|
 Thebooedocksaint
Dead Dictator
Registered: 05/11/09
Posts: 5,725
Loc: Wild & Free
Last seen: 15 days, 22 hours
|
 Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record  [Re: niteowl] 1
#694800 - 11/21/13 09:55 AM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
co2 interacts with 3 wave lengths of light vs waters 8 wave lengths
so water is 3 times more reactive to light than co2 .... sorry
The question isn't "H2O OR CO2" Both are there, and yea H2O overall does more. However CO2 interacts with wavelengths that H2O doesn't, therefore increasing CO2 concentration will cause a greater overall interaction.
Do you even science scrub? Because I science, I science err' day.
--------------------
"Je pense, donc je suis (I am thinking, therefore I am)." -Rene Descartes
|
 niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,765
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: Thebooedocksaint]
#694803 - 11/21/13 10:28 AM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Yea, your beyond reach
you're so deep in the G.W. religion that your no different that a Westboro Baptist member
--------------------
The Ego is a pathological conditionlike a calcareous tumor or cystthat begins growing in the personalityin the absence of hallucinogenic substances-Terence McKenna-
|
Thebooedocksaint
Dead Dictator
Registered: 05/11/09
Posts: 5,725
Loc: Wild & Free
Last seen: 15 days, 22 hours
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: niteowl]
#694807 - 11/21/13 11:02 AM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I don't get how I'm beyond reach: If you have two gases in two isolated systems, yes the one with the most interaction will win (provided there is light of that wavelength in the system). Give two gases within the same system, then they will compliment one another.
You're just a pleb who wants to sound smart, and in doing so just made yourself out to be a fool who believes conspiracies more than widely accepted fact.
Any claim that more scientists oppose anthropogenic climate change than support it isn't only ridiculous, but also false.
The reason I can't argue against you is because some fucked up value system in your head makes you want to believe a conspiracy theory, that the IPCC is rigging everything, instead of the widely accepted scientific theory. If I press you for sources for anything you have said in this thread I guarantee you are false, and for clarification some crackpot trying to make a name for himself (with little support from the scientific community) does not count as proof.
Now take your ignorance and eat a bushel full of peach pits.
--------------------
"Je pense, donc je suis (I am thinking, therefore I am)." -Rene Descartes
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,765
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: Thebooedocksaint]
#694809 - 11/21/13 11:08 AM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
The Ego is a pathological conditionlike a calcareous tumor or cystthat begins growing in the personalityin the absence of hallucinogenic substances-Terence McKenna-
|
TomCollins
Registered: 10/06/09
Posts: 2,943
Last seen: 4 months, 11 days
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: Thebooedocksaint]
#694811 - 11/21/13 11:10 AM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists%27_views_on_climate_change
Science has made some immense mistakes, but also, lives have been ruined because people DID NOT HEED warnings from science.
I want to begin with some background to make my point:
Case 1
50 years ago, people were told consuming saturated fat and cholesterol will cause heart disease - which turned out to be so wrong it ruined lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Countries_Study
Some scientists fake their data. In the case of Ancel Keye's data, now there are still the american heart and cholesterol associations that don't know what else to do, except to keep fighting what they believe is the good cause against science. So misinformation is still perpetuated, despite overwhelming evidence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framingham_Heart_Study
Case 2
It wasn't until 20 years after Alice Stewart discovered x-raying pregnant women can cause cancer in the children (it was a clinical trial), that hospitals actually stopped doing it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Stewart This is sick and wrong at best.
So to wrap up the point I want to make here:
There are some scientists that fake their own data, and some of these folks have caused immense trouble - peer reviewing the the growth of the science community has minimized this error. However, even recently a famous Dutch professor was found to have faked all of his data. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Stapel
Then again, if we flat out ignore data - we just believe it isn't true - this ALSO causes immense damage!
So the conclude my point, we cannot ignore data that show relationships if many scientists are finding the same data in independent experiments.
With all of this in mind:
It's very easy to see why some scientists today will fake their data in favor of global warming - because it's soo believable now that no one will check their data collection.
Lot's of people agree on this and this has been criticized. So I think it's obvious we will have some scientists who are lazy and just bandwagon with this theory and make data up to match it.
