.

.

All topics the user community has voted to take off the front page are moved here.
Click on the "BURY this topic" link at the top of each topic to vote to bury a topic and take it off the front page.

Moderator: mods

User avatar
By TjW
#383501
The climate's been changing for the last four billion years.
The average temperature's been way higher, it's been way lower.
It's been gradually warming since the end of the last ice age.
This last big El Nino may just have managed to end an 18 year long pause in that warming. That, and adjusting older temperatures to be cooler than they were measured to be at the time.
Every one of the climate models used to spread FUD has way overpredicted the sensitivity of global temperature to CO2 forcing.
In a hundred years, this will be the biggest embarrassment to science ever.
A bigger embarrasment than the mass of the electron, a bigger embarrassment than N-rays, a bigger embarrassment than polywater, a bigger embarrassment than Pons and Fleischman.
User avatar
By RobertKesselring
#383502
TjW wrote:a bigger embarrassment than...
You forgot FTL neutrinos... :run:
User avatar
By TjW
#383508
RobertKesselring wrote:
TjW wrote:a bigger embarrassment than...
You forgot FTL neutrinos... :run:
I don't count them so much, because their paper basically said "We don't see a mistake", and laid out their methodology.
Alarmist climate science annouces their interpretations of modeling as incontrovertible fact, and hides data sources and details of the methodology so that it can't be examined.
User avatar
By trnbrn
#383541
keithbien wrote:Seems like conditions are less predictable with climate change.
This is a down right funny post.
User avatar
By Nicos
#383545
Yes, what an embarrassment :crazy:
Attachments
climate summit.jpg
climate summit.jpg (91.29 KiB) Viewed 6457 times
User avatar
By TjW
#383564
Nicos wrote:Yes, what an embarrassment :crazy:
Yes, what an embarrassment.
All admirable goals in the cartoon.
So why not promote them on their own merits, rather than politicizing science to its great detriment?

None of those is what's being accomplished. What's being attempted is extracting money from one group of people to give it to a different group of people. The end effect is not any of those admirable goals, or even that group ostensibly receiving the benefits actually receive it.
The end effect is that the people managing the transfers will gain wealth and power over others.
Please note that that doesn't require a conspiracy per se, just opportunists taking advantage of a situation.

The tragedy is that the science has been politicized by both sides to the point where the science no longer matters, as science. Rather than actually looking at the science, it's pretty much straight ad hominem from the echo chambers on both sides of the issue.

Science by government grant is resulting in researchers who refuse to release their data.
Rather than seeing data they've collected as evidence for their conclusions, to be shared with the scientific community, they treat the data as a cow to be milked repeatedly for additional grant proposals and papers,
Replication is how science works. And you can't replicate (or find the errors in) a study if you don't have access to the data.
It's not just in climate science. It's an issue in a number of fields.
User avatar
By pablog
#383586
TjW wrote:The climate's been changing for the last four billion years.
The average temperature's been way higher, it's been way lower.
It's been gradually warming since the end of the last ice age.
The point is not the change, but the rate.
In 100 years we may not have the time to adapt to a 10,000 year worth change :surrender:
User avatar
By Hugo
#383587
Way to go TJW. Good explanations on what is going on.
User avatar
By Mavi Gogun
#383593
Hugo wrote:Way to go TJW. Good explanations on what is going on.
Ya- in much the same way that Persephone going into the Underworld is a "good explanation" for the changing seasons: it combines perception, misunderstanding, and gross fact to tell a story. Unlike science, the innuendo, doubt, and predictions proffered by Tim are untestable, the conspiracy theory fantastic.
Tim wrote:Please note that that doesn't require a conspiracy per se, just opportunists taking advantage of a situation.
The 'only-consequence-will-be-graft' is a blind prejudice and silly prediction- and, again, asks the reader to abandon reality tests for a tasty rationalization. While the not-a-conspiracy-theory disclaimer might be stretched to plausibility here, the same cannot be said of the reality-abjuring claim of hidden data, demanding a world wide cabal of climate scientists committed to putting one over on everybody. It's just insane.

One thing is sure: this thread has no place on the "Hang gliding general" board.
User avatar
By HGXC
#383602
TjW wrote:
Nicos wrote:Yes, what an embarrassment :crazy:
Yes, what an embarrassment.
All admirable goals in the cartoon.
So why not promote them on their own merits, rather than politicizing science to its great detriment?

None of those is what's being accomplished. What's being attempted is extracting money from one group of people to give it to a different group of people. The end effect is not any of those admirable goals, or even that group ostensibly receiving the benefits actually receive it.
The end effect is that the people managing the transfers will gain wealth and power over others.
Please note that that doesn't require a conspiracy per se, just opportunists taking advantage of a situation.

The tragedy is that the science has been politicized by both sides to the point where the science no longer matters, as science. Rather than actually looking at the science, it's pretty much straight ad hominem from the echo chambers on both sides of the issue.

