climategate

#127 REDACTED, Posted: Dec 02 2009 at 2:49 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,

Quote Reply

#128 Dec 02 2009 at 3:00 PM Rating: Good

Uglysasquatch

Soulless Internet Tiger

35,474 posts

publiusvarus wrote:

Joph,

Of course even you realize fossil fuels weren't the main source of fuel for auto's when they first came out. I'm sure we would get by just fine w/o fossil fuels, not that it is ever going to happen because we're always going to have fossil fuels.

Probably not, but our kids might...oh I see what's going on. Man seeking Man can't have any kids, so why care about their future!

____________________________

Donate. One day it could be your family.

An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#129 Dec 02 2009 at 3:05 PM Rating: Excellent

__DEL__1618186764728

Sage

5,684 posts

publiusvarus wrote:

Bard,

Quote:

how is fostering worldwide change and accountability maintaining the status quo?

Accountable to what? You're asking people to change based on nothing more than junk science. That we're even discussing "green technology" as opposed to creating better, more efficient, ways to utilize our own natural resources absolutely blows me away.

you still have yet to show that it is junk science.

Green technology -IS- a better way to utilize our own natural resources. -WE- don't have enough oil in the US, so -WE- should utilize what we do have. Surely you can agree with lifting our oil dependence on those towel-twirlers you hate so much.

Quote:

And yes this green technology nonsense is the status quo.

You have no idea what "status quo" means, do you?

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#130 Dec 02 2009 at 3:17 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

publiusvarus wrote:

Of course even you realize fossil fuels weren't the main source of fuel for auto's when they first came out.

The first actually mas sproduced ones? Yeah, it was fossil fuels? Prior to that? Well, I suppose there were some steam powered vehicles. Are you suggesting we go to steam boilers on our cars?

Incidentally, my travels today had me browsing the November issue of Scientific American which contained an article saying new analysis of the climate record backs up the "hocky stick" graph skeptics keep claiming is flawed or not real or whatever.

SciAm wrote:

The â€œhockey stickâ€ graph has been both a linchpin and target in the climate change debate. As a plot of average Northern Hemisphere temperature from two millennia ago to the present, it stays relatively flat until the 20th century, when it rises up sharply, like the blade of an upturned hockey stick. Warming skeptics have long decried how the temperatures were inferred, but a new reconstruction of the past 600 years, using an entirely different method, finds similar results and may help remove lingering doubts.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#131 Dec 02 2009 at 3:20 PM Rating: Good

AshOnMyTomatoes

View User Forum

Bloodle-Oodle-Oodle

13,007 posts

Jophiel wrote:

SciAm wrote:

but a new reconstruction of the past 600 years, using an entirely different method, finds similar results and may help remove lingering doubts.

Doubtful.

____________________________

Anyway, there was a hippo sat there waiting to do his act. -Karl Pilkington

▲ Page top

#132 REDACTED, Posted: Dec 02 2009 at 3:23 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,

Quote Reply

#133 Dec 02 2009 at 3:23 PM Rating: Decent

bsphil

Edited by bsphil

21,739 posts

Jophiel wrote:

SciAm wrote:

The â€œhockey stickâ€ graph has been both a linchpin and target in the climate change debate. As a plot of average Northern Hemisphere temperature from two millennia ago to the present, it stays relatively flat until the 20th century, when it rises up sharply, like the blade of an upturned hockey stick. Warming skeptics have long decried how the temperatures were inferred, but a new reconstruction of the past 600 years, using an entirely different method, finds similar results and may help remove lingering doubts.

I bet I can think of someone who will continue to doubt it anyway.

____________________________

His Excellency Aethien wrote:

Almalieque wrote:

If no one debated with me, then I wouldn't post here anymore.

Take the hint guys, please take the hint.

gbaji wrote:

I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#134 Dec 02 2009 at 3:27 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

publiusvarus wrote:

lolWiki wrote:

In the 1890s, alcohol fueled engines were used in farm machinery, train locomotives, and cars in the U.S. and Europe, making countries more fuel independent. Ethanol was the first fuel used by American cars before gasoline.

You don't see the issue with a full conversion to ethanol? Smiley: laugh

I mean, I'm all for exploring other options and stuff including biofuels but you seem to be missing a part of the puzzle here.

Edited, Dec 2nd 2009 3:29pm by Jophiel

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#135 Dec 02 2009 at 3:40 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1618186764728

Sage

5,684 posts

Jophiel wrote:

publiusvarus wrote:

lolWiki wrote:

In the 1890s, alcohol fueled engines were used in farm machinery, train locomotives, and cars in the U.S. and Europe, making countries more fuel independent. Ethanol was the first fuel used by American cars before gasoline.

You don't see the issue with a full conversion to ethanol? Smiley: laugh

I mean, I'm all for exploring other options and stuff including biofuels but you seem to be missing a part of the puzzle here.

Edited, Dec 2nd 2009 3:29pm by Jophiel

poor people don't deserve to eat, remember?

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#136 Dec 02 2009 at 3:46 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1680481127345

View User Forum

Sage

21,262 posts

Quote:

And there's no chance in h*ll the we are going to run out of fossil fuels in the next 200yrs so I'm not exactly worried about what's not going to happen a couple hundred years from now.

This is what they said about the old growth forests of the East Coast back when the country was founded.

▲ Page top

#137 REDACTED, Posted: Dec 02 2009 at 4:52 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,

Quote Reply

#138 Dec 02 2009 at 5:34 PM Rating: Good

__DEL__1618186764728

Sage

5,684 posts

publiusvarus wrote:

Once the auto industry comes to a point when fossil fuels are no longer in such high supply, which will be never, they will find a way to keep us paying for whatever energy source they do come up with to replace it.

does Ford own an oil company? or maybe GM?

I'm lost.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#139 Dec 02 2009 at 5:38 PM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

publiusvarus wrote:

I was simply illustrating that cars can be powered by something other than fossil fuels.

Sure. We can also have them pulled by oxen or put giant hamster wheels in their engines. Just saying "They once weren't run on gasoline so we'll just come up with a new thing!" and leaving it at that is amazingly simple minded, even for you.

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#140 Dec 02 2009 at 6:20 PM Rating: Default

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

Professor AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:

publiusvarus wrote:

Next, and probably the most difficult to prove, you need to be able to show a direct correlation between human behaviour and rise in global temperature.

Um... At the risk of stating the obvious. In what way does that image show a correlation between human behavior and rise in global temperature? I see a temperature measurement which looks like it follows a regular pattern, with no discernible difference "today". And I see a CO2 measurement which shows unusually high levels "today", with no apparent effect on temperature.

That image shows the opposite of what you were asked for. It certainly shows a correlation between human activities and CO2 levels (although there's some argument that the last bit isn't accurate due to different measurements being used), but that doesn't show any correlation to global temperatures.

Want to try again?

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

▲ Page top

#141 REDACTED, Posted: Dec 03 2009 at 8:42 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,

Quote Reply

#142 Dec 03 2009 at 8:46 AM Rating: Excellent

Jophiel

View User Forum

Liberal Conspiracy

TILT

publiusvarus wrote:

I'd have to be complete moron

You're 99% of the way there!

____________________________

Belkira wrote:

Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#143 Dec 03 2009 at 9:00 AM Rating: Decent

__DEL__1592267273743

Scholar

10,359 posts

Quote:

That image shows the opposite of what you were asked for. It certainly shows a correlation between human activities and CO2 levels (although there's some argument that the last bit isn't accurate due to different measurements being used), but that doesn't show any correlation to global temperatures.

You don't believe very much in induction, or know what it is at all, so it's reasonable that you would infer this.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#144 Dec 03 2009 at 10:19 AM Rating: Good

Timelordwho

View User Forum

Unplanned

13,240 posts

Quote:

How about I just leave it up to the corporations that have a vested interest in seeing to it I get to where I need to go? I'd have to be complete moron to concern myself with how someones going to get from point a to b 200yrs from now.

Like Exxon?

____________________________

Just as Planned.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#145 Dec 03 2009 at 12:52 PM Rating: Decent

Debalic

Prodigal Son

20,643 posts

publiusvarus wrote:

Jophed,

Quote:

. Just saying "They once weren't run on gasoline so we'll just come up with a new thing!" and leaving it at that is amazingly simple minded, even for you.

How about I just leave it up to the corporations that have a vested interest in seeing to it I get to where I need to go? I'd have to be complete moron to concern myself with how someones going to get from point a to b 200yrs from now.

Can't figure out how to convert your Nissan to biofuel, huh?

____________________________

publiusvarus wrote:

we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#146 Dec 03 2009 at 2:06 PM Rating: Good

Omegavegeta

View User Forum

Sage

8,236 posts

Quote:

And yet some of the warmest years in recorded history occured before cars, industry, and even (gasp) the common use of fossil fuels as an energy source.

Cite please.

Quote:

How about the fact that the last 10yrs the global temperature has actually decreased?

Cite please.

Quote:

I'm sorry to say you're one of the many to have been completely brainwashed into believing the "fossil fuels are evil" mantra.

Nu uh. Or is that you don't believe in greenhouse gases?

They exist whether you believe in them or not. And it's relatively easy to lessen man's impact on them, even without giving up the whole "American Way of Life" thing you're so worried about.

You should love all of God's creations, even greenhouse gases. It's man's creations that should get under your skin. If look at it like man made greenhouse gases are akin to elective abortions (and considering the link between miscarriages & pollution, it's somewhat of an apt analogy), does that change your mind?

You should seriously drive a hybrid Varrus, think of all of those dead fetuses your gas guzzler is contributing too!

____________________________

"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#147 Dec 03 2009 at 2:54 PM Rating: Decent

gbaji

Encyclopedia

35,568 posts

Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:

Quote:

That image shows the opposite of what you were asked for. It certainly shows a correlation between human activities and CO2 levels (although there's some argument that the last bit isn't accurate due to different measurements being used), but that doesn't show any correlation to global temperatures.

You don't believe very much in induction, or know what it is at all, so it's reasonable that you would infer this.

Huh!? It's not about the reasoning at all. It's about the data. We can't even get to discussing whether or not the data shows a correlation between rising temperatures and human behavior if the data he presents doesn't even show rising temperatures. Can you honestly look at the temperature graph and say that there's anything unusual about the last period in the pattern?

He was asked to provide proof of a correlation between rising temperatures and human behavior. What he posted failed to do that. Do you agree?

____________________________

King Nobby wrote:

More words please

▲ Page top

Quote Reply

#148 Dec 03 2009 at 2:58 PM Rating: Good

Xsarus

View User Forum

10,601 posts

gbaji wrote:

Pensive the Ludicrous wrote:

Quote:

That image shows the opposite of what you were asked for. It certainly shows a correlation between human activities and CO2 levels (although there's some argument that the last bit isn't accurate due to different measurements being used), but that doesn't show any correlation to global temperatures.

You don't believe very much in induction, or know what it is at all, so it's reasonable that you would infer this.

Huh!? It's not about the reasoning at all. It's about the data. We can't even get to discussing whether or not the data shows a correlation between rising temperatures and human behavior if the data he presents doesn't even show rising temperatures. Can you honestly look at the temperature graph and say that there's anything unusual about the last period in the pattern?

He was asked to provide proof of a correlation between rising temperatures and human behavior. What he posted failed to do that. Do you agree?

It shows a correlation between CO2 levels and temperature. don't focus on the last millimeter of the graph.

look are you trying to say that there is no greenhouse gas, or that excess CO2 in the atmosphere doesn't cause things to be warmer? Because if that's what you're asserting, you've badly missed the mark in this debate. No one is saying that C02 isn't related to temperature, they're saying that human activity isn't a significant impact, or a few people might assert that the CO2 is purely a result and not a cause, but there is a correlation for sure.

Edited, Dec 3rd 2009 3:04pm by Xsarus

____________________________

01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ

▲ Page top

#149 REDACTED, Posted: Dec 03 2009 at 3:01 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Omega,

#150 REDACTED, Posted: Dec 03 2009 at 3:04 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Xarus,

Quote Reply

#151 Dec 03 2009 at 3:08 PM Rating: Decent

Debalic

Prodigal Son

20,643 posts

Sir Xsarus wrote:

gbaji wrote:

He was asked to provide proof of a correlation between rising temperatures and human behavior. What he posted failed to do that. Do you agree?

It shows a correlation between CO2 levels and temperature. don't focus on the last millimeter of the graph.

Okay, but this isn't really showing any sign of human manipulation. What we need is a zoom-in segment of the last few decades of the temperature chart to go along with the zoom-in of the co2 chart and see if the temperature is increasingly climbing at the same rate instead of falling as the historical data shows it should.

____________________________

publiusvarus wrote:

we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.

▲ Page top

climategateFollow