Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 4
Discussion
Gandahar said:
powerstroke said:
Gandahar said:
Not read too much about Trumps first stab at altering the US political scene on climate change but some initial thoughts -
Having lost a congress vote on health care, which is a hard get, he has resorted back to executive orders which are a quick fix and easier but then can be more easily overturned, as per his and Obamas other executive orders. Rather than going for tax reform in the house which might be another bleeding battle it seems like a side adjourn to something where he can get a quick win and a photo opportunity to show the "can do, make the deal man" is back in the driving seat.
It's actually quite a good move; his staff and he must have talked a lot about this in the last 12 to 24 hours to right the ship. So good thinking and the Captain is in charge again. Problem is this is rather a knee jerk reaction to the loss on healthcare. Does it mean an iceberg ahead for them?
Sorry for using the word iceberg, something warmer and more rocky if you do want.
Sorry but this was a big part of his pitch for becoming president , he promised to deal with this nonsense on which he has made a good start ,Having lost a congress vote on health care, which is a hard get, he has resorted back to executive orders which are a quick fix and easier but then can be more easily overturned, as per his and Obamas other executive orders. Rather than going for tax reform in the house which might be another bleeding battle it seems like a side adjourn to something where he can get a quick win and a photo opportunity to show the "can do, make the deal man" is back in the driving seat.
It's actually quite a good move; his staff and he must have talked a lot about this in the last 12 to 24 hours to right the ship. So good thinking and the Captain is in charge again. Problem is this is rather a knee jerk reaction to the loss on healthcare. Does it mean an iceberg ahead for them?
Sorry for using the word iceberg, something warmer and more rocky if you do want.
like cutting the EPA's budget and getting some better people in ... the Green Blob are upset so looks like he doing a better job on this than
obarma care ...
"he promised to deal with this nonsense on which he has made a good start ,
like cutting the EPA's budget and getting some better people in "
Go on then, name names.
I'll name Scott Pruitt as mine
From today
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/pruitt-epa-c...
""There's a warming trend, the climate is changing, and human activity contributes to that change in some measure," Pruitt said on "Fox News Sunday"
Read my lips
and human activity contributes to that change in some measure
Trumps got far more important things to sort out than you lot with your tin foil hats it seems.
(1) the climate is changing;
(2) the change is detrimental; and
(3) human production of CO2 is a material cause of such detrimental change.
The guy is a lawyer and a politician. Not sure how much research he has done, peer reviewed (not that this counts for much these days) or otherwise.
Gandahar said:
Read my lips
and human activity contributes to that change in some measure
Appeal to authority is a logical fallacy - fail.and human activity contributes to that change in some measure
Authority is not an authority - double fail.
Nothing new: the "authority" has not located a visible causal human signal in any global climate data (as it doesn't exist) the statement about a human contribution is therefore one of speculative belief, hence yet another tedious, nil points effort.
On the politics side, moving away from politicians pretending to see invisible things, have some fake news
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/03/27/politics/trump-c...
.
Gandahar said:
powerstroke said:
Gandahar said:
Not read too much about Trumps first stab at altering the US political scene on climate change but some initial thoughts -
Having lost a congress vote on health care, which is a hard get, he has resorted back to executive orders which are a quick fix and easier but then can be more easily overturned, as per his and Obamas other executive orders. Rather than going for tax reform in the house which might be another bleeding battle it seems like a side adjourn to something where he can get a quick win and a photo opportunity to show the "can do, make the deal man" is back in the driving seat.
It's actually quite a good move; his staff and he must have talked a lot about this in the last 12 to 24 hours to right the ship. So good thinking and the Captain is in charge again. Problem is this is rather a knee jerk reaction to the loss on healthcare. Does it mean an iceberg ahead for them?
Sorry for using the word iceberg, something warmer and more rocky if you do want.
