June 11, 2011
— andy Is there anyone who believes in anthropogenic global warming (AGW) at this point who isn't a charlatan or a dumbass? Or both? So which is it, Mitt?
“I don’t speak for the scientific community, of course,’’ Romney said. “But I believe the world’s getting warmer. I can’t prove that, but I believe based on what I read that the world is getting warmer. And number two, I believe that humans contribute to that . . . so I think it’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may well be significant contributors to the climate change and the global warming that you’re seeing.’’
Really? Well I guess AGW is possible. But Obamacare could reduce healthcare costs and Anthony Weiner could have been #Hacked!, too. I read both those things somewhere.
Possible is hell of a long way from probable. You're supposed to know this, Mitt.
And now we've come to the point where enough time has elapsed to grade the IPCC on its prior work with real historical data, not some garbage-in, garbage-out computer simulation. Read this, Mitt: people are starting to point out that their predictions, in a word, suck.
The graph is pretty simple, really. Temperatures that the IPCC predicted to continue trending upwards have failed to cooperate with the computer models and are, in fact, below the low-end of even the most conservative of their predictions. So, crisis averted, right? We can just disband the IPCC and go home.
Not on your life! This thing is its own industry now, and something so simple as its fundamental prediction failing to come to pass isn't going to stand in the way of its business model:
1. Blame capitalism
2. ???
3. Profit
If facts did matter, AGW true believers would have already been kicked to the curb. For instance, in this 4-part series by Australian geologist Bob Carter. (Mitt, you really should watch this.)
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. AGW is chock full of the former and utterly devoid of the latter. I wonder what Rick Perry thinks about this.
Texas on Tuesday became the first state to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency's finding that gases blamed for global warming threaten public health.Gov. Rick Perry and other Texas officials said the federal finding is based on flawed science and would harm the state's economy.
Now there's an inconvenient truth.
Posted by: andy at
04:38 PM
| Comments (144)
Post contains 410 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: Not Drinking Nearly Enough at June 11, 2011 04:40 PM (JEvSn)
Posted by: mare at June 11, 2011 04:43 PM (A98Xu)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 04:43 PM (kUaEF)
I want a smarter sister.
Posted by: Deathknyte at June 11, 2011 04:43 PM (BHNro)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 04:44 PM (kUaEF)
Posted by: Unclefacts Luxury-Yacht at June 11, 2011 04:46 PM (6IReR)
Posted by: Deathknyte at June 11, 2011 04:47 PM (BHNro)
Posted by: Deathknyte at June 11, 2011 08:47 PM (BHNro)
Only if it's Republicans talking about Medicare
Posted by: Unclefacts Luxury-Yacht at June 11, 2011 04:48 PM (6IReR)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 04:49 PM (kUaEF)
Posted by: mare at June 11, 2011 04:51 PM (A98Xu)
>>But he is so ELECTABLE!!!!!!1!1!
My belief is that there are elements with the Dem party anxious to be rid of the Chicago Radicals [Bill Clinton is obvious, but there's a significant grouping of them I think]. They like being in power, but it ain't really their power, if you see my meaning.
So there may be some help available to the Repubs from their side of the aisle in 2012 BUT its only on tap if we select somebody THEY'D go along with.
So there ya go.
Posted by: 7 Chinese Spammers at June 11, 2011 04:52 PM (SMqnS)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 04:54 PM (kUaEF)
Posted by: Gerg at June 11, 2011 04:56 PM (yQWNf)
Posted by: Vic at June 11, 2011 04:56 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Comrade Clueless at June 11, 2011 04:56 PM (F6xNb)
Posted by: twiceblessedmom at June 11, 2011 04:57 PM (HjxoE)
You really need to send that to Hugh Hewitt. He has been trying to back-fill for Romney the past week over Romney's green turds.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 11, 2011 04:59 PM (qaU+h)
There is some evidence the earth is warmer now then 150 years ago. There is no evidence of a continuing warming trend. There is no evidence that this is caused by human activity. And there is no evidence that global warming would be "bad".
One would think, before demanding lower carbon emissions by raw government force that all three of those questions would have to be answered in the affirmative. And even then, it isn't clear the US federal government has any power to do anything about it.
Posted by: 18-1 at June 11, 2011 05:03 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: Peaches at June 11, 2011 05:03 PM (afUO8)
Posted by: PaleRider at June 11, 2011 05:04 PM (m+nIW)
Couldn't have anything to do with that big fuckin' fire out there about there about ninety million miles could it?