Science by government grant is resulting in researchers who refuse to release their data.
Rather than seeing data they've collected as evidence for their conclusions, to be shared with the scientific community, they treat the data as a cow to be milked repeatedly for additional grant proposals and papers,
Replication is how science works. And you can't replicate (or find the errors in) a study if you don't have access to the data.
It's not just in climate science. It's an issue in a number of fields.

Spot on.

Climate change has not been sold in any positive manner. It from the very beginning was a guilt trip perpetrated for political gain. Its a shame because we could do so much better if we tried to find common ground and cleaner and better energy sources which I am for. The other annoying issue is the hypocrisy, that i am being preached to by people flying corporate jets and owning over sized mansions and involve in recreational activities that require oil. In the end we will buy cars when they provide better value then what we have now. We will solar panel up when they develop a cheap battery system that allows us to store power effectively (I can't wait for that one myself -:)), and we will transition over time to a cleaner economy that doesn't put people out of work or set us back economically.

Dennis
User avatar
By SeeHoweToFly
#383607
Climate change has not been sold in any positive manner. It from the very beginning was a guilt trip perpetrated for political gain. Its a shame because we could do so much better if we tried to find common ground and cleaner and better energy sources which I am for. The other annoying issue is the hypocrisy, that i am being preached to by people flying corporate jets and owning over sized mansions and involve in recreational activities that require oil. In the end we will buy cars when they provide better value then what we have now. We will solar panel up when they develop a cheap battery system that allows us to store power effectively (I can't wait for that one myself -Smile), and we will transition over time to a cleaner economy that doesn't put people out of work or set us back economically

Read more: http://www.hanggliding.org/viewtopic.ph ... z3zyLkTQ4Z

:ditto: :ditto:
User avatar
By Mavi Gogun
#383609
Dennis wrote:In the end we will buy cars when they provide better value then what we have now.
The problem with that consumption model is that liabilities are externalized costs. Market forces didn't stop acid rain or ozone depleting aerosols- regulation did. Likewise the externalized cost of energy production in health, environmental, and climate impacts.

I've never understood the "I wouldn't have shot myself in the foot if you hadn't made me feel guilty for it" rational. For sure, handing folks solutions when recognizing problems is way more constructive- but we'd been living in a climate of industry and governmental denial for all of the Bush II years and half of the Obama stint -recognition had been removed from the equation! Exon research sited the deleterious impact of burning oil back in the 80's- before launching a 3 decade long disinformation campaign in contradiction of what they knew; add to that oil industry/Bush Administration's forbidding certain language when government funded agencies talked about power generation.
User avatar
By Spark
#383633
YGBSM

sink this topic - it should be in the basement, or at least the camp fire.
User avatar
By flybop
#383634
Seven years or so ago an insider released thousands of emails from the alarmists at the East Anglia University in the UK. This place was the primary source of climate change data. One of the most well known "results" from this University is the infamous "Hockey Stick" temperature chart from Michael Mann. This chart allegedly showed a dramatic increase in temperatures since the mid 1800's. For many years this was cited as the proof of global warming. (That's what it was called back then.)

Here's the problem though: The internal emails very clearly showed that the data used for this chart was not true. The emails also showed that the computer programs used to calculate global temperatures, as well as trends, were purposely flawed. The desired data was input and the program was written to spit out the desired results.

The emails were released by a whistle blower who was privy to them and also disgusted by the blatant and purposeful and out right lies coming out of this "research" center.

Here is one link that begins to discuss the emails, the purposeful deception and the reasons why. Have an open mind and do just a little reading here. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor ... 5076b9988d

Here is another link that details the deception. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/colu ... ation.html
Last edited by flybop on Fri Feb 12, 2016 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By Spark
#383635
flyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyflyfly

fly or not fly

there is no try
User avatar
By Mavi Gogun
#383636
flybop wrote:Have an open mind and...
...accept one instance as representational? No- that ain't how science works. You weed out the frauds and hucksters- not take them as definitive. How many legitimate studies have been done in the 7 years since? Surely you must have a count? No? Doesn't fit into the narrative?

Vote to bury ---> http://www.hanggliding.org/bury.php?t=34055&f=16
User avatar
By flybop
#383637
Mavi Gogun wrote:
flybop wrote:Have an open mind and...
...accept one instance as representational? No- that ain't how science works. You weed out the frauds and hucksters- not take them as definitive. How many legitimate studies have been done in the 7 years since? Surely you must have a count? No? Doesn't fit into the narrative?

Vote to bury ---> http://www.hanggliding.org/bury.php?t=34055&f=16
NONE.

You need to do something about your hangstrap and […]

Not going to play these silly bobK games. People […]

Don't forget the hook-in check especially before c[…]

I guess since were halfway through the comp, if an[…]