Sorry but this was a big part of his pitch for becoming president , he promised to deal with this nonsense on which he has made a good start ,Having lost a congress vote on health care, which is a hard get, he has resorted back to executive orders which are a quick fix and easier but then can be more easily overturned, as per his and Obamas other executive orders. Rather than going for tax reform in the house which might be another bleeding battle it seems like a side adjourn to something where he can get a quick win and a photo opportunity to show the "can do, make the deal man" is back in the driving seat.
It's actually quite a good move; his staff and he must have talked a lot about this in the last 12 to 24 hours to right the ship. So good thinking and the Captain is in charge again. Problem is this is rather a knee jerk reaction to the loss on healthcare. Does it mean an iceberg ahead for them?
Sorry for using the word iceberg, something warmer and more rocky if you do want.
like cutting the EPA's budget and getting some better people in ... the Green Blob are upset so looks like he doing a better job on this than
obarma care ...
"he promised to deal with this nonsense on which he has made a good start ,
like cutting the EPA's budget and getting some better people in "
Go on then, name names.
I'll name Scott Pruitt as mine
From today
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/pruitt-epa-c...
""There's a warming trend, the climate is changing, and human activity contributes to that change in some measure," Pruitt said on "Fox News Sunday"
Read my lips
and human activity contributes to that change in some measure
Trumps got far more important things to sort out than you lot with your tin foil hats it seems.
A transient and insignificant additional delay in cooling,
Not permanent dangerous warming.
No warming of human origin is visible in the data.
It is however placed in computer model outputs, by the modellers - this isn't data.
Most politicians and almost all believers don't understand the differences involved.
All covered n times already in this and other threads.
Not permanent dangerous warming.
No warming of human origin is visible in the data.
It is however placed in computer model outputs, by the modellers - this isn't data.
Most politicians and almost all believers don't understand the differences involved.
All covered n times already in this and other threads.
Todays CC Beeb CC Puff story:-
Sci-fi forest tracks carbon impact
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3947...
An industrial-scale experiment in a Staffordshire forest will help fill GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE about climate change.
The project has created an outdoor laboratory by encircling trees with 25m masts gushing high levels of carbon dioxide.
The site is surrounded by a 3m anti-climb fence, and silvery tubes snake along the forest floor in what looks like a sci-fi alien invasion.
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
That means full lab conditions: no food and drink in the woods, and no relieving yourself behind a tree.
Funny, I thought the science was settled! Never mind, another funded project to keep some employed
Sci-fi forest tracks carbon impact
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3947...
An industrial-scale experiment in a Staffordshire forest will help fill GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE about climate change.
The project has created an outdoor laboratory by encircling trees with 25m masts gushing high levels of carbon dioxide.
The site is surrounded by a 3m anti-climb fence, and silvery tubes snake along the forest floor in what looks like a sci-fi alien invasion.
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
That means full lab conditions: no food and drink in the woods, and no relieving yourself behind a tree.
Funny, I thought the science was settled! Never mind, another funded project to keep some employed
BBC said:
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
They'll be scratching their heads a lot, then guessing. IPCC soothsaying uses multiple storylines to get around the inevitable ignorance on this point.Carbon coupled models have had error bars for the tax gas level in the year 2100 at +/- 300 ppmv. The smaller error bar for 2050 won't be small.
turbobloke said:
BBC said:
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
They'll be scratching their heads a lot, then guessing. IPCC soothsaying uses multiple storylines to get around the inevitable ignorance on this point.Carbon coupled models have had error bars for the tax gas level in the year 2100 at +/- 300 ppmv. The smaller error bar for 2050 won't be small.
Shame he didn't ask the scientist how many trees the World needs to make a difference. Having been under estimating by a factor of ten was it?
In other news - the oak is out (here in the SE) before the ash - we're in for a splash. Hosepipe ban before end of May?
robinessex said:
Todays CC Beeb CC Puff story:-
Sci-fi forest tracks carbon impact
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3947...
An industrial-scale experiment in a Staffordshire forest will help fill GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE about climate change.
The project has created an outdoor laboratory by encircling trees with 25m masts gushing high levels of carbon dioxide.