Posted by: De' Debil Hisself at June 11, 2011 05:04 PM (H+LJc)
Posted by: Jean at June 11, 2011 05:04 PM (k+pnO)
Posted by: mare at June 11, 2011 05:06 PM (A98Xu)
It looks like it has been deleted.
Posted by: Vic at June 11, 2011 05:07 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Robert Williams at June 11, 2011 05:07 PM (Z/zqA)
Posted by: Mitt Romney at June 11, 2011 05:08 PM (zgZzy)
However it isn't problematic, global, or impressive.
Go set up a thermometer and measure the temperature in the middle of a field for 30 years... then lay 2 acres of asphalt/blacktop for an airport, parking lot, etc. around your thermometer and tell me what happens.
It warms... quite a bit. Of course your other thermometer 5 miles away sees no real change; but for that area, you have clear man-made warming.
Unfortunately for "SCIENCE!" many of their weather monitoring stations are in places that see this previously explained "warming" signal... many of them. If you assume that this is the guide for the planet... you're going to be disappointed.
http://www.surfacestations.org/
Approximately 8% of the sites used meet the criteria to be a site to use... which is not impressive by any standards. Even if you relax standards a bit and allow the 21.5% that are close but not nearly good enough you don't even have a simple majority of the data being acceptable.
I found a site (which has since gone pay for data) that provided individual location information... and a site well located, with no roads or cities within a couple miles had no noticeable warming over a 30+ year period.
But simply put man made warming is real; at least in cities... where most liberals live. As the city grows and the surrounding area is paved it gets warmer. They see this and know "OMG WARMIN IS REALZ"...
Considerably less real if you require useful, meaningful, unadjusted data from sites that also haven't seen adjustment.
The satellite/atmospehre data is considerably more reliable but oddly many scientists aren't interested in using it...
Posted by: gekkobear at June 11, 2011 05:08 PM (n95X9)
They can have it. It along with the bank are both broke.
Posted by: Not Drinking Nearly Enough at June 11, 2011 05:10 PM (JEvSn)
Posted by: Hugh Hewitt-Romney at June 11, 2011 05:10 PM (TprD1)
Fraudulent isn't quite right...cherry picked would be the better term.
For example, IIRC, on seminal study featured 12 tree rings out of hundreds. Almost all of the measured warming came from one tree.
So, out of a forest of hundreds, they could only find one tree that gave them AGW evidence, and this is considered "good science" now.
Posted by: 18-1 at June 11, 2011 05:10 PM (bgcml)
Posted by: Andy at June 11, 2011 05:11 PM (veZ9n)
Gird yer loins, boys 'n girls...
Ominous new White House warning on Syria calls the situation a 'humanitarian crisis'; sound familiar?
Maybe coincidence, but....
When President Obama launched missiles and warplanes against Libya's longtime dictator Col. Kadafi in March, it came after a series of public warnings from both the president himself and his press secretary, Jay Carney, in support of pro-democracy demonstrators and against the regime's violent reactions.
Posted by: Llarry at June 11, 2011 05:11 PM (SI/pw)
Not much. That is the one that had the 600° temps in Lake Michigan.
One of the problems is that both NASA and NOAA adjust6 the raw temperature measurements using some kind of formula that seems to make them higher and higher.
Posted by: Vic at June 11, 2011 05:12 PM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Kurt at June 11, 2011 05:12 PM (/DG71)
Unfortunately, it has to be despite the nano-second like attention span most voters have.
However, Romney's embrace of government solution and the precautionary principle as a reason for government action must frame the debate.
This is where we might lose the debate because the shrill alarmists' immediate response, "If you admit humans contribute upwards of 4% of the CO2 increase in the atmosphere, you have to agree with command and control preventative measure or you're insisting that we all die." It's a difficult circle to square and no technocrat can win that debate ever.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 11, 2011 05:12 PM (qaU+h)
Posted by: mare at June 11, 2011 05:13 PM (A98Xu)
Nice post, Andy!
Posted by: Theresa D. at June 11, 2011 05:13 PM (/XWjq)
But simply put man made warming is real; at least in cities... where most liberals live. As the city grows and the surrounding area is paved it gets warmer. They see this and know "OMG WARMIN IS REALZ"...
