What Do We Think About Climate Change

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by Pericles, Feb 19, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Butch .H
    Joined: Apr 2008
    Posts: 619
    Likes: 12, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 205
    Location: South Africa

    Butch .H Senior Member

    Boston no need to defend your self or your info.Mostly we do understand what you are saying in your posts.We (I ) am pulling your leg. I live in the most boring place in the world when it comes to climate and our geoligieys are so stable we need to go to a mining town to feel a tremor. The only thing going for this place is the fossil record.I for one think we are a little late in trying to reverce the climatic trend.
     
  2. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    ok watched em
    nothing all to convincing
    frankly this guy would be eaten for breakfast at any conference Iv ever been to
    his only real point is concerning data collection and when it boils down to it
    were loosing glaciers faster than the catholic church is loosing alter boys
    cant really argue with ice melting now can you
    one way or another
    we are warming up
    and no amount of arguing the data can deny it
    sorry
    but no thorn in the lions paw here either
    B
     
  3. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    ya a lot of people feel that way
    but I prefer to think we have a chance
    got kids you know
    at least ones Ive adopted
    and Ild like to leave em some thing other than a starving hulk
    oh
    if the oceans stratify
    it wont be boring any longer
    things will change fast
    and ugly
    so keep the old fingers crossed
    B
     
  4. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    feel free to provide me with peer reviewed

    k
    I just went through every post on this thing and read or watched the data you provided
    the data presented was all one lecture through a institution called the Australian enviromental institute which actually isnt a school at all but a front for a right wing think tank

    a DR Bob Carter lecture

    I think it important to note that Wikipedia states and I quote

    the following article presents its opinion well concerning the Australian environmental foundation

    another gem I found on this guy

    another jewel in the crown of Dr Bob is the following statement he made about working for big oil

    I
    basically
    this guy is not exactly what I would call a shining example
    he hasn't submitted a single article on climate change for review
    nor has any by him been published

    he's a marine geologist for the oil companies near as I can tell

    feel free to provide me with 3 peer reviewed and published works concerning detracting opinions of the global climate change theory
    as of yet I have not seen any
    even after going through all your posts in this thread

    I would add that a random sampling of over 900 published works
    found not one to be dissenting

    pretty dam compelling if you ask just about any one

    B
     
  5. Guillermo
    Joined: Mar 2005
    Posts: 3,644
    Likes: 189, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2247
    Location: Pontevedra, Spain

    Guillermo Ingeniero Naval

    I'm confused. Aren't you a carpenter?

    Cheers.
     
  6. Guillermo
    Joined: Mar 2005
    Posts: 3,644
    Likes: 189, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2247
    Location: Pontevedra, Spain

    Guillermo Ingeniero Naval

    Testimony of Roy W. Spencer (PhD in Meteorology, a guy with several peer reviewed works on climate matters, and a recipient of NASA's Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement) before the USA Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, on 22 July 2008:

    http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....Store_id=e12b56cb-4c7b-4c21-bd4a-7afbc4ee72f3

    From there:
    "Regarding the currently popular theory that mankind is responsible for global warming, I am very pleased to deliver good news from the front lines of climate change research. Our latest research results, which I am about to describe, could have an enormous impact on policy decisions regarding greenhouse gas emissions.
    Despite decades of persistent uncertainty over how sensitive the climate system is to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, we now have new satellite evidence which strongly suggests that the climate system is much less sensitive than is claimed by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)....
    If true, an insensitive climate system would mean that we have little to worry about in the way of manmade global warming and associated climate change. And, as we will see, it would also mean that the warming we have experienced in the last 100 years is mostly natural. Of course, if climate change is mostly natural then it is largely out of our control, and is likely to end -- if it has not ended already, since satellite-measured global temperatures have not warmed for at least seven years now."

    Cheers.
     
  7. the1much
    Joined: Jul 2007
    Posts: 3,897
    Likes: 44, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 696
    Location: maine

    the1much hippie dreams

    he's a carpenters dream,,,,,,,flat as a board,,, and never been screwed
    haha :D:p:D
     
  8. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    Boston:

    Too bad all your "Gems" were from Realclimate.org. virtually the ONLY people you can find ANYWHWERE that still defend the infamous 'hockey stick' graph, which even your much vaunted IPCC have summarily abandoned.

