gyrofry posted:
we got both kindsa measurements, country AND western
Those ones are alright, they’re not affected by the urban heat island affect.
guidoanselmi posted:
yeah i dunno what he's getting at but i figure i can indulge.
i mean, there's really a somewhat finite selection of measurements to make to help understand climate and develop models. i mean specific spectrometers, imagers, in situ measurements or whatever. you can make your investigations increasingly complex, but there's a reasonable understanding of the higher level measurements you need. it's the issue of understanding what those measurements mean and how they play together that's the hard part and really limits the demand of data gets collected.
Yeah I just don’t think your measurements are capable of actually predicting what’s going to happen with any accuracy. We were meant to have flooded Pacific Islands and Ice-free Arctic summers by now. They kept telling us that Australia had to get used to permanent drought and it’s been flooding for 3 years now.
Shania Twain summed it up best:
Okay, so you're a rocket scientist
That don't impress me much
So you got the brain but have you got the touch
Don't get me wrong, yeah I think you're alright
But that won't keep me warm in the middle of the night
That don't impress me much
Ironicwarcriminal posted:
Yeah I just don’t think your measurements are capable of actually predicting what’s going to happen with any accuracy. We were meant to have flooded Pacific Islands and Ice-free Arctic summers by now. They kept telling us that Australia had to get used to permanent drought and it’s been flooding for 3 years now.
I dunno who 'they' is.
You're completely right that the ability to project climate patterns is lacking. The environment is very complex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_climate_model is just a part of it. weighting of heat xfer terms, influence of particulates, etc can all be tweaked to astoundingly different results. for the titan ones mentioned in the last post, the addition of topography made an order of magnitude change in wind speeds or something.) and there's a grasp on some relationships and certainly not all. But not trusting people for bias is different than not trusting out of capability/competence.
guidoanselmi posted:Ironicwarcriminal posted:
Yeah I just don’t think your measurements are capable of actually predicting what’s going to happen with any accuracy. We were meant to have flooded Pacific Islands and Ice-free Arctic summers by now. They kept telling us that Australia had to get used to permanent drought and it’s been flooding for 3 years now.I dunno who 'they' is.
You're completely right that the ability to project climate patterns is lacking. The environment is very complex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_climate_model is just a part of it. weighting of heat xfer terms, influence of particulates, etc can all be tweaked to astoundingly different results. for the titan ones mentioned in the last post, the addition of topography made an order of magnitude change in wind speeds or something.) and there's a grasp on some relationships and certainly not all. But not trusting people for bias is different than not trusting out of capability/competence.
No it isn’t. It doesn’t really matter if they’re making mistakes through incompetence or malfeasance. Us, the public, is being lumbered with the same erroneous conclusions (and prescriptions) either way.
“They” is the climate change lobby in general. NGOs, high profile scientists, green politicians etc. All those whose livelihoods depend on selling fear and have a vested interest in pushing “action on climate change”.
And then they shut down debate by saying "the science is in" and using loaded terms like "denier".
shennong posted:
what data did you consider to arrive at the conclusion that climate models are "erroneous"
you do know IWC has pushed this argument since the beginning of time, even on mathematics. like "how can you know your math is right? what if other cultures developed other types of math?"
Ironicwarcriminal posted:guidoanselmi posted:Ironicwarcriminal posted:
Yeah I just don’t think your measurements are capable of actually predicting what’s going to happen with any accuracy. We were meant to have flooded Pacific Islands and Ice-free Arctic summers by now. They kept telling us that Australia had to get used to permanent drought and it’s been flooding for 3 years now.I dunno who 'they' is.
You're completely right that the ability to project climate patterns is lacking. The environment is very complex (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_climate_model is just a part of it. weighting of heat xfer terms, influence of particulates, etc can all be tweaked to astoundingly different results. for the titan ones mentioned in the last post, the addition of topography made an order of magnitude change in wind speeds or something.) and there's a grasp on some relationships and certainly not all. But not trusting people for bias is different than not trusting out of capability/competence.No it isn’t. It doesn’t really matter if they’re making mistakes through incompetence or malfeasance. Us, the public, is being lumbered with the same erroneous conclusions (and prescriptions) either way.
“They” is the climate change lobby in general. NGOs, high profile scientists, green politicians etc. All those whose livelihoods depend on selling fear and have a vested interest in pushing “action on climate change”.