Are you referring to the phenomena of hot pavement, heat from vehicles, buildings, machines, etc? The reason why those IPCC thermometers are always placed on the ground in major cities instead of out in the burbs or rural or wild areas?
Posted by: arhooley at June 11, 2011 05:13 PM (eNx0o)
Now that I would believe.
Didn't one of the, oh let's call them scientists, recently make comments to the effect that the models were still good it's just that the data wasn't complying?
Reality based!
Posted by: alexthechick at June 11, 2011 05:15 PM (sf+iw)
Posted by: Mitt Romney at June 11, 2011 05:16 PM (kUaEF)
Posted by: Korla Pundit at June 11, 2011 05:17 PM (yrI9L)
Just because it snowed in Hawaii and and Zsa Zsa Huffington's tits are harder than a polar bears dick doesn't mean the science on Global Baloney isn't believable.
Posted by: Dr. Al Gore, Internet Fat Daddy at June 11, 2011 05:17 PM (cwFVA)
Paraphrased:
"I get all my AGW info from Stephen Hayes, and he says we're partially responsible for a minor increase. This is not to say that a) anything can be done, b) drastic, economy wrecking measures are needed, c) we can't bluff our way through any debate in which we need to distinguish 'conservatism' from the Left. Listen to me, and drop all objects to Romney as a candidate because I said so and I'm a lawyer, peons!"
Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 11, 2011 05:18 PM (qaU+h)
Ominous new White House warning on Syria calls the situation a 'humanitarian crisis'; sound familiar?
But Nancy Pelosi said Syria was the path to peace in the Middle East. And Obama promised to extend an open hand instead of a closed fist in our foreign policy. And Michelle said she's tired of being told to fear people just because they look different. And Obama's gutsy call to kill OBL was supposed to end all our troubles in that part of the world. And who are we to point fingers when GITMO still exists and the war criminals Bush and Cheney haven't been frog-marched into the IC to be tried for war crimes? And --
Posted by: arhooley at June 11, 2011 05:18 PM (eNx0o)
P.S. If you're a Mormon, and accept the theory of AGW, that's two impossible things you've believed before breakfast.
Posted by: TH at June 11, 2011 05:19 PM (nyHxK)
Sign me up for some of that Global Warming. Otherwise come 4th of July I'm still gonna be sitting in the ice fishing shanty.
Posted by: mama winger at June 11, 2011 05:19 PM (R9bQ9)
Posted by: empress franz josef of arhooley at June 11, 2011 05:20 PM (eNx0o)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 05:21 PM (kUaEF)
Now, you know why Romney has taken the tactic of hiding out until Labor day. He said it's not a good thing to overexpose yourself.
As long as when you do open your mouth you say shit like this, well, no shit Sherlock.
Posted by: Steph at June 11, 2011 05:21 PM (AkdC5)
Posted by: PaleRider at June 11, 2011 05:22 PM (m+nIW)
After President Obama completes the shutdown of all the offending coal powered electric plants, only then will the temperature return to normal levels, and American's can once again live productive lives without the danger of coal dust clogging their urethra's.
Posted by: Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Moonbattery at June 11, 2011 05:22 PM (cwFVA)
It's best understood as a religion. A religion which has weaseled it's way into becoming the official state religion where the police enforce the sins (pollution) and daily ablutions (recycling).
I don't care what dumbass cult you join, but don't make me join your stupid religion, too. Don't make me follow the dictates of your cult under the penalty of law.
Fuck environmentalists. Fuck the eco-nazis with the carbon-encrusted cock of Satan.
Posted by: Clubber Lang at June 11, 2011 05:24 PM (QcFbt)
Nice post, Andy!
Posted by: Theresa D.
Um, yeah.
Some day, I'm going to read all the comments and not find what I wanted said.
Posted by: Dianna at June 11, 2011 05:25 PM (mKMj1)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 05:27 PM (kUaEF)
Yeah, LaRouche is nuts. But on the point which stands to cost our civilisation the most in time and treasure... the point over which the Enrons and Goldman Sachs were poised to impose a "carbon economy" over all of us... LaRouche was less nuts than the mainstream of the Democratic Party, and less nuts than Romney and Gingrich.
And with that, you may all commence drinking.
