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.

(Syracuse Post-Standard)   Great Lakes ice coverage set to break the all-time record next week, exactly as predicted by global climate models   (syracuse.com) divider line 260
    More: Cool, Central New York, Great Lakes, Great Lakes ice, physical scientist, Lake Ontario, global climate models, lake effect  
•       •       •

9571 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Feb 2014 at 3:21 PM (27 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-14 11:13:11 AM

AngryDragon: Farking Canuck: What is obvious is the whole "L-l-l-look at China! Our doing anything can never help so do nothing!!!" is a cornerstone of the denier agenda. Congratz if you came up with it independently of a industry funded blog

So the fact that our emissions are dropping means that we're doing nothing.


Not at all. Much progress has been made in spite of the denier mantra of "do nothing". But the denier campaign to spread misinformation and to convince everyone to take a "sit back and wait" position has negatively impact progress towards cleaner power.


AngryDragon: Farking Canuck: The point is that China is taking action. We will see how effective it is ... but at least they acknowledge the science and evidence and they are trying

But China is "trying" so that means what again?


It means that they've recognized that there is a problem and they are moving forward with the very difficult task of trying to bring power to their massive population in a cost-effective manner while simultaneously trying to reduce pollution. A daunting task that they are only starting out at. It will be decades before we see any positive movement from them. But they are trying. Deniers say that because they are not making huge leaps forward today we should do nothing.

AngryDragon: Agenda.  I think you have one.


I most certainly have an agenda:

Item 1: Reduce Pollution: Cleaner air, less negative impact on AGW, long term health benefits for the population, reduced long term health costs

Item 2: Reduce Dependence on Middle East Oil: Stop funneling money to people who want to kill us.

Item 3: Attack Anti-Science: Science has been the force that pulled us out of the dark ages. These politically motivated attacks on science and scientists ("They're all lying for grant money") are pathetic, obvious and despicable. They need to be countered at every opportunity.


Deniers are not on board with this agenda. They invent ridiculous talking points like:

- "They want to destroy the economy" - Who the fark wants to destroy their own economy? This is epic stupidity.

- "They want to redistribute wealth" - While there is certainly an anti-1% movement out there it is not related to the science of AGW. They conflate these two to sew confusion and to misdirect away from the science.

- "The UN is going to take over our government" - They are claiming that the organization that they eternally mock for being impotent and only able to send out "strongly worded letters" is now going to take over the world. Real Dr. Evil stuff here folks.

These idiot statements represent the intense stupidity of the denier movement.

Personally I prefer cleaner air, less money to terrorists and support for science. But you keep going with the idiotic lies if that suits you better.
 
2014-02-14 11:20:55 AM

Farking Canuck: Personally I prefer cleaner air, less money to terrorists and support for science. But you keep going with the idiotic lies if that suits you better


No.

You have an agenda because despite the fact that I agree with your position, with the exception of the assertion that you believe we're doing nothing, you insist on labeling me as a denier and calling me idiotic.  You are so blinded by your evangelism that you can't see when someone mostly concurs if they dispute even one of your "facts"

I'm going to build a coal powered steam car just to spite you now..
 
2014-02-14 11:27:03 AM

AngryDragon: Farking Canuck: Personally I prefer cleaner air, less money to terrorists and support for science. But you keep going with the idiotic lies if that suits you better

No.

You have an agenda because despite the fact that I agree with your position, with the exception of the assertion that you believe we're doing nothing, you insist on labeling me as a denier and calling me idiotic.  You are so blinded by your evangelism that you can't see when someone mostly concurs if they dispute even one of your "facts"

I'm going to build a coal powered steam car just to spite you now..



a) I did not say I believe we're doing nothing. I said "Much progress has been made in spite of the denier mantra of "do nothing". Please do not misrepresent me.

b) I did not call you idiotic ... I attacked the denier movement and the denier talking points as idiotic. Please do not misrepresent me.

c) I attacked the denier talking points that you were presenting. If you do not agree with these talking points then stop presenting them. If you do agree with them ... well, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck ...