**I am prepared to defend wikipedia as an encyclopedia that is no worse that the Britannica.
But if you think a little more deeply about what this means look at the articles I posted, you will see the point of the news article and youtube video are controversial and a stretch at best - the people who authored both of those sources knew it would be controversial , which attracts views - Fox News is infamous for this I believe (which you shared.)
You will see from a statistical standpoint, it's not possible for global warming to be made up.
think about this: The reason people slip through the cracks making up data that agrees with global warming is because it's not controvertial to agree with the theory.
So people who get caught doing this make everyone else look bad.
It would require an extraordinary secret collaboration of hundreds of thousands of people, and the motivation for this conspiracy for everyone involved is still vague I think.
Most people don't get into science to lie to others.
tbh Niteowl, it just looks like you read some recent biased news article and then confirmed your own biases by finding a video on youtube that agrees with it, and this is how you adopted your opinion on what the motivations behind a certain scientific theory are.
It makes no sense.
--------------------
andyistic said:
Ok so let me bring you idiots up to speed.
The admins are tired of this shitfest being made the joke of the weed community on the Internet.
|
Thebooedocksaint
Dead Dictator
Registered: 05/11/09
Posts: 5,725
Loc: Wild & Free
Last seen: 15 days, 22 hours
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: TomCollins]
#694817 - 11/21/13 11:24 AM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I believe we call that "The Problem with Confirmation."
Have a link!
The fact is nothing is proven, I can't even deductively prove that what I'm seeing at this very moment is real. We all have to make pragmatic choices about what we do believe or not. This means that different values can heavily bias what choice one considers to be pragmatic.
Personally I think the pragmatic choice is to prepare for the possibility that has harms associated with it, and if we're wrong so be it.
Let us have e be the evidence that we see, and Hi denote possible Hypotheses. With the probability of e given a H let us have 1 be that there is an anthropogenic effect on weather, and 2 simply be that there is not one. One would assume that the models we use (that are mostly accurate) would provide probabilities much like this (as our current models account for anthropogenic effects).
pr(e|H1)=.9
pr(e|H2)=.01
There are sample numbers, but it's not like you can ever have real numbers with equations that would involve as many variables as climate models do. Regardless I would say the fact that our current climate models, which when adjusted showed that the increased ice cap is from increased wind strength, would show that pr(e|H1)>pr(e|H2)
And combined with the fact that my value system includes a heavy desire to avoid catastrophic climate change that may or may not end life as we know it, I side with the more likely bet.
--------------------
"Je pense, donc je suis (I am thinking, therefore I am)." -Rene Descartes
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,765
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: TomCollins]
#694818 - 11/21/13 11:26 AM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
All the 'evidence proving' human based G.W. is bullshit, so why believe the theory?
It sounds good so lets believe it.....
NOT HOW SCIENCE WORKS.....SORRY!
Every time anyone seriously looks at any of the evidence FOR HBGW it's always been skewed to prove the theory = B.S.
Just like the B.S. on the dangers of cannabis back in the early 1900's
It was P.C. to demonize cannabis with bogus 'scientific papers' back then
This is no different.
co2 is not harmful nor a toxin.
any that we add to the system is easily assimilated by the system
co2 is food for plants for crying out loud
and you've been confused into thinking it's somehow poisonous
It's like trying to talk to convince a Jehovah's Witness that Jesus is just a sun god myth
--------------------
The Ego is a pathological conditionlike a calcareous tumor or cystthat begins growing in the personalityin the absence of hallucinogenic substances-Terence McKenna-
|
TomCollins
Registered: 10/06/09
Posts: 2,943
Last seen: 4 months, 11 days
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: niteowl]
#694832 - 11/21/13 12:22 PM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
All the 'evidence proving' human based G.W. is bullshit, so why believe the theory?
Theories are not theories if they are proven. Gravity is theory. 
--------------------
andyistic said:
Ok so let me bring you idiots up to speed.
The admins are tired of this shitfest being made the joke of the weed community on the Internet.