Posted by: Zimriel at June 11, 2011 05:29 PM (pl1+G)
Posted by: CanadaGuy at June 11, 2011 05:31 PM (+J68k)
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at June 11, 2011 05:32 PM (54F2e)
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at June 11, 2011 05:32 PM (1yViP)
Also, IÂ’ve shared your site in my social networks!
The Miracle of Freedom ePub
If Anthony Weiner is on your network, make sure you forward the Can't Get Pregnant Cure!
Posted by: Fish the Impaler at June 11, 2011 05:33 PM (cwFVA)
Posted by: Jean at June 11, 2011 05:34 PM (7P7Ij)
Now you tell me.
Posted by: Anthony Weiner at June 11, 2011 05:36 PM (TprD1)
Posted by: 18-1 at June 11, 2011 09:10 PM (bgcml)
And that one they lifted straight out of a flawed Russian study. One fucking tree in motherfucking Siberia. No one has actually seen this tree. But it was good enough for Mann
Posted by: Pooter Hound, Mann's best friend at June 11, 2011 05:36 PM (le5qc)
Posted by: Anony at June 11, 2011 05:37 PM (Yigvc)
Posted by: andycanuck at June 11, 2011 05:37 PM (kZ5Ek)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 05:38 PM (kUaEF)
oh my god, look at Keith! He's drinking orange juice and checking his e-mails at the same time! He doesn't give a shit, he just eats with one hand and texts with the other. And look at that power breakfast, it's like black coffee without any cream or anything, ewwwww! And those newspapers are all over the place, but he doesn't give a shit. He just texts with one eyeball and solves the crossword puzzle with the other. There's no one else at the table because they all got scared and ran away, but he doesn't give a shit. He just texts and ignores that crazy old payphone behind him because he goes into weird, cool places with radiators. But he wears a jacket with no tie and his top button undone, oh my god! The Keith!
Posted by: arhooley Randall at June 11, 2011 05:40 PM (eNx0o)
Posted by: toby928™ at June 11, 2011 05:41 PM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Helen A Hanbasquet at June 11, 2011 05:42 PM (Ztbqa)
Posted by: JimK at June 11, 2011 05:43 PM (HWpl4)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 09:38 PM (kUaEF)
You know Blondie, there are two kinds of people in the world, those that come in by the door and those that come in by the window.
Posted by: Pooter Hound, Mann's best friend at June 11, 2011 05:44 PM (le5qc)
Nah. Patterico's taken that assignment for the evening, it seems. Pretty good post, too.
Posted by: Dianna at June 11, 2011 05:44 PM (mKMj1)
I believe that somewhere in the darkest night, a candle glows.
I believe for everyone who goes astray, someone will come to show the way.
I believe, I believePosted by: MCPO Airdale at June 11, 2011 05:45 PM (FAyWo)
Posted by: Zimriel at June 11, 2011 05:45 PM (pl1+G)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 05:45 PM (kUaEF)
Posted by: Splunge at June 11, 2011 05:46 PM (2IW5Q)
I believe that somewhere in the darkest night, a candle glows.
I believe for everyone who goes astray, someone will come to show the way.
I believe, I believeI believe that there is no progressive crap so stupid that a rino won't believe it.
Posted by: WalrusRex at June 11, 2011 05:48 PM (TVvXc)
Posted by: toby928™ at June 11, 2011 05:48 PM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Jean
Trails as in '500,000 years ago until whenever we change to a thermometer record.' The AGW argument, outside of Al Gore's loose-shit propaganda is that, yes, CO2 HAD followed temps, but we f'd it up. That's not me, that's the AGW crew.
The point being if there is a slight, slight, effect of that 4% remaining CO2 we may or may not be responsible for, we're going to have a rough time trying to debate a damned thing. Romney thinks he can finesse the argument, even if he has to put in place expensive yet somehow 'reasonable' controls over industry.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 11, 2011 05:48 PM (qaU+h)
@78: What's hanging inside the laundry bags behind him, washable used condoms?
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 09:45 PM
Ewwww, used condoms! But Keith doesn't give a shit, he just pours them into his coffee instead of cream. The Keith!
Posted by: arhooley Randall at June 11, 2011 05:49 PM (eNx0o)
Mann's stick is the crucial evidence that basically "demonstrates" that all other sources of potential warming are "too small to cause the observed warming".
It is -also- the crucial evidence that the LIA and MWP were 'minor regional issues'.
