Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puppet Boy
:lol If having you meltdown and try your hardest to coverup your admission makes me your puppet then it is what it is.
It was about 2 weeks after I emailed your admission that you went back and edited all that shit and tried to smear me. What I want to know is what precipitated that.
That made me think that I should email your coworkers, GWPC, WUWT, Koch Industries etc with your admission. I am after all your puppet and you want me to do what I have been doing.
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
By leaving a giant carbon footprint? Hell, I can do that.
Why do you need to assemble 11,000 people to talk about climate? I'm just imagining all the emissions it took to get them there and then there's the problems pointed out by the article.
But, back to technology. Do all 11,000 people have time at the microphone? Because, there are online services that will broadcast seminars for that many people and allow multiple speakers to address the gathered crowd.
Because they are interested in forming international consensus and common ground amongst climate science. What an asinine question considering the discussion we have been having. If you are going to be coy and intentionally obtuse, don't be so blatant.
Back to technology, it's your argument. If you don't know the answers to those questions that just goes to show how ill informed on the issue you are and nothing else.
12-09-2014
FuzzyLumpkins
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
:lol You keep telling yourself that is my emotional disposition if it makes you feel better.
Interesting there is no contact information for Karl, Doug, Mike, and Snufflupagus. Emails sent to the others. Curious how you will react to the feedback this time.
12-09-2014
Poptech
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puppet Boy
:lol You keep telling yourself that is my emotional disposition if it makes you feel better.
Interesting there is no contact information for Karl, Doug, Mike, and Snufflupagus. Emails sent to the others. Curious how you will react to the feedback this time.
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
I never really thought much about the debate of how much man made CO2 remains in the atmosphere, but I just had an epiphany... Something I never heard mentioned before.
I don't think anyone disagree that carbon 13 level percentages have decreased in atmospheric CO2 If we use Böhm et. al 2002, the levels have changed from about 0.495% to 0.38% (extrapolated) during the assessment timeframe of the AR4. However, 278 ppm in 1750 means 1,376 ppb was CO2 with 13C and it rose to 1,440 in 2005. Since we have a net increase in CO2, we do with 13C as well. Since forcing is on a log curve, and if we assess the RE (radiative efficiency) separately, we get 0.00303 for CO2 with 13C and 0.0000151 for CO2 with 12C for the 1750 levels and 0.0029 for CO2 with 13C and 0.0000111 for CO2 with 12C for the 2005 levels. What this amounts to, if we take the stated 1.66 W/m^2 warming is that 0.21 W/m^2 of it was from CO2 with 13C and 1.45 W/m^2 from CO2 with 12C, or if the 1.66 W/m^2 is calculated for just the CO2 with 12C, then we can add another 0.24 W/m^2 for 13C increases.
Now what this means, can be important. I haven't looked at other studies, only this one for the values. However, if the values are wrong, and 13C is diminishing to less less than previously thought, and if the 1.66 W/m^2 is based only on CO2 with 12C, the individual forcing of CO2 made with 13C could possible cool the atmosphere more than the increasing 12C warms it. For example, since the RE of 13C is 200 times greater than the RE of 12C, if the atmospherics percentages of 13C actually dropped from about 0.5%, in half, to about 0.25%, then all the increased CO2 would provide a net cooling of about 0.2 W/m^2. This is because 13C would actually drop to 948 ppb, and it's radiative efficiency is so much higher.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think the 13C percentages have halved, or close, but this is food for thought.
What do you guys think, or do you have different 13C values in mind?
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
But when one side of an argument tries to stifle debate by claiming the science is settled, they should expect to have it thrown in their face every time it turns out it isn't, in fact, settled.
The bulk of the evidence, according to the experts that study it for a living is that we are affecting our atmosphere and changing our climate, just as the bulk of the evidence according to the experts, supports the theory of evolution, or the theory that we actually put men on the moon.
What I object to, is dishonesty and misrepresentation, which is rife in the denier movement.
I will act to stifle dishonesty and misrepresentation when I see it, no matter what type of quackery is being pushed.
Honest skepticism and debate is always welcome, and any good scientist should welcome the same.
12-10-2014
RandomGuy
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
So all the people saying there is ]evidence of potential catastrophic effects of man-made climate change ]are lying? How do you account for them in your milieu? Deliberately lying conspiracy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptech
No valid evidence exists.
Strawman argument.
It isn't a strawman to ask clarifying question, in fact quite the opposite.
To imply that a clarifying question asked in good faith is a strawman logical fallacy is dishonest.
So I will ask again, as I am attempting to merely understand the basis on which you claim there is no valid evidence.
There are scientists and organizations of scientists claiming there is evidence of potentially catastrophic damage caused by the rapid rise in atmospheric green house gases. I can provide links if you wish.
Are these scientists lying about the evidence?
12-10-2014
DarrinS
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuzzyLumpkins
Ahh, I see your 'Impact of Popular Technology" list. I have a lot more addresses to track down and emails to send.
Wow. You're a piece of shit!
12-10-2014
RandomGuy
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptech
Considering you have yet to present a definition from an actual dictionary nothing can be considered "dueling". It has been well established you resort to juvenile personal attacks anytime you cannot debate someone, so there is no need for you to further demonstrate this. Last I checked you do not define the context of the words people use here. And, yes, it is quite clear my points and positions are more supported by logic and facts - this has been well established here.
Interesting.
You rather deliberately left out the last line of my post in your quote. I would quantify that as misleading as well.
I provide some commonly accepted definitions of specialized terms. These are used in the context of a specialized consideration of the overall rationality of arguments, something dictionaries, or juveniles for that matter, don't generally tend to do. I don't really care if you find this specialized usage inconvenient, and have to rely on the crutch of online searches to substitute for genuine understanding of the principles and concepts needed for useful metacognition.
I will ask this question again, since you chose to ignore it:
Quote:
Do you think flawed reasoning is a valid way to construct an accurate model of the universe?
It is a simple yes or no question.
12-10-2014
RandomGuy
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yonivore
By leaving a giant carbon footprint? Hell, I can do that.
Why do you need to assemble 11,000 people to talk about climate? I'm just imagining all the emissions it took to get them there and then there's the problems pointed out by the article.
But, back to technology. Do all 11,000 people have time at the microphone? Because, there are online services that will broadcast seminars for that many people and allow multiple speakers to address the gathered crowd.
As an auditor who relies on such technology, I will tell you that the informal discussions and dissemination of information that happens in after-hours discussions at such seminars can be quite valuable.
As an accountant, I can tell you that incurring a small cost, to avoid a much larger cost, all things equal, is an optimal solution for any company or business.
Your suggestion, then, is another bit of flawed reasoning.
You take it as evidence that they don't believe in the science. This interpretation would require much more evidence that your insinuation.
Do you have better evidence, such as direct statements on the part of the partipants?
12-10-2014
boutons_deux
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Mysterious Seafloor Methane Begins to Melt Off Washington Coast
Warming of the Pacific Ocean off Washington state could destabilize methane deposits on the seafloor and trigger a release of the greenhouse gas to the atmosphere,
Methane is a significant greenhouse gas, with a global warming potential 86 times as potent as CO2 on a 20-year time scale. Some scientists worry that a significant release from the oceans could exacerbate climate change.
"Methane hydrates are a very large and fragile reservoir of carbon that can be released if temperatures change," Evan Soloman, a researcher at the University of Washington, said in a statement. "I was skeptical at first, but when we looked at the amounts, it's significant." http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...hington-coast/
So where is BigOil when they could do some good? :lol
12-10-2014
RandomGuy
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptech
Already addressed, and a strawman of wonderingminds video.
I don't think you can talk about this subject honestly, just like Cosmored cannot talk about the moon landings.
12-10-2014
Wild Cobra
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
Mysterious Seafloor Methane Begins to Melt Off Washington Coast
Warming of the Pacific Ocean off Washington state could destabilize methane deposits on the seafloor and trigger a release of the greenhouse gas to the atmosphere,
Methane is a significant greenhouse gas, with a global warming potential 86 times as potent as CO2 on a 20-year time scale. Some scientists worry that a significant release from the oceans could exacerbate climate change.