    On the issue of so-called 'Peer Review', maybe YOU can be the one that can convince Mikey Mann to release the algorithms that he used to produce his famous temp. recon. and it associated graph, or the 'alternate sources' for the data he alluded to but has YET to produce, now 3 YEARS later.

    Oh, the algorithms have been deduced forensically by McKitrick.
    He has a very fine website, BTW and I encourage all to take some time to read a couple of the articles and peer reviewed papers in pdf form. Unlike Mr Mann's 'pier review', Mckitrick lays it all out for everyone to see; no secret tricks or 'mann-o-matics' to make alarming graphs from even random number strings.

    If the case for AGW case is so strong, why the ********? Didn't we see this same sort of distortion of data into propaganda with the pre-war intelligence on Iraq?

    Isn't it even worse this time since new data sets and measurements keep a comin' with less and less alarming temp data? At least Iraq was a 'closed' society; you get to fill in a lot of 'blanks' with scary scenarios in that context and people will believe you. We don't have that excuse this time.

    There really WAS a MWP and it really WAS much warmer than today, and it really WAS a global phenomena, despite what Realclimate.org ideologues (Mr. Mann) will tell you with straight faces.

    Jimbo
     
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2008
    1 person likes this.
  9. mastcolin
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 151
    Likes: 14, Points: 18, Legacy Rep: 150
    Location: The Netherlands

    mastcolin Senior Member

    The difference between science and politics (the Iraq 'intelligence" analogy) is that science is all about peer review. The Iraq thing was "intelligence" argued behind closed doors for political reason.

    Scientist have no reason to argue the politics - that is for the politicians. Science is over theory, testing of theory etc etc. The peer review issue is that through arguement and testing a consensus arises ie an idea becomes a fact.

    Whilst you can argue that a lot of the discussion of climate change is political, the science is not.

    An analogy is contraception. You can argue the politics of it, but contraceptives stop babies (and disease). It isn't the health scientists job to argue the implication of a science.

    Feel free to ignore the science if you want. Why stop there? Why not deny gravity when you are keen to play basketball?

    Increased CO2 in the atmosphere increases the heat retention in the atmosphere (this fact was discovered about 150years ago)
    The CO2 level is increasing due to man (this is a fact)

    Now explain to me how the above means that climate change doesn't exist?

    Real climate is a forum for climate scientists and those interested in the field - this is a forum for boatbuilders with opinion. Feel free to argue the case on the basis of politics. Climate change is a fact recognised in science.

    ps the hockey stick issue is addressed on the site. The McKitrick paper - a paper printed in a non-climate science journal? It's like an economist coming here and telling you how to build a boat. He's an economist (a pseudo-science if ever there was). He has an opinion - it's wrong factually. (though politically is satisfies some people opinions)
     
  10. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    When scientists are serving at the whim of en ELECTED executive branch of government, then YOUR analysis is the one that fails. Did you not read the cited papers? This has been going on for decades, now.

    And if statistical analysis is such a psuedo-science, then why do you give it such credence when a piker (in statistical analysis) such as Mann dabbles in it-and gets it VERY WRONG??!!

    So you still believe the 'hockey stick' graph is an accurate representation of the earth's past climate? REALLY??!! What happened to the MEDIEVAL WARM PERIOD!!!????? How about the LITTLE ICE AGE??!!

    "The CO2 level is increasing due to man (this is a fact)"

    Even this seemingly basic tenet cannot be established as fact. The problem is that our contribution and the increase don't line up very well (for instance we KNOW CO2 was increasing BEFORE we started to release it in any significant way) and even if they did, it's strictly a circumstantial case, NOT a cause and effect relationship. The decline of European storks coincident with the decline of the human birth rate in Europe does not prove that storks bring babies. They are just coincident facts.

    Jimbo
     
  11. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    I wear a few hats
    when it came time for college I got the old
    " In my day we worked our way through school"
    line Ild been hearing my hole life
    so I did
    remodel carpentry mostly
    originally went to school for marine biology
    then got a yernin for electrical engineering
    then physics
    in the end although I try and keep up on things and contribute were I may
    ( seem to have a knack for brainstorming others research projects )
    I found that actually working rather than being an armchair warrior
    was more my style
    so I started a contracting biz
    seriously disappointed the old man
    although every once in a while I do come up with something pretty darn cool if I do say so
    try playing with hv/c2=m and see what you come up with
    once you get past the conversions issue
    it does get interesting


    getting long winded again
    oops

    yup Im way overeducated carpenter
     
  12. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    I believe I have used multiple sources well
    are you seriously suggesting I get more detailed

    we got bone heads on all sides with a few in front and a few behind
    my two cents
    any one who fails to produce there data upon request
    is full of it
    that said
    the hole hockey stick thing is an average that has been worked into the dirt
    by a zillion people
    and its still a hockey stick by all credible accounts

