Global Warming - Moved

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6,013
Credit: 85,955,825
RAC: 233,771

RE: I wonder if you are

Message 93063 in response to message 93061

Quote:

I wonder if you are using the same logic in you daily life?

" All the engineers except one say that with a probability of 97% the bridge will collapse and kill you if you try to drive on it. Hmmm..... Naaa! they are just a fundamentalist thinking group I think that the logic say that I should drive over it"

I guess that we have a different view of which one who belongs to the fundamentalist group guys ;)


Ah, probability :-)
Like we've launched a space shuttle 97 times with a perfect record, so the 98th will be fine? ( listen to the engineers who tested the O-rings )
Like the Tacoma Narrows bridge? ( discovery of wind induced resonance )
Like Apollo One? ( complex systems can surprise )
A poll of those boarding the Titanic? ( icebergs can be bigger than you think )

May I invoke Einstein? A rank outsider in 1905, considered a failure by nearly all who assessed him academically?

Naw ... what I'm getting at is that people in groups behave quite differently than when alone ( in both good and bad ways ). Yeah, I do use that everyday. :-)

It doesn't have to be decided by group partitioning, but if you do then account for group effects ..... simpler to go to the data.

Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter. Blaise Pascal

Simplex0
Simplex0
Joined: 1 Sep 05
Posts: 152
Credit: 964,726
RAC: 0

In science there is no such

In science there is no such thing as absolute proof or evidence, except for the field of math maybe :), it can only deliver an answer or estimation based on the knowledge of today.

But according to information of today everything points to that an overwhelmingly large group of scientists believes that a. There is an ongoing global warming and b. that is mainly caused by human activity.

Is there a problem with that, can it be at least halted, should we bather?
I believe so. According to what I have found the main impact when it comes to life threatening effects will occur amongst pore people, mainly in the continent of Africa but also in the land of USA, read what scientific american writes in this issue.

As I am not an expert in this, fare from it, I logically must base my taking on what the people with the best knowledge and reputation have to say and it this case and I do just that.

@ Bikeman as i remember regarding volcano's they should have a primary cooling effect on the climate due to an aerosol effect that is blocking the sunlight.

Keep on crunching guy's but with as little carbon fule based electricity as possible :)

I must also say that Einstein@home and you guys are crown in the BOINC comunity
when it comes to explain and information creds to you all Mike, Bikeman, Chipper Q and a lot of others that I just cant remember right now.


Simplex0
Simplex0
Joined: 1 Sep 05
Posts: 152
Credit: 964,726
RAC: 0

RE: ***********************

Message 93065 in response to message 93047

Quote:

****************************************************************************

Moved from Crunchers Corner - as there is likely an interest in continuing this topic. Keep it civil! :-)

Cheers, Mike.

****************************************************************************

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The good thing is that this group are shrinking faster then the polar ice;)

Err, which pole is that? ;-)

Cheers, Mike.

It stars with an 'N' ;)

Isn't the 'S' one shrinking too?


No, it's getting bigger. And that's the rub in the debate on climate/anthropogenic change/warming etc. .

No it is not, It is clearly understandable.
The explanaion is that the North pole ice is located in the wather while
the South pole ice is on land. Put ice in a bowl with wather an put it
in the freeze and just ask your self what temperature will the ice have as long all of the wather is not frosen, as it is in arctis.

If you put the ice on a plate and put it in the freeze it will cool down fast
and teach the temp. of the freezer, just as in Antactis.

If you take the ice- plate and bowl out after the same amonth of time
the ice in the bowl will have higher temperature than the ice on the plate
as long there is still free floating wather in the bowl.

Also. After you have take the ice- plate and bowl out The vapour in the air will condence much faster\more on the ice on the plate because it has a lower temp. than the ice in the bowl. This can explain why the ice on the South pol
can appare to grow while the ice on the North pole shrink.

MSE29
MSE29
Joined: 19 Aug 06
Posts: 14
Credit: 189,148,543
RAC: 366,667

Not GHG drives the climate.

Not GHG drives the climate. It was forever the sun and the next centuries it will be forever the sun together with the cosmic ray flux.
Only astronomical variables can describe the variability of the climate, related like russian astronomics which observed planet mars.
On planet mars it is the same global warming last decades than on our earth.

These words were wrote on http://www.sciencebits.com/CO2orSolar?page=1 on June 18th, 2007 by me.

At extremeweathercongress in Bremerhaven 2009 i've had a discsussion with Mr. Rahmstorf, a staff works at PIK in Potsdam. While the eye-to-eye talk i said to him that he and IPCC published, is the greatest scientific scandal at our time.
And in one email wrote by Mr. Rahmstorf to me and while the small talk, it is not possible to make an experiment that show how co2 influence air temperature.

extra:
a presentation of mr. Rahmstorf at ewk in bremerhaven before my eye-to-eye talk
http://vimeo.com/4915030

Best regards

Facebook | Twitter

Simplex0
Simplex0
Joined: 1 Sep 05
Posts: 152
Credit: 964,726
RAC: 0

Apparently that is

Apparently that is nonsense.

I have no idea of who you are or your knowledge in this mather but I do know
What Stanford University are and here is something for you which by the way is from 2008.
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob-warm.html

Furthermore. What wee discus here is the currently global warming and it's cause and whether it is possible and desirable to do something about it and thank God has the USA gov. finally start to take this matter seriously.

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6,013
Credit: 85,955,825
RAC: 233,771

RE: Furthermore. What wee

Message 93068 in response to message 93067

Quote:
Furthermore. What wee discus here ......


Tomas, he/she is allowed to disagree! :-)

In science the test is the data. That means if you want to know what the world is up to, you go and look at it. Discussion about what the data means or implies is a subsequent issue.

Squashing of dissent ( or pretending it doesn't exist ) is the core problem with the global warming debate - which is largely why it is disbelieved by many. Or they no longer care, which is even worse. People are generally suspicious if it appears that secrets are kept ( they deduce that it is not to their advantage ). The environmental movement(s) have suffered from the very lack of transparency that they criticise in others, alas ....

Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter. Blaise Pascal

Bill592
Bill592
Joined: 25 Feb 05
Posts: 786
Credit: 70,825,065
RAC: 0

RE: Not GHG drives the

Message 93069 in response to message 93066

Quote:
Not GHG drives the climate. It was forever the sun and the next centuries it will be forever the sun together with the cosmic ray flux.

Nir , __Thank You for that excellent article on sciencebits.com

BTW.

The IPCC that comes up with all these facts and figures
(mostly pulled from their nether regions)

Is not scientific at all, but Governmental__ It actually stands for
Intergovernmental for Planetary Climate Change.

This “ Should †clue anyone in that can add 2 and 2 together,
That they have a POLITICAL Agenda.

Their Agenda, may have very little to do with saving us all from
GHGs, and more to do with Control of the Serfs. Us.

Those of us who are not the elite privileged like AL Gore who
spends 30 thousand dollars a month on his electric bill for his
miniature white house mansion in Tennessee.
Yes, Carbon Credit Broker AL who flies around continually in a private jet .
If AL is “not†going to a greenhouse speech, then he rides in a SUV or Limo.
If he is going to a greenhouse speech, then he rides in a Hybrid.

AL Gore must be laughing like a hyena all the way to the bank over
the thought that some people actually believe what he has to say.

Bill

Simplex0
Simplex0
Joined: 1 Sep 05
Posts: 152
Credit: 964,726
RAC: 0

RE: RE: Furthermore. What

Message 93070 in response to message 93068

Quote:
Quote:
Furthermore. What wee discus here ......

Tomas, he/she is allowed to disagree! :-)

In science the test is the data. That means if you want to know what the world is up to, you go and look at it. Discussion about what the data means or implies is a subsequent issue.

Squashing of dissent ( or pretending it doesn't exist ) is the core problem with the global warming debate - which is largely why it is disbelieved by many. Or they no longer care, which is even worse. People are generally suspicious if it appears that secrets are kept ( they deduce that it is not to their advantage ). The environmental movement(s) have suffered from the very lack of transparency that they criticise in others, alas ....

Cheers, Mike.

Hi Mike.
I see. Squashing the information gathered by the IPCC and Al Gore is fine but not you favorites George Bush and the oil lobby, now I understand the rouls in this messabe board an I will aply to them from now on.

Would you say that there is anyting in the data known today that supports
that the currently incresed global tempereture of the Earth has anyting else
than a fraction to do withe the solar activity?

And plees refere to a reserch done by well-known university for the source.

Simplex0
Simplex0
Joined: 1 Sep 05
Posts: 152
Credit: 964,726
RAC: 0

RE: RE: Not GHG drives

Message 93071 in response to message 93069

Quote:
Quote:
Not GHG drives the climate. It was forever the sun and the next centuries it will be forever the sun together with the cosmic ray flux.

Nir , __Thank You for that excellent article on sciencebits.com

BTW.

The IPCC that comes up with all these facts and figures
(mostly pulled from their nether regions)

Is not scientific at all, but Governmental__ It actually stands for
Intergovernmental for Planetary Climate Change.

This “ Should †clue anyone in that can add 2 and 2 together,
That they have a POLITICAL Agenda.

Their Agenda, may have very little to do with saving us all from
GHGs, and more to do with Control of the Serfs. Us.

Bill

IPCC are just collecting information from today's science and make an opinion based on that.

So basically their report is based on what the vast majority of scientist have published.

The oil lobby on the other hand..... ;)

I believe that you can not deny that IPCC are right and that there is real threat, both for life and for economy.

So what harm could it possibly have to be preventive and try to cut down on the greenhouse gases?

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6,013
Credit: 85,955,825
RAC: 233,771

Dear Tomas, I'll leave you to

Message 93072 in response to message 93070

Dear Tomas, I'll leave you to do your own homework from here on. :-)

Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter. Blaise Pascal

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.