Overnight Open Thread

Open • Views: 5,607

The danger is that global warming may become self-sustaining, if it has not done so already. The melting of the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps reduces the fraction of solar energy reflected back into space, and so increases the temperature further. Climate change may kill off the Amazon and other rain forests, and so eliminate once one of the main ways in which carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere. The rise in sea temperature may trigger the release of large quantities of carbon dioxide, trapped as hydrides on the ocean floor. Both these phenomena would increase the greenhouse effect, and so global warming further. We have to reverse global warming urgently, if we still can.

— Professor Stephen Hawking

Jump to bottom

387 comments
1 laZardo  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:07:53pm

Great, just as I was starting to miss the ocean threads. q;

2 Fenway_Nation  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:14:54pm

re: #1 laZardo

With global warming, all threads will be ocean threads! It'll be like Waterworld...

3 laZardo  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:17:25pm

re: #2 Fenway_Nation

With global warming, all threads will be ocean threads! It'll be like Waterworld...

That is unless nuclear winter cancels it out.

/I miss Futurama...

4 lostlakehiker  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:18:48pm

I think we can keep it from getting to the Venus runaway stage. But much of what Hawking warns of is already baked in the cake.

5 Fenway_Nation  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:23:23pm

re: #3 laZardo

Don't they still crank out a movie every now and then?

6 freetoken  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:24:52pm

Not all that is beautiful may be photographed... the beauty of the mind is elusive...

What is not so elusive is Christmas, which is only 26 shopping days away!

MP3 Audio
7 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:26:02pm

re: #3 laZardo

That is unless nuclear winter cancels it out.

/I miss Futurama...

It'll be back on the air next year. Comedy Central will be airing a whole new season and all the original voice cast will be in it.

8 laZardo  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:26:06pm

re: #5 Fenway_Nation

I didn't know Futurama had movies. O:

9 carnaby  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:30:55pm

OK, that is really just plain dumb. If the earth climate system was that unstable, or unstable at all, the temperature of the planet would have run away ages ago. This is one of the primary arguments of Lindzen, that the earth climate system is intrinsically stable. If this were not the case, we would not be here not to discuss the matter.

10 Fenway_Nation  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:33:06pm

re: #8 laZardo

I think they were released straight to DVD.

11 freetoken  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:37:18pm

re: #9 carnaby

... of Lindzen, that the earth climate system is intrinsically stable. If this were not the case, we would not be here not to discuss the matter.

"Stable" is not a very good term to use. "Dynamic equilibrium" is thrown out by LVQ as the preferred description, though I don't really like that term either.

Hawking's point is simply that once drive far enough Earth's climate system will revert back to the very warm climate of 40 or 50 million years ago. That is, our current ice age, from the onset of the Pleistocene, can be overridden by human effort. In other words, we won't get an intermediate step that is say 60% Pleistocene and 40% Eocene, but rather the full on PETM in all its glory.

12 laZardo  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:37:27pm

Gonna snack. Brb. >_>

13 loudog  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:45:18pm

As much as I admire Stephen Hawking, he is a theoretical physicist. Climate change is not his area of expertise. He's entitled to his opinion, but like Al Gore, you can't put any weight behind it. (Perhaps given Al Gore's weight, that was probably not the best analogy...)

14 carnaby  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:48:13pm

re: #11 freetoken

But the earth is only 6000 years old, so there's no such thing as the Pleistocene or Eocene, and hence nothing to be overridden by human effort, duh.

In all seriousness, there are certainly myriad equilibria in which the earth/climate dynamic system could be found. I'm not an expert on this system in particular, but neither is Hawking, and I am more of an expert on dynamic systems than he is. The long and the short of the matter is that I think our current equilibrium is very stable, and to force us out of this equilibrium would take a lot more than the introduction into the atmosphere of the minuscule amount of CO2 we're capable of putting there.

15 Fenway_Nation  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:50:41pm

College Football over for the week. Very Sad.

16 Gus  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:52:21pm

re: #9 carnaby

OK, that is really just plain dumb. If the earth climate system was that unstable, or unstable at all, the temperature of the planet would have run away ages ago. This is one of the primary arguments of Lindzen, that the earth climate system is intrinsically stable. If this were not the case, we would not be here not to discuss the matter.


Affiliations & Funding: Dr. Lindzen has claimed in Newsweek and elsewhere that his funding comes exclusively from government sources, but he does not seem to include speaking fees and other personal compensation in this statement. Ross Gelbspan, who did some of the first reporting on climate skeptics' links to industry, wrote in Harper's Magazine in 1995: "[Lindzen] charges oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western Fuels, and a speech he wrote, entitled 'Global Warming: the Origin and Nature of Alleged Scientific Consensus,' was underwritten by OPEC."

Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D.

Dr. Lindzen is a member of the Advisory Council of the Annapolis Center for Science Based Public Policy, which has received large amounts of funding from ExxonMobil and smaller amounts from Daimler Chrysler, according to a review Exxon's own financial documents and 990s from Daimler Chrysler's Foundation. Lindzen is a also been a contributor to the Cato Institute, which has taken $90,000 from Exxon since 1998, according to the website Exxonsecrets.org and a review Exxon financial documents. He is also a contributor for the George C. Marshall Institute.

Recent viewpoints: On January 31, 2007, Lindzen appeared on Larry King Live and said, regarding fear of global warming, "I think it's mainly just like little kids locking themselves in dark closets to see how much they can scare each other and themselves." Weeks later, he told the San Diego Union-Tribune, "To say that climate change will be catastrophic hides a cascade of value-laden assumptions that do not emerge from empirical science." Dr. Lindzen also appeared in the March 8, 2007 film The Great Global Warming Swindle, which aired on British television.

17 Dark_Falcon  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:52:30pm

Good night, all.

18 freetoken  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:52:48pm

re: #14 carnaby

... the minuscule amount of CO2 we're capable of putting there...

Currently about 1/3 of the CO2 in the atmosphere is there due to human actions, and it is going to go much higher.

I would not call that miniscule.

Also, as there is no precedent in the current (or any other) ice age for what humans are doing, I'd challenge you to come up with a reason for, rather than an assertion of, the idea that "our current equilibrium is very stable".

19 freetoken  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:53:06pm

re: #17 Dark_Falcon

g'nite.

20 Gus  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:54:33pm
Lindzen clearly relishes the role of naysayer. He'll even expound on how weakly lung cancer is linked to cigarette smoking.

[Link: www.newsweek.com...]

21 Fenway_Nation  Sat, Nov 28, 2009 11:55:33pm

re: #17 Dark_Falcon


G'nite, D_F.

22 carnaby  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 12:08:31am

re: #18 freetoken

The amount of CO2 is minuscule compared to the total composition of the atmosphere, not compared to the amount of CO2. The earth atmosphere is currently something like 0.038% CO2 by volume. So if you take away a third of that, you are left with an atmosphere that is 0.026% CO2. Any way you slice it, it's puny.

23 freetoken  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 12:32:35am

re: #22 carnaby

The amount of CO2 is minuscule compared to the total composition of the atmosphere, not compared to the amount of CO2. The earth atmosphere is currently something like 0.038% CO2 by volume. So if you take away a third of that, you are left with an atmosphere that is 0.026% CO2. Any way you slice it, it's puny.

Just wanted to know where you are coming from... and now we do. It's the KUSI weatherman's approach, i.e., John Coleman and his effort to lead the innumerate astray.

It is a fallacy to try and represent the amount of CO2 using % and declare it small because it is after the decimal point. There are a very many chemicals in life that are quite deadly at that %.

Indeed, to understand molecules one should deal in Avogadro's number, which is about 6 x 10^22 atoms of Carbon-12 in 12 grams of mass. Since humans put roughly 30 billion metric tons of carbon in the atmosphere per year, that is 30 gigatonnes / 12 grams x Avogadro's number = 1 x 10^35 atoms of carbon man's fossil fuels add to the atmosphere per year.

100000000000000000000000000000000000 atoms more of carbon per year, and you call that "puny".

It's a silly game to play, but that is what you're doing.

The reason relatively small changes in CO2 end up having such a large effect is because the flow of energy from the Sun is so large, and because of conservation of energy.

Small rudders steer very big ships, and all of that.

24 Bagua  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 12:34:28am

Musical Interlude:

Welcome to Jamrock

MP3 Audio
25 freetoken  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 12:37:55am

re: #24 Bagua

Glad to see you figured out the mp3 player...

26 Bagua  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 12:45:51am

re: #25 freetoken

Yep, there's a new DJ in the House... thanks to your pioneering example.

27 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:00:22am

Dumb story of the day...Woman sees Jesus in iron...yup..her iron
[Link: blogs.discovermagazine.com...]

28 Fenway_Nation  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:03:08am

re: #27 HoosierHoops

Dumb story of the day...Woman sees Jesus in iron...yup..her iron
[Link: blogs.discovermagazine.com...]

Isn't it iron-ic?

29 tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:04:18am

re: #22 carnaby
right on. Couple this with the limited ability of CO2 to absorb radiative wavelengths and yur left with a warming signature that's...undetectable.
Doesn't matter, of course. Lindzen's recent work, arguably the world's greatest climate scientist, wherein he clearly proves via unassailable (in any relevant degree) ERBA data that as temperature goes up, the Earth 'takes off it's jacket'...well, it's pretty well reduced CO2 to a 'bit player' in the world climate system.
The Hawking quote is...provocative, not informative.

30 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:07:23am

re: #28 Fenway_Nation

Isn't it iron-ic?

crazy lady..
I'm watching the LSU game on the tube from earlier today..
I just know the rolling ticker on the bottom of the screen is going to tell me the ending score...

31 freetoken  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:08:19am

re: #29 tiburon

Couple this with the limited ability of CO2 to absorb radiative wavelengths and yur left with a warming signature that's...undetectable.

B.S.

32 Fenway_Nation  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:08:29am

re: #30 HoosierHoops

Keep watching- it's a good one.

So was Utah/BYU.

33 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:10:31am

re: #32 Fenway_Nation

Keep watching- it's a good one.

So was Utah/BYU.

I saw the BYU game...Your right..Good game..
TCU went 12-0? Wow...Impressed

34 Bagua  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:15:39am

re: #29 tiburon

[...] Lindzen's recent work, arguably the world's greatest climate scientist, [...]

Able to leap tall buildings, with a single leap?

35 Fenway_Nation  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:16:43am

re: #33 HoosierHoops

That includes games against BYU and Utah...

I'd say the Mountain West is no slouch.

36 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:20:18am

re: #35 Fenway_Nation

That includes games against BYU and Utah...

I'd say the Mountain West is no slouch.

Did you see Purdue Basketball is #6 in the Nation?

37 ghazidor  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:25:06am

Tim Tebow played his last home game for the Gators today, *sniff* it's the end of an era.

(not completely sure about the SEC championship though, they aren't playing quite as well as last year and Alabama is playing better. Should be a pretty good game anyway no matter who wins.)

38 littleugly  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:27:54am

#35 Fenway Nation

So what do you prefer; Halladay and keep Bay,
or Adrian and Halladay?

39 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:29:04am

re: #37 ausador

Tim Tebow played his last home game for the Gators today, *sniff* it's the end of an era.

(not completely sure about the SEC championship though, they aren't playing quite as well as last year and Alabama is playing better. Should be a pretty good game anyway no matter who wins.)

I wonder how Tim will do in the NFL.. He won't be able to run as much in the pros.. They will hurt you..
I like him though

40 Tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:32:31am

re: #31 freetoken
To quote ya: - "Small rudders steer very big ships, and all of that"
Worked great for the Exxon Valdez, eh? Talk about B.S.

41 Fenway_Nation  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:33:34am

re: #38 littleugly

Hmmm...I've seen what Adrian can do in a pitcher-friendly park like PetCo. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't intruiged at the prospect of seeing him in a Sox uni.

/plus Lowell's not getting any younger- we'll be needing a corner infielder sooner rather than later

42 ghazidor  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:33:36am

re: #29 tiburon

When the lights go down in the California town
The socks come out for the evening
I jump into my car and I throw in my guitar
My heart beatin' time with my breathin'
Drivin' over Kanan, singin' to my soul
There's people out there turnin' denial into gold...

43 Tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:37:17am

re: #42 ausador

sorry, ausador - I came to my 'denial' honestly...at the feet of John Daly, (memory-for-a-blessing). Yours?

44 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:38:41am

re: #40 Tiburon

To quote ya: - "Small rudders steer very big ships, and all of that"
Worked great for the Exxon Valdez, eh? Talk about B.S.

So by that thought process...If a Indy Car hits the wall at 200mph we can blame the steering wheel?
The Captain of the Valdez was drunk..Doesn't back up your climate change argument

45 ryannon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:41:47am

Optimism you can believe in.

46 ghazidor  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:42:25am

re: #43 Tiburon

With 2863 posts and only 51 karma? You must not ever much to say that anyone finds very insightful. Just sayin...

47 Tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:45:34am

re: #44 HoosierHoops
Hi Hoosier. Ummm, ...I'm not making an 'argument', my friend. Just science facts. Check out how, physically, CO2 actually absorbs heat, and what the limits of that are, physically. Grossly simplified, there's already nearly enough in the atmosphere (thanks to our help) that additional inputs will have logarithmically decreasing effects.
And the Earth, having being around 3-4 billion years (our time, here), hasn't been pulled over DWI that I've heard of...

48 Tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:47:09am

re: #46 ausador

wot's a karma, mate?

49 ryannon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:47:23am

re: #25 freetoken

Glad to see you figured out the mp3 player...

I wish I could...

Zit 'splained somewhere 'round heah?

50 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:47:41am

re: #47 Tiburon

On a side note..Are you from Tiburon, Ca.?
Great town

51 littleugly  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:48:58am

re: #41 Fenway_Nation

I'm shooting myself in the foot here, for I am a Yankees fan. but your best fit is Adrian, he hit 40 while playing most of his games at PetCo and I think he is only like 26.
Good luck, next year.

52 Fenway_Nation  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:50:47am

re: #51 littleugly

Same deal w/Bay when he was a pirate IIRC. High 200s batting average for somebody who played most of their home games in a pitcher-friendly ballpark.

53 Tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:52:17am

re: #50 HoosierHoops
nah...Canuck...but there's a sharp markets guy who is...

54 ryannon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:53:07am

re: #42 ausador

When the lights go down in the California town
The socks come out for the evening
I jump into my car and I throw in my guitar
My heart beatin' time with my breathin'
Drivin' over Kanan, singin' to my soul
There's people out there turnin' denial into gold...

That deserves a listen to the real thing - and a great American classic it is. Love hearing Stevie Nicks with him as well:

Youtube Video
55 Tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:55:09am

re: #54 ryannon
ditto that

56 ghazidor  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:01:06am

re: #54 ryannon

That deserves a listen to the real thing - and a great American classic it is. Love hearing Stevie Nicks with him as well:

My brother was such a hugh Stevie fan boy he about ruined her for me, I was actually glad when he found out she was a "witch" and wrote her off. Or at least I was until he turned to Olivia Newton John to take her place, I must have heard the "grease" and "xanadu" soundtracks about a million times. :(

57 Fenway_Nation  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:04:34am

re: #56 ausador


Isn't Xanadu the alien that flew to earth with all those souls on ice according to Scientology?

58 ghazidor  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:07:20am

re: #57 Fenway_Nation

Isn't Xanadu the alien that flew to earth with all those souls on ice according to Scientology?

Ask Cruise or Travolta, I'm not too sure.

59 ryannon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:11:40am

re: #56 ausador

My brother was such a hugh Stevie fan boy he about ruined her for me, I was actually glad when he found out she was a "witch" and wrote her off. Or at least I was until he turned to Olivia Newton John to take her place, I must have heard the "grease" and "xanadu" soundtracks about a million times. :(

She sounds like an ok witch (if that was really what she was into) to me:

Rumors of witchcraft
A rumor that has trailed Nicks through the years is that she is a witch and is heavily involved in Wicca. While she admits to having a high regard for the mythic and gothic, she denies any solitary dedication to any one religion, including Wicca. She speaks about this erroneous image in a 2006 interview.[61] Nicks' music is copyrighted under the name Welsh Witch Music, a reference to her song Rhiannon, which she introduced as "a song about a Welsh witch" in concerts between 1975 and 1978. In a Yahoo! interview on April 28, 1998, Nicks said of the rumor: "I have no idea what precipitated those rumors...I am not a witch. Get a life!" Nicks also stated in a 1983 Entertainment Tonight interview: "I spent thousands of dollars on beautiful black clothes and had to stop wearing them for a long time because a lot of people scared me. And that's really unfair to me, I think, for people – other people – to conjure up their ideas of what I am or what I believe in." In a 1998 Redbook magazine article, Nicks spoke of her faith, stating that she believes in angels and knows that she is alive today because "there was a God looking out" for her during her years of addiction.

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]


Come to think of it, I know a SoCal married couple who are Wiccans: nicest people you'd ever want to meet.

60 Fenway_Nation  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:13:15am

re: #58 ausador

I think I should just watch that South Park episode where they verbatim summarize Dianetics or whatever the fuck it is...

61 ryannon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:14:46am

re: #60 Fenway_Nation

I think I should just watch that South Park episode where they verbatim summarize Dianetics or whatever the fuck it is...

The 'Tom Cruise is in the closet' (not the real title, but I've since forgotten) episode! Worth finding - hilarious!

62 ghazidor  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:17:37am

re: #56 ausador

I should have mentioned that this was when he like 20 years old and shareing an apartment with me at college. As the older brother mom felt it was my duty to let him move in with me, man did that year suck. If I had to pick a roommate I least wanted it would have been his smug holier than thou uber christianist self.

Thank goodness he decided to move to other quarters for his second year because he didn't like my "friends and those girls you always have around." He was seriously putting a crimp on my partying and any hopes I ever had of getting laid in college.

63 ghazidor  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:28:13am

re: #59 ryannon

She sounds like an ok witch (if that was really what she was into) to me:

Come to think of it, I know a SoCal married couple who are Wiccans: nicest people you'd ever want to meet.

You would have to know my brother, he is an ultra christianist rather than being Christian. As soon as he heard even a rumor of Stevie being a witch he was done with her, all that "Thou shall not suffer a witch to live" crap you know. :(

64 Fenway_Nation  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:31:22am

Hot chocolate and Bailey's is the shiz-nit.

That's all I'm saying on the matter.

65 ryannon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:32:19am

re: #63 ausador

You would have to know my brother, he is an ultra christianist rather than being Christian. As soon as he heard even a rumor of Stevie being a witch he was done with her, all that "Thou shall not suffer a witch to live" crap you know. :(

Oh do I ever know. Give people like that the widest berth possible.

66 NogenDavid  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:33:21am

When I consult Iyogi for technical support, they always conclude by wishing me good karma.

When I post on LGF on global warning, Charles always downdings me, and thereby implicitly reduces my karma score on this site, with possibly cosmic implications...

I am undaunted on the merits of my AGW arguments, which I believe are based on mature and reasoned inquiry; unrelieved of my need for software support, which is emotional, craven and primal, so...

..time for a little karmic chiasmus...

I will try discussing discuss my global warming views with Iyogi and
seek technical support from Charles.

Hopefully this is not a lechatelier principle situation, where any attempted perturbation is meet by a feedback mechanism which maintains my karma at a net zero.

My adversaries might argue that I do not deserve better karma.
I am hoping that the Clint Eastwood/Gene Hackman principle obtains, and desert has nothing to do with it.

67 son of a son  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:42:10am

The climate emperor has no clothes. The dam is broken. Nothing more to say.

68 Neutral President  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:50:08am

re: #67 son of a son

The climate emperor has no clothes. The dam is broken. Nothing more to say.

Yeah yeah yeah, dry that one out and you can fertilize the lawn.

69 Jon a Brit in Euroland  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 3:25:57am

Whatever a genius like Hawking says is obviously significant.

The advantage of Hawking is that he is steeped in the scientific method, and then some. Is he saying that we are at a position of dynamic equilibrium, of instability made stable by lots of feedback loops which can just turn into feed-forward loops as soon as certain boundary conditions are breached ? Sounds like it.

In such an unstable system I suggest that tinkering with just one of the elements which pushed us to instability is unlikely to be the holy grail to re-stabilize the system, just simply because there are so many variables at play.

If we are to do "climate engineering", which even a reduction of CO2 levels is in truth, we ought to be trying to jig a number of variables into place, particularly variables which we can fine tune as time goes on.

The most important variable is obviously incident solar radiation. Probably the reflection of incident solar radiation from the high atmosphere is another, which is likely correlated with surface albedo (white stuff, including ice, clouds etc...)

We have to start thinking about climate as a system, and take away climate control from those pursuing another agenda, related to a return to the "good old days", to primitive magical thinking about the ills of civilization and how nasty humankind is to the Earth.

The Earth does not owe any particular civilization a living, things change, and we are changing them. We have allowed our population to increase, and in some places this is already, or will soon become, unsustainable (sea level changes, climate changes and other stuff.)

Humanity was around during the last ice age, and obviously survived that. Presumably this would not have been survivable for all, and one can imagine (or try to) what a rapid development of an ice age would do to today's world. This should make us humble, and more determined to bite the bullet on climate engineering.

70 AK-47%  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 3:26:00am

Let's just put aside temporarily the arguments about climate change, the political and aconomic affililations of those involved in research, etc., and look at other benefits of cutting CO2.

For starters, reducing oil imports will make America and Europe less economically dependent on politically unstable nations and will reduce our need to maintain a military presence to keep supply lines open.

Researching and developing alternative means of generating energy along with more efficient means of using it could also help maintain America's technical leadership position, a very important consideration, especially as our manufacturing industries dwindle in significance.

I also come to the conclusion that the Earth is inherently stable over the long term, but it would take only the slightest change in temperature or climate to prompt some serious changes in our ability to grow food or access fresh water.

There is historical and archaeological evidence of such changes occuring in the past, and the evidence points to the fact that CO2 emissions would only exacerbate them.

71 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 3:42:48am

re: #69 Jon a Brit in Euroland

Whatever a genius like Hawking says is obviously significant.

Well, no. Noam Chomsky is certainly a brilliant mathematician, but you're not going to find many who accept his political ravings as a result. This is an example of an Argument from Authority, a well known fallacy that is never valid.

72 Purpendicular  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 3:45:17am

Charles,

Regarding another entry you write

I’ve commented several times in our discussions about this issue that I understand why the scientists at CRU were resistant to sharing data with people like Steven McIntyre, whose only reason for demanding access to the data is to cherry-pick through it for new out-of-context denialist talking points.


To me, this is the core of the whole argument. The normal scientific behaviour is to obtain your data, do your analysis, send off the article and the conference contributions. In your paper, you have an "Experimental" section, where you describe exactly how you did it, so that Bob and his uncle can reproduce your results. If someone asks, you send your data you to them. If you did a good job, all they can do is to reproduce your results. They will not get any papers published or jump ahead of you in the academic world based solely on reproducing your work.
If they decide to "cherry pick" from your results and draw dubious conclusions, they make fools out of themselves.
Of course, alternatively, they may come up with another, better explanation of your findings, but that is fine as well. You were wrong, and there should be no shame in that as long as your effort was honest, or their explanation is just an alternative version, and everyone needs to collect more data and/or think harder.
Whatever happens, science is being advanced.

You applied such critical thinking to the Beirut photos and to the Dan Rather scandal. I would guess you started off with a feeling that "that does not seem right" and then began digging. Unfortunately, the "other side" did not apply scientific openness.

73 Neutral President  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 3:50:29am

re: #71 SixDegrees

Well, no. Noam Chomsky is certainly a brilliant mathematician, but you're not going to find many who accept his political ravings as a result. This is an example of an Argument from Authority, a well known fallacy that is never valid.

Well he's a linguist not a mathematician but he's a genius in that field. I studied enough about context free languages getting my CS degree and his name popped up everywhere including what is called Chomsky Normal Form.

You are right though, in politics, not so much. In fact, I would go as far as to say he's an idiot in the field, probably due to being immersed in academia and not the real world.

74 schnapp  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 3:51:26am

The thing that pisses me off about climate sceptics is that they are not scientists or experts of any kind in climate science but thay refer to their "evidence" which they get from fringe scientists and accept it as fact because they want to believe it. They haven't done the research, they don't know jack sh*t about science, they're not climate scientists or geologists or anything like that, they just don't want to believe the science. I used to be one of them because yes, I would prefer it if climate change wasn't happening, but now i believe, as I'm not a scientist, I can't have an informed opinion on it and in the possibility that it is true, despite what the sceptics say, it will be worth it in 100 years time if we invest today in saving the environment from the possible effcts of global warming. But maybe the scientists are wrong. Maybe climate change isn't happening. But I am a conservative, and being a conservative I believe that we should take the precautions in case it is true, and the world is warming, because if we aren't conservative, and don't look at the effects of what will happen if we take no action, then we are pretty much f*cked. And this relentless denying of climate change by non-scientists has started to put me off people like Andrew Bolt, who I like and generally agree with. I'll stick with Charles who I have been reading every day without fail since January 2007.

75 Riptides  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 3:54:12am

re: #64 Fenway_Nation

Hot chocolate and Bailey's is the shiz-nit.

Old Gregg: Easy now, fuzzy little man-peach, hmm? You ever drunk Bailey's from a shoe?

76 Neutral President  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 3:55:38am

re: #74 schnapp

What pisses me off about, most... no all of them that tend to chime in here anyway is that they keep coming back with the same already debunked talking points. They are like creationists with their irreducible complexity and 'no transitional forms' garbage. Come with something new, and I'll listen and judge accordingly. Come with old bullshit, and you aren't doing anyone any good and are being dishonest, as well as wasting time, bandwidth, and my (and others) patience.

77 Oh no...Sand People!  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 4:33:35am
The danger is that global warming may become self-sustaining, if it has not done so already.

I am sure it has. Time to go and put my head back into my Call of Duty Modern Warfare II sand. Good time to the hot end!

78 son of a son  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 4:53:34am

re: #74 schnapp

I am a geologist and not a politically correct scientist. Nothing more to say.

79 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 4:58:41am

re: #74 schnapp

The thing that pisses me off about climate sceptics is that they are not scientists or experts of any kind in climate science

You mean like Al Gore?

80 AmeriDan  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:17:39am

re: #79 SixDegrees

You mean like Al Gore?

Heh.

81 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:17:53am

re: #29 tiburon

7Couple this with the limited ability of CO2 to absorb radiative wavelengths and yur left with a warming signature that's...undetectable.

The absorption of CO2 is not only incredibly basic physics, it's an experiment you can do yourself.

Why would you say something so obviously misleading? Of course it has a 'limited' ability, but it still has a very, very potent ability. Everything has a limited ability to absorb, except a perfect black-body. But the action of CO2 in atmosphere to promote global warming is simple, basic physics.

82 Wozza Matter?  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:24:51am

"My Fellow Americans" has just come on the teevee... Jack Lemon, James Garner... a great farce :-)

83 JohninLondon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:29:47am

re: #74 schnapp

The thing that pisses me off about climate sceptics is that they are not scientists or experts of any kind in climate science but thay refer to their "evidence" which they get from fringe scientists and accept it as fact because they want to believe it. They haven't done the research, they don't know jack sh*t about science, they're not climate scientists or geologists or anything like that, they just don't want to believe the science. I used to be one of them because yes, I would prefer it if climate change wasn't happening, but now i believe, as I'm not a scientist, I can't have an informed opinion on it and in the possibility that it is true, despite what the sceptics say, it will be worth it in 100 years time if we invest today in saving the environment from the possible effcts of global warming. But maybe the scientists are wrong. Maybe climate change isn't happening. But I am a conservative, and being a conservative I believe that we should take the precautions in case it is true, and the world is warming, because if we aren't conservative, and don't look at the effects of what will happen if we take no action, then we are pretty much f*cked. And this relentless denying of climate change by non-scientists has started to put me off people like Andrew Bolt, who I like and generally agree with. I'll stick with Charles who I have been reading every day without fail since January 2007.

And Stephen Hawking's qualifiations in climatology are ???

84 Cathypop  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:54:19am

It's so quiet this morning.

WAKE UP LIZARDS!!!

85 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:55:23am
We have to reverse global warming urgently, if we still can.

Aye, there's the rub.

Expecting humanity in the aggregate to do anything urgently is like asking an avalanche to please cease and desist for its own good.

Most people in this world have either never heard of global warming or are too busy living their lives to give a crap, regardless of what lip service they pay.

Good luck, people!

86 JohninLondon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:57:14am

re: #76 ArchangelMichael

What pisses me off about, most... no all of them that tend to chime in here anyway is that they keep coming back with the same already debunked talking points. They are like creationists with their irreducible complexity and 'no transitional forms' garbage. Come with something new, and I'll listen and judge accordingly. Come with old bullshit, and you aren't doing anyone any good and are being dishonest, as well as wasting time, bandwidth, and my (and others) patience.


But surely there are now some NEW points, following the CRU leak ?

1 The peer-reviewing process looks to have been compromised, to say the least. Without proper peer review - not a process that sets out to block dissenting views - we are left with a fairly closed circle of people in the US and UK, all on one side of the argument, dictating what gets into the main journals or into the IPCC process.

2 It has been known for a long time that the CRU - whose Briffa work is a fundamental piece of the AGW theory, has not supplied the raw data, and the programmes used to analyse the data, to people looking to reproduce the results. Reproducability of results is an essential part of the scientific method. The CRU has argued that some of the raw data is "proprietary" - they do not have authority to release it. That looks to me to be a cop-out, I don't discern any real WILL at CRU to ask for release of proprietary material. On stuff as momentous as this - why would any proprietary owner refuse ? The CRU hubbub shows us that they refused to release raw data to anyone wanting to run reproducability checks, and also appear to have been resisting FOIA requests.

3 What could be most serious of all, the Harry's File stuff suggests at least prima facie that their (unreleased)coding is a total dog's breakfast. Again - the failure of several years to release the coding for reproducability checks looks decidedly dodgy.

In sum, what has been averred to be "watertight", properly checked out, proving things beyond any doubt, the science is settled etc - is and will remain suspect until all the data and codings are out in the open.

The onus lies on CRU to release, in full. Not on others to challenge or disprove stuff that is highly opaque and non-released. The CRU so far have not complied with normal scientific method. Saying that there could then be "cherry-picking" is another cop-out - any such cherry-picking would itself be open to review and criticism

Until full r3elease of the raw data and the analysis programmes happens, people who are relying on the CRU stuff as one of the key arguments for the AGW theory could well be building their houses on sand.

In the UK we have a tradition of "Royal Commissions" to examine weighty matters. As so much public policy pivots on the CRU's work, some such commission, with a remit to act urgently, could be a quick way forward. Unless there is proper review of the CRU work, why shouldn't people be sceptical ?

87 Cathypop  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:58:05am

re: #85 Cato the Elder

Alot of people in this world have no idea what global warming is. Very sad and very true.

88 littleugly  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 5:59:47am

re: #78 son of a son

Where is all the gold so we can go extract it now that we have the technology to do it in a green way.
Make friends, there are a lot of us that are just plain Americans willing to make a profit and share, pay our taxes and if necessary without a revolution have our tremendously successful Companies be called Monopolies..1 2 3 4... just broken up knowing that this will only force them to diverse or go overseas and make other countries strong.
Yankee just today was goading Cato as to Norway GDP as opposed to US GDP.
Of course, NORWAY is just great, but so is OHIO GSP#8, less than half the area, in the middle our country and would also kick Norway's' behind at Soccer if they put their minds to it.
Do not look at the other GSPs for our States for you will be ashamed to having brought it up Yankee.

And you are a good guy in my estimation, just do not bang your alma mater.

89 MandyManners  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:11:20am

re: #88 littleugly

And you are a good guy in my estimation, just do not bang your alma mater.

In bed.

90 Jameel Rasheed  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:12:37am

It's not Professor Stephen Hawking's fault that he was given false and manipulated data.

91 albusteve  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:12:50am

re: #87 Cathypop

Alot of people in this world have no idea what global warming is. Very sad and very true.

alot of people are just trying to find some food and water...meanwhile we burn corn to appease the greenies and nuclear power is off limits to the US...look at the politics for the source of much of human suffering...amen

92 MandyManners  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:13:15am

re: #83 JohninLondon

And Stephen Hawking's qualifiations in climatology are ???

Shut up, kid.

Youtube Video
93 MandyManners  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:18:10am

re: #84 Cathypop

It's so quiet this morning.

WAKE UP LIZARDS!!!

I'm gonna' hit the SNOOZE button soon.

94 MandyManners  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:21:32am

And, Obie began to cry.

95 MandyManners  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:23:25am

I wanna' see blood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth.

96 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:28:03am

re: #23 freetoken

“...The reason relatively small changes in CO2 end up having such a large effect is because the flow of energy from the Sun is so large, and because of conservation of energy."

Being not entirely innumerate; do I understand your position to be, the presence of CO2 in the atmosphere acts like a sort of one way lens or mirror that allows a very large inflow of energy from the Sun but effectively restricts the amount of reflected heat from the earth to be radiated back into space.

"...“...Small rudders steer very big ships, and all of that.

Thusly; a very small increase in the lensatic effect of CO2 surrounding the earth can result in a very large increase of energy in the form of heat to be trapped on the earth.

97 Cathypop  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:33:38am

re: #93 MandyManners

I'm gonna' hit the SNOOZE button soon.


Good thing my name is not SNOOZE.

98 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:33:48am

Good Morning Lizards!
The LGF prayer list will be posted at 10am...Anyone have any prayer requests to add this beautiful Sunday morning?

99 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:46:13am

Uh Oh:

Swiss vote on banning minarets

100 JohninLondon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:46:33am

Earlier in the week it was suggested that the ClimateGate stuff would blow over immediately, would be forgotten by this weekend.

Obviously not - press coverage in the UK and the US continues, quite apart from lots of blogging.

We now have confirmation that a lot of the CRU's raw data has been dumped, so cannot be reviewed :

[Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...]

And the University of East Anglia (a tinpot place if ever there was one) has now done a U-Turn, has undertaken to release all available data - with the UK Met Office Hadley Centre being asked to get release of as much "proprietary" data as possible. But it says this will take some months - why ?

[Link: www.telegraph.co.uk...]

Lots of other coverage this weekend in the UK press on the "Nonevent", eg :

[Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...]

[Link: www.telegraph.co.uk...]

[Link: www.economist.com...]

101 littleugly  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:47:38am

#78 son of a son

I was just joshing with you. I respect.

My post just bled into Yankee with whom I diisagree on some points.

Again, son of a son, sorry.

102 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:52:39am

re: #86 JohninLondon

But surely there are now some NEW points, following the CRU leak ?

1 The peer-reviewing process looks to have been compromised, to say the least.

Seriously, you think peer review is 'compromised'?

What great papers on climatology do you think have been prevented from being published by this evil global warming conspiracy?

I mean, some terrible papers against AGW have been published; I expect that's part of the cunning ploy of the AGW people-- to make sure that their opponents look like terrible scientists by only allowing their worst papers to be published!

Truly, they are low and cunning.

103 MandyManners  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:53:06am

re: #99 Boogberg

Uh Oh:

Swiss vote on banning minarets

Golly gee whillickers! I tried to post "Rock the Casbah" in reply but, it's been pulled from YouTube due to copyright violation. This after how many years?

104 MandyManners  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:53:44am

What a world, what a world!

105 lawrior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:54:24am

I just noticed that Drudge has linked to another climate article that does not say what he thinks it does.

Pretending climate email leak isn't crisis won't make it go away

(I haven't been around for a few days, so PIMF if this has already been posted)

106 MandyManners  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:55:28am

Speaking of snoozing, The Kid is at chuch and it's mighty quiet.

107 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:55:47am

re: #103 MandyManners

Golly gee whillickers! I tried to post "Rock the Casbah" in reply but, it's been pulled from YouTube due to copyright violation. This after how many years?


Youtube Video
108 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:56:07am

re: #103 MandyManners

Golly gee whillickers! I tried to post "Rock the Casbah" in reply but, it's been pulled from YouTube due to copyright violation. This after how many years?

Good grief. Seems like that copyright stuff changes on an hourly basis.

109 JohninLondon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:56:36am

Even though the pound sterling is down the tubes, and UK government debt is set to reach virtually-unsustainable levels, here's Gordon Brown, who for 10 years has spent our money like a drunken sailor, announcing a plan to give lots more of our money away on climate change stuff :

[Link: www.independent.co.uk...]

110 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:57:42am

re: #109 JohninLondon

John, do you understand that the greenhouse effect is a real thing?

111 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:57:53am

re: #107 Cannadian Club Akbar

D'oh!

112 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:59:10am

The Little green football prayer list
Today is 11-29-2009
On this Day in History
November 29, 1947
U.N. votes for partition of Palestine
Despite strong Arab opposition, the United Nations votes for the partition of Palestine and the creation of an independent Jewish state


We pray Father for our dear Lizards in need... Those that cry out for help and comfort in this hour.
Reine: Health and Family
gregb - 4 year old son who suffered a head injury last Friday and spent the
weekend in the ICU with some lingering effects all week.
Semper Fi – longtime friend and co-worker “Jim” diagnosed with intestinal cancer. Surgery to remove entire large intestine scheduled for the 6th of October. Also pray for his wife, Debbie.
Irish Rose… midlife retraining for a new career
Irish Rose I have a loved one who has been out of work now for almost 2 years.
Irish Rose: I'm trying to cope with the loss of my little dog, Bayley. Had to have her put to sleep yesterday afternoon, she was my loving and faithful companion for 15 years and I'm just devestated.
Also
I received word yesterday that my son is going to be working the flight deck on the USS Stennis for a month or two, helping train pilots for an upcoming middle eastern deployment. He worked the flight deck for months while out on the USS Nimitz, its' a very dangerous environment and now he's going back to it. I'd like to request prayers for his safety.

SteveC: Two friends, one needs heart surgery, and one might.
Update from our friend SteveC:
News on both my friends - the one who might have heart surgery: They're going to adjust her medication and try a Brachoscopy (?) before deciding on the surgery.
Update
After surgery to replace her Aortic valve, my friend was released from the hospital today! Since she is at Mayo Clinic and lives several hundred miles away, her family is staying at a local hotel and will head for home tomorrow!
Anyone who held a good thought for her, I humbly thank you.

My other friend got a surgical date in January. She quickly got tired of the waiting and asked the surgeon if she could reschedule earlier. Now she's set for Nov 16


lurking faith… prayers for an aunt
Sanity Inspector: Wives Nephew: is in graduate school and is buckling under the strain. His relations with his mother are tense,
Beekiller: Sister has been diagnosed with Cancer…We pray for a speedy recovery
Wlewisiii: Son John has the H1N1 flu….May God touch and heal him this morning
Prairiefire: Good friend John had surgery on cancer in the jaw..We pray for a speedy recovery
Mcspiff: if you could add my uncle to the list. He went in for surgery today and it didn't go so well. Extra organs had to come out, etc. Still just hearing bits and pieces now. But any prayers would be greatly appreciated.
In Memoriam:
Obi Wan
Dublin(CA)Dude
USMC 1968
ElderZion
All our Troops who have died protecting our Freedom and their families.
Lord. Hear our Prayers

113 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:00:34am

re: #88 littleugly

And you are a good guy in my estimation, just do not bang your alma mater.

Whether or not she's alma, I will not bang my mater.

114 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:01:02am

re: #87 Cathypop

Alot of people in this world have no idea what global warming is. Very sad and very true.

Even if everyone did, it would make no difference in the outcome.

115 Spare O'Lake  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:03:56am

Link for Hawking quote?
Good Morning LGF.

116 Ericus58  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:06:32am

re: #103 MandyManners

I'm finding an increase in pulled video's for "Copyright" issues... darn shame

117 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:11:26am

re: #115 Spare O'Lake

Link for Hawking quote?
Good Morning LGF.

I simple google search finds it referenced as a 16 August 2006 ABC interview.

and here's the interview

abcnews transcript

It's quite real. It's fascinating, and horrifying, to see Hawking himself begin to be slandered in the anti-AGW, anti-science shit-tossing fest that's currently going on.

I don't understand the suicidal impulse of deniers.

118 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:12:19am

re: #115 Spare O'Lake

Link for Hawking quote?
Good Morning LGF.

To use words from it
IF I can I MAY link to it
/

119 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:12:37am

re: #116 Ericus58

I'm finding an increase in pulled video's for "Copyright" issues... darn shame

It seems to come in waves; lots of MST3k videos got pulled, but often only one out of the series. You can still find plenty.

There's an old quote from someone in the early days of the internet "In a broader sense, the Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it."

120 thebigolddog  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:13:24am

SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

[Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...]

121 Jeff In Ohio  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:13:46am

re: #91 albusteve

alot of people are just trying to find some food and water...meanwhile we burn corn to appease the greenies and nuclear power is off limits to the US...look at the politics for the source of much of human suffering...amen

What greenies favor corn based ethanol? Unless you mean those great environmentalists the National Corn Growers Association and American Farm Bureau. Not sure where Kermit the Frog is on burning corn. Corner a 'greenie' on corn ethanol and you'll get an earful on corn monocultures.

Nuclear power...I see this a lot here a LGF and am intrigued by both the advocacy and the advances in power plant technologies.

I understand the regulatory roadblocks and the NIMBY crowd have brought the process to a standstill in the US. Let's pretend that there was a political will in the US to bring Nuclear energy production on a large scale into the energy mix and a realistic approach to waste disposal and reprocessing. In this scenario, the NIMBY crowd is overwhelmed by people who see the threat of AGW and recognize the national security implications of being beholden to energy interests outside our borders. What, then, does the nuclear energy sector look like? Surely not the French model of nationalizing energy producers and creating a vertical monopoly of nuclear energy production and distribution? Will a market based approach favor easing the regulatory process as well as lifting the cap on liability? Who's doing the wonky work now that analyzes what a US nuclear energy sector could be?

122 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:14:47am

Iran lawmakers urge limited cooperation with IAEA

Iranian lawmakers have passed a motion calling on the government to downgrade its cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog in reaction to its recent resolution against the country.

In a Sunday statement read in the Iranian Parliament (Majlis), the lawmakers asked President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government to submit a bill that maps out a plan for reducing interaction with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The parliamentarians condemned the resolution, which calls on Iran to halt the construction of its second uranium enrichment plant in the central town of Fordo.

123 Spare O'Lake  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:14:53am
"As scientists, we understand the dangers of nuclear weapons and their devastating effects, and we are learning how human activities and technologies are affecting climate systems in ways that may forever change life on Earth. As citizens of the world, we have a duty to alert the public to the unnecessary risks that we live with every day, and to the perils we foresee if governments and societies do not take action now to render nuclear weapons obsolete and to prevent further climate change... There’s a realization that we are changing our climate for the worse. That would have catastrophic effects. Although the threat is not as dire as that of nuclear weapons right now, in the long term we are looking at a serious threat."
- Stephen Hawking
At a press conference for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, as the Doomsday Clock is moved forward by two minutes to five minutes to midnight, as quoted in "Nukes, climate push 'Doomsday Clock' forward" MSNBC (1 January 2007)

As I read this quote, NK and Iran are more dire threats than AGW.

124 E.T.  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:16:19am

An interesting article if you dare to read... my favorite line:

...that Mann was utilizing an algorithm that would produce hockey sticks if you fed it telephone numbers.

125 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:16:36am

re: #122 Sharmuta

Iran lawmakers urge limited cooperation with IAEA

So they're cutting back "cooperation" from Nada to Zilch!?!?

126 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:16:40am

re: #123 Spare O'Lake

As I read this quote, NK and Iran are more dire threats than AGW.

They are also threats that we actually stand a chance of thwarting.

127 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:17:33am

re: #120 thebigolddog

Yes, thank you, the other deniers have already spammed the thread with that.

So, do you disbelieve in the greenhouse effect?


re: #123 Spare O'Lake

As I read this quote, NK and Iran are more dire threats than AGW.

Hawking was probably talking about Russia, given that it's basically become a place run by a gang of criminals, their missile regimen is for shit, and they've lost a bunch of warheads.

But anyway, there's no reason you can't address both AGW and nuclear weapons.

128 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:18:40am

re: #126 Cato the Elder

They are also threats that we actually stand a chance of thwarting.

Who is this 'we" you speak of?
The UN is feckless. The US doesn't seem to have a plan now. Israel has even been silent of late (and even IF Israel were to do something, the worlds condemnation would be deafening!)

129 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:18:46am

re: #116 Ericus58

I'm finding an increase in pulled video's for "Copyright" issues... darn shame

Yeah. Sucks when intellectual property owners try to maintain their rights and actually get paid. Boohoo.

130 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:18:58am

(Iowa) Register poll shows opening for GOP

The poll, published in a copyright story in Sunday's newspaper, says 43 percent of Iowans say they're conservative. That compares to 36 percent who call themselves moderate and 17 percent liberal. About 50 percent consider themselves fiscally conservative and 42 percent conservative on social issues.

Analysts say that could present an opening for Republicans, but the poll also shows former Republicans say by roughly 2-to-1 they left because the GOP seemed partisan and offered few new ideas.

I hope RNC HQ is listening...

131 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:19:16am

re: #119 Obdicut

There's an old quote from someone in the early days of the internet "In a broader sense, the Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it."

Enforcing one's copyright is not censorship.

132 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:19:36am

re: #84 Cathypop

I just did. Can barely type yet. Hello all.

133 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:20:41am

re: #125 sattv4u2

So they're cutting back "cooperation" from Nada to Zilch!?!?

I guess so!

134 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:21:06am

re: #128 sattv4u2

Who is this 'we" you speak of?
The UN is feckless. The US doesn't seem to have a plan now. Israel has even been silent of late (and even IF Israel were to do something, the worlds condemnation would be deafening!)

All true. And nevertheless, if there were a "we" and if "we" put "our" minds to it, the chances of success are far greater than stopping the human avalanche that is global warming.

135 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:21:28am

re: #131 Cato the Elder

Enforcing one's copyright is not censorship.

I'm all for it-- copyright and patents, that is-- but from the perspective of the Internet, a video being removed for any reason looks the same. It's nearly impossible to ban things on the internet-- only if the things themselves are illegal can you keep them to small numbers.

136 Jeff In Ohio  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:21:40am

re: #131 Cato the Elder

Enforcing one's copyright is not censorship.

Yeah, that's like saying stopping for a red light is inhibiting your right to freedom of assembly.

137 The Curmudgeon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:21:56am

For those who may have missed it yesterday, I mentioned that my AGW skepticism was about the proposed political solutions, not the science, because free enterprise will solve the problem better than Al Gore and the UN. Then Charles provided a link to Doubt is Their Product: How Industry's Assault on Science Threatens Your Health at Amazon.

So far I've just read a description of the book and its author, and a few of the reviews, but it's been an eye-opener. It's rare these days when someone makes me step back and revisit some of my core beliefs, but Charles may have done that to me. I still don't trust Al Gore, but now I'm mulling over the alternatives. It's not quite as simple as I had thought.

138 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:22:11am

re: #131 Cato the Elder

Enforcing one's copyright is not censorship.

Agreed.
This message brought to you by CCA. May not be reproduced in any way

139 thebigolddog  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:22:20am

Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation
Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with the Climategate whitewash, says Christopher Booker.

[Link: www.telegraph.co.uk...]

140 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:22:21am

re: #133 Sharmuta

I guess so!

I've said it a hundred times, I'll say it a hundred more
World = Charlie Brown
Iran = Lucy

Wanna play football, Charlie??

141 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:22:54am

re: #131 Cato the Elder

Enforcing one's copyright is not censorship.

I just wish they would hurry up and get it resolved. I don't mind watching ads in order to enjoy copyrighted material. Look at the success of Hulu.com.

142 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:23:28am

re: #139 thebigolddog

Man, the Telegraph is really working overtime on the anti-AGW front.

If you want your propaganda to be more believable, you should just type the headline title in, not the link, so you can hide that all your guys' sources are from a few papers.

143 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:24:44am

re: #137 The Curmudgeon

It's rare these days when someone makes me step back and revisit some of my core beliefs, but Charles may have done that to me.

Charles is actually quite good at that. There are a number of people he helped concerning the Intelligent Design movement, so I'm not surprised he'd be able to do the same thing with AGW.

144 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:25:25am

re: #142 Obdicut

Man, the Telegraph is really working overtime on the anti-AGW front.

If you want your propaganda to be more believable, you should just type the headline title in, not the link, so you can hide that all your guys' sources are from a few papers.

Most people only read a few "sources". Especially in that lots of "sources" get THEIR info from the same "sources" anyway!

145 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:25:58am

re: #144 sattv4u2

Most people only read a few "sources". Especially in that lots of "sources" get THEIR info from the same "sources" anyway!

It's like a negative feedback loop.

146 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:26:02am

re: #135 Obdicut

I'm all for it-- copyright and patents, that is-- but from the perspective of the Internet, a video being removed for any reason looks the same. It's nearly impossible to ban things on the internet-- only if the things themselves are illegal can you keep them to small numbers.

No, a video being removed for copyright violation with an explicit message to that effect does not look the same as censorship.

And just because I can't keep people from stealing my words or songs or images in toto doesn't mean I'm going to let some clown on YouTube get away with it.

There are responsible entities on the internet. And there are armies of lawyers for ripped-off authors and musicians and painters who will shut down what they can. I imagine our host, for one, is grateful.

147 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:26:04am

re: #137 The Curmudgeon

Good for you. I had the same humbling experience here. Ludwig, or "LVQ" is one of the most ... uh passionate advocates. His links helped a lot.

148 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:26:42am

re: #147 Rightwingconspirator

You're still able to read those links in North Korea though, aren't you?

149 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:27:41am

re: #141 Boogberg

I just wish they would hurry up and get it resolved. I don't mind watching ads in order to enjoy copyrighted material. Look at the success of Hulu.com.

Not everyone is obliged to use Hulu or the equivalent for the convenience of internet users. Not every author wishes to be available on the Kindle, either.

If there are certain things that I have to actually go to a museum or purchase on paper to access, so be it.

150 Spare O'Lake  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:27:55am

re: #127 Obdicut

re: #123 Spare O'Lake

Hawking was probably talking about Russia, given that it's basically become a place run by a gang of criminals, their missile regimen is for shit, and they've lost a bunch of warheads.

But anyway, there's no reason you can't address both AGW and nuclear weapons.

Hawking's prioritization of nukes is spot on.
Too bad Obama, along with the entire West, has shown himself to be nothing but a dithering, impotent enabler of Iran...and not noticeably better on AGW.

151 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:28:11am

Through my seekrit spyz.
:)

152 lawhawk  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:29:05am

Greets and saluts from the NYC metro area. I see that the Swiss are about to enact a ban on the construction of new minarets in their country. They have 4 already built, and the Swiss already have a ban on using them for the call to prayer.

Europe's take on religious freedom is quite different than ours in the US, and they are seriously struggling with religious freedoms, tolerance, and assimilation. They are also seeing firsthand the growth of political Islam and xenophobia.

153 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:29:30am

re: #148 Sharmuta

You're still able to read those links in North Korea though, aren't you?

Who has time? Between the 16 hour shift in the rice paddy, and the 6 hour audio messages from Dear Leader to listen too, that leaves me 2 hours to eat and sleep.
Granted, I only need about 3 minutes to eat. Thanks to Dear Leader we're not burdened with meal 'courses"!

154 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:29:59am

Bill & Melinda Gates is appearing next on Meet the Press speaking about their Charity...

155 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:30:00am

re: #143 Sharmuta

Charles is actually quite good at that. There are a number of people he helped concerning the Intelligent Design movement, so I'm not surprised he'd be able to do the same thing with AGW.

I'm glad he's taking such a forthright approach to it; it's very disheartening to see how much work he has to do. I hadn't realized the anti-AGW propaganda had been as effective as it has been, or that the defeatist attitude they've attempted to spread had taken root so deeply.re: #146 Cato the Elder

No, a video being removed for copyright violation with an explicit message to that effect does not look the same as censorship.

Yes, it does. The end result is the same; the video remains available, somewhere else, just slightly more obscured. Only when the actual subject is illegal in and of itself-- child porn, for example-- is it possible to really functionally quash it.


And just because I can't keep people from stealing my words or songs or images in toto doesn't mean I'm going to let some clown on YouTube get away with it.

And I support the effort of any artist to be paid properly for their work. However, it's mainly been the various industries resistance to change that's interfered with the natural evolution of the market.

There are responsible entities on the internet. And there are armies of lawyers for ripped-off authors and musicians and painters who will shut down what they can. I imagine our host, for one, is grateful.

Meh, I think groups like the RIAA have made things worse for artists, not better. I think things like the Kindle are much more to be grateful for, in terms of authors getting paid, than industry lawyers.


Again: I'm not in the least bit against artists and anyone else with copyright claims getting paid for their work. I'd like it always to happen.

156 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:30:38am

LOL. At Mass this morning, when it came time for the sign of peace, the little old white ladies were doing Obama fist-bumps instead of handshakes to avoid swine flu. Cute.

157 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:30:53am

Man, I screwed the formatting on that one all to hell.

Apologies, Cato, for making it hard to read.

158 Ericus58  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:33:33am

re: #152 lawhawk

read your blog posts this morning about that - and just saw the link you provided on the "comedian" being funded by Iran. Thanks.

Did I hear a report in the last few days about Iran passing laws for Jews to wear a 'badge' of yellow on the outside of their cloths to identify them? Thought it also mentioned other groups having to wear badges as well...

159 Ojoe  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:36:04am

re: #156 Cato the Elder

Well cute, but hardly contemplative like mass before Vatican 2, which I miss.

160 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:36:07am

re: #157 Obdicut

Man, I screwed the formatting on that one all to hell.

Apologies, Cato, for making it hard to read.

The murkiness of your formatting matches that of your thinking.

Cato: No, a video being removed for copyright violation with an explicit message to that effect does not look the same as censorship.

Obdicut: Yes, it does. The end result is the same; the video remains available, somewhere else, just slightly more obscured. Only when the actual subject is illegal in and of itself-- child porn, for example-- is it possible to really functionally quash it.

What nonsense. It is not possible to quash anything, most notably child porn. Or bomb-making instructions.

The point is that an author in the broadest sense gains every time an illegal copy of her work is suppressed. Making it slightly more obscured is a victory. It has nothing to do with and does not resemble censorship in any way.

161 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:36:38am

re: #154 HoosierHoops

Bill & Melinda Gates is appearing next on Meet the Press speaking about their Charity...

Whenever someone starts talking shit about Bill Gates, I like to provide a link to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. :)

162 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:36:45am

re: #159 Ojoe

Well cute, but hardly contemplative like mass before Vatican 2, which I miss.

You can now find the Tridentine Mass in almost any big city, and any parish that wants to can offer it.

164 Spare O'Lake  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:36:53am

re: #150 Spare O'Lake

re: #127 Obdicut

Hawking was probably talking about Russia, given that it's basically become a place run by a gang of criminals, their missile regimen is for shit, and they've lost a bunch of warheads.

But anyway, there's no reason you can't address both AGW and nuclear weapons.


Hawking's prioritization of nukes is spot on.
Too bad Obama, along with the entire West, has shown himself to be nothing but a dithering, impotent enabler of Iran...and not noticeably better on AGW.
(attempted format repair)

165 Ojoe  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:37:12am

re: #162 Cato the Elder

Yes, that is good again.

166 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:37:39am

re: #163 Ojoe

Great catch!

167 lawhawk  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:37:41am

re: #150 Spare O'Lake

Currently, a good portion of the nuclear fuel used in nuclear power plants, and the isotopes used for all manner of nuclear medicine and other research and civilian applications is the result of taking weapons grade materials (primarily from Russian decommissioned weapons) and mixing it down to civilian grade. It's far cheaper to do it in that fashion, than to enrich from naturally occurring levels to the grade necessary for nuclear reactors.

As we go through the decommissioned weapons, we're running out of the weapons grade uranium, and the demand for uranium is set to increase as a result of nuclear reactor building programs around the world, particularly in China.

168 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:38:04am

re: #161 Boogberg

Whenever someone starts talking shit about Bill Gates, I like to provide a link to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. :)

They gave $100 million to Hillsboro County Skools in Florida.

169 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:38:59am

re: #163 Ojoe

Ice crystals on the lens of the Towercam. Check it out, who knows how long it will last.

"I'm MELTINGGG!!!"
(channeling The Wizard Of Oz)

170 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:39:13am

re: #127 Obdicut

Yes, thank you, the other deniers have already spammed the thread with that.

Throwing away the original data, however, is a serious blunder. It's nearly unheard of in scientific circles to destroy data - it is often necessary to revisit it to answer criticisms, and - more importantly - every single case of scientific fraud brought over the last several decades has ultimately been resolved through examination of the original, raw data. Sometimes in favor of the original researchers, other times against them. But preservation of such data is the norm, to the extent that even the cheaters have hung onto it lest it's disposal raise eyebrows.

I'm not going to draw any conclusions regarding the researchers in question in this particular case, but I will say two things about their destruction of the data. First, it feeds directly into the story being told by their opposition that the research is cooked and they were trying to cover their tracks when questions were raised. Second, it's extremely unusual to destroy such data in the first place, and such behavior bespeaks extreme sloppiness on the part of the researchers in question. Given the political nature of the argument, it is hard to understand why such an action would have been taken. It ought to be obvious that, at the very best, it would only add fuel to the fire already roaring. And I would expect better of researchers trying to convince a skeptical world to radically alter it's behavior and spend vast sums of money whose arguments ultimately rest on that data.

For those opposed to taking action against global warming, this is a dream come true. I'm interested in hearing the researchers involved explain their actions.

As I said when the CRU documents came to light: it isn't about the contents; it's about the appearance. And the appearance here is hard to cast in a positive light.

171 Ojoe  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:39:27am

re: #166 Rightwingconspirator

"Global icing"

LOL

172 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:39:50am

re: #168 Cannadian Club Akbar

They gave $100 million to Hillsboro County Skools in Florida.

also 3 million Vaccines to the poorest children in Africa

173 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:39:53am

re: #167 lawhawk

Currently, a good portion of the nuclear fuel used in nuclear power plants, and the isotopes used for all manner of nuclear medicine and other research and civilian applications is the result of taking weapons grade materials (primarily from Russian decommissioned weapons) and mixing it down to civilian grade. It's far cheaper to do it in that fashion, than to enrich from naturally occurring levels to the grade necessary for nuclear reactors.

As we go through the decommissioned weapons, we're running out of the weapons grade uranium, and the demand for uranium is set to increase as a result of nuclear reactor building programs around the world, particularly in China.

Uranium is a good bet for investors.

174 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:40:04am

Hooray! We can all Blame Bush™ for something! ///

Senate report: Bin Laden was 'within our grasp'

Osama bin Laden was unquestionably within reach of U.S. troops in the mountains of Tora Bora when American military leaders made the crucial and costly decision not to pursue the terrorist leader with massive force, a Senate report says.

The report asserts that the failure to kill or capture bin Laden at his most vulnerable in December 2001 has had lasting consequences beyond the fate of one man. Bin Laden's escape laid the foundation for today's reinvigorated Afghan insurgency and inflamed the internal strife now endangering Pakistan, it says.

Staff members for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Democratic majority prepared the report at the request of the chairman, Sen. John Kerry, as President Barack Obama prepares to boost U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

The Massachusetts senator and 2004 Democratic presidential candidate has long argued the Bush administration missed a chance to get the al-Qaida leader and top deputies when they were holed up in the forbidding mountainous area of eastern Afghanistan only three months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Although limited to a review of military operations eight years old, the report could also be read as a cautionary note for those resisting an increased troop presence there now.

More pointedly, it seeks to affix a measure of blame for the state of the war today on military leaders under former president George W. Bush, specifically Donald H. Rumsfeld as defense secretary and his top military commander, Tommy Franks.

Perhaps it's for the best we didn't capture him. He'd get a federal court trial too. Could you imagine?

175 lawhawk  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:40:30am

re: #158 Ericus58

That's a story that circulated a few years back, but it appears untrue. Amir Taheri claimed that the Iranians were passing legislation that would push non Muslims to wear badges, but other experts claimed he was wrong.

176 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:41:21am

re: #160 Cato the Elder

What nonsense. It is not possible to quash anything, most notably child porn. Or bomb-making instructions.

Sorry, just a misuse of terms; I meant quash as in 'send to the creepy, dark, dank back alleys of the interwebs'.

You are misinterpreting what I'm saying; I'm not making any sort of argument against an author having the right to the profits of their work.

The point is that an author in the broadest sense gains every time an illegal copy of her work is suppressed. Making it slightly more obscured is a victory. It has nothing to do with and does not resemble censorship in any way.

Well, the author doesn't necessarily gain or lose from the copy of the work being suppressed. And making it more obscured is a victory only if it does not come with a negative cost.

I don't think that censorship is the best word, but the person who I was quoting-- and I apologize for not having the source-- was making the point that from the perspective of the Internet, as a phenomenon, removing things from it doesn't really work. It replaces them. There are people who specifically exist to do so, and they are not going to be going away.

The point is that it is much better for artists to engage with distribution channels than to attempt to shut them down. I bet that Hulu has reduced the amount of piracy of TV episodes more than any number of takedown orders.

177 Ojoe  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:42:34am

re: #174 Sharmuta

This would have been better:

More pointedly, it seeks to affix a measure of blame for the state of the war Bin Laden's head to a pike.


BBL

178 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:42:41am

A federal trial for bin Ladin would be a great victory for US.

Fortunately, we don't have to argue the point, as he is almost certainly dead and has been for eight years.

179 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:43:08am

re: #171 Ojoe

From time to time I would drive to Mt Wilson. Usually in pursuit of some good pictures, always for the drive and the meditation time. The Calif. 2 highway has been closed due to damage sustained in the Station fire. Opens soon I think.

180 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:43:40am

re: #174 Sharmuta

Staff members for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Democratic majority prepared the report at the request of the chairman, Sen. John Kerry, as President Barack Obama prepares to boost U.S. troops in Afghanistan.


This is the same guy who said he would have jumped up on 9/11 and gotten right to work. Then it was found out he was on Larry King saying he sat in Pelosi's office, stunned, for 45 minutes.

181 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:43:55am

re: #170 SixDegrees


As I said when the CRU documents came to light: it isn't about the contents; it's about the appearance. And the appearance here is hard to cast in a positive light.

The appearance of the anti-AGW detractors revving up the noise machine before Copenhagen? Yeah, that does look pretty terrible. I'm glad that Charles is doing his damnedest to point it out at every opportunity, though I'm dismayed that people are so resistant to listening to him.

182 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:44:33am

re: #179 Rightwingconspirator

From time to time I would drive to Mt Wilson. Usually in pursuit of some good pictures, always for the drive and the meditation time. The Calif. 2 highway has been closed due to damage sustained in the Station fire. Opens soon I think.

Coming over that road from the east at night to see LA open out before your dazzled eyes is an experience I will never forget.

183 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:44:46am

re: #127 Obdicut

re: #170 SixDegrees

Second, it's extremely unusual to destroy such data in the first place, and such behavior bespeaks extreme sloppiness on the part of the researchers in question. Given the political nature of the argument, it is hard to understand why such an action would have been taken

And there's the fly in the ointment right there. Imagine the hue and cry if say a financial institution had destroyed original documents, or a business that's filing for bankruptcy protection destroyed original purchase and sales data, or even in your personal life you destroyed an original document relevant to a lawsuit brought against you

184 lawhawk  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:46:13am

re: #174 Sharmuta

Well, there's the justification Obama can use to cudgel Democrats in Congress into demanding and getting the troop increase (and the requisite funding). The problem is that we've known or had reason to know that Osama was at Tora Bora during the operation against the region for years now. The report is simply timed to give Obama the political cover to make the decision to consider troop increases.

As it is, Democrats have been wavering on their support for the Afghan campaign.

185 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:46:24am

re: #174 Sharmuta

I remember that controversy. We used locals because they know the terrain. We did/do not. Damned if you do damned if you don't...

The telling excerpt
Staff members for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Democratic majority prepared the report at the request of the chairman, Sen. John Kerry, as President Barack Obama prepares to boost U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

These guys are just desperate to politicize the war. Craven.

186 Ericus58  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:46:53am

re: #175 lawhawk

Thank you for the link - I'm a bit lazy this a.m. Reloaded my xp pro last night and still downloading all my programs and apps this morning.

Yes, if the desktop was a newer one I'd go to Windows 7 - I'll save that for my next build this Christmas ;)

187 thebigolddog  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:49:32am

"In 1905, French mathematician and scientist Henri Poincaré said that the willingness to embrace pseudo-science flourished because people “know how cruel the truth often is, and we wonder whether illusion is not more consoling ... The bottom line: Pseudo-science preys on well-intentioned people who, motivated by love for their kids, become vulnerable to one of the world’s oldest professions. Enter the snake-oil salesman."

-- An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All
[Link: www.wired.com...]

188 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:51:54am

re: #181 Obdicut

The appearance of the anti-AGW detractors revving up the noise machine before Copenhagen? Yeah, that does look pretty terrible. I'm glad that Charles is doing his damnedest to point it out at every opportunity, though I'm dismayed that people are so resistant to listening to him.

I'm not talking about those whose position is already entrenched. The problem here is the effect such revelations will have on the much larger group of moderates. The message "The data has been faked, and they're covering their tracks!" is easy to understand, and when actions are taken giving the appearance that this is true, it's a strong reinforcement of that message. The other side's response, which ordinarily would be, "Just look at the data!" is blunted, as well. Most folks are already adept at looking past the usual squabbling and bickering they see everyday on the Internet and assessing the arguments based on their merits. The merits supporting AGW, however, require a good deal of expertise to assess, while the charge that the data has been cooked is simple to understand and easy to connect to common experience.

I agree with Charles' recent point that the very best thing to do is for the AGW researchers to release their data as quickly as possible to avoid the appearance of any sort of cover up. Unfortunately, the announcement that some of the data has been destroyed only makes matters worse, regardless of whatever explanation may be offered for it. As already noted, such destruction is extremely rare in scientific circles; it's an action that demands a forthright explanation, and soon.

189 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:54:13am

re: #183 sattv4u2

re: #170 SixDegrees

Second, it's extremely unusual to destroy such data in the first place, and such behavior bespeaks extreme sloppiness on the part of the researchers in question. Given the political nature of the argument, it is hard to understand why such an action would have been taken

And there's the fly in the ointment right there. Imagine the hue and cry if say a financial institution had destroyed original documents, or a business that's filing for bankruptcy protection destroyed original purchase and sales data, or even in your personal life you destroyed an original document relevant to a lawsuit brought against you

That's my point. The destruction of data may have been totally innocent and justified, but the appearance is easy to cast as something sinister.

190 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:54:17am

re: #188 SixDegrees

I'm sorry, but why are you concentrating on the scientists, and not the anti-AGW crowd who are spamming disinformation on the public?

Why not attack them?

191 Spare O'Lake  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:56:34am

re: #188 SixDegrees

I'm not talking about those whose position is already entrenched. The problem here is the effect such revelations will have on the much larger group of moderates. The message "The data has been faked, and they're covering their tracks!" is easy to understand, and when actions are taken giving the appearance that this is true, it's a strong reinforcement of that message. The other side's response, which ordinarily would be, "Just look at the data!" is blunted, as well. Most folks are already adept at looking past the usual squabbling and bickering they see everyday on the Internet and assessing the arguments based on their merits. The merits supporting AGW, however, require a good deal of expertise to assess, while the charge that the data has been cooked is simple to understand and easy to connect to common experience.

I agree with Charles' recent point that the very best thing to do is for the AGW researchers to release their data as quickly as possible to avoid the appearance of any sort of cover up. Unfortunately, the announcement that some of the data has been destroyed only makes matters worse, regardless of whatever explanation may be offered for it. As already noted, such destruction is extremely rare in scientific circles; it's an action that demands a forthright explanation, and soon.

Original data, original shmata...trust but can't verify!
No problem here. ///

192 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:57:37am

I predict that in the future people will look back on our predictions of the future and laugh until their exoskeletons crack.

193 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:58:42am

re: #190 Obdicut

I'm sorry, but why are you concentrating on the scientists, and not the anti-AGW crowd who are spamming disinformation on the public?

Why not attack them?

Dunno,,, perhaps for the same reason you're ''attacking" someones perfectly normal reaction when they hear "well ,,, we destroyed the originals, but it doesn't mean anything at all" and not the scientists that either
A) screwed up by destroying it
or
B) destroyed it knowingly
which leads to
C) why?

194 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:59:13am

re: #190 Obdicut

I'm sorry, but why are you concentrating on the scientists, and not the anti-AGW crowd who are spamming disinformation on the public?

Why not attack them?

Because I'm discussing the destruction of data by the scientists; the misbehavior of their opposition has been covered at length, and in this case it's hard to see how to attack them, given that they don't appear to be the ones who destroyed the raw data in question.

As already noted, such destruction is rare in the scientific realm, and every case of scientific fraud investigated over the last several decades has ultimately cleared or convicted the accused by going back to the preserved original records in question. The act of destruction begs the question of why it was done, and that's something the researchers involved need to answer.

195 Spare O'Lake  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:59:23am

re: #190 Obdicut

I'm sorry, but why are you concentrating on the scientists, and not the anti-AGW crowd who are spamming disinformation on the public?

Why not attack them?

Have your people attack my people, and I'll have my people attack your people.
Sheesh...talk about greenhouse gas!

196 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 7:59:28am

re: #192 Cato the Elder

I predict that in the future people will look back on our predictions of the future and laugh until their exoskeletons crack.

Hell,, When I was a kid I thought by now I'd be commuting to work with a jet pack on my back!

197 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:00:56am

re: #196 sattv4u2

Hell,, When I was a kid I thought by now I'd be commuting to work with a jet pack on my back!

Dude, did your flying car break down?
/

198 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:03:13am

re: #193 sattv4u2

Maybe it doesn't mean anything because we have a gigantic overabundance of data on the subject?

Again: There is a clear, clear attempt by anti-AGW groups to muddy the waters. Charles has done a very good job of exposing it. They are currently making huge amounts of noise in an attempt to sway public opinion. They are engaged in propaganda.

Meanwhile, unless you believe the 97% of climatologists throughout the world, operating under different governments, using huge numbers of different data sets produced by large numbers of different sources, unless you believe all those climatologists are incompetent, fraudulent, or conspiratorial, there would seem to be a strong, compelling case for defending scientists against political attack.

199 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:03:59am

re: #197 Cannadian Club Akbar

Dude, did your flying car break down?
/

It's living wild in the Forbidden Forest.

200 kirkspencer  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:07:10am

re: #29 tiburon

right on. Couple this with the limited ability of CO2 to absorb radiative wavelengths and yur left with a warming signature that's...undetectable.
Doesn't matter, of course. Lindzen's recent work, arguably the world's greatest climate scientist, wherein he clearly proves via unassailable (in any relevant degree) ERBA data that as temperature goes up, the Earth 'takes off it's jacket'...well, it's pretty well reduced CO2 to a 'bit player' in the world climate system.
The Hawking quote is...provocative, not informative.

That word "unassailable", I do not think it means what you think it means. See, his (actually jointly Lindzen and Choi, "On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data" - call it LC for now) work using the ERBE satellite data has run into two separate challenges so far.

One of the two is a claim of a mathematical mistake. Put simply, LC shows graphs of current models giving negative slope results on feedback results, when they actually give positive (though much shallower) results. Since the conclusion is that the models are wrong and a negative feedback should be positive, this is an issue getting serious examination.

The second challenge comes from Dr. Roy Spencer who says (grossly simplifying) that his crunching of the ERBE numbers gives a completely different dataset than that of LC -- in fact, numbers that contradict Lindzen and Choi's results. This should be considered especially significant given Dr. Spencer is another active "anti-AGW" voice. When someone on your side says your numbers don't show what you say they show, you have a problem.

In sum, I think claiming the work as "unassailable" is just a bit of an overstatement.

201 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:07:16am

re: #196 sattv4u2

Hell,, When I was a kid I thought by now I'd be commuting to work with a jet pack on my back!

And just last year, I thought I'd be flying to work on a winged unicorn named Peggy Sue.

202 lostlakehiker  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:08:36am

re: #9 carnaby

OK, that is really just plain dumb. If the earth climate system was that unstable, or unstable at all, the temperature of the planet would have run away ages ago. This is one of the primary arguments of Lindzen, that the earth climate system is intrinsically stable. If this were not the case, we would not be here not to discuss the matter.

Hawking's not "just plain dumb". Earth's climate has been all over the place, from snowball earth, (with all the oceans frozen over, often to the sea floor), to a climate so hot that the largest land animals were the size of a dog, lived above the arctic circle, and burrowed below ground so as to escape the daytime heat.

The sun is warming. If it could get that hot a billion years ago, it could get hotter now. Not with today's arrangement of continents, not in the natural course of events. But long term, the earth's climate is destined to become fatally hot for all life unless we move the planet. We will be able to do that if we keep our civilization intact and build on what we already know: we could tweak the orbit of a minor planet to where it shuttled back and forth between near misses of earth and near misses of Jupiter, transferring angular momentum from Jupiter to ourselves. This would lift the orbit of the earth, very gradually, but with hundreds of millions of years to work with, it would be fast enough to back away from the sun as it grew hotter, and thus stay in the habitable zone.

Our current problem is much simpler. Don't put so much CO2 in the air that earth becomes less hospitable to us.

203 StillAMarine  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:08:41am

It is a sad and sorry truth that global warming is a fact, despite the anti-GW crowd that points to such irrelevant points such as a flattening of the warming process over the past few years. Just because November 30 is warmer than November 29 in North Carolina does not mean that Winter will not come to the Tarheel State. Just what the proportion between human generated causes and natural causes such as the solar cycle is remains unknown, however.
It is also a sad and sorry truth that combating global warming must have all nations of the world behind the effort, and anything less than that will not suffice. For that reason alone I believe we must not bankrupt ourselves in being the only country involved in an ineffectual effort, but must do more to prepare ourselves for the inevitable.
In a previous thread PyroDoctor made the point that 90% of what needs to be done to reduce global warming should be done anyway. Reducing greenhouse gasses would also reduce our waste of natural resources, decrease air and water pollution and preserve our nonrenewable energy resources for more urgent uses than driving around in oversized motor vehicles.

204 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:08:58am

re: #197 Cannadian Club Akbar

It got leased by Orbitz

205 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:09:24am

re: #201 Cato the Elder

And just last year, I thought I'd be flying to work on a winged unicorn named Peggy Sue.

I'd like to find and interview the lady who stated right after the election that now she wouldn't have to worry about paying her mortgage or buying gas for her car!

206 Spare O'Lake  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:10:11am

re: #196 sattv4u2

Hell,, When I was a kid I thought by now I'd be commuting to work with a jet pack on my back!

Meet George Jetson,
His boy Elroy,
Daughter Judy,
Jane his wife.

207 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:10:45am

re: #205 sattv4u2

I'd like to find and interview the lady who stated right after the election that now she wouldn't have to worry about paying her mortgage or buying gas for her car!

Just ask...

Youtube Video
208 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:12:57am

re: #207 Cannadian Club Akbar

Just ask...

[Video]

That was THEN. I want to talk to her NOW

209 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:15:35am

re: #206 Spare O'Lake

Meet George Jetson,
His boy Elroy,
Daughter Judy,
Jane his wife.

I want that Robot Maid they had

210 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:15:41am

re: #208 sattv4u2

That was THEN. I want to talk to her NOW

That was actually before the election. I am sure she scored a nice refrigerator box to call home after Zero forgot to pay her mortgage.
/

211 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:16:34am

So, I go away for a couple of months and the whole damn format and stuff is changed! WTF?! Over!

212 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:17:28am

re: #182 Cato the Elder

I am seriously getting the urge to get back up there. Let me see about that closure. I may just pop up there this afternoon. My shutter button finger is restless today.

213 jpkoch  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:17:38am

re: #198 Abduct

The thousands of scientists you speak of use a fairly narrow set of statistical databases that have been produced by a small group of "gatekeepers". CRY, NASA, and NOAA produce the recent temperature data and Mann, Hughes, and Biffra produce to dendro and paleo temp reconstructions. The IPCC relies heavily on these 2 groups for their temperature trends.

Another thing, NOAA uses portions of CRU's data, and vice versa. NASA also relies on portions of CRU's data, but they use their own internal algorithms, grid cells, and extrapolation techniques to back-fill empty grid cells. What most people do not realize is the fact the number of people who produce these reconstructions (recent or paleo) is very narrow, their databases incomplete (CRY did a massive purge of their public FTP sites in June), and their entire methodology done without any public accountability.

214 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:17:57am

re: #211 pingjockey

So, I go away for a couple of months and the whole damn format and stuff is changed! WTF?! Over!

Resistance is futile. Conform!!
/

215 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:18:15am

re: #210 Cannadian Club Akbar
What about the two women in Detroit (IIRC) who had lined up for the "free money"? I got a kick out of that.

216 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:18:47am

re: #214 Cannadian Club Akbar
Hah! Never!

217 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:19:14am

Off to teach class.
BBL!

218 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:19:16am

re: #213 jpkoch

The thousands of scientists you speak of use a fairly narrow set of statistical databases that have been produced by a small group of "gatekeepers". CRY, NASA, and NOAA produce the recent temperature data and Mann, Hughes, and Biffra produce to dendro and paleo temp reconstructions. The IPCC relies heavily on these 2 groups for their temperature trends.

Another thing, NOAA uses portions of CRU's data, and vice versa. NASA also relies on portions of CRU's data, but they use their own internal algorithms, grid cells, and extrapolation techniques to back-fill empty grid cells. What most people do not realize is the fact the number of people who produce these reconstructions (recent or paleo) is very narrow, their databases incomplete (CRY did a massive purge of their public FTP sites in June), and their entire methodology done without any public accountability.

But they had peer review, so what's the problem?

219 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:19:39am

re: #216 pingjockey

Hah! Never!

Just curious, were you on LGF medical leave? Or you don't have to answer.

220 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:21:00am

re: #219 Cannadian Club Akbar
Yep. Had a Squamous Cell Carcinoma in my neck. All gone now, in remission and just didn't have any pressing urge to come and chat, don't know why.

221 Big Steve  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:21:44am

I have been reading Climate Audit the past week or so. While it has a slant I actually find it detailed scientific and interesting. What is the official reason we hate Steve McIntyre here at LGF?

222 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:21:50am

re: #220 pingjockey

Yep. Had a Squamous Cell Carcinoma in my neck. All gone now, in remission and just didn't have any pressing urge to come and chat, don't know why.

perspectives change when there's something amiss!

223 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:22:10am

re: #220 pingjockey

Good news. Congrats!!

224 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:22:40am

re: #218 Walter L. Newton
If all those hacked emails are true, peer review is going to be in the same league as steroid abuse in baseball, all records will be tainted.

225 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:23:16am

re: #223 Cannadian Club Akbar

Thanks, been back to work about a month.

226 Cannadian Club Akbar  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:23:49am

re: #224 pingjockey

If all those hacked emails are true, peer review is going to be in the same league as steroid abuse in baseball, all records will be tainted.

But, baseball players had to testify in front of congress.

227 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:24:19am

re: #224 pingjockey

If all those hacked emails are true, peer review is going to be in the same league as steroid abuse in baseball, all records will be tainted.

There is nothing in those emails that taint anything, you must be listening to the wrong people.

228 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:24:32am

re: #226 Cannadian Club Akbar
Mwahahaha! What a zoo that was.

229 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:24:39am

re: #221 Big Steve

I have been reading Climate Audit the past week or so. While it has a slant I actually find it detailed scientific and interesting. What is the official reason we hate Steve McIntyre here at LGF?

Putting Steve McIntyre in the LGF search returned this article:

Anti-AGW Propaganda Shot Down Again

The worst part of this misleading story: climate blogger Steve McIntyre claimed that tree ring data was withheld from him on purpose — but he had the raw data all along.

230 Big Steve  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:25:05am

re: #226 Cannadian Club Akbar

But, baseball players had to testify in front of congress.

Trust me...Mann et.al. will be brought up in front of Parliament in some fashion. Wonder if they will have to wear wigs?

231 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:25:34am

re: #226 Cannadian Club Akbar

But, baseball players had to testify in front of congress.

Now that documents have been destroyed either un/or intentionally (take your pick) scientists may be compelled to also

232 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:26:07am

re: #227 Walter L. Newton

Just Rush while I'm in the work van. So you're saying the crap Limbaugh has brought up isn't germaine?

233 sattv4u2  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:26:47am

And on that note, the thundering horde (my son and his freinds) have emerged from their X-BOX lair

They Must Be Fed!

234 jpkoch  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:28:00am

re: #203 StillAMarine

It is a sad and sorry truth that global warming is a fact, despite the anti-GW crowd that points to such irrelevant points such as a flattening of the warming process over the past few years. Just because November 30 is warmer than November 29 in North Carolina does not mean that Winter will not come to the Tarheel State. Just what the proportion between human generated causes and natural causes such as the solar cycle is remains unknown, however.
It is also a sad and sorry truth that combating global warming must have all nations of the world behind the effort, and anything less than that will not suffice. For that reason alone I believe we must not bankrupt ourselves in being the only country involved in an ineffectual effort, but must do more to prepare ourselves for the inevitable.
In a previous thread PyroDoctor made the point that 90% of what needs to be done to reduce global warming should be done anyway. Reducing greenhouse gasses would also reduce our waste of natural resources, decrease air and water pollution and preserve our nonrenewable energy resources for more urgent uses than driving around in oversized motor vehicles.

Th flattening you refer to isn't a flattening of one small portion of the globe, and is a reversal of thermometer records which manipulated using a 25 year low pass statistical filter. This was then added to the endpoints of the proxy Reconstruction, with the end result of warming, and not cooling. The main point is that if the proxies cannot be calibrated with local thermometers, what use are they? This is the heart of the so-called divergence problem. What Mann did was to hide this problem using the so-called "Nature Trick". This trick has been public knowledge for years, as both McIntyre and von Storch have been able to replicate it in their reverse engineering of Mann's MBH9x.

What makes the emails significant is that for years Mann has said he never grafted temp records onto his reconstruction. We know now that at the very least Phil Jones and Mann were prevaricating.

No, this doesn't discount all the other AGW theories out there, but it does call into question HadCRUT, NASA's GISS, and NOAA's data for temp trends of the last 150 year to 1000 years.

235 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:29:17am

re: #233 sattv4u2

Teenagers remind me of that giant flower that is always saying "feed me Seymour"!

236 Walter L. Newton  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:29:18am

re: #232 pingjockey

Just Rush while I'm in the work van. So you're saying the crap Limbaugh has brought up isn't germaine?

I don't know what Rush has said. I don't listen to such crazy people. What does Rush know? He's not a peer reviewed scientist, is he?

237 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:29:31am

re: #224 pingjockey

If all those hacked emails are true, peer review is going to be in the same league as steroid abuse in baseball, all records will be tainted.

No- it isn't. Peer review has stood the test of time, and a handful of emails compared to the body of evidence supporting AGW is like spit to the ocean.

238 prairiefire  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:30:02am

re: #112 HoosierHoops

Thanks again for the prayers for John. It is looking like he can go home tomorrow. He then starts down that long road of chemo and radiation to recovery. My prayers for the issues on Hoosier Hoops list. God bless.

239 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:30:21am

re: #232 pingjockey

Just Rush while I'm in the work van. So you're saying the crap Limbaugh has brought up isn't germaine?

There's the problem. Rush isn't a credible source on climatology.

240 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:30:41am

re: #236 Walter L. Newton
Nope. He was reading some of the hacked emails showing there had been some shenanigans going on.

241 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:33:06am

re: #240 pingjockey

You should listen to less Rush and read more LGF.

242 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:33:35am

re: #237 Sharmuta

I have an issue with the politics that has been put into science. If we have global warming caused by humans...show it. If it is part of the planets natural processes show that. It is to the point for me, if Algore is for it or supports it and Hollyweird is in the same boat, I'm against it.

243 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:34:00am

re: #241 Sharmuta
You are very correct!

244 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:34:34am

re: #242 pingjockey

I have an issue with the politics that has been put into science.

And you think this means RUSH is a good source for science news?! You should read LGF, where Charles will link you to actual science.

245 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:35:12am

re: #242 pingjockey

If we have global warming caused by humans...show it. If it is part of the planets natural processes show that.

That have shown this- have you read any of it?

246 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:36:41am

re: #245 Sharmuta

They have shown this- have you read any of it?

Pimf. In fact, here's a link Ping:

The Discovery of Global Warming

247 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:36:50am

re: #244 Sharmuta
No, no, no...I was just saying this was where I first heard of the email uproar. Rush is most definetly NOT a credible source for climatology.

248 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:38:16am

re: #246 Sharmuta

Thank you. Musch to my shame, I have not read enough on Global warming. I do remember when I was in high school we were all supposed to be in an ice age now.

249 pingjockey  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:40:43am

Damnit! Sitting here and the laundry is still not doing itself. What is up with that? I will be back to get more enlightenment from y'all.

250 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:41:31am

re: #248 pingjockey

I got that link here at LGF from Freetoken- it's an excellent resource, and it's very enlightening. I would start with the introduction, and then you can look around the home page and read other essays as you find time.

251 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:43:52am

re: #250 Sharmuta

I got that link here at LGF from Freetoken- it's an excellent resource, and it's very enlightening. I would start with the introduction, and then you can look around the home page and read other essays as you find time.

GREAT LINK!
But I started on the simple models of Climate change down the page...I'll work my way up to the more advanced stuff.

252 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 8:51:28am

re: #251 HoosierHoops

Thanks, Hoops. Freetoken was patient enough to keep linking it, and I finally had decided to look at the science for myself, and not get info from talking heads or propaganda outlets. That's been a great link in helping me to understand, and as a way to help others the way Freetoken helped me, I try to share that link with others. I hope Ping checks it out, as it's not so technical we can't understand, and it's not so dumbed down as to be insulting.

253 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:01:52am

re: #252 Sharmuta

When I was a kid...We had dirty water, toxic dumps, Love Canals, Brown haze over our cities...Environmentally we were a mess...People said we can't do anything to change our world...But by political will power we cleaned up America...Cleaned up our lakes and rivers, cleaned up the air...We haven't made it yet but we are on the road to recovery...Now we need to tackle greenhouse gasses..People throw up their arms and say we can't do anything to change the environment... But God made us caretakers of this world...And we have proved generation by generation we can care for our world...Anti-AGW deniers stand in the way of progress...I hope my great great great grandchild will be proud of us.

254 soflauthor  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:08:33am

AGW [anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming] is a pseudo-religion for many people. They follow their apostles (e.g., Al Gore) and have their selected wise men (the UN IPCC). The problem is, their beliefs are based on flawed science, their projections are derived from inaccurate algorithms and self-serving models, and worse, their experimental data has been demonstrably and dishonestly manipulated for political and ideological reasons (e.g., see the recent "climategate scandal).

Charles' attempts at debunking serious AGW skeptics are, in their own way, similar to a Church's attacks on those that question fundamental doctrine. They sound good on the surface, but fall apart upon closer examination. Today's appeal to authority (the Hawking quote) is both inappropriate and irrelevant. Hawking is a brilliant physicist, but he is not a climate scientist. He has a right to an opinion, but he has not spent any significant time studying AGW. He should be taken only a tad more seriously than Al Gore, who won't debate the AGW issues because, as we say in the sciences, he's exactly one question deep.

It's time for the AGW true believers to take a breath and recognize that more objective study is needed before trillion dollar commitments are made to a "science" that has an extremely shaky foundations.

No one yet knows the true impact of the human component in the earth's climatic system, and anyone who claims they do is either a fool or a liar.

255 jaunte  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:14:37am

re: #254 soflauthor

Assuming the point is correct that we don't know enough yet to make policy changes, how much time and dollar commitments are you proposing for more objective study, and who will decide if it's more objective?

256 schnapp  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:16:31am

re: #254 soflauthor

and if it is true? then in 100 years we will be f*cked. it is being conservative to assume that it could happen and to take the necessary precautions now in case it is real. if it isn't real then so be it, we would have made a mistake and wasted a lot of money. but if it is real and we do nothing then we are screwed.

257 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:18:25am

re: #255 jaunte

Assuming the point is correct that we don't know enough yet to make policy changes, how much time and dollar commitments are you proposing for more objective study, and who will decide if it's more objective?

On a related note: assuming changes of some sort are adopted and measurable decreases in atmospheric CO2 are realized, what climatic effects should we expect to see, and when?

258 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:19:37am

And here we go again with the "religion" accusation. Do you people who toss this silly canard around realize that you're making an implicit assumption that religion is somehow less valid than science, when you try to smear scientists with this nonsense?

259 2senseplain  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:20:34am

re: #201 Cato the Elder

Was that why you needed the sale-priced unicorn food?

260 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:21:46am

re: #257 SixDegrees

On a related note: assuming changes of some sort are adopted and measurable decreases in atmospheric CO2 are realized, what climatic effects should we expect to see, and when?

Good question. I suspect it would take many generations to see any measurable effects.

261 schnapp  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:22:04am

re: #258 Charles

the people who say we should do nothing about climate change are not being "conservative" at all . . .

262 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:31:16am

re: #258 Charles

And here we go again with the "religion" accusation. Do you people who toss this silly canard around realize that you're making an implicit assumption that religion is somehow less valid than science, when you try to smear scientists with this nonsense?

Religion is less valid than science, because it accepts so much on faith for which no evidence exists. I would expect you to agree with that, Charles.

263 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:33:37am

re: #262 Slim_Junior

You're missing the point. I'm sure the people who make that accusation wouldn't agree with what you just said -- and yet, there they are, using "religion" as an insult.

264 jonik  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:33:59am

I have to admit I am skeptical about Global Warming. I think a lot of it has to do with my dislike for Al Gore. I see a leader who practices "do what I say and not I do". Now, we have this debacle with the scientific community. I know before this story broke, roughly half the of the country was doubtful about GW, now I think that number is going to go up 65-70 percent. I disagree with Charles when he says this is a non-story. I think most people will think the scientific community has lied to them for their own agenda.

265 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:34:35am

re: #262 Slim_Junior

Religion is less valid than science, because it accepts so much on faith for which no evidence exists. I would expect you to agree with that, Charles.

So what you're saying is that religion is less valid than science when examined on a scientific basis. A classic circular argument.

In fact, religion and science address two entirely different aspects of existence. Each is entirely valid within it's own domain.

It's only when attempts are made to extend the scope of either into the other that problems arise.

266 Killgore Trout  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:35:04am

Demonstrators Torch Cars,Vandalise Buildings In Geneva.

Liveleak Video
267 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:36:53am

re: #254 soflauthor

AGW [anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming] is a pseudo-religion for many people. They follow their apostles (e.g., Al Gore) and have their selected wise men (the UN IPCC).

Tell me, did you think up that analogy all by yourself?

268 Killgore Trout  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:37:01am

Stop Capitalism!

269 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:37:19am

re: #264 jonik

I have to admit I am skeptical about Global Warming. I think a lot of it has to do with my dislike for Al Gore. I see a leader who practices "do what I say and not I do". Now, we have this debacle with the scientific community. I know before this story broke, roughly half the of the country was doubtful about GW, now I think that number is going to go up 65-70 percent. I disagree with Charles when he says this is a non-story. I think most people will think the scientific community has lied to them for their own agenda.

So, because you don't like Al Gore (I'm not particularly fond of him either) you're going to just ignore the vast amount of scientific evidence on global warming? That makes sense. (Not.)

And by the way, on the subject of Al Gore practicing what he preaches: Al Gore Gets Gold On Tennessee Digs.

A few treehuggers were chagrined that we would question Al Gore's worthiness as a Nobel prize winner, pointing out that the good that's he's done in raising the issue of global warming to the global public far outweighs any CO2 emissions from his personal travels, either by commercial or private jet. OK, point taken. In a CNN interview from Oslo, Gore noted: "The only way to solve this [climate] crisis is for individuals to make changes in their own lives."

So it seemed fitting to applaud Gore's completed renovations on his Tennessee mansion - we talked about his plans here. What's new is that Gore has gotten LEED gold certification from the Green Building Council - the 10,000-square-foot home is one of only 14 in the U.S. to achieve this rating, and the only home in Tennessee that's gotten any certification at all, according to the Associated Press. (There is also a platinum standard) Solar panels, solar roof fans, a rainwater collection system, and geothermal heating were all installed at the house. All incandescent lights - including those on the Christmas tree! - were replaced with either compact fluorescents or light-emitting diodes. And according to AP, energy use at the home decreased 11 percent during Tennessee's sultriest months, when the area was also hit by a heat wave. Good going, Mr. Gore.

270 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:37:35am

re: #261 schnapp

the people who say we should do nothing about climate change are not being "conservative" at all . . .

Ostriches: the new conservatives!

271 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:38:08am

re: #266 Killgore Trout

Demonstrators Torch Cars,Vandalise Buildings In Geneva.

[Video]

Oh for cryin' out loud. NOW what? Is this today?

272 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:38:48am

re: #271 Boogberg

Oh for cryin' out loud. NOW what? Is this today?

Another WTO meeting, another Anarchist riot.

Some things never change.

273 jaunte  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:39:03am

Critics of the scientists who are warning of AGW should be prepared to offer some kind of a plan to find out what's happening in the environment, and propose some objective scientists to do the research.
Flying blind is maladaptive.

274 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:40:52am

re: #263 Charles

You're missing the point. I'm sure the people who make that accusation wouldn't agree with what you just said -- and yet, there they are, using "religion" as an insult.

Do you assume they wouldn't agree, or do you have other evidence?

275 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:41:08am

re: #264 jonik

I have to admit I am skeptical about Global Warming. I think a lot of it has to do with my dislike for Al Gore. I see a leader who practices "do what I say and not I do". Now, we have this debacle with the scientific community. I know before this story broke, roughly half the of the country was doubtful about GW, now I think that number is going to go up 65-70 percent. I disagree with Charles when he says this is a non-story. I think most people will think the scientific community has lied to them for their own agenda.

Seriously, get over Al. He is not in charge of global warming, nor of those of us who think it's a real problem.

I get sick of this "Al Gore does X, so I don't believe in AGW." That's like saying that a celebrity who adopted a baby from Africa was arrested for drunk driving, so now you don't believe in African orphans. I had a two hour discussion with a student once who kept repeating "But how come you believe everything you saw in Al Gore's movie?" I kept repeating "I haven't seen Al Gore's movie. Al Gore is a popularizer, not a scientist. He didn't come up with this."

Forget about Al. He's done some good work, popularizing and getting people interested, but if your dislike for him is getting in the way of rational thought, just pretend he's not there, and do some real reading. The link Sharmuta put in above is very good.

276 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:41:48am

re: #272 SixDegrees

Another WTO meeting, another Anarchist riot.

Some things never change.

I really, Really, REALLY despise those fuckers.

277 jonik  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:42:26am

re: #269 Charles

By the vast amount of scientific evidence you mean by the same scientific community that has been shown to falsify data, professionally attack those that disagree, and only publish articles that agree with their theory. Because that's what the majority of people who are reading on the internet will conclude. That's the problem.

278 Killgore Trout  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:42:53am

re: #271 Boogberg

Yeah, It seems to be angry anarchists and communists.

279 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:42:58am

re: #276 Boogberg

I really, Really, REALLY despise those fuckers.

I can never figure out how they're able to organize such things in the first place.

280 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:43:25am

re: #276 Boogberg

I really, Really, REALLY despise those fuckers.

They're really, really, annoying. Even the other protestors hate the Black Block.

281 E.T.  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:44:09am

Lets say that creationists reported they have proved that evolution is a sham – that the science is settled. Would you want to see the data? I think so.

If they came back later and said that their dog ate the data … or some other bullshit excuse would you believe them?... again I think not

282 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:44:15am

re: #268 Killgore Trout

Stop Capitalism!

If they really want to "stop capitalism," shouldn't their signs all be hand-lettered, instead of being printed professionally by someone who obviously was paid for it?

283 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:44:29am

re: #278 Killgore Trout

Yeah, It seems to be angry anarchists and communists.

It's the 'anarchists' who usually go in for the random car-burning, McDonalds-window-smashing. Emma Goldman would whap them upside their black-masked little heads.

284 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:45:10am

re: #281 E.T.

Lets say that creationists reported they have proved that evolution is a sham – that the science is settled. Would you want to see the data? I think so.

If they came back later and said that their dog ate the data … or some other bullshit excuse would you believe them?... again I think not

What does that mean? No one is claiming to have lost their data.

285 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:45:26am

re: #279 SixDegrees

I can never figure out how they're able to organize such things in the first place.

Would you believe there's an anarchists.org? Talk about an oxymoron.

286 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:45:34am

re: #277 jonik

By the vast amount of scientific evidence you mean by the same scientific community that has been shown to falsify data, professionally attack those that disagree, and only publish articles that agree with their theory. Because that's what the majority of people who are reading on the internet will conclude. That's the problem.

Really. So you believe that all scientists are frauds who fake evidence, and they're just trying to trick you about this global warming thing?

Ooohhhkay.

287 Varek Raith  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:45:39am

re: #279 SixDegrees

I can never figure out how they're able to organize such things in the first place.

You'd think 'Organized Anarchy' would be an oxymoron to these people. :/

288 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:46:14am

re: #287 Varek Raith

You'd think 'Organized Anarchy' would be an oxymoron to these people. :/

[Link: www.anarchists.org...]

289 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:47:15am

re: #283 SanFranciscoZionist

It's the 'anarchists' who usually go in for the random car-burning, McDonalds-window-smashing. Emma Goldman would whap them upside their black-masked little heads.

I liked the response the protesters received in The City, London's financial district, when they showed up to disparage rampant capitalism. Stock traders were leaning out of the upper windows overlooking the protests, jeering and waving fistfuls of money at them.

290 littleugly  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:47:21am

re: #104 MandyManners

I expected a whack,

I am not a toy to be sent to bed
I am not a boy or a dope
I am excited instead
I will make you toss your old rope,
I just want you to have some hope

And Mandy ,

Youtube Video
291 schnapp  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:47:39am

re: #282 Charles

then they would have to buy a pen :P

292 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:48:06am

re: #284 SanFranciscoZionist

What does that mean? No one is claiming to have lost their data.

No. Apparently, they're claiming to have destroyed it. See upthread and elsewhere for details.

293 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:48:59am

re: #285 Sharmuta

Would you believe there's an anarchists.org? Talk about an oxymoron.

Heh, on a number of levels.

294 jonik  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:49:05am

re: #286 Charles

No, I am saying that the majority of people (who were skeptical to begin with) are now reading these articles and will come to the conclusion that GW is not important. It's a matter of perception. That's my point.

295 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:49:48am

re: #285 Sharmuta

Would you believe there's an anarchists.org? Talk about an oxymoron.

In the Bay Area there used to be anarchists' soccer team. They would play the socialist soccer team.

296 jaunte  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:49:56am

You just can't trust a scientist who makes you uncomfortable
by saying you have to change.
/

297 E.T.  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:50:36am

re: #284 SanFranciscoZionist

What does that mean? No one is claiming to have lost their data

Here ya go

298 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:50:40am

re: #287 Varek Raith

You'd think 'Organized Anarchy' would be an oxymoron to these people. :/

Back when anarchists were a real political presence, they even had a magazine and stuff. These guys couldn't organize their way out of a wet paper bag.

299 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:51:10am

re: #295 SanFranciscoZionist

In the Bay Area there used to be anarchists' soccer team. They would play the socialist soccer team.

Anarchist soccer? Are they allowed to use their hands, or something?

300 jaunte  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:51:42am

re: #288 Sharmuta

[Link: www.anarchists.org...]

Looks like you can buy that website from "Valuable Web Names."

301 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:52:05am

re: #300 jaunte

Someone should snatch it up and make it a parody site.

302 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:52:13am

re: #297 E.T.


What does that mean? No one is claiming to have lost their data

Here ya go

Big sigh. Guys, I even tell my freshmen, keep all your copies, and your notes!

303 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:52:45am

re: #299 Sharmuta

Anarchist soccer? Are they allowed to use their hands, or something?

I think they play regular soccer, but make jokes about not following the rules.

304 jaunte  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:53:19am

re: #301 Sharmuta

Someone should snatch it up and make it a parody site.

These folks have already posted the prime material:
[Link: www.instructables.com...]

305 Racer X  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:53:39am

My butthurts.

What? I haven't ridden my mountain bike in a while.

306 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:53:42am

Five hate mails full of insults and venom already today. The idiocy is really raging out there on the right wing.