    (now we are having fun)

    your AGW ing me again there brother
    arent these the camping folks who forgot to bring the steaks last time round
    now thats bull ****

    and for my coupe de grace

    funny the data on ice advance/decline is awfully dam one sided these days
    I believe the wicked witch said it best


    I'm melting, melting. Ohhhhh, what a world, what a world. Who would have thought that some little girl like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness
     
  13. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    actually the bush regime detests the clobal climate change theorists
    and would just assume stand around, roasting some form of endangered owl
    over a campfire of scientific papers and empty oil barrels
    than hear one more peep about the wellbeing of someone other than themselves

    on the other hand
    there are those who seem to serve old Reorge and his cronies with something
    ( bull pucky to the rest of the comunity )
    they try and refer to as science

    not yet
    but I am looking forward it

    the single author of the last four sources provided was so bad
    he begged a back ground check
    resulting in some interesting finds from three different sources
    ( keeping it short or Ild list em )
    ( list available upon request )
    I did find it interesting old DR Bob had not published a single article on global climate change and yet found himself a keynote speaker at some fictitious institute for the environment
    ( nice touch eh )

    (in Japanese)
    ok I admit
    looks more like the goalies stick to me

    [​IMG]

    hmmmm
    still looks kinda like a goalie stick

    [​IMG]

    definitely a goalies stick

    [​IMG]

    so there you have the work of about twenty different people
    each using various forms of data collection
    in what amounts to
    dare I say
    a consensus

    hokey my friend
    includes some time on the boards
    oh
    and heres your stick back

    ps
    ( or bs, call it what you will )
    the level of data available simply swamps detracting opinions
    with most detracting opinions focusing on the narrow view while right in front of there faces that last pacific salmon
    just got thrown on the grill
     
  14. Jimbo1490
    Joined: Jun 2005
    Posts: 785
    Likes: 41, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 527
    Location: Orlando, FL

    Jimbo1490 Senior Member

    "that said
    the hole hockey stick thing is an average that has been worked into the dirt
    by a zillion people
    and its still a hockey stick by all credible accounts "

    Too bad you or Mikey Mann or any of the others can't seem to produce any of these alleged 'zillions' whenever pressed. Ditto for those 'Alternate Sources' for the hockey stick he claimed existed in testimony to congress. Congress is still waiting.....

    Face it, the scary hockey stick graph has been thoroughly discredited; even the IPCC has tacitly admitted this by EXPUNGING it from subsequent reports. No MWP?! No LIA?! Those things happened during RECORDED history! Did you really think you could DO AWAY with those events and NOBODY WOULD NOTICE??!! The simple fact that you cannot even acknowledge the demise in stature of MBH98 proves this is no longer about the science. For you, it is simply a matter of faith; if the science checks out, great! If not, SO WHAT??!!

    Find a new tent and preach somewhere else, pastor Elijah B. Greene :D

    Jimbo
     

  15. masalai
    Joined: Oct 2007
    Posts: 6,818
    Likes: 121, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 1882
    Location: cruising, Australia

    masalai masalai

    I am not pushing a barrow either way but in the interest of a spectrum of broad expert opinion & inputs - the following may be worthy of further research to those interested.... http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/19/2339924.htm?section=justin

    An expert in climate change says the world's sea levels could rise by up to four metres this century.

    The head of the climate change unit at the Australian National University and science adviser to the Federal Government, Professor Will Steffen, says he believes the scientific community is underestimating the speed at which the climate is changing.

    Professor Steffen has raised the concerns at the Coast to Coast Collaboration Conference in Darwin.

    He says polar ice sheets across the northern shelf are melting quickly and last year was a record year in the loss of ice.

    "The evidence over the past 12 to 18 months suggests that we have underestimated how fast this aspect of the earth's system can change," he said.

    "We see things happening much faster than we thought."

    A four-metre rise could have devastating effects on many low-lying areas in coastal Australia, including Darwin, where the Northern Territory Government was recently a major contributor to a billion-dollar waterfront redevelopment including the conference centre where today's meeting is being held.
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.