Climate Disruption.

A place to discuss politics and things related to Govts
Message
Author
AtomKraft
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 2549
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 8:05 am
Location: Planet Claire
Gender:
Age: 63

Re: Climate Disruption.

#41 Post by AtomKraft » Fri Jun 29, 2018 4:55 pm

Exackerly Fox.

Don't listen to what they say, watch what they DO!

BenThere
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 12:54 am
Location: Michigan/Quintana Roo
Gender:
Age: 72

Re: Climate Disruption.

#42 Post by BenThere » Sun Jul 01, 2018 8:44 pm

Isn't it interesting though, that the more energy a nation consumes, the better off its population is?

The rub seems to be more how clean that energy is. It's pretty clear to me that the future will demand nuclear energy development and application, and eventually the luddite opposition will be swept away.

John Hill
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 5695
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 7:40 pm
Location: Aotearoa

Re: Climate Disruption.

#43 Post by John Hill » Sun Jul 01, 2018 8:54 pm

Not every country is allowed to use nuclear energy.
Been in data comm since we formed the bits individually with a Morse key.

BenThere
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 12:54 am
Location: Michigan/Quintana Roo
Gender:
Age: 72

Re: Climate Disruption.

#44 Post by BenThere » Sun Jul 01, 2018 9:45 pm

Actually every country is allowed to use nuclear energy. There is no international authority to prevent it. Some countries, apparently including New Zealand, self-impose constraints against the cleanest, most cost-effective energy source the world has yet developed. Why I can't tell you as it makes no sense to me.

Slasher

Re: Climate Disruption.

#45 Post by Slasher » Sun Jul 01, 2018 10:50 pm

BenThere wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 9:45 pm
Some countries, apparently including New Zealand, self-impose constraints against the cleanest, most cost-effective energy source the world has yet developed. Why I can't tell you as it makes no sense to me.
Same with Oz. That island has huge reserves of U (yellowcake) in the ground and refuse to dig any up. In the 70s and 80s there was a very influential and interfering left wing anti-nuke movement (courteously set up by the CPA, SPA in assistance to the ALP), aims of which were to decrease U production to the Western powers and so to the advantage of the USSR, and to of course stifle any economic gain by the country in such yellowcake sales. At least it gave dope-smoking dole-blushing no-hoper morons some activity to do after the Nam war ended.

Dunno what the attitude to Uranium mining is down there these days Ben. As usual I couldn't give a stuff.

BenThere
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 12:54 am
Location: Michigan/Quintana Roo
Gender:
Age: 72

Re: Climate Disruption.

#46 Post by BenThere » Mon Jul 02, 2018 5:13 am

You'd think Oz would promote its abundance of commodities like uranium. A few years ago, when commodities were hot, the Aussie dollar sold for $1.05 US. I know, I was in Oz at the time, marveling at the high cost of everything, especially cigarettes. Now they're over $30 for a pack of 20. The upside is that the tax is regressive, punishing tobacco addicts who can mostly least afford it.

Today, though, the Aussie dollar can be bought for about $.74 US, which is about right in terms of purchasing power parity.

But there's also the matter of tariffs under discussion these days. I bought a car last year for about $80,000 US. To buy the same car in OZ, my brother in law told me, would be about $110,000 US (converted to Aussies). It's amazing people still smoke or drive in OZ.

Slasher

Re: Climate Disruption.

#47 Post by Slasher » Mon Jul 02, 2018 10:33 am

In actual fact Ben I'm surprised anyone down there can afford anything that isn't a priority for survival, given the very heavy ubiquitous taxes imposed on the local masses. But that's their problem.

From what I've been told, one can obtain cheap smokes there from the underground economy. But it's a matter of not getting caught.

User avatar
Fox3WheresMyBanana
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 12987
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:51 pm
Location: Great White North
Gender:
Age: 61

Re: Climate Disruption.

#48 Post by Fox3WheresMyBanana » Wed Jul 04, 2018 1:53 pm

The Arizona Appellate Court has ordered the release of the emails surrounding the 'hockey stick' graph, after over 4 years of the University trying to stop just that.
The opponents of AGW are rubbing their hands with glee. Should be interesting. Discussion here:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/07/03/ ... -released/

User avatar
Fox3WheresMyBanana
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 12987
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:51 pm
Location: Great White North
Gender:
Age: 61

Re: Climate Disruption.

#49 Post by Fox3WheresMyBanana » Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:47 pm

If you ever wondered what rubbish data the IPCC is using to come up with their climate nonsense, an Aussie has just done an analysis of their primary dataset for his PhD.
Some highlights:
Freakishly improbable data, and systematic adjustment errors , large gaps where there is no data, location errors, Fahrenheit temperatures reported as Celsius, and spelling errors.
Almost no quality control checks have been done: outliers that are obvious mistakes have not been corrected – one town in Columbia spent three months in 1978 at an average daily temperature of over 80 degrees C. One town in Romania stepped out from summer in 1953 straight into a month of Spring at minus 46°C. These are supposedly “average” temperatures for a full month at a time. St Kitts, a Caribbean island, was recorded at 0°C for a whole month, and twice!
Temperatures for the entire Southern Hemisphere in 1850 and for the next three years are calculated from just one site in Indonesia and some random ships.
Sea surface temperatures represent 70% of the Earth’s surface, but some measurements come from ships which are logged at locations 100km inland. Others are in harbors which are hardly representative of the open ocean.
When a thermometer is relocated to a new site, the adjustment assumes that the old site was always built up and “heated” by concrete and buildings. In reality, the artificial warming probably crept in slowly. By correcting for buildings that likely didn’t exist in 1880, old records are artificially cooled. Adjustments for a few site changes can create a whole century of artificial warming trends.
More here
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/10/07/ ... th-errors/

Sisemen

Re: Climate Disruption.

#50 Post by Sisemen » Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:01 pm

But tell that to the believers.....the sky is definitely falling in :D

User avatar
Alisoncc
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 4260
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 7:20 am
Location: Arrakis
Gender:
Age: 80

Re: Climate Disruption.

#51 Post by Alisoncc » Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:17 pm

Fox3WheresMyBanana wrote:
Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:47 pm
If you ever wondered what rubbish data the IPCC is using to come up with their climate nonsense, an Aussie has just done an analysis of their primary dataset for his PhD.
I expected better from you Fox. So one persons analysis supposedly is more credible than that of a hundred or so well respected scientists. Given sufficient time one can pick holes in every scientific paper ever published. Which does raise an interesting concern. The IPCC report has only just been released. So when did your PhD student get to analyse it? Was it an overnight thing?

Alison
Rev Mother Bene Gesserit.

Sent from my PDP11/05 running RSX-11D via an ASR33 (TTY)

User avatar
Fox3WheresMyBanana
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 12987
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:51 pm
Location: Great White North
Gender:
Age: 61

Re: Climate Disruption.

#52 Post by Fox3WheresMyBanana » Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:32 pm

The student was awarded his doctorate.
He analysed the HadCRUT data as it was in Nov 2016.
The opinion of the scientists must be based on credible data, and HadCRUT isn't that.
They may wish to reconsider their opinions now the errors are known. One awaits the database being corrected, which is what anyone calling themselves a scientist should immediately do.
The criticisms of the data have been going for a long time, using many individual examples, but this is the first comprehensive survey.
One particular criticism which I have been aware of for 20 years is the paucity of the data from earlier times, one particular one being the use of a very small number of trees to estimate the temperature for most of South America about 50 years ago. Naturally, the scientists involved had no interest in continuing to use the trees since the data reflected what they wanted to hear. Well, some student went down to Chile, I think it was, and after some clever detective work actually managed to find those trees, down to the holes in them from the tree ring borer. He took some more modern samples and noted the environment. The climate scientists didn't want to know, mainly because the new data didn't fit their AGW theories.
And the person's analysis is not the key point, the data errors are, and they are facts, unarguable. These errors exist throughout the database,, and render it completely unusable for estimating small margins of change over long periods, which is what the IPCC are using it for.

Science is about facts and accurate predictions. The IPCC are using neither.
"Well respected" has persisted errors in science throughout history more than any other single cause. And that's not my opinion, that's the standard syllabus point for teaching science in the UK.

Sisemen

Re: Climate Disruption.

#53 Post by Sisemen » Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:39 pm

“a hundred or so well respected scientists”

A glib statement Alison. Do you actually know who they are and what fields of science they represent or are you just quoting the standard mantra of the believers?

User avatar
Alisoncc
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 4260
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 7:20 am
Location: Arrakis
Gender:
Age: 80

Re: Climate Disruption.

#54 Post by Alisoncc » Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:10 pm

Sorry Fox your premise wholly lacks credibility because your third last sentence has two commas when there should only be one. <sic!>

Whilst as an Aspie I love numbers, I also have a very logical brain. One that says if we have been releasing truly massive quantities of previously sequestered carbon then there will be a downside. "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch". I would seek to draw your attention to a common phenomena often evident in IT development. Analysis paralysis. Nothing actually gets done as people refuse to move forward until all the "facts" are 100% provable. At some point in time one must accept the logic of a statement.

Not dissimilar to the massive plastic pollution that is burying the planet. There are beaches in Australia that have never felt a human footprint, yet there is evidence of our presence by the plastic debris thereon. Should we choose not to do anything about it until we can accurately measure the size of the problem? I think not.

