Warming up

[essence]

I know there is another thread, but this article was interesting in terms of how computer models are getting more sophisticated.

http://www.hpcwire.com/hpcwire/2012-...es_models.html

[UB9IB6]

But.... But.... But......
This is credible evidence.....
Don't let the (R) wingnuts see this.

Do you realize how much effort they put into
discrediting common knowledge. This will definitely
Take time from an upcoming anti this or anti
That thread they post.
Be considerate, don't bother them with facts...
They have to dig long and hard to find a single thread to pull.

[Guest123018-4]

Yep, I just watched a show on the science channel that said if the sun burps in our direction that we will all be dead in a manner of s few seconds.
I am betting that will destroy the earth as we know it long before climate change will.


If it happens like you chicken littles say it will, I am in a perfect spot for beach front property. Life will be grand.

[UB9IB6]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Yep, I just watched a show on the science channel that said if the sun burps in our direction that we will all be dead in a manner of s few seconds.
I am betting that will destroy the earth as we know it long before climate change will.


If it happens like you chicken littles say it will, I am in a perfect spot for beach front property. Life will be grand.

But with your failing eyesight, how would you know?

I fully agree with your statement about the sun burping .
Good thought.

[Sidewinder]

What the Main Stream Media don't tell you about the climate models is that they don't actually model climate.

By this statement, I mean that NONE of the existing models can be started from some known point in the past, allowed to run forward in time, and arrive at another known point in the more recent past. Nor can any of them be run backwards, starting from known conditions in the now, and working backwards to the climate at a known point in the past.

In every other field, this is the Gold Standard Acid Test of a model. Does it match known reality? If it cannot be made to match known reality, then it is, by definition, Garbage.

Note: High-energy physics includes models that must be "renormalized", scaled to fit experimental data. Those models include a factor that is the exponential of an unknown quantity. Renormalization amounts to finding a value for that unknown quantity that allows the model to generate results that match the experimental data. Now, when you have an exponential factor like that, you are saying that you might be multiplying by ANYTHING, from infinitesimally small to astronomically large. This is still acceptable, because you CAN get the model to match the real world. The climate models can't even do it under those conditions.

Yet the Global Warming, uhhh, excuse me, Climate Change crowd (the change happened when they figured out that some areas were COOLING) tell us that we must immediately spend skyzillions of dollars because their models say so.

And that's BEFORE they tell us how they arrive at one number to describe the temperature of the entire planet, so they can say that the entire planet is warming...

[IIFFOFRDB]

Originally Posted by UB9IB6

But with your failing eyesight, how would you know?

I fully agree with your statement about the sun burping .
Good thought.

Eyesight..huh...you better back the fuck up bitch...

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by UB9IB6

But.... But.... But......
This is credible evidence.....
Don't let the (R) wingnuts see this.

It's not. Its just a model and not a long term model at that. By your thinking all the people playing Farmville should be millionaires.

Originally Posted by UB9IB6

Do you realize how much effort they put into
discrediting common knowledge. This will definitely
Take time from an upcoming anti this or anti
That thread they post.
Be considerate, don't bother them with facts...
They have to dig long and hard to find a single thread to pull.

What fact is that? That climate changes over the millennia? That people using supercomputers can predict that 100 year flood areas are going to get big floods every so often? A model is not a fact. Laughable.

[CuteOldGuy]

Sure climate change exists. It has always existed. The earth's climate is always in flux. What governments want to do now is use this as an excuse to establish more laws, more regulations, and more taxes, which in turn will allow them to give more and greater tax breaks to crony-donors and drive out upstart competitors to those same crony-donors.

They could give a shit less about the ecology. Look at the cars they drive and the jets they fly.

Phony bastards with scientific sounding mumbo-jumbo designed to scare the shit out of Joe Average, so he will vote for their side.

But go ahead. Give them more authority, lose some more liberty. Who cares, it's not like we have any liberty left to save, anyway.

[Sidewinder]

Indeed, COG.

The panic du jour a few years ago was about the risk of Man's activities, emitting huge quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, causing Global Warming. The fix, since Global Warming is BAD, is to establish an unelected international body that will control ALL processes that emit carbon dioxide, tax them, grant or withhold permits for them, and, in general decide who gets to emit CO2 and who doesn't.

If you go back a few decades, you will find that the panic du jour was about the risks of Man's activities, emitting huge quantities of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, causing a new Ice Age. The fix then, since an Ice Age is BAD, was to establish an unelected international body that would control ALL processes that emit carbon dioxide, tax them, grant or withhold permits for them, and, in general decide who gets to emit CO2 and who doesn't.

Interestingly enough, even though the fears were diametrically opposite, the cure was the same: limit and control CO2 emissions. As CO2 is a necessary direct or indirect (power generation) byproduct of just about every industrial process known to man, such permit processes have Implications. One hypothesizes that this isn't about controlling CO2, about reducing Global Warming or fending off an Ice Age, but rather about Taking Global Control Of EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE.

[icuminpeace]

If the earth is 4 billion years old, and we have climate data on a couple of hundred years, statistically speaking, the data available (sample size) is not enough relative to the age of the earth (population size) to determine if there is a significant trend and its cause. Sure, it is getting hotter, but the earth has gone through warming and cooling cycles, and perhaps we're going through a warming cycle. As in everything, you can attribute an "effect" to a "cause" based on your particular interests, but that doesn't mean there is direct correlation between one and the other.

[Little Stevie]

Originally Posted by icuminpeace

If the earth is 4 billion years old, and we have climate data on a couple of hundred years, statistically speaking, the data available (sample size) is not enough relative to the age of the earth (population size) to determine if there is a significant trend and its cause. Sure, it is getting hotter, but the earth has gone through warming and cooling cycles, and perhaps we're going through a warming cycle. As in everything, you can attribute an "effect" to a "cause" based on your particular interests, but that doesn't mean there is direct correlation between one and the other.

It is NOT TRUE that the data IS UNAVAILABLE!

The deniers are falling like flies and anyone who doesn't think the food, farming, harvesting and transportation power needed to feed the NOW SEVEN Billion people on this planet (reached last November) compared to the first time the planet had a ONE Billion human inhabitants in 1805 is an IDIOT.

At least REAL SCIENTISTS evaluate real data and continue to refine the models they use to predict climate change.

BTW, ice core sampling from both the North and South polar ice packs can reveal atmospheric CO2 and other chemical levels for millions of years into the past on a yearly basis!

Here is a real Climate Science Denier who decided he should do his own independent studying - with amazing results:

http://www.ethicsdaily.com/global-wa...ever-cms-18783

http://lezgetreal.com/2012/07/climat...ddow-about-it/

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ecent-warming/

[CuteOldGuy]

Stevie, you will believe in anything that will give the government more power and control, regardless of facts, won't you?

And if you are going to cite to those obviously biased sources, STFU about the sites I use.

[Little Stevie]

YOU are a dodger and a LIAR, COF. Muller, the convert, used to work for Koch. Try telling the truth and instead of lying and making a scientific argument instead of a biased political one!

You didn't even take time to read the supplemental documentation, did you, COF?

[CuteOldGuy]

Stevie, . . . oh, never mind. Wear sunscreen and have a nice day.

[icuminpeace]

OK Stevie, so it's a huge problem to have 7 billion people on earth. What are your suggestions? It seems to me that the currently proposed solutions will be lining some people's pockets and once that comes into play, I automatically stop supporting their "cause".