And then they shut down debate by saying "the science is in" and using loaded terms like "denier".
uh there is a qualitative difference between deception and error. and talking about "them" isnt helpful, because it is a very obtuse conspiracy theory type thing. the type of predictions they are making are not here to serve the present power structure. you think spreading panic and doom serves power? only when it is used on the enemy, not your own constitutive base.
look at the way newspapers report on the crisis in Greece, they always sensationalize only to a fault, then pull you back in to a safe point of reference where everything can be resolved. politicians frequently do the same thing, they spread fear, but also present an answer to which to rally around, making sure to contain panic. you see this in the political body of the IPCC, but this alone doesnt go very far to explain the conclusions beyond the IPCC.
secondly, the political goals of whatever 'fear-mongering' scientific clique youre talking about, are in contradiction with the oil and gas industries, with much industrial production and procurement, and indeed with the actual US government and economic structure. there is a well-documented denial lobby, if you've been paying any attention, which is not only held up by the energy industry, but also Philip Morris of all companies.
The website Exxonsecrets.org, using data found in the company's official documents, lists 124 organisations that have taken money from the company or work closely with those that have. These organisations take a consistent line on climate change: that the science is contradictory, the scientists are split, environmentalists are charlatans, liars or lunatics, and if governments took action to prevent global warming, they would be endangering the global economy for no good reason. The findings these organisations dislike are labelled "junk science". The findings they welcome are labelled "sound science".
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/sep/19/ethicalliving.g2
unlike your 'climate change lobby', who have a murky, and undefined political agenda of 'more grants' (i guess they're just spinning the wheels of bullshit, eh? not interested in research which will actually stand the test of time?) and 'funding', the climate change denial lobby actually has concrete, profit-driven motives for their intensive disinformation campaign.
anyway, obviously forecasts into the future are extremely difficult, since it is a matter of contingency, not to mention extremely complex systems. either way, there's some very bad stuff happening in regard to our climate, it'll have a very bad effect on us, and it's quite obvious that there are people standing selfishly in the way of any sort of solution.
thirdplace posted:
who cares if gw is real, fossil fuels are finite resources that we should be tapering down the use of anyway
peak oil is a lie perpetuated by the wind farm industry!
shennong posted:
the notion that climate modelling results predicting enormous intractable challenges for global capitalism is a saleable commodity which drives science funding is fucking hilarious btw and shows that you have literally never interacted with a funding agency on any level
It doesn’t just drive science funding, it drives fear in the community which politicians (of the “progressive” stripe) can cash in on. “Only WE can protect you from this menace so vote for us”.
And no you’re right I don’t “have experience with funding agencies” because I have a career that doesn’t rely on blackmailing the public with preachings of millenialist apocalypse
Ironicwarcriminal posted:
It doesn’t just drive science funding
this is the part i want you to explain. tell me how this works
shennong posted:Ironicwarcriminal posted:
It doesn’t just drive science fundingthis is the part i want you to explain. tell me how this works
We have a Department of Climate Change here in Australia. Obviously, the bigger the concerns and the more dire the warnings are, the more money they get, the more their organization expands, and the more power they amass.
What possible interest do they have in taking a sober perspective on the issue rather than the most possible alarmist one?
What possible interest do they have in taking a sober perspective on the issue rather than the most possible alarmist one?
lmao they are not making profit out of their 'alarmist' research. al gore isnt a goddamn scientist. you really shouldnt speak on things you do not know
Ironicwarcriminal posted:
We have a Department of Climate Change here in Australia. Obviously, the bigger the concerns and the more dire the warnings are, the more money they get, the more their organization expands, and the more power they amass.
you're making the assertion that tens of thousands of PIs at academic institutions around the world are consciously fabricating or distorting data in order to get more funding, but public funding for these institutions has been frozen or rolled back across most of the west for more than a decade (ie the period in which the warnings coming out of the climate field have become more and more strident). you need some evidence to demonstrate that the gravity of predictions being made has an effect on funding levels for those individual scientists
Ironicwarcriminal posted:
What possible interest do they have in taking a sober perspective on the issue rather than the most possible alarmist one?
there is a massive incentive in any scientific field to attack an orthodox position. overturning paradigms happens all the time and it makes careers. if someone could demonstrate on the merits that climate change orthodoxy is incorrect, the fossil fuel industries would be beating a path to their door. the recent koch-funded BEST program at UC Berkeley is a great example. with indepedent, skeptic-friendly money, and skeptical scientific staff, the BEST group found itself unable to argue for the denialist position, instead concluding that the orthodox position on climate change is correct. what possible interest could they have in confirming that instead of milking the koch industries for all they're worth?
thirdplace posted:
what do you think of the 9/11 truth movement iwc?
More plausible than the official explanation, but materially irrelevant.
FOLLOW THE MONEY, MAN
Crow posted:What possible interest do they have in taking a sober perspective on the issue rather than the most possible alarmist one?lmao they are not making profit out of their 'alarmist' research.
Neither does the DEA, but they sure do love draconian new laws and powers.
