2 by global agreements such as Paris. This is not automatic and only results from seeing climate projections that have been made, such as by the IPCC. Support these agreements if you want China to feel more pressure, and also to stop transitioning to more reserves of fossil fuels that can be made available if the technology goes in that direction. The whole realization about CO2 levels is what is driving the right choices for future fuel and power.
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Max_OK, Citizen Scientist
Joe Born’s lofty praise of fossil fuels got me to thinking about the importance of beasts of burden.
It doesn’t take a scientist to see how much human misery has been reduced by our quadruped friends, horses, burros, mules, oxen, elephants, and camels. Sure, a team of men could pull a heavy wagon or plow, but after such a back-breaking feat those poor wretches wouldn’t feel like going home and showing their wives much attention.
Who believes he could pick up a thousand pound log with his nose? Also, who thinks he could saddle-up another person and ride him at break-neck speed across the continent to deliver letters to California? And who wants to herd cattle to Dodge on foot?
We should be thankful our four-legged servants have helped advance our civilization and saved us from the misery of sore muscles, torn tendons, achy joints, and early arthritis. Many have also been our affection companions. Remember how much Trigger loved Roy Rogers.
I forgot to include llamas and sled dogs.
↧
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by captdallas2 0.8 +/- 0.2
Mosher, “Lamb was wrong”
but how wrong?
And who do you think has it right?
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Max_OK, Citizen Scientist
ordvic, thanks. I hadn’t seen that one. I need to explore old sitcoms.
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Tonyb
Captain
I am bemused that apparently we have managed to spend billions and get up to AR5 and yet man has not been fingered as the culprit according to mosh.
We might as well all go home and Judith can close down climate etc.
As regards Lamb, he is mostly right but I think greatly underestimates the warmth of the first half of the 16 th century which was indistinguishable to much of the MWP. According to documents I have seen in the Scott
Olar institute in Cambridge it seems possible that the Northern sea route opened up. The period around 1540 had three or four of the warmest years in the extended CET record.
Tonyb
↧
Comment on 2014 → 2015 by Faustino
Rob, I’ve found truth in that old saying. Definitely some positives from the negatives.
↧
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Rob Starkey
Mosher writes—“It’s pretty simple guys.”
But then Mosher mistakenly tries to define how all skeptics think.
Humanity can be contributing to the climate being warmer than it would have been without humans, but that does not mean that the IPCCs suggested actions make sense.
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Tonyb
Max
Fawlty towers was set in my next door sea side resort of Torquay. Our village cafe has a Fawlty towers night later this month. If you can make it over I will buy you a ticket…
Tonyb
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by cwon14
Hoax is a weak word as the ability to play a false reactionary narrative indicates. It’s not hard to see why, even if neither of us might endorse it, we see a religious response to a movement that is more built on political and cultural faith then science. That response is also easy to twist in a culture with a strong secular predisposition. So this is literalism without context.
It’s curious the secular views are often so offended by religiously based parties who are no where the center of the policy in question and the authority it invokes. I’m not going to go into the rabbit hole of what “God as Man” rejection is being invoked by other religiously based responses and what they might mean. I get the symbolism of the argument without believing Inhofe or others are imposing theocratic science as the basic argument. That’s a quote mine of misinformation and straw. It’s also a huge double standard that worshiping of a politically motivated science isn’t very much a modern replacement of the theological predispositions you might be critical of. Why one without the other?
If you’re trying to say these are equal faults that’s very false. People aren’t executing science policy in the mainstream to suit biblical preferences. This simply isn’t a social problem where as a radical statist ambition is very much in the DNA of the AGW movement. Religious response is a form of dissent to attitude that is prevalent. Romans could have rejected Pagan beliefs on their own merit but in the end made other choices. I’m sorry that anything comes up that can be twisted such as religious commentary or the word “hoax”.
There are plenty of flaming secular, Marxist sympathizing academic lefty’s on this board on a regular basis. I’m mean they’re on every thread in drag or not. I can’t recall anyone making bible as science quotes here so I think your point about Inhofe isn’t in context to where the debate actually is. There is something about fanatical mainstream AGW belief systems, religious and political excess that naturally impacts people in very fundamental ways. I no more condemn Inhofe then I would soldiers holding a bible service in Afghanistan as if this isn’t willfully misinterpreted as the West imposing Christianity on Islamic peoples by parties in conflict. The anti-religious posturing isn’t surprising and to a degree on the surface something effective for AGW advocates. I would just argue it’s based on simplicity and to a degree cultural bigotry. We hear religious scientists smeared all the time in this fashion so what exactly are you embracing? Then again, this is the risk of making religiously based comments outside a group so wholly unsympathetic to ones belief system.
I simply want climate Paganism destroyed, I don’t need climate Christianity to replace it and I really don’t think that’s the point for most political skeptics of the AGW cause.
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by David L. Hagen
Congratulations in hitting the big time with Rick Santelli!
(Hair do looks much better too.)
Yes extreme weather is much more important than "energy".
Yet please also consider the importance of <b> transport fuels</b>
(Atlanta especially will shut down especially fast when shortages hit.)
The US still <a href="http://www.oilvoice.com/n/Making_sense_of_the_US_oil_story/33bbbb943aae.aspx#gsc.tab=0" rel="nofollow">imports 45% of its oil.</a> - and <a href="http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/data_graphs/330.htm" rel="nofollow">OPEC claims to control 83% of conventional oil resources.</a>
"Tight oil" well production declines ~85% in 3 years.
<a href="http://ourfiniteworld.com/2014/12/29/how-increased-inefficiency-explains-falling-oil-prices/" / rel="nofollow">GROSS per capita oil consumption has been FLAT since 1983.</a>
Energy Return on Energy Invested (EROI) for oil declined ~90% from > 100 to ~ 12 in the USA. Consequently, NET per capital oil consumption is DECLINING.
That will bite far faster than "climate change" aka anthropogenic global warming.
↧
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by cwon14
The fact “skeptics” quibble here often bitterly over the smallest of side details or the largest of blind spots imaginable in his case indicates Mosher is incorrect.
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Faustino
Dick, as an economic policy officer, I often had to do one-page briefs on extremely complex subjects. It is an art which is not easily mastered; and some subjects can not sensibly be dealt with in one page. This art has never been relevant in Judith’s work, and when she engages publicly she seeks to get across more complex ideas reflecting her understanding in a clear and comprehensible way. Good for her, good for the debate. People like me like to encapsulate Judith’s knowledge and good sense in, for example, letters to the editor, to inform a broad audience at a simple level. Judith’s work has also clearly influenced the main environmental writer of The Australian, who writes lucid and relevant pieces comprehensible to a large and educated audience. I think that Judith’s doing a great job, don’t expect her to do everything.
↧
Comment on Georgia politicians cool to global warming by Max_OK, Citizen Scientist
Deniers think the relationship should be linear or there is no relationship. I’m not aware of any climate scientist who would agree, but maybe I don’t understand what you are talking about.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