307 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:53:59am

re: #296 jaunte

You just can't trust a scientist who makes you uncomfortable
by saying you have to change.
/

You can't make people change by having scientists wag fingers at them.

You need laws, coercion, and force.

308 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:54:05am

I mean really- anarchists selling "valuable" web names? The parodies almost write themselves.

309 Digital Display  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:55:06am

99.99% of all scientific data is backed up on tape..Delete all you want..The data still lives in a tape vault somewhere

310 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:55:37am

re: #308 Sharmuta

I mean really- anarchists selling "valuable" web names? The parodies almost write themselves.

The woman who publishes Bamboo Girl has a copyright notice that reads in part: Copyright isn't punk? Well, who said I was punk?

311 bloodnok  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:55:53am

re: #308 Sharmuta

I mean really- anarchists selling "valuable" web names? The parodies almost write themselves.

Kerchiefs and spraypaint cost money, y'know?

312 Killgore Trout  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:56:25am

re: #282 Charles

If they really want to "stop capitalism," shouldn't their signs all be hand-lettered, instead of being printed professionally by someone who obviously was paid for it?

Good point. They're also all wearing manufactured clothing and shoes.

313 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:56:28am

It seems like some strategically located "active denial systems" might cut down on some of the property damage.

314 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:56:32am

re: #240 pingjockey

Kevin Trenberth, who acknowledged the e-mail is genuine, says bloggers are missing the point he’s making in the e-mail by not reading the article cited in it. That article actually says that global warming is continuing, despite random temperature variations that would seem to suggest otherwise.

“It says we don’t have an observing system adequate to track it, but there are all other kinds of signs aside from global mean temperatures — including melting of Arctic sea ice and rising sea levels and a lot of other indicators — that global warming is continuing,” he says.

Gavin Schmidt, a research scientist with NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says the e-mails offer no damning indictment of climate researchers, and that bloggers are reading information in them out of context.

“There’s nothing in the e-mails that shows that global warming is a hoax,” he told Threat Level. “There’s no funding by nefarious groups. There’s no politics in any of these things; nobody from the [United Nations] telling people what to do. There’s nothing hidden, no manipulation.

“It’s just scientists talking about science, and they’re talking relatively openly as people in private e-mails generally are freer with their thoughts than they would be in a public forum. The few quotes that are being pulled out [are out] of context. People are using language used in science and interpreting it in a completely different way.”

Trenberth agrees.

“If you read all of these e-mails, you will be surprised at the integrity of these scientists,” he says. “The unfortunate thing about this is that people can cherry pick and take things out of context.”

Mountains and molehills abound...!

315 subsailor68  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:56:40am

re: #279 SixDegrees

I can never figure out how they're able to organize such things in the first place.

Here's a partial transcript from their last meeting:

"Excuse me. Excuse me! I'd like to call the meeting to order now, please."
"What?"
"Come to order!"
"Order? What the heck is that?"
"Folks, we've got a lot of things to get done before the protest tomorrow. Let's get started. Where's Bob with the subcommittee on sign production report?"
"Who's Bob? What's a subcommittee?"
"Hey, dammit will everyone please stop just milling around? I'm serious here!"
"Wanna see my sign? I made it myself."
"Wait a minute! That sign reads 'We want an Archy.' That's not right, you idiot. Anarchy is one word."
"Really? I was wondering what an Archy was."
"The hell with it. Everyone just meet at First and Main tomorrow at noon."
"Heh, yeah, like that's gonna happen."

316 jaunte  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:57:56am

re: #307 Cato the Elder

You can't make people change by having scientists wag fingers at them.

You need laws, coercion, and force.

Or self-interest.

317 Sharmuta  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:58:05am

Update:

I mean really- clothed anarchists with manufactured spray paint selling "valuable" web names? The parodies almost write themselves.

318 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:58:08am

re: #309 HoosierHoops

99.99% of all scientific data is backed up on tape..Delete all you want..The data still lives in a tape vault somewhere

Apparently, not in this case. The raw data was destroyed, and the destruction has been acknowledged.

At best, it's a major embarrassment.

319 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:59:31am

re: #265 SixDegrees

So what you're saying is that religion is less valid than science when examined on a scientific basis. A classic circular argument.


I'm saying it's less valid period, for the reason stated, and it's not science. As I look here into my empty coffee cup, believing that it's full does not make it so, and that realization does not make me a scientist.


In fact, religion and science address two entirely different aspects of existence. Each is entirely valid within it's own domain.


I think religion is bunk, and a holdover from our primitive past. I think of it as a precursor to actual science. I speculate that it rose out of early humans' attempts to answer then-unanswerable questions, like where they came from (creation myths) and what caused terrifying stuff like thunder and lighting (angry gods).


It's only when attempts are made to extend the scope of either into the other that problems arise.

Yeah. When you apply science to religion, religion starts to look like hokum. And when you apply religion to science, you get the mass hysteria which is AGW.

Regardless of how this is spun, the CRU scandal is huge, and cuts the legs out from under the entire AGW fraud. The evidence is clear, they were making shit up out of whole cloth, applying arbitrary multpliers to reduce data points they wanted reduced and increase the ones they wanted increased.

If this was valid science, it should withstand the scrutiny of the most vehement opponents. There is good reason the high priests at the CRU couldn't let opponents see their data and methodologies. They knew it couldn't stand up to scrutiny by anyone who wasn't also a True Believer.

320 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 9:59:38am

re: #313 Boogberg

It seems like some strategically located "active denial systems" might cut down on some of the property damage.

Local zoning ordinances prevent me from cladding my house and car in reactive armor. Which makes my daily commute a lot less interesting than it could be.

321 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:00:13am

re: #319 Slim_Junior

Yeah. When you apply science to religion, religion starts to look like hokum. And when you apply religion to science, you get the mass hysteria which is AGW.

Regardless of how this is spun, the CRU scandal is huge, and cuts the legs out from under the entire AGW fraud. The evidence is clear, they were making shit up out of whole cloth, applying arbitrary multpliers to reduce data points they wanted reduced and increase the ones they wanted increased.

If this was valid science, it should withstand the scrutiny of the most vehement opponents. There is good reason the high priests at the CRU couldn't let opponents see their data and methodologies. They knew it couldn't stand up to scrutiny by anyone who wasn't also a True Believer.

Try to close your mind a bit more.

322 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:00:31am

re: #318 SixDegrees

Apparently, not in this case. The raw data was destroyed, and the destruction has been acknowledged.

At best, it's a major embarrassment.

Climate: Scientists return fire at skeptics in 'destroyed data' dispute.

According to CRU's Web site, "Data storage availability in the 1980s meant that we were not able to keep the multiple sources for some sites, only the station series after adjustment for homogeneity issues. We, therefore, do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (i.e. quality controlled and homogenized) data."

Phil Jones, director of the Climatic Research Unit, said that the vast majority of the station data was not altered at all, and the small amount that was changed was adjusted for consistency.

The research unit has deleted less than 5 percent of its original station data from its database because the stations had several discontinuities or were affected by urbanization trends, Jones said.

"When you're looking at climate data, you don't want stations that are showing urban warming trends," Jones said, "so we've taken them out." Most of the stations for which data was removed are located in areas where there were already dense monitoring networks, he added. "We rarely removed a station in a data-sparse region of the world."

Refuting CEI's claims of data-destruction, Jones said, "We haven't destroyed anything. The data is still there -- you can still get these stations from the [NOAA] National Climatic Data Center."

323 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:02:08am

re: #312 Killgore Trout

Good point. They're also all wearing manufactured clothing and shoes.

Anyone here a Life fan? Remember 'Jim shoes'?

324 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:02:41am

re: #320 SixDegrees

Local zoning ordinances prevent me from cladding my house and car in reactive armor. Which makes my daily commute a lot less interesting than it could be.

Lol! :D

325 erraticsphinx  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:02:42am

Swiss voters just banned minarets:

Interesting.

326 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:04:22am

re: #319 Slim_Junior

Yeah. When you apply science to religion, religion starts to look like hokum. And when you apply religion to science, you get the mass hysteria which is AGW.

Regardless of how this is spun, the CRU scandal is huge, and cuts the legs out from under the entire AGW fraud. The evidence is clear, they were making shit up out of whole cloth, applying arbitrary multpliers to reduce data points they wanted reduced and increase the ones they wanted increased.

If this was valid science, it should withstand the scrutiny of the most vehement opponents. There is good reason the high priests at the CRU couldn't let opponents see their data and methodologies. They knew it couldn't stand up to scrutiny by anyone who wasn't also a True Believer.

I think you know very little about religion. They have classes, and books and stuff.

327 steve  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:06:21am

The last time we had global warming didn't we have things like this running around?
[Link: ghostradio.wordpress.com...]

Hunting will be more exciting now!

328 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:07:13am

re: #325 erraticsphinx

Swiss voters just banned minarets:

Interesting.

Looks like by a substantial margin, too.

329 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:07:47am

re: #322 Charles

By the way, here's some information on the group spreading the "destroyed data" claim: Competitive Enterprise Institute.

CEI is a think tank funded by donations from individuals, foundations and corporations. CEI does not accept government funding. Past and present funders include the Scaife Foundations, Exxon Mobil, the Ford Motor Company Fund, Pfizer, and the Earhart Foundation[5][6]. ...

CEI is also active in the legal aspects of antitrust and government regulation. As part of its "Control Abuse of Power" (CAP) project, CEI launched lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the 1998 tobacco Master Settlement Agreement and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), respectively.

Again, the connection to energy industries and big tobacco. Every single one of the main anti-AGW front groups is connected to either big energy or big tobacco, and often both.

330 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:08:44am

re: #325 erraticsphinx

Swiss voters just banned minarets:

Interesting.

In recent years many countries in Europe have been debating their relationship with Islam, and how best to integrate their Muslim populations.

France focused on the headscarf, while in Germany there was controversy over plans to build one of Europe's largest mosques in Cologne.

How classic. 'Integration' achieved by making laws against religious expression. Oh, Europe.

331 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:09:14am

And people think the scientists are in a conspiracy to defraud them ... even as they uncritically accept every word of propaganda that comes from R.J. Reynolds and Exxon-Mobil.

332 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:11:03am

OT
Really bad cop shooting in Washington state. 4 cops shot dead at a coffee shop. Shot point blank. My thoughts and prayers to the families. Suspects still at large.

333 SanFranciscoZionist  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:11:25am

re: #332 Rightwingconspirator

OT
Really bad cop shooting in Washington state. 4 cops shot dead at a coffee shop. Shot point blank. My thoughts and prayers to the families. Suspects still at large.

Oh my God.

334 Boogberg  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:11:54am

re: #329 Charles

Someone is talking shit about you on the "American Digest" blog, Charles.

335 subsailor68  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:12:32am

re: #325 erraticsphinx

Swiss voters just banned minarets:

Interesting.

That seems like a silly thing to do. Nobody dances the minaret anymore anyway. Now the Lambada - well, that would be worth banning.

Um, Miss Litella...

336 lawhawk  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:12:54am

Charles,

It's good to see that Gore has reduced his house energy consumption and gotten LEED rating for it. LEED is especially stringent with its ratings and I have to applaud him for that. However, every last bit of LEED improvements undertaken are overtaken by a single trip overseas to attend some conference somewhere. His globetrotting with private aircraft, emits more COx in one trip puts out more emissions than an average US citizen emits in a year.

So, he's responded to the criticism about his home energy consumption, but still engages in a behavior that does more damage to the environment.

I guess it's baby steps, but if he really intended to save the planet, he'd stop with the globe trotting and stick to teleconferencing, where he could get his point across without damaging the very thing he hopes to save.

337 J.S.  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:12:58am

OT

As some may be aware, there's a referendum going on in Switzerland. The question? Whether or not minarets should be tolerated...yes, yet another Menace! it's Minarets! The exit polls indicate that the anti-Minaret faction is winning...This will be seen as a slap in the face of the current government which argued for tolerance (as opposed to hysteria.) The final results aren't in yet, so have to wait and see.

338 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:17:34am

I think Stephen Hawkings self sustaining concern AGW is telling. What this really means is mankind is about to embrace deliberate climate modification, then manipulation. We have no choice.

339 Racer X  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:19:46am

re: #325 erraticsphinx

Swiss voters just banned minarets:

Interesting.

Perhaps they are concerned about the call to prayers?

The BBC's Imogen Foulkes, in Bern, says the surprise result is very bad news for the Swiss government which also fears unrest among the Muslim community.

Ya think?

340 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:20:16am

re: #331 Charles

And people think the scientists are in a conspiracy to defraud them ... even as they uncritically accept every word of propaganda that comes from R.J. Reynolds and Exxon-Mobil.

Now that you mention those two companies, Charles, let's try a little thought experiment:

Imagine that someone released many megabytes of emails from researchers in their employ that discussed deleting data in the face of FOIA requests, or using "tricks" to hide a particular trend that was clearly evident in the raw data. Imagine there was also computer source code that included numbers, described in the comments as the "fudge factor", that were clearly arbitrary and intended to produce a desired result.

Now I'll stipulate for you that the Crazy Right-Wing Creationist Glenn Beck-Worshippers would dismiss it all as a whole bunch of nothing. How do YOU think the left would react, and the MSM, and Democrats in congress, and the various government agencies that regulate those companies? Do you think their reactions would be markedly different from the way they're reacting the CRU scandal?

341 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:22:50am

re: #319 Slim_Junior

"...They knew it couldn't stand up to scrutiny by anyone who wasn't also a True Believer.

Slim_J
check my...
re: #314 oldegeezr

Eric... is not a player in this debate.

342 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:22:53am

re: #322 Charles

It's good form to keep copies even of derivative data, should questions ever arise. Nice to hear that the data can apparently still be gotten from it's original source, but that isn't the same as being able to produce the precise collection of data CRU derived it's results from.

When we do a software delivery, we tag everything that went into that delivery - including third party software packages that we have never modified at all. At any time, we are able to construct exactly what was shipped to the customer in a given delivery.

Scientific data needs to be treated exactly the same way - and most often, it is. As noted earlier, every major claim of scientific fraud I'm aware of over the last several decades has ultimately been resolved by reference to the original, raw data - either in the researcher's favor or not. In some realms - drug trials, I believe, are one example - there are regulatory requirements that the raw data be turned over and archived for a set length of time, and at least a fair amount of government-sponsored research in the US requires retention of data.

Mostly, such requirements aren't really necessary - self-policing ensures that records are hung onto for extended periods of time, on the off-chance they need to be revisited for some reason. The discovery, just a few years ago, that the widely accepted value for the speed of sound - a fundamental measurement long considered settled - was wrong led to the examination of the original experimental data, which revealed a small, systematic error in data collection. In other instances, we have Darwin's original field notebooks, along with his personal copies of Malthus and other texts that influenced his thinking; we have Galileo's and da Vinci's original notebooks; large swaths of Newton's original papers; and on and on. The importance of data preservation isn't exactly new. And it isn't unusual to revisit it; Mendel's experimental results, when analyzed using modern statistical methods, are almost certainly "too good to be true" and were probably fudged, consciously or unconsciously, to make them better fit the hypothesis Mendel had constructed. In that particular case, he turned out to be right anyway, and was borne out in spades when the physical mechanisms of genetics were elucidated. But again, the importance of keeping good records cannot be overstated.

And as I've also mentioned, the appearance here is what matters in the realm of public opinion, far more so than the science. The admission that even a small portion of data was destroyed, or that the original dataset published results were based on no longer exists is like a wet dream come true for the opposition. The public is going to hear one side saying, "They cooked their data, lied and destroyed the evidence!" while the other side responds with, "The data speaks for itself!" which sounds pretty weak under the circumstances.

Again, appearances matter even more in this case, where the public must be swayed and the opposition is active. The researchers should have known better than to delete anything, regardless of their ability to explain the deletion. The effect on public perception is that their case is severely weakened.

343 son of a son  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:23:18am

Climategate was yesterday. Sciencegate is emerging.

344 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:23:26am

re: #336 lawhawk


I guess it's baby steps, but if he really intended to save the planet, he'd stop with the globe trotting and stick to teleconferencing, where he could get his point across without damaging the very thing he hopes to save.

To paraphrase Instapundit, I'll believe AGW is an emergency when those who keep telling me it's an emergency start acting like it's an emergency.

345 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:24:14am

re: #342 SixDegrees

Again: Why aren't you applying this level of scrutiny and argument to the propagandist pushing anti-AGW?

346 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:24:31am

re: #342 SixDegrees

Bottom line: no data was destroyed. The original data is still available.

347 Ericus58  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:25:30am

re: #332 Rightwingconspirator

A Terrible day indeed - 30 miles to my south. We in Seattle just laid to rest an Officer executed two weeks ago while sitting in his patrol car with a new officer.

348 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:27:06am

re: #345 Obdicut

Again: Why aren't you applying this level of scrutiny and argument to the propagandist pushing anti-AGW?

