217 replies to this topic

[questionmark]

BFB, on 05 March 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:

BTW since you dont want to discuss if global warming and climate change are the same thing, i'll see it as a greek admission, who doesn't public like to admit they were wrong.

First, I am not Greek, and second, as you can see from the post above I have no problem admitting errors. But first I have to be wrong.

[BFB]

questionmark, on 05 March 2012 - 04:12 PM, said:

The only real climate affecting event I can see at the time is Kamkatcha, but that was 300 years before the little ice age. Of what we know of similar events (i.e. Katla 18th century) the effects of a big volcanic eruption are much more immediate.

And no, even this graph of a climate skeptic (who claims that since 1998 there was no additional carbon dioxide) shows a continuous decrease of carbon since around 1000:

Sorry mate but... Cherry pciking doesn't cut it.

Seriously were did you get that graph from? Are you sure its atmospheric CO2 levels? So you are saying our atmospheric CO2 level is around -31,5 ppm. Questionmark you have just made a huge discovery!!!

Just ask and i'll find all the studies and all the graph which are needed to show you that Ruddiman's theory is probably incorrect.

[BFB]

questionmark, on 05 March 2012 - 04:21 PM, said:

First, I am not Greek, and second, as you can see from the post above I have no problem admitting errors. But first I have to be wrong.

If not greek what then? Clearly you have the greek mentality.

Also you are wrong.

[liteness]

questionmark, on 05 March 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

Nobody is denying that other plants have warmed, which they are supposed to do when they are in their summer ellipse on the way around the sun. What has been debunked is that there is a correlation between the warming of those other planets and the warming on this planet. Which is what ninja is talking about.

I think to state that it is debunked(a correlation) is too soon to tell.
I think concluding that there is *no correlation* is also a bit early to say.

It might be that human activity is mainly to blame for climate the past 50+ years or so.
It might be that solar and galactic activity is to blame for climate the past forever, and we don't understand it yet.

I've stated before that I think (think) CAGW is totally insane. But I could be thinking wrong.
I have probably very clearly stated that I seriously doubt human activity has much to do with climate change as well. I could be wrong. But I do not think I've stated AGW© is wrong or debunked. I have not stated that there is no correlation between human activity and climate. (perhaps I've flamed the science behind it very childishly once or twice...) And I do not think it smart of you to say any other correlations to be wrong.

Besides, if the Earth turns out like Venus, we'll just move to Mars...

[questionmark]

BFB, on 05 March 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

If not greek what then? Clearly you have the greek mentality.

Also you are wrong.

Oh great guru, tell me the way to enlightenment!

Edit: Can you provide anything that does not show a decrease in carbon around 1000 if I am wrong?

Edited by questionmark, 05 March 2012 - 04:34 PM.

[BFB]

liteness, on 05 March 2012 - 04:21 PM, said:

Thank you.

I suppose NEVER is a big word
Never, always etc... I normally don't use those words.
Shame on me.

Thanks for correcting.
I suppose one beautiful day we will be blessed with knowledge of climate and the universe.
I think my train of thought was more along the lines of how the Earth's ecosystem could be tied in with
the rest of the galaxy, and the rest of the universe. Why shouldn't it? Everything is tied together from what we know now. IF this is so, then we would need to gain knowledge of many other areas before we could see the Earth's climate as one system and understand it as such.

I agree, we dont know how Earth's climate really works. People who study weather would all agree.
There is still so many unknowns in weather, so what would make us think we know everything about climate.

Its because scientists dont like to admit we dont really know.

[liteness]

My 2 cents which is worth only that. Is that CAGW is a scam.
I think the whole scare tactic abuse is fishy, scare tactics will always bring up skepticism.
I think world leaders behind closed doors are using CAGW to bring up tighter cooperation with the countries
of the world under a one world government. A process, a tactic. =) it's out in the open now. A new world order, no longer myth. It's happening. It might be a good thing, it might be crappy. Have any of you really looked deep into the fine print on these treaties and so called climate cooperation contracts? Really strange stuff if you ask me.
Nevertheless...

I have a bit of a conspiracy theory mindset

[liteness]

BFB, on 05 March 2012 - 04:37 PM, said:

I agree, we dont know how Earth's climate really works. People who study weather would all agree.
There is still so many unknowns in weather, so what would make us think we know everything about climate.