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,765
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: TomCollins]
#694833 - 11/21/13 12:32 PM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
The Ego is a pathological conditionlike a calcareous tumor or cystthat begins growing in the personalityin the absence of hallucinogenic substances-Terence McKenna-
|
TomCollins
Registered: 10/06/09
Posts: 2,943
Last seen: 4 months, 11 days
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: TomCollins]
#694834 - 11/21/13 12:32 PM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
The simple fact of the matter is, the international scientific opinion on the matter is as follows:
Quote:
.... Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming, and it is extremely likely (at least 95% probability) that humans are causing most of it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels.
This opinion is not at all limited to the IPCC.
This is from one of the links I provided earlier about the scientific opinion on climate change or G.W. as you refer to it.
--------------------
andyistic said:
Ok so let me bring you idiots up to speed.
The admins are tired of this shitfest being made the joke of the weed community on the Internet.
|
niteowl
GrandPaw
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 4,765
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: TomCollins]
#694836 - 11/21/13 12:41 PM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
More pretentious chest thumping to garner more funding
--------------------
The Ego is a pathological conditionlike a calcareous tumor or cystthat begins growing in the personalityin the absence of hallucinogenic substances-Terence McKenna-
|
Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal 
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: niteowl] 1
#694842 - 11/21/13 01:00 PM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
co2 interacts with 3 wave lengths of light vs waters 8 wave lengths
so water is 3 times more reactive to light than co2 .... sorry
Holy fuck this is the most retarded thing I've ever read on the internet. And remember the internet is a place where people sew fake vaginas into stuffed animals. This is literally the most retarded thing.
You have NO fucking clue what you're talking about. You spout random shit like this (which is clearly just a regurgitated talking point that you heard some other uneducated hillbilly say) and you have absolutely no idea what it means. :blahblah: "3 wavelengths vs 8 wavelengths" Jesus H Christ. Electromagnetic radiation wavelengths are along a graduated continuum. There's no hardset NUMBER OF WAVELENGTHS.
What you MEANT to say is that water has a higher absorbance and reradiance coefficient than CO2 across the infrared spectrum (which, just so you know is a band of light comprising ALL wavelengths from 800 to 16,000 nm). The part that's super fucking stupid is that this actually supports the point you were trying to make, but because you made the assertion with the scientific aptitude of a 3rd grader now we'll never know. H2O is absolutely a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, as is Methane, and fuck me, the most potent is Sodium Hexafluoride. That doesn't mean that our contribution of CO2 to the atmosphere is null and void however. I'm baffled at how you can't see that correlation.
And just for the record, it's about a 99.8% ratio of scientists who think global warming has at least a minor anthropogenic component. It's not really a debate anymore, except from people like you who post random slanted articles from biased sources (seriously, you didn't actually think that what you posted counts as a source, right?).
--------------------
|
TomCollins
Registered: 10/06/09
Posts: 2,943
Last seen: 4 months, 11 days
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: niteowl]
#694843 - 11/21/13 01:04 PM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
niteowl said:
More pretentious chest thumping to garner more funding
Not really. More like a reason to save on gas, take your bike and earn a year or two onto your life. Plant a tree.
And if anything, this "pretentious chest thumping" as you call it is going to garner more funding for climate science and research, which evidently is in need of progression and development - especially if we're actually going to be dealing with the very serious ramifications of climate change caused by us in the future.
I say funding climate research is our best bet of survival at this point if the stability of our planet truly is at stake, which according to most climate scientists, as I've pointed out, is in fact the case.
There is nothing to back up what your saying.
--------------------
andyistic said:
Ok so let me bring you idiots up to speed.
The admins are tired of this shitfest being made the joke of the weed community on the Internet.
|
HipsterDoofus
Dude
Registered: 07/14/11
Posts: 38
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
|
Re: Antarctic Sea Ice Extent Breaks All-Time Record [Re: niteowl]
#694943 - 11/22/13 05:24 AM (10 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
It's different ice, it's not the same. The ice covers more area, but it's thinner and less dense. There is actually less total ice. It's like if your dealer gave you a big bag of buds and you think oh cool what a deal but then you get home and they are all fluffy and rotten inside. This "record" ice is all fluffy and rotten inside.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