The site is surrounded by a 3m anti-climb fence, and silvery tubes snake along the forest floor in what looks like a sci-fi alien invasion.
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
That means full lab conditions: no food and drink in the woods, and no relieving yourself behind a tree.
Funny, I thought the science was settled! Never mind, another funded project to keep some employed
"Some scientists argue that the tree fertilization effect offers a reason to be less pessimistic about the effects of increasing CO2.Sci-fi forest tracks carbon impact
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3947...
An industrial-scale experiment in a Staffordshire forest will help fill GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE about climate change.
The project has created an outdoor laboratory by encircling trees with 25m masts gushing high levels of carbon dioxide.
The site is surrounded by a 3m anti-climb fence, and silvery tubes snake along the forest floor in what looks like a sci-fi alien invasion.
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
That means full lab conditions: no food and drink in the woods, and no relieving yourself behind a tree.
Funny, I thought the science was settled! Never mind, another funded project to keep some employed
But Professor Mackenzie disagreed: "Not at all, not at all. The land is providing us with a fantastic free service by taking up carbon, and there are uncertainties about how much carbon is going into the land… but there is no chance that will offset hazardous climate change."
And that is what is wrong with Climate Scientrickery today - The head scientist has already made up his f
king mind 
The Don of Croy said:
turbobloke said:
BBC said:
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
They'll be scratching their heads a lot, then guessing. IPCC soothsaying uses multiple storylines to get around the inevitable ignorance on this point.Carbon coupled models have had error bars for the tax gas level in the year 2100 at +/- 300 ppmv. The smaller error bar for 2050 won't be small.
Shame he didn't ask the scientist how many trees the World needs to make a difference. Having been under estimating by a factor of ten was it?
Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere "excessive" and that was from a scientist?!
The level is low, not high. Scraping the barrel never soiunded so bad. Currently carbon dioxide at 400ppmv is still at starvation levels for photosynthesising organisms and that includes trees.
Those are the trees that were previously thought to number 400 billion but are now counted at 3 trillion and mostly of the right type
with roots and a trunk plus branches and leaves. http://www.naturalnews.com/039720_carbon_dioxide_m...
turbobloke said:
Also on naturalnews.com this week:Vaccines are harmful
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-the-insane-v...
Pharmaceutical companies - and not anti-vax morons - could be behind disease outbreaks
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-vaccine-indu...
GMO's are evil
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-gmo-rice-tra...
Yep, climate change denial sits right in amongst all the other anti-science b
ks that soils the internet.dickymint said:
robinessex said:
Todays CC Beeb CC Puff story:-
Sci-fi forest tracks carbon impact
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3947...
An industrial-scale experiment in a Staffordshire forest will help fill GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE about climate change.
The project has created an outdoor laboratory by encircling trees with 25m masts gushing high levels of carbon dioxide.
The site is surrounded by a 3m anti-climb fence, and silvery tubes snake along the forest floor in what looks like a sci-fi alien invasion.
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
That means full lab conditions: no food and drink in the woods, and no relieving yourself behind a tree.
Funny, I thought the science was settled! Never mind, another funded project to keep some employed
"Some scientists argue that the tree fertilization effect offers a reason to be less pessimistic about the effects of increasing CO2.Sci-fi forest tracks carbon impact
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3947...
An industrial-scale experiment in a Staffordshire forest will help fill GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE about climate change.
The project has created an outdoor laboratory by encircling trees with 25m masts gushing high levels of carbon dioxide.
The site is surrounded by a 3m anti-climb fence, and silvery tubes snake along the forest floor in what looks like a sci-fi alien invasion.
The scientists behind the experiment want to find how forests will respond to the levels of carbon dioxide expected in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st Century.
That means full lab conditions: no food and drink in the woods, and no relieving yourself behind a tree.
Funny, I thought the science was settled! Never mind, another funded project to keep some employed
But Professor Mackenzie disagreed: "Not at all, not at all. The land is providing us with a fantastic free service by taking up carbon, and there are uncertainties about how much carbon is going into the land… but there is no chance that will offset hazardous climate change."