And yes Australia’s chief climate commissioner Tim Flannery (who is a scientist) has indeed made a profit out of his career selling doom and gloom……the proceeds of which he then used to buy a waterfront house. lol
Flannery was named Australian of the Year in 2007 and is currently a professor at Macquarie University. He is also the chairman of the Copenhagen Climate Council, an international climate change awareness group. His sometimes controversial views on shutting down conventional coal fired power stations for electricity generation in the medium term are frequently cited in the media.
2005:
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2005/s1389827.htm
"But since 1998 particularly, we’ve seen just drought, drought, drought, and particularly regions like Sydney and the Warragamba catchment - if you look at the Warragamba catchment figures, since ‘98, the water has been in virtual freefall, and they’ve got about two years of supply left, but something will need to change in order to see the catchment start accumulating water again.... So when the models start confirming what you’re observing on the ground, then there’s some fairly strong basis for believing that we’re understanding what’s causing these weather shifts and these rainfall declines, and they do seem to be of a permanent nature…
Well, the worst-case scenario for Sydney is that the climate that’s existed for the last seven years continues for another two years. In that case, Sydney will be facing extreme difficulties with water."
The Weather Makers: The History and Future Impact of Climate Change (2005) is a book by Tim Flannery.
The book received critical acclaim. It won the major prize at the 2006 New South Wales Premier's Literary Awards, and was short-listed for the 2010 Jan Michalski Prize for Literature.
2 months ago
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water-issues/dam-level-hits-10year-high-20111223-1p7rk.html
Warragamba Dam levels have exceeded 80 per cent for the first time in nearly 10 years.
The dam, 60 kilometres west of Sydney, is the city's primary water source. The Warragamba catchment area is 9000 square kilometres.
The last time the dam's levels rose above 80 per cent was June 2002, according to the Sydney Catchment Authority.
It has rained on 44 days of summer so far, above the average of 36 days.
The Bureau of Meteorology forecasts the showers will stick around this week, putting Sydney on track for its wettest summer since 1998-99 when it rained on 49 days.
He's made scary predictions for nearly all Australian cities about "running out of water" and nearly all of them have received several extremely wet years and abundant waters. He got rich off his scaremongering and the subsequent power he ammassed from doing so.
And yet i still hear this "no no you have to trust the scientists, they are pure of heart" nonsense.
Ironicwarcriminal posted:
Neither does the DEA, but they sure do love draconian new laws and powers.
yea the dea sure isn't making money from effectively instating a slave based labour system producing consumer goods for private interests ...
Ironicwarcriminal posted:Flannery was named Australian of the Year in 2007 and is currently a professor at Macquarie University. He is also the chairman of the Copenhagen Climate Council, an international climate change awareness group. His sometimes controversial views on shutting down conventional coal fired power stations for electricity generation in the medium term are frequently cited in the media.2005:
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2005/s1389827.htm
"But since 1998 particularly, we’ve seen just drought, drought, drought, and particularly regions like Sydney and the Warragamba catchment - if you look at the Warragamba catchment figures, since ‘98, the water has been in virtual freefall, and they’ve got about two years of supply left, but something will need to change in order to see the catchment start accumulating water again.... So when the models start confirming what you’re observing on the ground, then there’s some fairly strong basis for believing that we’re understanding what’s causing these weather shifts and these rainfall declines, and they do seem to be of a permanent nature…
Well, the worst-case scenario for Sydney is that the climate that’s existed for the last seven years continues for another two years. In that case, Sydney will be facing extreme difficulties with water."
The Weather Makers: The History and Future Impact of Climate Change (2005) is a book by Tim Flannery.
The book received critical acclaim. It won the major prize at the 2006 New South Wales Premier's Literary Awards, and was short-listed for the 2010 Jan Michalski Prize for Literature.
2 months ago
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water-issues/dam-level-hits-10year-high-20111223-1p7rk.html
Warragamba Dam levels have exceeded 80 per cent for the first time in nearly 10 years.
The dam, 60 kilometres west of Sydney, is the city's primary water source. The Warragamba catchment area is 9000 square kilometres.
The last time the dam's levels rose above 80 per cent was June 2002, according to the Sydney Catchment Authority.It has rained on 44 days of summer so far, above the average of 36 days.
The Bureau of Meteorology forecasts the showers will stick around this week, putting Sydney on track for its wettest summer since 1998-99 when it rained on 49 days.
He's made scary predictions for nearly all Australian cities about "running out of water" and nearly all of them have received several extremely wet years and abundant waters. He got rich off his scaremongering and the subsequent power he ammassed from doing so.