Its because scientists dont like to admit we dont really know.

I think a lot of scientists in today's day are under too much pressure.
It saddens me.
It's difficult for a scientist to say "I don't know" when funds are hanging over their heads.
I think more and more, scientists will find themselves saying "I can figure it out". As to keep a job, and keep
supporting family or what have you.

Especially in the USA I think.
If one scientist says "I have absolutely no idea!!" and another "I can probably most likely prove that, or figure it out!"
You know who's getting funding.

[BFB]

questionmark, on 05 March 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

Oh great guru, tell me the way to enlightenment!

Edit: Can you provide anything that does not show a decrease in carbon around 1000 if I am wrong?

[liteness]

BFB, on 05 March 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

BFB=True dialectic
When I watch your bend of a conversation/debate. It's like watching you fly-fishing. Only, you KNOW you're going to catch a fish. And YOU decide when it's going to bite.

haha

[liteness]

Check the thermo data on this surprise!
No correlation? Way too early to state that. (jumps back to previous statements. sorry)

http://science.nasa....ec_giantbreach/

Dec. 16, 2008: NASA's five THEMIS spacecraft have discovered a breach in Earth's magnetic field ten times larger than anything previously thought to exist. Solar wind can flow in through the opening to "load up" the magnetosphere for powerful geomagnetic storms. But the breach itself is not the biggest surprise. Researchers are even more amazed at the strange and unexpected way it forms, overturning long-held ideas of space physics.

[liteness]

liteness, on 05 March 2012 - 05:05 PM, said:

Check the thermo data on this surprise!
No correlation? Way too early to state that. (jumps back to previous statements. sorry)

http://science.nasa....ec_giantbreach/

Dec. 16, 2008: NASA's five THEMIS spacecraft have discovered a breach in Earth's magnetic field ten times larger than anything previously thought to exist. Solar wind can flow in through the opening to "load up" the magnetosphere for powerful geomagnetic storms. But the breach itself is not the biggest surprise. Researchers are even more amazed at the strange and unexpected way it forms, overturning long-held ideas of space physics.

http://sci.esa.int/s...fobjectid=33618
No correlation? Must be enough to not want to say there is *no correlation*. Should be plausible or worth pondering on now.

Edited by liteness, 05 March 2012 - 05:10 PM.

[liteness]

liteness, on 05 March 2012 - 05:08 PM, said:

http://sci.esa.int/s...fobjectid=33618
No correlation? Must be enough to not want to say there is *no correlation*. Should be plausible or worth pondering on now.

http://www.etheric.c...erwave/Ch4.html

[questionmark]

liteness, on 05 March 2012 - 05:05 PM, said:

Check the thermo data on this surprise!
No correlation? Way too early to state that. (jumps back to previous statements. sorry)

http://science.nasa....ec_giantbreach/

Dec. 16, 2008: NASA's five THEMIS spacecraft have discovered a breach in Earth's magnetic field ten times larger than anything previously thought to exist. Solar wind can flow in through the opening to "load up" the magnetosphere for powerful geomagnetic storms. But the breach itself is not the biggest surprise. Researchers are even more amazed at the strange and unexpected way it forms, overturning long-held ideas of space physics.

liteness, on 05 March 2012 - 05:08 PM, said:

http://sci.esa.int/s...fobjectid=33618
No correlation? Must be enough to not want to say there is *no correlation*. Should be plausible or worth pondering on now.

liteness, on 05 March 2012 - 05:11 PM, said:

http://www.etheric.c...erwave/Ch4.html

And so you say that this is happening since 1850? Or what ESA and NASA say that this could be an additional peril we are facing?

We are not talking about anything that is happening in the last ten years, we are talking about something that is happening since the beginning of the 19th century.

Distracting from the real theme is about as useful as discussing my Greekness and all it does is shift the theme to the irrelevant to it.

[questionmark]

BFB, on 05 March 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

Ah, why would I not be surprised you are using the Law dome measurements that start just after the year 1000.... because it does not show the levels it came from before the first plague outbreak (around 900)

Well, how about Vostock that has data for the last 2000 years?



Ooops...big change from the warm medieval to the cold little ice age...innit?