But: 1) It makes a hockeystick if you take the thousands of proxies and insert them 'upside-down and backwards'. That is, relabel the proxies as "2000-year" instead of "year". His method is far too focused on finding hockeysticks in anything.
2) The original set of proxies was the "kitchen sink" method. Where you put -everything- in there, and try to find the ones that agree with your (crappy) temperature measurements. The entire goal is to "find the teleconnected tree", that is: a tree that does have a good mesh with the records across the instrumental period. This turns thousands of proxies into ten useful ones, and a very small set of crucial ones. But... Some of those exact same trees have been reexamined, and they no longer agree in the 1990-2011 time frame. This means if you just run his own damn method over the -current- best temperature data, you actually end up with a different freaking set of 'best proxies'. This is fatal: If each decade has different 'best proxies', then why in the flaming ginger-scandi poo would you expect the current ones to predict a Allah-be-damned thing in the period -before- the instruments. You know, the one you're claiming is 'flat'.
3) Nothing else particularly refutes the MWP & LIA - so the idea "Hey, this is all just rebound from the Little Ice Age" hasn't been particularly well studied in the past decade. (Since 'the science is settled, and there just wasn't one.)
4) There's a resurgence of the plausibility of solar effects as well. The -direct- 1% change in solar energy flux has long been pooh-poohed as insufficient. But apparently the solar cycle influences the magnetosphere/solar wind and might affect cloud formation.
Posted by: Al at June 11, 2011 05:49 PM (MzQOZ)
Posted by: AmishDude at June 11, 2011 05:49 PM (73tyQ)
Anony thinks opinion polls are a part of the scientific method.
Posted by: Not Drinking Nearly Enough at June 11, 2011 05:49 PM (JEvSn)
Posted by: Rodent Liberation Front at June 11, 2011 05:50 PM (lgw0N)
People making definitive statements about AGW on both sides look like idiots. The leading scientists on our side agree there is some AGW.
Its all a matter of of degrees and remedies. Its not significant enough and there are other variables involved to warrant bad law.
People people who make the jump from supporting AGW claims to supporting cap and trade look like idiots
Posted by: Mancher at June 11, 2011 05:57 PM (4C6bO)
Yep. Someone call me when the French Vinters are again complaining to their government that English wine is undercutting their business.
Written history; it's a marvel.
Posted by: toby928™ at June 11, 2011 05:59 PM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Anony at June 11, 2011 09:37 PM (Yigvc)
Well, as a mathematician, I care about science. I care that those slimy corrupt overpaid bastards start getting a little humility when they get things wrong.
If you believe in it so damned much, then convince me. Give up all government funding for climate research. The science is settled so only fund skeptics.
It's the scientific method, right? Falsifiable hypotheses against data, etc.
But you actually swerved into something. I don't think there is any AGW and I. AM. PISSED.
The earth is too damned cold. February is an ice box here. Our most arable land is in Canada and Siberia. We have a whole goddamn continent we aren't using.
I want global warming and I want it NOW!
Posted by: AmishDude at June 11, 2011 06:00 PM (73tyQ)
Romney's going to get the last laugh here.
Romney pulled Massachusetts out the regional cap and trade compact as governor. The only guy with a record of fighting cap and trade, back when Palin and Pawlenty were on the global warming bandwagon.
Posted by: Mancher at June 11, 2011 06:00 PM (4C6bO)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 06:01 PM (kUaEF)
Posted by: Jean at June 11, 2011 06:02 PM (7P7Ij)
The leading scientists on our side agree there is some AGW.
The A stands for "Anthropogenic." How 'bout a link to something showing that "our" scientists (Moron scientists?) all agree that planetary warming is man-caused.
I'll wait.
Posted by: Cicero at June 11, 2011 06:04 PM (Txl/u)
Posted by: humphreyrobot at June 11, 2011 06:04 PM (EiH7n)
Source? I figured Canada for an ice-scraped Precambrian / Cambrian shield. Not much grows on that but rocks.
Posted by: Zimriel at June 11, 2011 06:05 PM (pl1+G)
Palin and Pawlenty were on the global warming bandwagon.
Posted by: Mancher at June 11, 2011 10:00 PM
Palin grudgingly climbed on for about 15 minutes while she was veep candidate. She got off the minute the campaign was over. In fact before, since she alluded to disagreement on that issue.
Posted by: arhooley Randall at June 11, 2011 06:07 PM (eNx0o)
Return that, bitch!