Asked, and answered, above.

349 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:31:22am

re: #348 SixDegrees

Not in anything approaching a sufficient way. You responded that you're attacking them because they destroyed data-- which it does not appear actually happened. You're pushing a direct line of anti-science propaganda without apparent regard for the truth of it.

And when asked why you're using it to attack scientists and not those abusing science to discredit AGW, your response is simply to repeat the attack on the scientists.

I do not find that a compelling argument in the least.

350 carnaby  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:33:29am

re: #23 freetoken

Just wanted to know where you are coming from... and now we do. It's the KUSI weatherman's approach, i.e., John Coleman and his effort to lead the innumerate astray.

It is a fallacy to try and represent the amount of CO2 using % and declare it small because it is after the decimal point. There are a very many chemicals in life that are quite deadly at that %.

Indeed, to understand molecules one should deal in Avogadro's number, which is about 6 x 10^22 atoms of Carbon-12 in 12 grams of mass. Since humans put roughly 30 billion metric tons of carbon in the atmosphere per year, that is 30 gigatonnes / 12 grams x Avogadro's number = 1 x 10^35 atoms of carbon man's fossil fuels add to the atmosphere per year.

100000000000000000000000000000000000 atoms more of carbon per year, and you call that "puny".

It's a silly game to play, but that is what you're doing.

The reason relatively small changes in CO2 end up having such a large effect is because the flow of energy from the Sun is so large, and because of conservation of energy.

Small rudders steer very big ships, and all of that.

But how many total atoms are there in the atmosphere? Quite a few more than that big number with zeros you write up there. It's the relative amount of carbon that counts, not the total. The amount of carbon is relatively puny. I'm not saying this can't make a difference in global temperatures, by the way, I'm just saying I'm not convinced.

351 Daniel Ballard  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:34:18am

re: #347 Ericus58

4 good men down. Very little detail so far, not even the agencies these guys worked for. My sympathies, thats a huge number for such a small town to absorb.

352 Ericus58  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:38:20am

re: #351 Rightwingconspirator

Early reports are one or two shooters involved. The officers were in uniform. Pure targeted intent, others in the coffee shop not hurt or injured.

353 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:39:06am

re: #346 Charles

Bottom line: no data was destroyed. The original data is still available.

The corpus of data they amassed to conduct their research has been destroyed. Yes, it can be reproduced. Whether the reconstruction is identical to what was used will forever remain an open, unanswerable question.

They should have archived their dataset. It's just that simple, and now they're going to be raked over the coals for not doing so. And, in my opinion, they deserve it. They cannot guarantee that a reconstruction of the dataset actually matches what they used, and that doubt cannot be erased. As a practical matter, data gets corrupted during transmission and transcription - I see this happen on a regular basis, and it's often difficult to identify bad data as the culprit. And of course, all sorts of other, more nefarious suggestions are going to be put forward as well.

I have two suggestions. Neither will fix this particular problem, but they may help going forward. First, raw data of this sort ought to be archived as a matter of course; this is already done for the most part, but it ought to be a requirement of doing science. Second, all "proprietary" claims to such raw data ought to be eliminated, and the data itself ought to be released to the public domain where it can be openly examined; reference to the original, archived data can resolve disputes based on corruption. They're small steps, but apparently necessary ones.

Whether these actions can be justified or not, they can only serve to undermine trust in the results from this field, and from other scientific endeavors. They certainly do nothing to bolster trust, and in the end the net result will be some number of people dissuaded from taking AGW seriously.

354 tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:39:40am

re: #200 kirkspencer Fair enough, kirkspencer. Not, as you point out, "unassailable", as I wrote. As I understand it, Lindzen et.al. had to wait some 20 years to have enough raw data to generate their conclusions. And there are, as you also point out, serious questions as in the former case, it IS a question of sign, and in the latter, Spencer (whose work I respect) has possibly major falsifications developing.
I want to compliment you - it took 200 comments for someone to pick up on this, on an AWG thread. Kudos.

Now, given we are speaking of hundreds of trillions of dollars of investment over centuries, to achieve a possible reduction of a celsius degree or two in the outcome (theoretically, of course), do you think this science might garner some attention from the Enlightened - maybe a few minor percent of the tens of billions in research already thrown at the AWG issue worldwide?
We shall see soon enough, I suppose. I doubt it of course, as a layman who has spent several hundred hours online doing Climatology 101 over the years...because those who insist on the debate being over never seem to be willing to methodically deconstruct the positions and answer directly, on a scientific basis, the Deniers. They don't have to, they have the momentum, (still). Heard a cute aphorism the other day, applicable to many IMHO on the AWG side: - they have a traffic light issue - gotta be Green cause they're too Yellow to be RED.

BTW, speaking of 'unassailable data', (or not), relevant to Hawking's quote on hydrides - apparently, the New Oceanic Buoy data is excluded (I'm sure for good reason, eh?) from IPCC ocean heating calculations. Could it be because it's apparently showing the oceans to be cooling?
Inquiring minds want to know.

And finally, because it's not my job as a non-scientist to convince anyone of anything, and that further my comments are only to ask that others please make the effort to obtain to sufficient understanding of the science to achieve informed choice (and I'll testify that the science IS ACCESSIBLE to the layperson, given one has a few hundred hours), I wish to point out that were it not for terms like "Climate Deniers", and Industry Shills, I'd remain agnostic on AWG. For like the CRU crowd themselves, I recognize we cannot possibly attain to understanding of a Chaotic System as complex as the world climate at our present level of understanding. And to think otherwise is gross HUBRIS, precautionary-principal fuzzy thinking, and smacks of fundamentalist religious fervour/fever (apologies as appropriate to the site owner).

But given the constant bandy-ing about of such invective laden terms, I choose a side, and it's not COP of whatever number. And you'll have to allow me a little sanguine schadenfreude, because after CLIMATEGATE (a search term that Powerline points out has exceeded Global Warming for search hits on Google), the debate is indeed refreshed, and...to those still defending the 'settled science' = the floor is yours.

PS: Just Curious - I`ve been reading that Soros is behind RealClimate, and that SHELL OIL is deep in it (the emails...the emails...) with the CRU. Whoddathunkit! Anyone with insight on this?

355 SixDegrees  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:41:42am

re: #349 Obdicut

Your argument is irrational. I've been very careful not to take sides in this argument, and only to comment on what I see as the problem at hand. If you want to turn this into a "Yer fer it er agin' it!!!" argument, please take it up with someone interested in such squabbling.

And if you don't see this as creating a problem for those supporting AGW, you really need to examine the matter objectively.

356 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:44:16am

re: #316 jaunte

Or self-interest.

Self-interest does not extend beyond two weeks into the future if real sacrifice is involved today.

357 Achilles Tang  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:45:50am

re: #13 loudog

As much as I admire Stephen Hawking, he is a theoretical physicist.

...and endowed with more brains than most of us, along with the same access to data that we have. I'll take his opinion over the Ben Steins of the world any day.

358 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:47:44am

re: #319 Slim_Junior

Regardless of how this is spun, the CRU scandal is huge, and cuts the legs out from under the entire AGW fraud. The evidence is clear, they were making shit up out of whole cloth, applying arbitrary multpliers to reduce data points they wanted reduced and increase the ones they wanted increased.

That is a pile of absolute nonsense.

359 Obdicut  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:47:53am

re: #355 SixDegrees

I see it as creating a problem because people are asserting that it creates a problem. It's flag pins all over again.

When you are assailing only the scientists and not those promoting the anti-AGW, anti-science platform, I'm not sure why you expect to be able to differentiate yourself from those espousing the anti-AGW, anti-science platform.

360 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:48:11am

re: #350 carnaby

Check out my #314...

361 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:50:08am

And now, of course, because Stephen Hawking is concerned about global warming, we have people dissing him. People who aren't climate scientists are yelling that Hawking isn't a climate scientist -- and ignoring that he's one of the most brilliant physicists of our generation.

Of course, he is a scientist -- so obviously he's in on the hoax along with the rest of those tricksy frauds.

362 tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:53:57am

re: #358 Charles
well, maybe...except in the case of Mann, et. al., n'est ce pas? That was certainly embarrassing, from a 'peer-review' standpoint, yes? (still?)

363 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:56:34am

re: #361 Charles

Funny how brilliant physicist Freeman Dyson's not being a climate scientist counts against him when voices doubts about the "consensus", while the opinion of a fellow physicist is welcomed as long as it's AGW-PC.

364 tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 10:59:14am

re: #361 Charles
well, yes, it's unfortunate about all the tricksie accusations. Let's agree to assign only good motives to all. But as a physicist, astrophysicist no less, do you think he may have expanded his comment a little regards CO2 and light absorption? No one seems to have picked up on this on the thread, so maybe you could help here. While in the relevant wavelengths CO2 is veryvery potent as one commenter pointed out, we have to remember that the amount of light hitting the Earth from that big yellow thing up there is in fact, limited. Please expand on this, debunk (or ignore).

365 Cato the Elder  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:06:10am

ΠΙΜΦ: "...when he voices doubts..."

366 tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:08:46am

re: #363 Cato the Elder
ditto that, Cato
Have a good and quiet Sunday. Our Lords and Masters will sort it all out for us.

367 emcesq  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:09:07am

Speaking of Hockey Sticks - the most prominent, absolutely undeniable one, is exponential increase in population. Does anyone think this can go on without bounds? And what to do about it? I wonder how the long-term warming trend overlays population growth...

368 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:16:10am

re: #358 Charles

That is a pile of absolute nonsense.

Would you call it nonsense if the hypothetical Exxon-Mobile-RJReynolds scandal I described in my other post (#340) to you was real, and that was the one I was referring to?

369 tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:21:19am

re: #367 emcesq
"the machine
that we built
would never save us"
thats what they say
(thats why they aint coming with us today)
and they also said
"its impossible for man
to live and breath underwater..
forever" was their main complaint

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmRoGtiJp_E

370 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:33:46am

re: #340 Slim_Junior

Hey Slimbo...check my re: #314 oldegeezr

Kevin Trenberth, who acknowledged the e-mail is genuine, says bloggers are missing the point he’s making in the e-mail by not reading the article cited in it. That article actually says that global warming is continuing, despite random temperature variations that would seem to suggest otherwise.

Mountains and molehills abound...!

371 emcesq  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:36:07am

I do not consider Jimmy Hendrix an authority on this subject... Guitar - YES!

372 emcesq  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:39:50am

re: #369 tiburon

Sorry , screwed up the header

"I do not consider Jimmy Hendrix an authority on this subject... Guitar - YES!"

373 tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 11:57:37am

re: #372 emcesq
Ya...I guess not so... - though Jimi always appeared to me to be a little 'touched' - mystic
But my thought was: - Maybe things will balance out in ways we can't yet anticipate, yet short of Calamity. Bear in mind, anyway, that demographically, as folk become 'wealthier', at least up through the middle class (the trend reverses again once one has real money), birth rates drop, save for in the faith communities. This is a fact of 'human nature', children being a form of natural 'old-age insurance' for the poor and destitute (and I'm NOT implying anything 'wrong' with this).
I figure we should do all we can for and with each other, to better all our lot, and let the big questions, like 'Earth's capacity for sustainability of folks', play out without resort to some totalitarian nightmare. I believe (no proofs) that said capacity may be way more than we imagine, today.
The Verities, remain for me our central challenge, not 'population growth' - but then I do see the world in most ways a stage for a human morality play. So shoot me. :-P

374 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 12:19:44pm

re: #326 SanFranciscoZionist

I think you know very little about religion. They have classes, and books and stuff.

Actually, I have been through the classes, and books and stuff. And it wasn't easy to overthrow that indoctrination.

Belief in creationism is roundly mocked on this site. But to me, the idea of creationism is no more or less absurd than the idea of a "savior" who accepted punishment for my alleged wrongdoings. That goes against my own sense of justice. If the leader of a criminal gang murdered a loved one of mine, I would want that person punished, and no one else. If one of his underlings offered a phony confession and did the time for him, I wouldn't consider that justice. But in tribal societies several millenia ago, people accepted the idea that as long as someone took the punishment, justice was served.

I wonder why "creationists" are singled out for special ridicule on this site? Why aren't all religious believers?

375 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 12:43:56pm

re: #374 Slim_Junior

“...I wonder why "creationists" are singled out for special ridicule on this site? Why aren't all religious believers?

I have no problem with creationism...who’s to say better; the world is six thousand years old or six billion years olde...?

I rather subject the analysis to equating “belly button lint” to the ancestral circumstance or... lack of attention to detail while bathing in the bath or shower...

Newt Gingrich could be the historical reference with respect to this detail...

Newts' been around for a long time but doesn't mean he's still not relevant...!

376 Tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:08:32pm

re: #375 oldegeezr

I have no problem with creationism...who’s to say better; the world is six thousand years old or six billion years olde...?


Why not both? Read the reknowned (orthodox) Jewish astrophysicist Gerald L Schroeder on the subject. Not, factoring in the latest advances in understanding of the Universe and it's Origins, a contradiction.
Thought I'd also just post a link here; for those interested in investing a little time, and in possession of basic high school math skills, Milloy has done a big service in assembling, complete with neat little online calculators and lots of clear graphics - a Primer in atmospheric physics, the enhanced greenhouse effect, and the science underlying the entire debate, pro AND con AWG. An understanding of which without tends to needlessly amplify CO2 emission via "hot air", so-to-speak (little 'play on words' there, intentional)
Seriously, take a little time folks: - Learn the basics. Figure an hour or two to read and understand the 4 or 5 pages, starting from scratch.
Personally, I'm not clear how anyone reading this material, can pronounce the 'debate is settled'...but will certainly drop back here now and then, to be so informed. Have Fun!
Somewhat pedantic, but what to do!

377 Tiburon  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:10:29pm

corrigere: - "...the latest MAINSTREAM advances in ASTROPHYSICS..."

precision counts.

378 Charles Johnson  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:48:10pm

re: #376 Tiburon

Somewhat pedantic, but what to do!

Junkscience.com is a front group for the energy industries, and started as a front group for the tobacco lobbies. Their credibility is below zero.

379 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:52:54pm

re: #375 oldegeezr

I have no problem with creationism...who’s to say better; the world is six thousand years old or six billion years olde...?

Those who actually back their claims with evidence are "to say better."

And it does make a difference, because it undercuts the whole Abrahamic-Monotheistic business. It's what made me really question my former beliefs. When presented with evidence that humans had existed for tens of thousands of years prior to when the Earth was supposedly created, I had to ask myself, where did the souls of those people go when they died? They probably had their own long-forgotten religious ideas on that, but they had never heard of the God of Abraham or Jesus, etc., so what was their afterlife like? And yes, I've heard a lot of pat answers to that question, but I don't buy any of them, so please, keep 'em if you got 'em.

380 emcesq  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 1:59:16pm

re: #373 tiburon

Agreed! There is always "something else" hiding in the background, that we "did not see".

Global cooling, global warming, nuclear winter, Malthusian theories... Point is that our closed ecosystem is finite. The only question is when does the overall negative feedback kick in. Is it happening now? I would give it a few decades yet. In my lifetime, global population doubled and almost doubled again. I do not believe that it can be doubling like this much longer. Global warming is just the beginning. My bet is on infectious disease(s). The global warming will take care of itself as a consequence.

381 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:14:23pm

re: #379 Slim_Junior

Did they ever tell you there were no atheists in foxholes...?

Actually I never met an atheist in a foxhole...although I spent the better part of four years of combat in Vietnam , from 1962 to 1966...!

I’ve seen grown men cry like babies...!
Until yeh kick em’ in the arse to stand up...and fight!

Question is ...what is an atheist..?
Kick my arse...!

Slimbo...!

382 emcesq  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:21:44pm

re: #379 Slim_Junior

And what makes you so sure there ARE souls?

383 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 2:30:21pm

re: #379 Slim_Junior

Slimbo...
It's "smoke 'em if yeh gottem...!"

384 oldegeezr  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 4:21:33pm

379 Slim_Junior

“...And it does make a difference, because it undercuts the whole Abrahamic-Monotheistic business. It's what made me really question my former beliefs.

“...I had to ask myself, where did the souls of those people go when they died?


382 emcesq

‘”...And what makes you so sure there ARE souls?

Are you certain there are not personnel outside of Wright Patterson...?

385 emcesq  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 4:51:30pm

re: #384 oldegeezr


HUH?

386 Slim_Junior  Sun, Nov 29, 2009 6:22:37pm

re: #382 emcesq

And what makes you so sure there ARE souls?

I said I was questioning my former beliefs. That was back when I still sort of believed them.

And if you're wondering if I now think there is a soul or not, I'll give you the same answer I gave the last pair of Mormons who knocked on my front door and asked the exact same question: Don't know and don't care.

387 carnaby  Mon, Nov 30, 2009 8:37:06am

re: #360 oldegeezr

Check out my #314...


OK, I did. I don't see the relevance to anything I've written here.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
2 days ago
Views: 100 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 264 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1