Good luck with the car ... you will need some science to achieve your goal.
 
2014-02-14 11:34:18 AM

GeneralJim: LouDobbsAwaaaay: gretzkyscores: Someone tell reality to start conforming to the models NOW, dammit!

Or we could just tell you that a single year doesn't equate to a trend that you can compare to model projections.  You idiots chase every data point like you're scoring points in a game against someone, and completely ignore the trend.
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 850x402]


people.virginia.edu

Heh. GeneralJim is inadvertently providing an example of exactly the sort of cherry-picking that LouDobbsAwaaaay is arguing against. Instead of chasing a single data point in a temporal sense, GeneralJim has done so in a spatial sense.  A single temperature record from Greenland does not somehow disprove global trends.

That out of the way, a more robust holocene record from Marcott et al. 2013,  taking 73 records instead of just one, looks more like this:

img.fark.net
 
2014-02-14 11:45:04 AM

fredmcmurray: I agree, we can't be sure that any of this global warming, climate change, blah blah blah can be proven. Ipso facto, let's pollute more! Do conservatives actually CONSERVE anything anymore?


Ignorance, failed economic policies, failed drug policies, discrimination, and intolerance, for starters.

Yeah, they still conserve quite a bit, sadly.
 
2014-02-14 12:07:15 PM

GeneralJim: Surpheon: What a shock, a confident Internet Expert knows far more than all the folks who study this for a living.Yeah, he may well know better.   The so-called "experts" have booted every prediction they've made so far.  Not only that, they've booted them in the same direction, and by approximately the same factor, and in over 25 years haven't managed to correct their error.  And, in fact, if the gentleman you are insulting here is being honest, he is ahead of much of the climatology community.  Pretty much the entire "leadership" of the climatology community is selling their "consensus" to politicians, who are buying results favorable to draconian new measures with a 20-fold increase in research money as a Quid-Pro-Quo.
[www.climatedialogue.org image 607x342]



Comparing a temperature record to the  averages from model runsis misleading.

It's the exact same faulty reasoning that mandated this response:
img.fark.net

No matter how it's presented, shorter term changes may not accurately reflect longer-term ones. It's a simple concept that I hope others can grasp, even if GeneralJim (and subby) cannot.
 
2014-02-14 05:25:30 PM

oldfarthenry: Psssst - note to Canuckians: the US invasion starts next week.


First we'll throw Bieber at you, and then Drake. Don't make us go full Dion.
 
2014-02-14 07:11:04 PM

ransack.: Dr Jack Badofsky: unexplained bacon: looks like we're getting a heat wave next week, not sure if that's factored in DRTFA

damn it's been a hard winter, I can't recall one so cold and so snowy with so few breaks.

In the Buffalo area, that would be the winter of 2010/2011.  Started December 3rd, and didn't warm up until at least mid-march.  We just didn't have the temps so close to zero (or below like a couple nights ago).  That was some major mandingsnow.

What is "mandingsnow"?


That is my own term for the major screwing WNY got from the large amount of snowfall we got.  It was big and hung....around for awhile.  It also farked the area good when it came to people who had longer commutes.  It happened in 1992 and 1993 as well.  The blizzard of '77 was the largest amount of mandingsnow I've ever seen, even though it wasn't new snow (that was snow sitting on top of frozen Lake Erie that the wind picked up off the ice and dropped on us).
 
2014-02-14 09:56:11 PM
Isnt it about time we just let go and embrace the global warming and stop worrying about it?

There is little no nothing individuals can do about it beyond personal responsibility.  And each of our separate carbon footprints is practically meaningless compared to industry.
 
2014-02-14 11:57:06 PM

SlothB77: jgilb: Since our planet acts as a zero sum engine, I would fully expect winter to become worse as the planet heats up.

so, as the planet gets warmer, it will get equally colder.  so the warmth will be counterbalanced.  so the net effect will be no change.  got it.  so the problem is what then?


The problem is that someone is actually moranic enough to think that the planet acts as a zero sum engine.
 
Displayed 10 of 260 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report