Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)
Discussion
gadgetmac said:
El stovey said:
gadgetmac said:
“He has made many statements before Congress and elsewhere that are at odds with the scientific evidence because of his personal value system. He is not an appropriate appointee for this advisory panel, unfortunately,” said Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research who was one of Christy’s graduate school supervisors.
That’s exactly what any supervisors would say about the sceptic ‘academics’ on this thread. People letting their personal value system (politics) cloud any judgement they might have on the subject.That’s the politics of climate change.
it’s what drives TB.People like deeps have proudly admitted TB and wattsupwiththat have given him his world view and now follow him loyally around like little pet dogs.
It’s fascinating to watch.
El stovey said:
gadgetmac said:
El stovey said:
gadgetmac said:
“He has made many statements before Congress and elsewhere that are at odds with the scientific evidence because of his personal value system. He is not an appropriate appointee for this advisory panel, unfortunately,” said Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research who was one of Christy’s graduate school supervisors.
That’s exactly what any supervisors would say about the sceptic ‘academics’ on this thread. People letting their personal value system (politics) cloud any judgement they might have on the subject.That’s the politics of climate change.
it’s what drives TB.People like deeps have proudly admitted TB and wattsupwiththat have given him his world view and now follow him loyally around like little pet dogs.
It’s fascinating to watch.
People who’s belief in their own innate abilities allows them to think they have superior knowledge and insight into a subject over those of qualified experts-in-the-field. Like when your taxi driver tells you where cancer surgeons are going wrong because his mum’s friends daughter died just 10 days after her operation.
As you say though, it is in its own way, intriguing.
Atomic12C said:
The failure of the models that were used when MMGW was the political tool to create policy back in the early 2000's.
Every model since the 1970s predicted a warming trend at around the rate we've observed given the CO2 increase, so this is obviously wrong.Atomic12C said:
The un-predicted/unwanted 'pause in rising temps'.
There have been several phases in the temperature record where the rate of change slows or increases, as anyone would expect from a complex system with a lot of variables. The trend, however, is consistently upward. Temperatures now are higher than they were in the 1990s.Atomic12C said:
The 'settled' science claim - when brand new warmist claims of the sea eating up all the warming.
This is meaningless.Atomic12C said:
The fact that Al Gore's claim of "millions will die by the year 2012"? was it? - because cities would be under water.
I presume this is made up? Even so, Al Gore is more of a TV personality than a scientist, so his claims should be taken with that in mind.Atomic12C said:
The fact that observed sea level rise and atmospheric temps are within a generalised region of natural variance.
Being inside "natural variance" is irrelevant. Sea levels have risen as expected given the melting ice and higher temperatures. We know ice has melted and temperatures have risen, so what's your point here? Are you disputing the theories of water displacement and thermal expansion? 
Atomic12C said:
The fact that published data seems to have undergone an amount of manipulation to hide the warm periods of the past and increase the warming trends of the present.
You say, "seems to have," which is intended to make it sound underhand and like it was done secretly. The fact is, the temperature record has been adjusted and the data before and after was and still is in the public domain, and the reasoning for adjustments was always explained. Trying to paint this as some great conspiracy theory that was uncovered by the intrepid investigators at WUWT is laughable. It's all done in plain view and explained at every stage.
Atomic12C said:
The media reporting that sea ice melt would increase sea levels.
The media pretty much get all science wrong, all the time. Irrelevant.Atomic12C said:
The 97% consensus - widely discredited as nothing more than a political activism exercise of meaningless numbers.
Only widely discredited inside an echo chamber. Given the clear paucity of scientific voices speaking out, it's clearly overwhelmingly accepted (unless you believe they're too frightened to do so 
). This is so simple to prove: if AGW was widely disputed, the deniers would not be wholly reliant on a microscopic pool of sources.Atomic12C said:
Climate gate - The CRU and their 'data math tricks' to make more or less any input of large data to form a hockey stick graph.
This whole supposed scandal was based on a handful of sentences plucked out of context out of hundreds of emails. It was investigated several times and nothing came of it. None of the accusations stood up to basic scrutiny, and for there to be a problem you would be implicating every other science organisation producing the same results which, again, puts this into the barmy conspiracy theory category.Atomic12C said:
The polar bears - no mention that human hunting of seals was an issue - bear population now stronger than ever.
There is nowhere near enough data on polar bears to make this claim.Atomic12C said:
etc. etc. etc. etc.
You're not fooling anyone here because that's actually pretty much it isn't it. This substance-free list is the whole damning case! 
gadgetmac said:
Agreed. The Netflix documentary on the Flat Earth Society was a similar study into the minds of cultists who live on the fringes of scientific belief. The Psychologists on the documentary likened the flat earthers mental issue (Dunning-Kruger effect) with those of other similar beliefs like climate change denial.
People who’s belief in their own innate abilities allows them to think they have superior knowledge and insight into a subject over those of qualified experts-in-the-field. Like when your taxi driver tells you where cancer surgeons are going wrong because his mum’s friends daughter died just 10 days after her operation.
As you say though, it is in its own way, intriguing.
Cultists on the fringes is completely accurate. They’re always a similar type. People who’s belief in their own innate abilities allows them to think they have superior knowledge and insight into a subject over those of qualified experts-in-the-field. Like when your taxi driver tells you where cancer surgeons are going wrong because his mum’s friends daughter died just 10 days after her operation.
As you say though, it is in its own way, intriguing.
Interesting that a few of the key posters are academics and have been teachers. Perhaps there's an issue with holding these politically motivated beliefs and then having young easily influenced people listening to you and not having this nonsense challenged, that empowers this kind of self delusion.
In the real world (outside academia) and in most work places, they would likely have managers and coworkers etc pointing out their nonsense or sacking them or simply telling them to shut up.
gadgetmac said:
I salute you for bothering sir.
Whenever anyone bothers to check. These papers and facts and lists never stack up. They just repost the same click and paste a few months later from the same websites though.
It doesn’t matter though because the cultists have seen a list and it’s reinforced their views and made their echo chamber a little more robust.
El stovey said:
gadgetmac said:
I salute you for bothering sir.
Whenever anyone bothers to check. These papers and facts and lists never stack up. They just repost the same click and paste a few months later from the same websites though.
It doesn’t matter though because the cultists have seen a list and it’s reinforced their views and made their echo chamber a little more robust.
His last one was written by Marc Morano who quotes John Christy. I got a double-whammy right there
As durbster says above they are totally reliant on a small pool of sources.
gadgetmac said:
El stovey said:
gadgetmac said:
El stovey said:
gadgetmac said:
“He has made many statements before Congress and elsewhere that are at odds with the scientific evidence because of his personal value system. He is not an appropriate appointee for this advisory panel, unfortunately,” said Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research who was one of Christy’s graduate school supervisors.
That’s exactly what any supervisors would say about the sceptic ‘academics’ on this thread. People letting their personal value system (politics) cloud any judgement they might have on the subject.That’s the politics of climate change.
it’s what drives TB.People like deeps have proudly admitted TB and wattsupwiththat have given him his world view and now follow him loyally around like little pet dogs.
It’s fascinating to watch.
zygalski said:
durbster said:
gadgetmac said:
I salute you for bothering sir.
I've buggered my knee so am sofa-bound and have to kill time somehow We must set an example, after all
Diderot said:
gadgetmac said:
El stovey said:
gadgetmac said:
El stovey said:
gadgetmac said:
“He has made many statements before Congress and elsewhere that are at odds with the scientific evidence because of his personal value system. He is not an appropriate appointee for this advisory panel, unfortunately,” said Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished senior scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research who was one of Christy’s graduate school supervisors.
That’s exactly what any supervisors would say about the sceptic ‘academics’ on this thread. People letting their personal value system (politics) cloud any judgement they might have on the subject.That’s the politics of climate change.
it’s what drives TB.People like deeps have proudly admitted TB and wattsupwiththat have given him his world view and now follow him loyally around like little pet dogs.
It’s fascinating to watch.
Got that Scientific Intitute that agrees with you yet Fakey?
zygalski said:
durbster said:
gadgetmac said:
I salute you for bothering sir.
I've buggered my knee so am sofa-bound and have to kill time somehow We must set an example, after all
Sir David Attenborough to present climate change documentary
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-4766...
Sir David Attenborough is to present an "urgent" new documentary about climate change for BBC One.
The one-off film will focus on the potential threats to our planet and the possible solutions.
The broadcaster says "conditions have changed far faster" than he ever imagined when he first started talking about the environment 20 years ago.
The documentary will show footage showing the impact global warming has already had.
It will also feature interviews with climatologists and meteorologists to explore the science behind recent extreme weather conditions, including the California wildfires in November 2018.
Last December, Sir David called climate change "humanity's greatest threat in thousands of years" at the opening ceremony of the United Nations climate change conference.
He said it could lead to the collapse of civilisations and the extinction of "much of the natural world".......continues
Stand by for serious sound voice talking complete b
ks. Wonder if he'll mention the California fires were started by Humans or Electrical equipment failures?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-4766...
Sir David Attenborough is to present an "urgent" new documentary about climate change for BBC One.
The one-off film will focus on the potential threats to our planet and the possible solutions.
The broadcaster says "conditions have changed far faster" than he ever imagined when he first started talking about the environment 20 years ago.
The documentary will show footage showing the impact global warming has already had.
It will also feature interviews with climatologists and meteorologists to explore the science behind recent extreme weather conditions, including the California wildfires in November 2018.
Last December, Sir David called climate change "humanity's greatest threat in thousands of years" at the opening ceremony of the United Nations climate change conference.
He said it could lead to the collapse of civilisations and the extinction of "much of the natural world".......continues
Stand by for serious sound voice talking complete b
ks. Wonder if he'll mention the California fires were started by Humans or Electrical equipment failures? DibblyDobbler said:
I'm interested in the link between climate change and extreme weather events - droughts, floods, wildfires, hurricanes etc - what's the view on the science behind this?
(sorry I know it's the politics thread but they're a bit scary on the science thread!)
There isn't one. All the supposed links are guessing or crystal ball gazing.(sorry I know it's the politics thread but they're a bit scary on the science thread!)
DibblyDobbler said:
I'm interested in the link between climate change and extreme weather events - droughts, floods, wildfires, hurricanes etc - what's the view on the science behind this?
(sorry I know it's the politics thread but they're a bit scary on the science thread!)
They’re only scary if you don’t like hearing the truth.(sorry I know it's the politics thread but they're a bit scary on the science thread!)
gadgetmac said:
DibblyDobbler said:
I'm interested in the link between climate change and extreme weather events - droughts, floods, wildfires, hurricanes etc - what's the view on the science behind this?
(sorry I know it's the politics thread but they're a bit scary on the science thread!)
They’re only scary if you don’t like hearing the truth.(sorry I know it's the politics thread but they're a bit scary on the science thread!)
robinessex said:
gadgetmac said:
DibblyDobbler said:
I'm interested in the link between climate change and extreme weather events - droughts, floods, wildfires, hurricanes etc - what's the view on the science behind this?
(sorry I know it's the politics thread but they're a bit scary on the science thread!)
They’re only scary if you don’t like hearing the truth.(sorry I know it's the politics thread but they're a bit scary on the science thread!)
Dunning-Kruger 101
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff