If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Global warming denier: NASA report proves that solar activity is causing warming Report: "This fits in with the conclusion of the IPCC and previous NRC reports that solar variability is NOT the cause of global warming over the last 50 years"   (wattsupwiththat.com) divider line 113
    More: Fail, IPCC, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Goddard Space Flight Center, climate change denial, NASA, Maunder Minimum, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, troposphere  
•       •       •

1304 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 Jan 2013 at 2:58 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



113 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-09 03:15:28 PM
The sun is there?
 
2013-01-09 03:27:34 PM
WALL OF TAGS
 
2013-01-09 03:29:00 PM
How does he have time to find so many wrong words for one blog?
 
2013-01-09 04:13:04 PM
I honestly think that using condescending, loaded terms like "denier" is partially responsible for the number of people who have become convinced that anthropocentric climate change. Another big part really is putting a hypocrite and polarizing political figure like Al Gore as the face of the fight against climate change -- particularly after he made tens of millions of dollars selling carbon credits and then just sold his floundering TV network to the biggest of oil interests for half a billion dollars.

Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.
 
2013-01-09 04:20:34 PM

meanmutton: Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.


Well they won't listen to the science.

It's like having to convince someone that the sky is blue, because they won't lift their head up and look.
 
2013-01-09 04:23:15 PM
Do to all the bad press lately, the Sun has decided to no longer provide us with heat. Thanks a lot NPR.
 
2013-01-09 04:30:15 PM
It's Wednesday. Must be laundry day, and the day modmin drags out every cliched argument for and against global warming, cooling, staying the same. Personally, I'm bored of these threads, but hey, don't let that stop you from kicking it around a few hundred more times. I'm sure it'll keep people renewing subscriptions.
 
2013-01-09 05:29:17 PM
Lindsey Buckingham unavailable for comment

1.bp.blogspot.com

/your blog sucks
//these sketches are stupid but always make me laugh
///slashies come in threes
 
2013-01-09 06:38:32 PM

meanmutton: I honestly think that using condescending, loaded terms like "denier" is partially responsible for the number of people who have become convinced that anthropocentric climate change. Another big part really is putting a hypocrite and polarizing political figure like Al Gore as the face of the fight against climate change -- particularly after he made tens of millions of dollars selling carbon credits and then just sold his floundering TV network to the biggest of oil interests for half a billion dollars.

Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.



You do that to keep those whom initially agree with you from ever straying to the other side.


And subby could have read the second comment of the post:

From the report [page 7]:
"Ongoing discussion of the role of solar variations in the early 20th century has given rise to the unfounded conjecture that the observed increase in temperature in the last half century could also be due to changes in TSI rather than to anthropogenic influences"

REPLY: That's an important point readers should embrace. They should also embrace the fact that NASA is considering the possibility and has convened a group to study it. One mechanism I see as a possibility is related to UV variation and ocean algae/plankton variation changing the albedo. NASA is keeping an open mind, looking for mechanisms. To me, that's a good thing, and the way of science. - Anthony



So you see, he said it's only the sun what dun it, hurrr, what dun the global warming, the global warming that don't exist, cuz he's a dee-nyer, hurrr.
 
2013-01-09 07:15:15 PM

meanmutton: I honestly think that using condescending, loaded terms like "denier" is partially responsible for the number of people who have become convinced that anthropocentric climate change. Another big part really is putting a hypocrite and polarizing political figure like Al Gore as the face of the fight against climate change -- particularly after he made tens of millions of dollars selling carbon credits and then just sold his floundering TV network to the biggest of oil interests for half a billion dollars.

Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.


It's never been about convincing them, it's been about justifying their (false)superiority complex.
 
2013-01-09 07:16:43 PM

omeganuepsilon: It's never been about convincing others, it's been about justifying their own (false)superiority complex.


FTFM
 
2013-01-09 07:25:12 PM
I thought the NASA report stated that the whole system of global cooling and warming is very complex and the sun is a factor that plays into it.
 
2013-01-09 07:25:36 PM
Yeah, ya know the Sun, which is the size of a million Earths and the source of all of our life-sustaining radiation warmth, couldn't have anything to do with Earth climate!
Just IMPOSSIBLE.
IMPOSSIBLE I SAY!
 
2013-01-09 07:26:44 PM
Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.
 
2013-01-09 07:28:54 PM
/Yes, apparently all the AGW arguers have been furloughed, let go, laid off, canned, fired now that the unwashed herds don't need to be stampeded toward an election result.
 