And that is what is wrong with Climate Scientrickery today - The head scientist has already made up his f
king mind I wonder if they are also "correcting" for the effects of the entire site being surrounds by a 3 meter wall and filled with metal pipes when they look at the results for influences other than CO2 fertilization?
One would hope that they are of course - they are scientists after all. But how are they doing it and how do they know their adjustments are appropriate at the specific location and with the chosen flora and fauna?
durbster said:
turbobloke said:
Also on naturalnews.com this week:Vaccines are harmful
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-the-insane-v...
Pharmaceutical companies - and not anti-vax morons - could be behind disease outbreaks
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-vaccine-indu...
GMO's are evil
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-gmo-rice-tra...
Yep, climate change denial sits right in amongst all the other anti-science b
ks that soils the internet."How Vaccines Can SPREAD Disease"
"Vaccines VIOLATE WOMEN!"
Seems like standard turbo fare.
durbster said:
turbobloke said:
Also on naturalnews.com this week:Vaccines are harmful
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-the-insane-v...
Pharmaceutical companies - and not anti-vax morons - could be behind disease outbreaks
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-vaccine-indu...
GMO's are evil
http://www.naturalnews.com/2017-04-02-gmo-rice-tra...
Yep, climate change denial sits right in amongst all the other anti-science b
ks that soils the internet.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3413...
Note the comments that implies the error bars, if graphed, would probably look interesting.
Can't comment on the original report as the link seems to be broken.
durbster said:
Shooting the messenger is a subdivision of the ad hominem logical fallacy.Your use of it to show absolutely nothing of relevance to the current starvation levels of carbon dioxide (regarding photosynthesising organisms) is as predictable as it is a waste of pixels. Reliance on the use of this type of nonsense ought to tell the user something.
Not sure why the link fizzled out.
For an alternative source covering low carbon dioxide levels as per now - and lower still during glacial periods - I have something from Gerhart and Ward (Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Kansas) on file but hard copy and no current link, it may well be searchable for keen believers to have another shot at these messengers, We're still hovering around starvation levels of tax gas and recent increases have had several beneficial effects.
There's still no sign of any visible causal human signal from tax gas to save the AGW bacon however.
turbobloke said:
Shooting the messenger is a subdivision of the ad hominem logical fallacy.
Your use of it to show absolutely nothing of relevance to the current starvation levels of carbon dioxide (regarding photosynthesising organisms) is as predictable as it is a waste of pixels. Reliance on the use of this type of nonsense ought to tell the user something.
Not sure why the link fizzled out.
For an alternative source covering low carbon dioxide levels as per now - and lower still during glacial periods - I have something from Gerhart and Ward (Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Kansas) on file but hard copy and no current link, it may well be searchable for keen believers to have another shot at these messengers, We're still hovering around starvation levels of tax gas and recent increases have had several beneficial effects.
There's still no sign of any visible causal human signal from tax gas to save the AGW bacon however.
After all that waffle, you've used an idiotic site to make your point. You are rightly ridiculed for it. Your use of it to show absolutely nothing of relevance to the current starvation levels of carbon dioxide (regarding photosynthesising organisms) is as predictable as it is a waste of pixels. Reliance on the use of this type of nonsense ought to tell the user something.
Not sure why the link fizzled out.
For an alternative source covering low carbon dioxide levels as per now - and lower still during glacial periods - I have something from Gerhart and Ward (Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Kansas) on file but hard copy and no current link, it may well be searchable for keen believers to have another shot at these messengers, We're still hovering around starvation levels of tax gas and recent increases have had several beneficial effects.
There's still no sign of any visible causal human signal from tax gas to save the AGW bacon however.
Gandahar said:
Is there something called storage? Like when you charge up your phone overnight?
Major EU grant for Gaelectric Islandmagee cave project - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-3947...jjlynn27 said:
turbobloke said:
Shooting the messenger is a subdivision of the ad hominem logical fallacy.