Posted by: HermanCain at June 11, 2011 06:07 PM (/IW23)
Posted by: CoolCzech at June 11, 2011 06:10 PM (kUaEF)
That right there should be a clue that we don't want Romney.
Posted by: mpurinTexas supports Rick Perry, bitch at June 11, 2011 06:10 PM (J4Pnx)
The GOP is welcome to get my support back by boosting someone explicitly for Ryan's Medicare plan, and a few other libertarian-ish moves. Otherwise, I have to support the person who will crash this system fastest, so we can start again with something less #hack-able.
Posted by: Zimriel supports Obama at June 11, 2011 06:15 PM (pl1+G)
I want global warming and I want it NOW!
Posted by: AmishDude at June 11, 2011 10:00 PM (73tyQ)
Hmmmm.... just had to go look at a map...
Global Warming would HURT those close to the Equator, while helping more temperate areas... and really helping far northern and southern areas...
Now... look at the Equator... and the countries on it.... except for Australia... do we really care if those countries go to shit?
Posted by: Romeo13 at June 11, 2011 06:17 PM (NtXW4)
Yes, understood, and things like lefties still holding demagogic positions that win like 'rent-control' makes me forever crazy. But Romney's muddying of the waters has made it harder for the other candidates to avoid the key points of the AGW debate. He basically shot a magnesium flare straight up, revealing any potential cover the others could have used to just get to the primary without significant controversy.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at June 11, 2011 06:19 PM (qaU+h)
I believe in Global Warming, and as proof positive, I submit that my hooter's grew from comfortable C into Double D's, and it was a direct result of the massive change in temperature caused by conservative failure to address this warming problem.
Posted by: Meggy McCain at June 11, 2011 06:19 PM (cwFVA)
(The nettle, of course, is that any single-issue red line (I hate the phrase "litmus test", what an ugly word, "litmus", almost as repulsive as "blog") is itself an indicator of monomania. After examination, I think not, this time. But you got to check yourself.)
Here's the thing with AGW: it's a complete fraud, and that has become obvious to anyone who looks. There is not now, nor has there ever been, any unimpeached (not just unimpeachable) observation or set of observations that imply, by unbroken chain of reason, any human influence on Earth's climate. Pay attention, mouth-breathers: that is zero observable influence, and zero logical implication that there might be. Whatever might lead one to reasonably speculate about the A in AGW (sure is hot today!), there is no set of connected dots that gets you there. Or even two contiguous steps there. Nothing.
Now, I guess I don't expect anybody to take that on my say-so. If you've honestly dug into this climate mess, and you know some math, and you can read computer code, then you're probably pretty close to agreement. And I bet it's more your own caution about making absolute statements than anything else that keeps you from complete agreement. (I don't care about being wrong, I'm just an internet commenter.)
If somebody actually shows me some good data that hasn't been homo-treated until it drips little hockey pucks, and some reasoning I can respect, and that package leads to Anthro, then I'll help you hang the bastard. Well, maybe not, but I'll adjust my conclusions and thank you for fixing my perspective.
When you hear a scientist say, or more likely some ass-talker who claims to have heard a scientist say, "there is broad agreement that human activity has raised global temperatures by some amount", you are hearing grade school playground chatter.
That contention (I should say, that "feeling") is based on a trivial thermodynamic argument, that people sense more than they concretely express: Atmospheric carbon dioxide passes inbound short wave radiation, absorbs some outbound long wave radiation, and then transfers that energy isotropically. All laboratory-proven facts, beyond reasonable contention. That must raise the overall temperature, right? Um, no, you sad dumb asses, it does not necessarily do so. If the climate system (land, ocean, farts, clouds, volcanoes, airplanes, ...) were linear then the conclusion would be valid. But it ain't linear, stupid, it is a natural system - complex verging on chaotic. A little more carbon dioxide could just as easily cool things in this real, measurable world.
There are a thousand other reasons the proposition is dim witted and none, save that lone child's assumption about the simplicity of nature, that should encourage one to entertain it. Doing so, especially today in the midst of easily obtained evidence counter to every aspect of this delusion, marks one as wanting to believe.
A dependence on belief is the state of an intellectual and moral juvenile. Adults are not afraid of the dark, and to not know something is our natural state.
Ok, so it's hard to find a real adult among the politicians and maybe we just have to settle for the punk with the best policies and tendencies. A choice to believe in AGW is too likely motivated by the political desire for a lever of control, with all that entails.