"Methane hydrates are a very large and fragile reservoir of carbon that can be released if temperatures change," Evan Soloman, a researcher at the University of Washington, said in a statement. "I was skeptical at first, but when we looked at the amounts, it's significant." http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...hington-coast/
So where is BigOil when they could do some good? :lol
Alarmnism at it's finest.
Tell us. How much methane do you think might be released?
If the methane in the atmosphere doubles, is the new GWP(20) still 86 times CO2?
12-10-2014
Poptech
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
So I will ask again, as I am attempting to merely understand the basis on which you claim there is no valid evidence.
There are scientists and organizations of scientists claiming there is evidence of potentially catastrophic damage caused by the rapid rise in atmospheric green house gases. I can provide links if you wish.
Are these scientists lying about the evidence?
Loaded Question.
12-10-2014
Poptech
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrinS
Wow. You're a piece of shit!
No he is just a brain dead stoner that still does not realize how bad he has been trolled. His actions are merely confirmation of how scared he is off me. Puppet boy is doing free promotions for me and does not even realize it.
12-10-2014
Poptech
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
Interesting.
You rather deliberately left out the last line of my post in your quote. I would quantify that as misleading as well.
I only quote what I respond to not your idiotic off-topic and loaded questions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
I provide some commonly accepted definitions of specialized terms. These are used in the context of a specialized consideration of the overall rationality of arguments, something dictionaries, or juveniles for that matter, don't generally tend to do. I don't really care if you find this specialized usage inconvenient, and have to rely on the crutch of online searches to substitute for genuine understanding of the principles and concepts needed for useful metacognition.
More incoherence, you do not define the meaning of words that is what dictionaries are for. Failure to provide a proper definition using a dictionary means you have no interest in honest communication and instead are intent on misleading those who you communicate with. And I am ignoring your idiotic off-topic and loaded questions.
12-10-2014
Poptech
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomGuy
Already addressed, and a strawman of wonderingminds video.
No you haven't and no it is not, this absolutely destroys your idiotic wonderingmind video.
12-10-2014
Th'Pusher
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptech
Loaded Question.
:lol you're not adding any value here. You're just emotionally spamming the thread with tired memes and your hyper defensive defensive about your "work". Add some value or go back to the forums where you have intellectual discussions about the fact that AGW doesn't pose any threat to civilization. Your non responses have truly become tiresome...
12-10-2014
Poptech
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Th'Pusher
:lol you're not adding any value here. You're just emotionally spamming the thread with tired memes and your hyper defensive defensive about your "work". Add some value or go back to the forums where you have intellectual discussions about the fact that AGW doesn't pose any threat to civilization. Your non responses have truly become tiresome...
Actually I corrected a bunch of misinformation about my work which is the only reason I am here. I have no interest in having a serious debate with brain-dead stoners.
12-10-2014
Th'Pusher
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptech
Actually I corrected a bunch of misinformation about my work which is the only reason I am here. I have no interest in having a serious debate with brain-dead stoners.
Great. Can you stop spamming the thread with tired childish memes and try and not be so hypersensitive and emotional when someone criticizes your "work"?
12-10-2014
Poptech
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Th'Pusher
Great. Can you stop spamming the thread with tired childish memes and try and not be so hypersensitive and emotional when someone criticizes your "work"?
Again another dishonest loaded question.
12-10-2014
Th'Pusher
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poptech
Again another dishonest loaded question.
Explain to me how that question was dishonest. Have you not been spamming the thread with childish memes? I see three on this page alone. You've absolutely been hypersensitive and emotional when your "work" has been criticized. I think any objective reader would agree to that.
:lol Libelous
12-10-2014
Poptech
Re: Why I think Climate Change Denial is little more than pseudoscience. - Part 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Th'Pusher
Explain to me how that question was dishonest. Have you not been spamming the thread with childish memes?
Still a dishonest loaded question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Th'Pusher
I see three on this page alone. You've absolutely been hypersensitive and emotional when your "work" has been criticized.