And yet i still hear this "no no you have to trust the scientists, they are pure of heart" nonsense.
how can we be sure this isnt an anomaly based on australians being genetically predisposed to crime
tpaine posted:
TRAP DOOR SPIDER CASSOWARY DROP BEAR PISSED OFF BUSHCAT SPAZZY SPUD ABORIGINAL ANAL RAPE KANGAROO AIDS BAT BINOCULAR SASQUATCH SQUATTER LEOPARD BEARDED BUTTFLY NOISOME KIDNEYWORM SHOE SCORPION SHOWERHEAD LICE BREAKOFF-IN-YER-DICKHEAD FISH MEALY TROUT VIRUS CELLULAR CANCER WEED MUTANT BRIGANDS PLANT THAT LOOKS LIKE WEED BUT JUST MAKES YOU NACKER SMALLER BIG BAD DOGS OI OI OI OI IO
imagining this in the cadence and rhythms of the non-chorus parts of REM's 1987 hit It's the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)
blinkandwheeze posted:Ironicwarcriminal posted:
Neither does the DEA, but they sure do love draconian new laws and powers.yea the dea sure isn't making money from effectively instating a slave based labour system producing consumer goods for private interests ...
You got any info on this? I know what you're getting at but i didn't know the DEA itself reaped profits from prison labour.
mistersix posted:Ironicwarcriminal posted:Flannery was named Australian of the Year in 2007 and is currently a professor at Macquarie University. He is also the chairman of the Copenhagen Climate Council, an international climate change awareness group. His sometimes controversial views on shutting down conventional coal fired power stations for electricity generation in the medium term are frequently cited in the media.2005:
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2005/s1389827.htm
"But since 1998 particularly, we’ve seen just drought, drought, drought, and particularly regions like Sydney and the Warragamba catchment - if you look at the Warragamba catchment figures, since ‘98, the water has been in virtual freefall, and they’ve got about two years of supply left, but something will need to change in order to see the catchment start accumulating water again.... So when the models start confirming what you’re observing on the ground, then there’s some fairly strong basis for believing that we’re understanding what’s causing these weather shifts and these rainfall declines, and they do seem to be of a permanent nature…
Well, the worst-case scenario for Sydney is that the climate that’s existed for the last seven years continues for another two years. In that case, Sydney will be facing extreme difficulties with water."
The Weather Makers: The History and Future Impact of Climate Change (2005) is a book by Tim Flannery.
The book received critical acclaim. It won the major prize at the 2006 New South Wales Premier's Literary Awards, and was short-listed for the 2010 Jan Michalski Prize for Literature.
2 months ago
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water-issues/dam-level-hits-10year-high-20111223-1p7rk.html
Warragamba Dam levels have exceeded 80 per cent for the first time in nearly 10 years.
The dam, 60 kilometres west of Sydney, is the city's primary water source. The Warragamba catchment area is 9000 square kilometres.
The last time the dam's levels rose above 80 per cent was June 2002, according to the Sydney Catchment Authority.It has rained on 44 days of summer so far, above the average of 36 days.
The Bureau of Meteorology forecasts the showers will stick around this week, putting Sydney on track for its wettest summer since 1998-99 when it rained on 49 days.
He's made scary predictions for nearly all Australian cities about "running out of water" and nearly all of them have received several extremely wet years and abundant waters. He got rich off his scaremongering and the subsequent power he ammassed from doing so.
And yet i still hear this "no no you have to trust the scientists, they are pure of heart" nonsense.how can we be sure this isnt an anomaly based on australians being genetically predisposed to crime
That’s a good theory and I would feel more comfortable if it were true. Sadly there is power and money to be made in Big Climate all around the world. Usually by politicians or businesses but it’s all made possible by the assurances and sweaty, nervous certainty of Science.
elemennop posted:thirdplace posted:
who cares if gw is real, fossil fuels are finite resources that we should be tapering down the use of anywaypeak oil is a lie perpetuated by the wind farm industry!
that's ridiculous.
actually it's a lie perpetuated by geopolitical power brokers with an interest in limiting the thermoeconomic growth of the global south.
gyrofry posted:
actually it's a lie perpetuated by geopolitical power brokers with an interest in limiting the thermoeconomic growth of the global south.
this is the main application of global climate change science as a strategic weapon and as a threat to global justice rather than hurf durf US politics
Ironicwarcriminal was probated until (Feb. 23, 2012 09:23:30) for this post!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3324918/King-penguin-faces-extinction-due-to-climate-change.html
The prospect that the King penguin will go extinct as a result of climate warming is rising inexorably, scientists say today…
Using a mathematical model, the scientists calculate that there will be a nine per cent decline in the adult penguin population for every 0.26ºC of sea surface warming, suggesting that this population is at high risk under current global warming conditions, which predict an average increase of 0.2ºC per decade for the next two decades.
They conclude that there is a “heavy extinction risk” given current global warming predictions of a 0.4ºC rise over two decades, which cuts the chance of survival from 95 per cent to 80 per cent.
RESEARCHERS say it is remarkable that a population of king penguins on the brink of extinction has not only recovered but expanded its colonies on remote Macquarie Island.
Whoops, science is wrong again. Probably got somebody some juicy research grants though.