Hey, I supported Mitt over that carcass we ran last time, but things have changed. I know more about AGW, for one thing, and so should he. Willful or slothful ignorance, intellectual pandering, just plain flakiness - I don't care, any of these disqualify one from high office. Get gone, Mitt. You too, Newt, you flake, I'd sooner elect Toffler.
Posted by: Forger at June 11, 2011 06:27 PM (RPPhB)
Posted by: Cicero at June 11, 2011 10:04 PM (Txl/u)
Almost all do. Richard Lindzen is a beast for our side, a genius, a gentleman and one of us. He warns against global warming "alarmism". He claims much of the data is compromised, that warming trends are insignificant, and that that weather fluctations are normal.
But he also warns people are on side not to be so rigid to dismissive all the opposing arguments out of hand. The science is no conclusive for either side.
Posted by: Mancher at June 11, 2011 06:28 PM (4C6bO)
Posted by: ABouts at June 11, 2011 06:39 PM (oElGp)
.I thought he would be much smarter about the health care mandate in MA, not signing it, and now with not calling out the cargo cult AGM thing for what it is, I think he's an also ran. I still think he's a very decent man, but a smart guy like him must have read up on this, seen Lindzen's and other's articles, then made the calculation to not challenge it because of the united front of journalists, etc that would pound him over a contrarian view. I need, the country needs more courage than that.
(Its easy to call someone out for courage when you're a lurker on a smart mil-blog)
Posted by: Buck O. Phive at June 11, 2011 06:50 PM (HwIdb)
I've never trusted the predictions because they're based on computer models and a model is only a hypothesis until it's been tested and retested. The models are still being adjusted all the time, and they take decades and centuries to be tested. Secondly, I don't think systems as complex as this planet, its oceans and atmosphere can be accurately predicted in detail because they can be influenced by unpredictable factors like solar ejections, cosmic radiation, volcanic eruptions, etc.
Third, I've always figured that even if AGW turns out to be real, it can't be stopped by the means advocated by environmentalists. The Kyoto Treaty wouldn't change the earth's temperature by more than 2%, and rolling back the industrial revolution is a non-starter. The best thing we can do is spread economic development,, property rights and freedom. If the warming does occur in the future the answers will be technological, not trying to stuff the genie back in the bottle.
I think that Romney will be open to the arguments in this this post and to my own. He's also called for more efficiency, but his wording is important "we should try to encourage" more efficiency, not appoint more bureaucrats and czars.
His skills are making organizations work efficiently, cutting spending, making businesses profitable, and balancing budgets without tax increases. He's demonstrated that in business, government and the Winter Olympics. He was one of the nations premier business analysts and advisers before he formed his own business and, later, went into politics.
One of the great truths about politics is that you've got to raise a lot of money and the higher the office, the more you have to raise. He has that ability, too.
Posted by: flataffect at June 11, 2011 07:34 PM (alC6Q)
People people who make the jump from supporting AGW claims to supporting cap and trade look like idiots
Posted by: Mancher
There is far more mischief coming out the AGW camp than just cap and trade. There's government supported wind and solar farms, government supported ethanol production and forced useage, government support for electric and hybrid cars few people want to buy, government support for ridiculous edicts coming from the EPA.....JeezLouise lookit the damage support for AGW has caused without cap and trade for pity's sake.
Get your head out of your Keister of maybe your should just sew your ass shut while your head is still stuck there.
Posted by: Speller at June 11, 2011 07:44 PM (J74Py)
In other words, horseshit.
There are facts. Unfortunately, there are also prejudices and lies. And even more unfortunately the *process* of science and policymaking has been so corrupted that we could try to sort it all out over the next month, and it would not be possible. At the end of the month we would be in the same place.
We have let our government get out of control. And when I say "we" I don't mean me and you and you and you, because a lot of us here have been arguing and voting and contacting and whatever we can, it just hasn't been enough to counter corrupt politicians and advocates who believe so strongly that they feel they have no moral limits.
I don't know how to fix it. The Web helped, but the problem is far from fixed. Without the Web and the "New Media" (both), we would already be so badly boned we would be talking about starting over, not fixing things.
Unfortunately while some people are trying to untangle the process, we've reached a "critical mass" of people depending on the corruption and they're working at least as hard to avoid the untangling.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at June 11, 2011 08:17 PM (bxiXv)
In other news, since the end of the Younger Dryas, the seas have risen an average of 4 feet per century. Well, most of that occurred way back when, but why spoil a good narrative with facts?
Posted by: chuckR at June 11, 2011 08:20 PM (UGxsK)
Posted by: ManeiNeko at June 11, 2011 08:33 PM (TiE76)
Posted by: Tantor at June 11, 2011 10:45 PM (RYbm2)
Posted by: Nozzle at June 12, 2011 04:07 AM (sE08M)
but I believe based on what I read...
What exactly did you read? And by who?
Algore, Inconvenient truth.
Posted by: Ringo at June 12, 2011 04:29 AM (kUWOA)
Posted by: pd at June 12, 2011 06:15 AM (VCZce)
Posted by: Ken at June 12, 2011 06:40 AM (fFh95)
thanks for having nice time
Posted by: urdu tutorial at June 12, 2011 07:09 AM (e4WFu)
OMG!! Just think... the Earth would be on fire now if we hadn't done Kyoto and carbon credits and all those civilization saving efforts!!11eleventy11!!
Thank goodness we have Teh Won, The Obamasiah in charge. If those hateful racists tea baggers had won the leadership NYC would be underwater by now. and the unicorns... the poor unicorns... the Denialists must be stopped! Stopped I tell ya!
Posted by: twenty-something who lives in mommy's basement at June 12, 2011 08:26 AM (EhYdw)
@136 Tantor, a VERY good point my friend. A lot of people do not understand "predicting the past" considering it usually gets taught in upper level courses. However the basic concept is easily understood when you explain it to them.
I've been a victim of my own mathematical hubris when modelling certain pricing actions in open cry markets. I've used Fourier analysis, etc. and I get really nice numbers and models. Invariably these chaotic systems shove my hubris up my nose as soon as I lean on them for real world actions. I even had a period of insanity where I kept trying to adjust the math again and again. S-l-o-o-o-o-l-y the light came on when Chaos Theory hit the main stream. I am now a graduate of the 12 steps of data modelling recovery. <grin>
I wish I had thought to rip the system for a few million before coming to grips with sanity. Oh well.
Posted by: chuck in st paul at June 12, 2011 08:33 AM (EhYdw)
Mitt Romney.
Another reason to stay home in 2012 with a large bottle of Valu-Rite vodka and a collection of Benny Hill and Black Adder DVD's instead of holding my nose to pull the handle.
January 1, 2013 - the rise of The Constitution Party
Posted by: chuck in st paul at June 12, 2011 08:38 AM (EhYdw)
I'm hoping Romney can clarify this views on the subject. Even if he says "I reject all schemes that tax or regulate CO2, but I think there's some AGW; wh should just develop less CO2-producing energy and technology, that still helps the AGW morons. It enables them. NO ENABLING, MITT!
Posted by: ParisParamusInNrooklyn at June 12, 2011 10:03 AM (QN76w)
Aren't they already shit?
Posted by: free tibet-with purchase of - aww- you know the rest at June 12, 2011 10:44 AM (e0TtL)
Sorry ParisParamusInNrooklyn, but Romney has whored himself to any populist cause. RomneyCare has just about bust the bank in Massholechussets and if he'd been able to get the buggers to pass some sort of carbon nonsense the state would have gone down the flusher already.
It's one thing to say, "I need to see more on this before I can take a definitive position," or some such quibble, but to come right on out for stupid stuff and do it over and over again disqualifies him for me.
Posted by: chuck in st paul at June 12, 2011 11:53 AM (EhYdw)
Posted by: chuck in st paul at June 12, 2011 03:53 PM (EhYdw)
Sorry, but if you read No Apology with an open mind, you'll think differently. It was a foolish thing to say, but stricto senso, it's not inaccurate or beyond the conservative pale. Even the scientists on the anti-AGW side, Linzen, for example, accept that there may be some AGW, but not enough for it to matter. Romney's statement is foolish because in the stupid MSM World, it enables the idiots.
If I've been seduced by a RINO, time will tell. But I don't think it's the case. But I will be watching the debate tomorrow night with great anxiety.
Posted by: ParisParamusInNrooklyn at June 12, 2011 12:02 PM (cdCC7)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2255 seconds, 272 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: steevy at June 11, 2011 04:40 PM (P2eF1)