Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Global warming 'on pause' but set to resume

global warming on pause resume oceans temperatures

  • Please log in to reply
183 replies to this topic

#31    Imaginarynumber1

Imaginarynumber1

    I am not an irrational number

  • Member
  • 4,278 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 24 July 2013 - 03:38 AM

View PostGodiva58, on 23 July 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:

May I humbly posit that this article is a perfect example of how dogmatic materialism restricts one's ability to look,examine,test and propose alternate scientific theories. In our very own solar system,there are significant climatic changes happening on the other planets that do not stand up to the position that here on planet earth, CO2 emissions are the cause of climate change. There are climatic changes taking place on Terra, but to place the blame on man is disingenuous. While certainly human kind has not been kind to our environment, there are larger forces at work.
It's kind of the "can't see the forest for the tree's" effect.

Are you a climatologist? A planetary scientist? Cosmologist, perhaps? Even a meteorologist?

Somehow I doubt you fully grasp the situation.

"A cat has nine lives. For three he plays, for three he strays, and for the last three he stays."


July 17th, 2008 (Full moon the next night)

RAPTORS! http://www.unexplain...pic=233151&st=0


#32    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 24 July 2013 - 03:58 AM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 22 July 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Complex systems do not behave in a straight line response, get over it.
It is the job of scientists to account for circumstances as they arise.


Exactly, That is why the attempt to simplify the complex system of planetary climate to one single and ridiculously small factor (made made CO2 emissions) is so ludicrious right off the bat.

But the POLITICIANS love it, of course. And so do the recipients of research funding.

Edited by Zaphod222, 24 July 2013 - 03:59 AM.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#33    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,092 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 07:30 AM

View PostZaphod222, on 24 July 2013 - 03:58 AM, said:

Exactly, That is why the attempt to simplify the complex system of planetary climate to one single and ridiculously small factor (made made CO2 emissions) is so ludicrious right off the bat.

But the POLITICIANS love it, of course. And so do the recipients of research funding.
If that was what they were attempting we could agree. They are in fact quantifying myriad influences - of which CO2 is just one. Only by understanding the totality can the role of CO2 be quantified. So I am afraid your wrong.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#34    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    The Multi Purpose Donkey

  • Member
  • 24,245 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 07:35 AM

So basically, Climate change is far too complex for anyone who hasn't made a career of studying it for years to possibly have a hope of understanding, but Climate Change is very real and irreversible, and it's all our fault? Not at all anything remotely like the more complex arguments about theological doctrine, is it. This is why I do honestly think that Climate Change is very much like a religion for some people, with its enthusiasts absolutely insisting that we must believe what the Experts (the Cardinals and Archbishops of the Climate Change faith), since it's far too complex for ordinary folks to possibly understand. So just trust the Experts.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#35    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,092 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 07:56 AM

View PostColonel Rhuairidh, on 24 July 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

So basically, Climate change is far too complex for anyone who hasn't made a career of studying it for years to possibly have a hope of understanding, but Climate Change is very real and irreversible, and it's all our fault? Not at all anything remotely like the more complex arguments about theological doctrine, is it. This is why I do honestly think that Climate Change is very much like a religion for some people, with its enthusiasts absolutely insisting that we must believe what the Experts (the Cardinals and Archbishops of the Climate Change faith), since it's far too complex for ordinary folks to possibly understand. So just trust the Experts.
If there really was a pause in global warming, as opposed to a slowdown in surface temperature rise, then such a faith based position might ring true. A failure to understand that a complex system can behave in a complex way - whilst still progressively accumulating energy - shows a lack of reasoning ability.
There are no indications in the data that climate change has paused and if you took the time to study the research you would know this.

Since the majority of the population are not prepared to take the effort to understand a complex system it is unfortunately the role of scientists to simplify the message into a form which can be easily grasped - and that is where the problems arise.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#36    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 24 July 2013 - 08:16 AM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 24 July 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

A failure to understand that a complex system can behave in a complex way - whilst still progressively accumulating energy - shows a lack of reasoning ability.

That failure would be on the side of the global warming faith community. The whole idea that we can (or even should) regulate the global climate like an oversized airconditioner is absurd.

A failure to see that the motivation for the simplistic "CO2 equals global warming" slogan really is a push for more political power and taxes really shows some naivite.

Case in point, remember that UN attempt to introduce a cow fart tax to save our climate? Turns out methane emissions have a much bigger impact than CO2. But somehow pushing that through was to messy, so it was quietly buried:

http://www.independe...ars-427843.html

How short memories are...

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#37    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    The Multi Purpose Donkey

  • Member
  • 24,245 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 08:27 AM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 24 July 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

If there really was a pause in global warming, as opposed to a slowdown in surface temperature rise, then such a faith based position might ring true. A failure to understand that a complex system can behave in a complex way - whilst still progressively accumulating energy - shows a lack of reasoning ability.
There are no indications in the data that climate change has paused and if you took the time to study the research you would know this.

Since the majority of the population are not prepared to take the effort to understand a complex system it is unfortunately the role of scientists to simplify the message into a form which can be easily grasped - and that is where the problems arise.

Br Cornelius
see what i mean? Classic dogmatism. Anyone who isn't convinced by them has "a lack of reasoning ability"; "if you took the time to study the research you would know this"; "Since the majority of the population are not prepared to take the effort to understand a complex system"; we (those who know the Truth), (or the Experts we take as our figures of authority) know more than you. But if it's far too complex for the ordinary person to hope to begin to understand, (so you have to trust the Experts), what good will studying the research do to help the ignorant masses understand the holy mysteries?