Your use of it to show absolutely nothing of relevance to the current starvation levels of carbon dioxide (regarding photosynthesising organisms) is as predictable as it is a waste of pixels. Reliance on the use of this type of nonsense ought to tell the user something.
Not sure why the link fizzled out.
For an alternative source covering low carbon dioxide levels as per now - and lower still during glacial periods - I have something from Gerhart and Ward (Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Kansas) on file but hard copy and no current link, it may well be searchable for keen believers to have another shot at these messengers, We're still hovering around starvation levels of tax gas and recent increases have had several beneficial effects.
There's still no sign of any visible causal human signal from tax gas to save the AGW bacon however.
After all that waffle, you've used an idiotic site to make your point. You are rightly ridiculed for it. Your use of it to show absolutely nothing of relevance to the current starvation levels of carbon dioxide (regarding photosynthesising organisms) is as predictable as it is a waste of pixels. Reliance on the use of this type of nonsense ought to tell the user something.
Not sure why the link fizzled out.
For an alternative source covering low carbon dioxide levels as per now - and lower still during glacial periods - I have something from Gerhart and Ward (Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Kansas) on file but hard copy and no current link, it may well be searchable for keen believers to have another shot at these messengers, We're still hovering around starvation levels of tax gas and recent increases have had several beneficial effects.
There's still no sign of any visible causal human signal from tax gas to save the AGW bacon however.
Is that a political opinion?
If you take the three articles durbster selected and presented, presumably, as being belief generated rather science based ..
The Golden RIce story seems to be based on a report by an academic. If not based on then presents much the same message.
https://phys.org/news/2016-06-genetically-golden-r...
The story about vaccines sound about as plausible as any other story, positive or negative to one's point if view whatever it might be, that appears in print in any health related and newspaper or magazine. Is it's credibility, whatever we think of personally, more or less acceptable to the massed ranks of the population than the opinions of, say, Prince Charles?
Is mass vaccination the right way to go for everyone with no doubts at all? Should it be mandated? If so, why? This is, after all, a political question where one can invert the "if one person dies" mantra from being a case for perceived social good to something being a very low risk harm for someone. But is it really as low risk as people think for everyone?
Are Pharma companies really totally safe operations that have only people's health in mind?
I would certainly like to think so but then there are frequent situations where investigation and courts decide they are not, whether thorugh poor execution of quality standards or less than complete science.
A few years back large number of blind trials were stopped early when drugs on which future hopes were pinned were suddenly found to have a such a dramatic positive result on those receiving it that it was felt potentially immoral to not offer the control groups the same treatments.
Well, that's true enough but also implies that the tests as developed would never be complete. They might be OK or they might have produced long term concerns. Who carries the can when claims are made 10 or 15 years down the track?
My grandson recently had the triple vaccine given at around a year old. He was very noticeably out of sorts for some weeks. The little girl who was in line before him ended up at A&E. Maybe her parents were simply over worried by rumours of possible problems ... but since nothing is done to pre-assess the children - or anyone else for that matter - given these sorts of mass treatments there certainly seems to be room for differences in responses on an individual basis and the related increased risk individual by individual for some individuals, to creep in to proceedings.
The consensus seems to be that that such potentail risks can be ignored, if they exist, because of the the supposedly greater good for all.
Of course that is a political decision and as such is not necessarily aligned with other political decisions about risk.
Across the board we seem to lack any political will for consistency in such matters,
When you consider what is presented as being at stake politically this is hardly a surprise.
The only puzzle seems to be that people, given two very similar politically motivated policy decisions with significantly different outcomes and expectations, feel comfortable support one but not the other. In fact there is no reason to support either.
Never take anything at face value.
Never take anything for granted.
Both no matter what the course might be one's natural (no pun intended) inclination.
LongQ said:
Snip
I'm with TB on the impact of CO2 on the climate, not on the fence, waiting to be convinced, I fully share his conviction that it is a complete nonsense.That said Natural News was a s
tty link to make, if there was an alternative I'd have definitely gone for that.But what's worse is your defence of Natural News - have you even read it FFS?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff