Prince Charles Calls Climate Deniers "Headless Chicken Brigade"

[Tonington]

I think anyone with two brain cells could at least admit that the human animal is at very least a contributing factor, without having to discard the possibility other factors are also at play.

Absolutely. Like I said, it's simple math. Add up all the forcings, and the result is what happens to the climate. When you do that, and the results square with satellite measurements of energy coming in, and energy coming out, well then you know what space you're working within. They have measured with a high degree of certainty the energy absorbtion over a wide range of bandwidths, and we know from laboratory experiments which bandwidths greenhouse gases are absorbing outgoing longwave radiation at. It's a pretty clear picture that is not easilly ignored, though easier for some than others :lol:

 

[pgs]

Absolutely. Like I said, it's simple math. Add up all the forcings, and the result is what happens to the climate. When you do that, and the results square with satellite measurements of energy coming in, and energy coming out, well then you know what space you're working within. They have measured with a high degree of certainty the energy absorbtion over a wide range of bandwidths, and we know from laboratory experiments which bandwidths greenhouse gases are absorbing outgoing longwave radiation at. It's a pretty clear picture that is not easilly ignored, though easier for some than others :lol:

Your right turn out the lights the parties over .You first .

 

[captain morgan]

Yeah, well if you're willing to cast aside evidence as techno babble, then I can see how you would think it's factual that there is nothing more than some assumed natural cycle at work.

'Science' hasn't come close in any way, shape or form in being able to explain the past let alone the massive failure in predicting the future.

While it's entirely reasonable to expect that all things (humanity incl) has an impact via it's contributions, 'science' has called it wrong on this file each and every time to date.

So, that said, supporting a premise that is being used primarily as the impetus to institute a tax makes this even more ridiculous

You mean it is not some socialist plot to prevent us stalwart Canadians from tearing up (read, improving) our boreal forests and thereby living warmly in our 3000 square-foot homes?

Ever been to the pristine boreal forests around Ft Mac?

Sometime, you opught to head North to Clearwater Creek and just keep following upstream until there is no development North of ya... Think about taking a refreshing dip in the cool waters of Clearwater... Once you get out, you'll agree that the creek is horribly misnamed.

Ole Mother Gaia at her finest

 

[Angstrom]

I hope there is such a thing. The thought of humanity continuing sickens me. What a bunch a dirty ****s we are.

 

[Spade]

Geezus, man, been there. Not so pristine now...

 

[Cliffy]

 

[Tonington]

'Science' hasn't come close in any way, shape or form in being able to explain the past let alone the massive failure in predicting the future.

Nonsense. If that is true, then what exactly is the defining evidence for your natural cycles pseudo-scientific babble based on? If you are asserting that we have incomplete knowledge, well of course that is correct. But we don't need complete knowledge of everything. If that were true, there would be no such thing as scientific progress in any field of study at all, which is laughably untrue.

While it's entirely reasonable to expect that all things (humanity incl) has an impact via it's contributions, 'science' has called it wrong on this file each and every time to date.

So then you've made it very easy for me to falsify this statement. I only need to give one example, though I could give many more. That the stratosphere would cool while the troposphere warms is a prediction based on knowledge of radiative physics and what is known about the dynamics of our atmosphere. It was first predicted in 1967:
Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity
Those results were not confirmed by observations until much later in the 1990s.

The same physics allowed climate scientists to successfully predict effects of large tropical volcanic eruptions on global climate.

 

[Cliffy]

It can't happen here. We're too civilized and there is too much money to be made trashing the joint for future generations.

Frank Zappa - It Can't Happen Here - YouTube

 

[darkbeaver]

I think anyone with two brain cells could at least admit that the human animal is at very least a contributing factor, without having to discard the possibility other factors are also at play.

While that would seem to be a reasonable assumption, and I believe it is correct, that human contribution approaches zero. Certainly any lasting human generated damage will be to humans and not this planet. Take in to account the repeated cataclysmic destructions and the many extinction events and the fact that life, even human, continues to thrive on our planet. It is reasonable to assume that this thriving will continue unabated and largely unaffected by any human transgression. Destruction of this planet is humanly impossible and I can think of no case where we could even slow down it's continued natural development one iota.

 

[JLM]

While that would seem to be a reasonable assumption, and I believe it is correct, that human contribution approaches zero. Certainly any lasting human generated damage will be to humans and not this planet. Take in to account the repeated cataclysmic destructions and the many extinction events and the fact that life, even human, continues to thrive on our planet. It is reasonable to assume that this thriving will continue unabated and largely unaffected by any human transgression. Destruction of this planet is humanly impossible and I can think of no case where we could even slow down it's continued natural development one iota.

Don't bet your first born! -

 

[L Gilbert]

Somone a few posts ago, said the planet is cooling. There was a period of cooling but fluctuations being what they are, fluctuate and a hiatus is just a hiatus - it's temporary. Earth still warming despite 'hiatus,' Canadian scientist says - Technology & Science - CBC News

 

[darkbeaver]

Somone a few posts ago, said the planet is cooling. There was a period of cooling but fluctuations being what they are, fluctuate and a hiatus is just a hiatus - it's temporary. Earth still warming despite 'hiatus,' Canadian scientist says - Technology & Science - CBC News

Still warming despite the cooling. You know Les you have the makings of what passes as a scientist these days.

 

[captain morgan]

Nonsense. If that is true, then what exactly is the defining evidence for your natural cycles pseudo-scientific babble based on?

Yeah, the scientific community has done a real bang-up job, if you decide to look past the frauds, cover-ups, amoral and unethical 'peer review' scam, the fact that not one single computer model has succeeded and that they have been forced to do a 180 degree turn on anthropogenic global warming (insert villainous music here).

 

[taxslave]

Yeah, the scientific community has done a real bang-up job, if you decide to look past the frauds, cover-ups, amoral and unethical 'peer review' scam, the fact that not one single computer model has succeeded and that they have been forced to do a 180 degree turn on anthropogenic global warming (insert villainous music here).

But there is all that money to remove from the have to give to the have nots. Also lots of grants to keep the BS rolling.

 

[L Gilbert]

Still warming despite the cooling.

Yes. Beav. I guess you missed my point. I meant that despite the temporary cooling period, the Earth continues to warm.

You know Les you have the makings of what passes as a scientist these days.

Simply because I can understand what was said? I think not. I don't have the formal education.
Perhaps if you would study the issue objectively and with a clear head (sans the pot smoke and whatnot), you could understand what was said, too.

 

[Tonington]

Yes. Beav. I guess you missed my point. I meant that despite the temporary cooling period, the Earth continues to warm.

Is it so hard to believe that the earth can warm while the bottom 1.5 meters of atmosphere does not? Does placing your arm in cool water bring a fever down?

Our resident denier copy and paste expert Walter posted a relevant exerpt from Roger Pielke Sr. in 2008:

Moreover, as reported on Climate Science, global warming requires a more-or-less monotonic increase in the accumulation of heat (in Joules) within the climate system. The use of a global average surface temperature, regardless if it is increasing or decreasing is an inadequate and inaccurate metric of global warming as the heat is not only a function of temperature but also mass over which the heat change occurs! This is why the ocean is the dominate reservoir of heat content change.]

Pielke was more or less right then and he still is. 90% of the heat is stored in the oceans, and recent examinations of deep ocean heat storage have confirmed where most of that 'missing' heat is stored.

 

[L Gilbert]

Is it so hard to believe that the earth can warm while the bottom 1.5 meters of atmosphere does not?

Apparently so.

Does placing your arm in cool water bring a fever down?

I'll let the resident dissidents try figuring that out. lol

Our resident denier copy and paste expert Walter posted a relevant exerpt from Roger Pielke Sr. in 2008:


Pielke was more or less right then and he still is. 90% of the heat is stored in the oceans, and recent examinations of deep ocean heat storage have confirmed where most of that 'missing' heat is stored.

I think one of my recent links said something like that, as well.
Found it: http://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...t-ocean-heating-reveals-about-global-warming/

 

[JLM]

Yes. Beav. I guess you missed my point. I meant that despite the temporary cooling period, the Earth continues to warm. Simply because I can understand what was said? I think not. I don't have the formal education.
Perhaps if you would study the issue objectively and with a clear head (sans the pot smoke and whatnot), you could understand what was said, too.

Maybe it's that "formal education" that gets a lot of people in trouble..............it goes to their head and they tend to ignore the real education...........................Life. You can get pretty wise if you just watch how others F**k up. -

 

[L Gilbert]

Maybe it's that "formal education" that gets a lot of people in trouble..............it goes to their head and they tend to ignore the real education...........................Life. You can get pretty wise if you just watch how others F**k up. -

Also the lack of education that gets others "into trouble". If they don't understand the science yet make claims, they're bound to look a bit silly.
Anyway, the trend is warming. It'd be pretty silly to not expect fluctuations within the trend, though, as well as pretty silly to pick a period within a trend to argue against the trend.

 

[JLM]

Also the lack of education that gets others "into trouble". If they don't understand the science yet make claims, they're bound to look a bit silly.
Anyway, the trend is warming. It'd be pretty silly to not expect fluctuations within the trend, though, as well as pretty silly to pick a period within a trend to argue against the trend.

It's changed drastically just in our life time. I don't see any kids today walking up hill to and from school in 4' of snow. -