Alison
Rev Mother Bene Gesserit.

Sent from my PDP11/05 running RSX-11D via an ASR33 (TTY)

User avatar
Fox3WheresMyBanana
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 12987
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2015 9:51 pm
Location: Great White North
Gender:
Age: 61

Re: Climate Disruption.

#55 Post by Fox3WheresMyBanana » Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:38 pm

Firstly, thanks for the correction; I see the error now.
Secondly, that forms part of my next point. In science, one encourages others to try to pick holes in one's work, just as one does in aviation. If they can't, one has more corroboration that one may be right. If not, human knowledge still expands. As the man who flew the last unsuccessful round-the-world balloon flight said to my class, "We didn't fail, we found another way that doesn't work." And the next, successful, attempt was able to do so on the back of learning why his team failed. So any group of scientists that suppresses or ignores valid questions are either idiots, or more likely strongly suspect they are wrong.
The issue is not whether the world is warming up, it clearly is. Nor is it that human CO2 generation has a net contributory effect to global warming, it does. The issue is whether the human CO2 generation is a significant contributory factor to the current global warming, and the IPCC's model predictions that say it is don't work. The IPCC itself said that its predictions were not valid over a period of less than 19 years. Well, we're past that now, as they avoid saying. They are wrong. And one of the possible reasons is that they appear to be based on sh!t data.

I completely agree with you about plastic, and there's ample evidence of the problem in, for example, the stomachs of dead dolphins. Different issue. Partly connected by the attitude of a throwaway society, which I have always been against. We should be reducing carbon production as a natural consequence of increasing energy efficiency, in the major contributors of housing, transportation, and a consumer society. But the same politicians who bang on about AGW are doing practically nothing about any of those, and in lots of cases are making the situation worse. Hypocrisy alone does not do them justice, they are stupid and greedy as well.

User avatar
Stoneboat
Capt
Capt
Posts: 1947
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2015 9:09 pm
Location: 50-13.5N/66-16.0W
Gender:
Age: 77

Re: Climate Disruption.

#56 Post by Stoneboat » Thu Oct 11, 2018 1:01 pm


Magnus
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 3484
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2015 12:42 pm
Location: Edinburgh
Gender:
Age: 71

Re: Climate Disruption.

#57 Post by Magnus » Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:03 pm

Alison, the plastic evidence is irrefutable; plastic rarely arises spontaneously, and there is little evidence in the fossil record. However, the warmistas seem to confuse correlation with causation, and seem reluctant to explain what the climate was like when receding icecaps expose viking settlements in Greenland. What kept the icecaps at bay on pre-industrial days? The fossil and archaeological data seem to support the idea of a warmer planet nearly 1000 years ago. The archaeological record has yet to uncover wind turbines making a scintilla of difference to the planet's temperature during the reign of William the Conqueror when the icecaps appear to have been expanding again after centuries of recession.

BenThere
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 3804
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2015 12:54 am
Location: Michigan/Quintana Roo
Gender:
Age: 72

Re: Climate Disruption.

#58 Post by BenThere » Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:02 pm

Add to that the Climate Change/born as Global Warming zealots who promised a melted Arctic and the flooding of New York and Miami would have occurred by now haven't really been called to account, even though they cost the world trillions of $ to mitigate the catastrophe they falsely predicted.

Meanwhile, the climate here in Michigan hasn't changed a whit. It's warm and beautiful in Spring and Summer, cold and gray in Fall and Winter. It has ever been thus, despite the interventions of humanity. Actually Michigan would benefit from a bit of warming overall. You could also make the case that increased CO2 levels, coupled with associated warming might actually improve the lot of mankind and the flora and fauna we live with - more food, fewer thermal challenges, and for us retired folks, more warm, sandy beaches.

User avatar
Undried Plum
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 7308
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2018 8:45 pm
Location: 56°N 4°W

What's behind denialism?

#59 Post by Undried Plum » Wed Nov 07, 2018 3:54 pm


User avatar
OFSO
Chief Pilot
Chief Pilot
Posts: 18600
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 6:39 pm
Location: Teddington UK and Roses Catalunia
Gender:
Age: 80

Re: Climate Disruption.

#60 Post by OFSO » Wed Nov 07, 2018 8:36 pm

On the one hand, we have reports, lots of reports, from just about everywhere and everybody. Wow, things are getting bad ! On the other hand, having lived much of the past 25 years in the same spot, I've observed the seasons come and go, mountains turn white, leaves fall and return, local reservoir empty and refill, and I'd go along with Ben. Averaging the years out, in my little lifespan I can't see any evidence of climate change. Note what I wrote. I'm not denying it may be happening, just my local view. And my local town, as it was, is a marina city with 22 kms of sea-linked canals, and the water has not risen an inch.

Post Reply