2013-01-09 07:40:50 PM
I'm pro-Global Warming, so I'm getting a kick out of all the hub-bub.

I'm pretty sure humans will adapt and overcome.
 
2013-01-09 07:46:36 PM
What else should we call someone who, despite all the evidence to the contrary, insists current climate is natural and defends said position with statements like (paraphrasing, ill get the link when I get home)

Omeganuepsilon: "Any other perspective is anti-corporation Greenpeace nonsense."

What rational conversation can be had with a person who considers 99% of scientific research published on climate change "nonsense" because it conflicts with his opinion that climate change is natural instead of anthropogenic?
 
2013-01-09 08:47:51 PM
What are the chances that the rabidly pro-gun, anti-evolution climate deniers are all the same people?

Pretty high, I'd say.
 
2013-01-09 09:25:18 PM

treecologist: What are the chances that the rabidly pro-gun, anti-evolution climate deniers are all the same people?

Pretty high, I'd say.


treecologist: What are the chances that the rabidly pro-gun, anti-evolution climate deniers are all the same people?

Pretty high, I'd say.


Meh.

Pro Gun
Pro Evolution

Jury is out on AGW far as I'm concerned. When you're averaging such a large amount of highly variable data, I don't feel you can draw meaningful information out of that.
 
2013-01-09 09:43:29 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.


Googling that shows that the entire scientific community says he's full of shiat and that every bit of his data is wrong, as with Lockwood and Froelich, Sloan, and Laken et al.. So you really shouldn't be acting so superior, given that you're doing it on the basis of absolutely false ideas.
 
2013-01-09 10:24:46 PM
Does this really rate high enough to earn a greenlight? Deniers have been flogging the "it's the Sun!" myth for over a decade. It's the "evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics" of climate change.
 
2013-01-09 10:31:56 PM

MJMaloney187: I'm pro-Global Warming, so I'm getting a kick out of all the hub-bub.

I'm pretty sure humans will adapt and overcome.


I'm pretty pro-Global Warming too. I'm hoping New York will become the next North Carolina (except without the rednecks).
 
2013-01-09 11:06:24 PM

meanmutton: DERP


I had typed a detailed rebuttal of your incomplete sentences and other silliness, but then, I realized it wasn't necessary.

See, it's too late. Climate change is already affecting us, and if being called a "denier" hurts your feelings, well, tough. Scientists have spent at least two decades warning us of what would occur, and even as it was occurring, "deniers", well, they denied anything was happening. Then, they denied that humans had anything to do with it. Then, they denied that humans could halt or slow it.

"Deniers" is actually an old term, as only the most moronic of that ilk are still denying it in the face of bald evidence and actual, not predicted, data. But, there's no stopping some chuckleheads - now, deniers claim we can't mitigate the slowly encroaching changes. It doesn't matter, though, as reality is slowly asserting itself. "Deniers" just look more and more evil - not just foolish, as fools do such things inadvertently, while the actions of "deniers" were often deliberate, malicious, and self-interested - as the world turns.

Be friggin' grateful that "deniers", not "assholes", "idiots", "morons", or "imbeciles", became the commonly accepted term.
 
2013-01-09 11:07:43 PM

treecologist: What are the chances that the rabidly pro-gun, anti-evolution climate deniers are all the same people?

Pretty high, I'd say.


As a gun loving, climate change believer ,evolution believing liberal I don't have a clue.
 
2013-01-09 11:08:50 PM
 
2013-01-09 11:19:42 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.



Cosmic ray flux has zero correlation with global mean temperature.

Google. It. Up.


HotIgneous Intruder: /Yes, apparently all the AGW arguers have been furloughed, let go, laid off, canned, fired now that the unwashed herds don't need to be stampeded toward an election result.



You wish.
 
2013-01-09 11:48:34 PM

omeganuepsilon: When you're averaging such a large amount of highly variable data, I don't feel you can draw meaningful information out of that.


So the Higgs boson hasn't been found? Or is it maybe the case that your feelings aren't on a par with the work that scientists do?

/learn more statistics
 
2013-01-10 12:30:25 AM
omeganuepsilon:

Jury is out on AGW far as I'm concerned. When you're averaging such a large amount of highly variable data, I don't feel you can draw meaningful information out of that.

translation: i don't understand math, so the people who do must be wrong
 
2013-01-10 01:30:22 AM

meanmutton: I honestly think that using condescending, loaded terms like "denier" is partially responsible for the number of people who have become convinced that anthropocentric climate change. Another big part really is putting a hypocrite and polarizing political figure like Al Gore as the face of the fight against climate change -- particularly after he made tens of millions of dollars selling carbon credits and then just sold his floundering TV network to the biggest of oil interests for half a billion dollars.

Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.


But it fits right in with the elitist liberal mentality.

And it's fun.
 
2013-01-10 01:31:36 AM

Rev.K: meanmutton: Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.

Well they won't listen to the science.

It's like having to convince someone that the sky is blue, because they won't lift their head up and look.


The issue, son, IS whether it's science. Or shenanigans.
 
2013-01-10 01:33:36 AM

omeganuepsilon: meanmutton: I honestly think that using condescending, loaded terms like "denier" is partially responsible for the number of people who have become convinced that anthropocentric climate change. Another big part really is putting a hypocrite and polarizing political figure like Al Gore as the face of the fight against climate change -- particularly after he made tens of millions of dollars selling carbon credits and then just sold his floundering TV network to the biggest of oil interests for half a billion dollars.

Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.

It's never been about convincing them, it's been about justifying their (false)superiority complex.


And setting the psychological stage for the Denier detention centers.
 
2013-01-10 01:34:45 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: Yeah, ya know the Sun, which is the size of a million Earths and the source of all of our life-sustaining radiation warmth, couldn't have anything to do with Earth climate!
Just IMPOSSIBLE.
IMPOSSIBLE I SAY!


And if the sun is heating up it must be because of all those SUVs there.
 
2013-01-10 01:42:09 AM

treecologist: What are the chances that the rabidly pro-gun, anti-evolution climate deniers are all the same people?

Pretty high, I'd say.


Stereotypes are da bomb. They make thinking so much easier.
 
2013-01-10 01:44:36 AM

captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.

Googling that shows that the entire scientific community says he's full of shiat and that every bit of his data is wrong, as with Lockwood and Froelich, Sloan, and Laken et al.. So you really shouldn't be acting so superior, given that you're doing it on the basis of absolutely false ideas.


I'll just drop this here... Link

Truth is not democratic.
 
2013-01-10 01:45:01 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: treecologist: What are the chances that the rabidly pro-gun, anti-evolution climate deniers are all the same people?

Pretty high, I'd say.

Stereotypes are da bomb. They make thinking so much easier.



Apparently.

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: But it fits right in with the elitist liberal mentality.

 
2013-01-10 01:48:05 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Rev.K: meanmutton: Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.

Well they won't listen to the science.

It's like having to convince someone that the sky is blue, because they won't lift their head up and look.

The issue, son, IS whether it's science. Or shenanigans.



Not according to the actual scientists.

ACC deniers have the same level of scientific credibility as anti-vaxxers or chemtrail believers, right down to their continued harping (HAARPing?) about discredited conspiracy theories.
 
2013-01-10 01:48:42 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.

Googling that shows that the entire scientific community says he's full of shiat and that every bit of his data is wrong, as with Lockwood and Froelich, Sloan, and Laken et al.. So you really shouldn't be acting so superior, given that you're doing it on the basis of absolutely false ideas.

I'll just drop this here... Link

Truth is not democratic.



"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment, you must also be right." - Robert Park
 
2013-01-10 01:49:42 AM

spesimen: omeganuepsilon:

Jury is out on AGW far as I'm concerned. When you're averaging such a large amount of highly variable data, I don't feel you can draw meaningful information out of that.

translation: i don't understand math, so the people who do must be wrong



Argument from Authority
 
2013-01-10 01:50:36 AM

Damnhippyfreak: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: treecologist: What are the chances that the rabidly pro-gun, anti-evolution climate deniers are all the same people?

Pretty high, I'd say.

Stereotypes are da bomb. They make thinking so much easier.


Apparently.
Just Another OC Homeless Guy: But it fits right in with the elitist liberal mentality.


Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
 
2013-01-10 01:52:31 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.

Googling that shows that the entire scientific community says he's full of shiat and that every bit of his data is wrong, as with Lockwood and Froelich, Sloan, and Laken et al.. So you really shouldn't be acting so superior, given that you're doing it on the basis of absolutely false ideas.

I'll just drop this here... Link

Truth is not democratic.



Wegener and his predecessors lacked any evidence for ongoing movement of the continents, or even a plausible mechanism for such movement. Modern climatologists have both.

Your argument is invalid.
 
2013-01-10 01:52:44 AM

common sense is an oxymoron: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Rev.K: meanmutton: Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.

Well they won't listen to the science.

It's like having to convince someone that the sky is blue, because they won't lift their head up and look.

The issue, son, IS whether it's science. Or shenanigans.


Not according to the actual scientists.

ACC deniers have the same level of scientific credibility as anti-vaxxers or chemtrail believers, right down to their continued harping (HAARPing?) about discredited conspiracy theories.


Wow. You keep assuming the truth of the points you are trying to prove. Oh, and saying something doesn't make it true.

Your kids must secretly hate you.
 
2013-01-10 01:54:49 AM

Damnhippyfreak: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.

Googling that shows that the entire scientific community says he's full of shiat and that every bit of his data is wrong, as with Lockwood and Froelich, Sloan, and Laken et al.. So you really shouldn't be acting so superior, given that you're doing it on the basis of absolutely false ideas.

I'll just drop this here... Link

Truth is not democratic.


"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment, you must also be right." - Robert Park


Adn Wegener was right - and the entire scientific establishment was wrong.

Too early to say as regards Svensmark.
 
2013-01-10 01:56:21 AM

common sense is an oxymoron: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.

Googling that shows that the entire scientific community says he's full of shiat and that every bit of his data is wrong, as with Lockwood and Froelich, Sloan, and Laken et al.. So you really shouldn't be acting so superior, given that you're doing it on the basis of absolutely false ideas.

I'll just drop this here... Link

Truth is not democratic.


Wegener and his predecessors lacked any evidence for ongoing movement of the continents, or even a plausible mechanism for such movement. Modern climatologists have both.

Your argument is invalid.


Once again, you are arguing to the result you want. Circular. The issue is whether those mechanisms are plausible.
 
2013-01-10 01:57:33 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: common sense is an oxymoron: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Rev.K: meanmutton: Insulting people and pushing them to appeal to base "us-versus-them" mentality isn't going to convince them that your side is right.

Well they won't listen to the science.

It's like having to convince someone that the sky is blue, because they won't lift their head up and look.

The issue, son, IS whether it's science. Or shenanigans.


Not according to the actual scientists.

ACC deniers have the same level of scientific credibility as anti-vaxxers or chemtrail believers, right down to their continued harping (HAARPing?) about discredited conspiracy theories.

Wow. You keep assuming the truth of the points you are trying to prove.



As do 97% of the practicing experts in the field.


Oh, and saying something doesn't make it true.


Says another guy who keeps on saying the same thing over and over.


Your kids must secretly hate you.


One of my daughter's favorite lines growing up was, "Why do you have to be so logical?" And she loved me for it.
 
2013-01-10 01:58:50 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: common sense is an oxymoron: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.

Googling that shows that the entire scientific community says he's full of shiat and that every bit of his data is wrong, as with Lockwood and Froelich, Sloan, and Laken et al.. So you really shouldn't be acting so superior, given that you're doing it on the basis of absolutely false ideas.

I'll just drop this here... Link

Truth is not democratic.


Wegener and his predecessors lacked any evidence for ongoing movement of the continents, or even a plausible mechanism for such movement. Modern climatologists have both.

Your argument is invalid.

Once again, you are arguing to the result you want. Circular. The issue is whether those mechanisms are plausible.



The climatologists say they're plausible. Why do you disagree?
 
2013-01-10 02:01:46 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Damnhippyfreak: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: captainktainer: HotIgneous Intruder: Cosmic rays, baby.
Svensmark from Denmark. Google it up.

Googling that shows that the entire scientific community says he's full of shiat and that every bit of his data is wrong, as with Lockwood and Froelich, Sloan, and Laken et al.. So you really shouldn't be acting so superior, given that you're doing it on the basis of absolutely false ideas.

I'll just drop this here... Link

Truth is not democratic.


"Alas, to wear the mantle of Galileo it is not enough that you be persecuted by an unkind establishment, you must also be right." - Robert Park

Adn Wegener was right - and the entire scientific establishment was wrong.

Too early to say as regards Svensmark.



Graph alert:

blogs.edf.org
 
2013-01-10 02:05:46 AM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: HotIgneous Intruder: Yeah, ya know the Sun, which is the size of a million Earths and the source of all of our life-sustaining radiation warmth, couldn't have anything to do with Earth climate!
Just IMPOSSIBLE.
IMPOSSIBLE I SAY!

And if the sun is heating up it must be because of all those SUVs there.



If only the sun were heating up as much as Earth, instead of actually showing (minimally) decreased output over the past 20-30 years...

www.skepticalscience.com
 
2013-01-10 02:17:33 AM

spesimen: translation


Whatever. The argument is too in depth to get into on fark.


Here's a link explaining how averages are almost meaningless.

Link

Since that is probably too much for typical fark readers, here's a more entertaining bit about how averages can suck the reality right out of real world events.

Link

Here are a few more simple ones:

Link

Link

Link

But enough on averages.

Co2 is bad?

Sure, I buy that.

Good luck trying to get humanity to change it's ways though. 20+ years and all the education and denigration etc. People still aren't willing to change because it's not convenient.

Thing here is, small changes(driving less, or getting a more "green" car, planting a tree) don't help at all, they're insignificant. Especially in the face of something like a forest fire.
Recycling is often worse than just throwing it away.(And no, our landfills are not "filling up").
The only way to really be green, is a massive reduction in population, and people living as if it it were the dark ages(more or less). Log houses made from trees cut by hand, because power-tools and their manufacturing plants, etc etc all have a large carbon footprint in one way or another. No shipping or traveling farther than your feet or a beast of burden can take you. etc etc etc.


Me, I'd rather humanity continue to advance technology and science myself, maybe get off this rock some day, rather than be what amounts to peasants on into eternity.

Want to know one of the biggest drivers in technological advancement is? Need.

Kinda simple, I know, but it's true.
NASA was a big driver, because they had to solve so many technical problems, and it was inspiring so the people were behind it.
War is obviously a major driver, because to win you've got to be on the cutting edge, and to do that people have to work towards it. Not as popular as it has been in the past, but still with people like Quadaffi killing their own people, it's something people can get behind.
Big business? Yes, people want to succeed, in order to raise their quality of life. To have the best business you've got to master efficiency.


Being green? Not such a big driver. People are uninterested, because it comes saddled with sacrifice up front and no real tangible dividend down the road. It will always be an outsider when it comes to a cause.

Much like any sort of outsider, you've got to get on the inside to have the means to make the changes you want. It's not selling out, it's taking advantage of.

I mean, really, didn't you people watch SLC Punk?
 
2013-01-10 02:27:08 AM

omeganuepsilon: spesimen: translation

Whatever. The argument is too in depth to get into on fark.


Here's a link explaining how averages are almost meaningless.

Link



You're right in that averages (whether short- or long-term) are meaningless.

The temperature trend, however, is anything but.
 
2013-01-10 02:51:40 AM

common sense is an oxymoron: omeganuepsilon: spesimen: translation

Whatever. The argument is too in depth to get into on fark.


Here's a link explaining how averages are almost meaningless.

Link


You're right in that averages (whether short- or long-term) are meaningless.

The temperature trend, however, is anything but.


But it's not a temperature trend, it's a trend of the averaged temperature.

Go measure 100,000 dicks, fully erect.

Now, do the same tomorrow, same people, but limp.

Now, a week later, do the same in a really cold swimming pool, erect or hard, your choice.

Now, rinse(maybe rinse twice, your hands are probably pretty nasty by now) and repeat in, only, in Africa.

What does that average tell you? Absolutely dick.

You average a temp measurement from an arbitrary time of day, average it with an arbitrary number of days(a week or a month), and average out how many of those periods fit within a year. Then maybe years into decades, or decades into centuries. You take outliers( a number past a certain arbitrary threshold) and scrap them at arbitrary stages(day, month, year, etc) because they don't look average.

Really, it's a bit of a Gamblers Fallacy if you step back and look at it, there is so much information...
Each and every day is part of our weather pattern, each day influences the next, and each day's weather has an almost infinite amount of data. We still can't predict the weather tomorrow with any great accuracy, not to mention next week or next month.

The best we can do even on that short term is a rough guess, and that's working with relevant real data, not some arbitrarily concocted average.

An average is just that, concocted. It's not actually representative of any one state of being. The earth has an infinity of points on it's surface. An average "global temperature" has jack shiat to do with any of them.
 
Displayed 50 of 113 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report