(And also, of course, classic dogmatism that the only Experts who should be trusted are those who agree with our point of view; anyone who doesn't is anathematised as a Heretic.)

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#38    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,092 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 08:37 AM

I never said it was to complex for the average person to understand - but you have to have a will to move beyond denial and have a little confidence that someone who has spent their life studying climate knows a little more than yourself. I think it is the arrogance of those in denial which is the problem here - not a faith in something that hasn't been demonstrated empirically.

The science is in no way beyond the ability of anyone to understand - if you want to understand it.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#39    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 24 July 2013 - 08:58 AM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 24 July 2013 - 08:37 AM, said:

I never said it was to complex for the average person to understand - but you have to have a will to move beyond denial and have a little confidence that someone who has spent their life studying climate knows a little more than yourself. I think it is the arrogance of those in denial which is the problem here - not a faith in something that hasn't been demonstrated empirically.

Ah, the "deniers".
That is what is such a giveaway about the global warming movement.... the doubters are attacked in religious terms. They are "deniers". Why not come out and call us infidels.

That fact that all of science is BASED on continuous doubt and re-examination and not on dogma somehow got lost here.

By they way, can I assume that Cornelius is a denier of the danger of cow farts to our climate?

Edited by Zaphod222, 24 July 2013 - 08:59 AM.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#40    Valdemar the Great

Valdemar the Great

    The Multi Purpose Donkey

  • Member
  • 24,245 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Sea of Okhotsk

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 09:13 AM

View PostZaphod222, on 24 July 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

Ah, the "deniers".
That is what is such a giveaway about the global warming movement.... the doubters are attacked in religious terms. They are "deniers". Why not come out and call us infidels.

That fact that all of science is BASED on continuous doubt and re-examination and not on dogma somehow got lost here.

By they way, can I assume that Cornelius is a denier of the danger of cow farts to our climate?
indeed. See what i mean about heretics. Anyone questions the official wisdom is in denial.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


Posted Image


#41    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,092 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 10:07 AM

If you want to continue with this and retain any credibility, please explain in detail what issues you have with CO2 been an agent of climate change. These high faluting statements of doubt are to easy to avoid the difficult question of what has caused recent climate change. If you want to remain in denial justify your position with a well researched counter explanation for what has caused the warming over the last century and a half. Then we can analysis what credibility your position has.

Lets take this out of the realm of accusing scientists of been religious fanatics and pin some hard facts on why you don't accept the climate science. Denial thrives on ignorance, so lets put an end to it.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 24 July 2013 - 10:21 AM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#42    MysticStrummer

MysticStrummer

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 868 posts
  • Joined:15 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Central Texas

  • The great path has no gates. Thousands of roads enter it. When one passes through this gateless gate, he walks freely between heaven and earth.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 04:28 PM

View PostZaphod222, on 24 July 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

Ah, the "deniers".
That is what is such a giveaway about the global warming movement.... the doubters are attacked in religious terms. They are "deniers". Why not come out and call us infidels.

I just read the entire thread, and it is the skeptics who brought religious terms into this discussion.

Ummon asked : "The world is such a wide world, why do you answer a bell and don ceremonial robes?" ~ Zen Flesh Zen Bones

#43    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 24 July 2013 - 04:39 PM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 24 July 2013 - 10:07 AM, said:

If you want to continue with this and retain any credibility, please explain in detail what issues you have with CO2 been an agent of climate change. These high faluting statements of doubt are to easy to avoid the difficult question of what has caused recent climate change. If you want to remain in denial justify your position with a well researched counter explanation for what has caused the warming over the last century and a half. Then we can analysis what credibility your position has.

Lets take this out of the realm of accusing scientists of been religious fanatics and pin some hard facts on why you don't accept the climate science. Denial thrives on ignorance, so lets put an end to it.

Br Cornelius
http://hockeyschtick...s-man-made.html

http://www.unexplain...6

Edited by Little Fish, 24 July 2013 - 04:48 PM.


#44    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,092 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 24 July 2013 - 04:48 PM

I am having bad deja vu here- vertigo inducing.
Little Fish we did that paper to death long ago - it is grossly flawed because it confuses cause and effect and strips out the main climate signal by design. probably one of the worst climate papers to slip through peer review.
I can point you to a detailed refutation if you haven't got the message yet;

Quote

Humlum et al., 2013 conclude that the change in atmospheric CO2 from January 1980 is natural, rather than human induced. However, their use of differentiated time series removes long term trends such that the presented results cannot support this conclusion. Using the same data sources it is shown that this conclusion violates conservation of mass. Furthermore it is determined that human emissions explain the entire observed long term trend with a residual that is indistinguishable from zero, and that the natural temperature-dependent effect identified by Humlum et al. is an important contributor to the variability, but does not explain any of the observed long term trend of + 1.62 ppm yr− 1.

http://www.sciencedi...921818113000908

An analysis of the refutation paper;


http://www.skeptical...ade-carbon.html

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 24 July 2013 - 04:57 PM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#45    Little Fish

Little Fish

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,000 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • The default position is to give a ****

Posted 24 July 2013 - 05:01 PM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 24 July 2013 - 04:48 PM, said:

I am having bad deja vu here- vertigo inducing.
Little Fish we did that paper to death long ago - it is grossly flawed because it confuses cause and effect and strips out the main climate signal by design. probably one of the worst climate papers to slip through peer review.
I can point you to a detailed refutation if you haven't got the message yet;



http://www.sciencedi...921818113000908

An analysis of the refutation paper;


http://www.skeptical...ade-carbon.html

Br Cornelius
where is the peer reviewed and published refutation?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users