There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998

[billvon 2,400]

On 5/17/2019 at 10:58 AM, richravizza said:

LOL 

I find it quit amussing in the context of AGW debate and its role in "Extreme weather".I find  the sensationalism extremely dependent on ignorance, on multiple fronts.

Politics ,media,sensationalism, fear and loathing simply don't hold up in a court of law.

Nor do they hold up in the "court" of science.  Which is why climate change is accepted science, and denialism and its associated fearmongering are generally ignored.

[wolfriverjoe 1,341]

23 minutes ago, billvon said:

Nor do they hold up in the "court" of science.  Which is why climate change is accepted science, and denialism and its associated fearmongering are generally ignored.

There's also the 'Court of Law' thingy.

 

While looking up Michael Mann for other reasons, I found that he has a libel suit in process. 
Apparently, he got sick and tired of the deniers falsely accusing him of making up his data.
So he sued. 

As some may know, a libel suit is tough to win. The plaintiff has to prove that the libelous material is false, that the defendant knew it was false and that the false material was published with malicious intent (intent to harm).
Not terribly surprisingly, the defendants have thrown everything they can at it to get it dismissed. So far, everything has failed. The suit is proceeding. 

[turtlespeed 212]

On 5/18/2019 at 11:21 AM, kallend said:

I am truly impressed that you know more about this topic than the collective wisdom of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering (among other such bodies from other nations).

This post would have more merit if it you weren't so easily impressed.

[kallend 1,625]

8 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

This post would have more merit if it you weren't so easily impressed.

The <sarcasm> tag was implied.

[brenthutch 383]

On 5/18/2019 at 12:21 PM, kallend said:

I am truly impressed that you know more about this topic than the collective wisdom of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering (among other such bodies from other nations).

Two words...,,

Samuel Langley

[DJL 232]

10 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Two words...,,

Samuel Langley

Isn't he the guy who the government gave money to so he could design and experiment with wasteful....what were they called...aerodromes or aeroplanes or some such rubbish?

SOCIALISM!!!

Edited May 21, 2019 by DJL

[turtlespeed 212]

5 minutes ago, DJL said:

Isn't he the guy who the government gave money to so he could design and experiment with wasteful....what were they called...aerodromes or aeroplanes or some such rubbish?

I though that was the name sake for the FBI building.

[DJL 232]

4 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I though that was the name sake for the FBI building.

You're thinking CIA headquarters in Langley, VA, the George Bush Center for Intelligence.  They should probably now specify "Sr." so people don't misunderestimate that it's named after his son.

Edited May 21, 2019 by DJL

[Coreece 190]

4 minutes ago, DJL said:

9 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I though that was the name sake for the FBI building.

You're thinking CIA headquarters in Langley, VA, the George Bush Center for Intelligence.  They should probably now specify "Sr." so people don't misunderestimate that it's named after his son.

Nah, that stigma has faded since Trump makes GWB look like more George Washington. . .Bush.

[DJL 232]

7 minutes ago, Coreece said:

Nah, that stigma has faded since Trump makes GWB look like more George Washington. . .Bush.

Ah, those glorious days of yore when the only thing we got mad about was the President mispronouncing everything and lying to the country to send us into an unwinnable conflict under the flag of blind patriotism.  That's one thing I will say for T, while he lies about everything at least he is vocally and publicly against us tangling with Iran.

[Coreece 190]

3 minutes ago, DJL said:

lying to the country

Don't attribute to malice that which is. . .well you know the rest.

[kallend 1,625]

16 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Two words...,,

Samuel Langley

Funded by the Smithsonian, NOT the National Academies,  and one individual, not a collective.

Fascinating that you compare yourself with him anyway - what exactly have you contributed?  

Are you a card carrying member of the "Fact Resistant Humans".

[brenthutch 383]

6 hours ago, kallend said:

Funded by the Smithsonian, NOT the National Academies,  and one individual, not a collective.

Fascinating that you compare yourself with him anyway - what exactly have you contributed?  

Are you a card carrying member of the "Fact Resistant Humans".

If ad hominem is the only card you have, I suppose you have to play it......sad, I expected more from you.

Oh BTW, looks like the “collective”  miscalculated the age of the universe by about a billion years.

Edited May 22, 2019 by brenthutch

[DJL 232]

11 hours ago, brenthutch said:

If ad hominem is the only card you have, I suppose you have to play it......sad, I expected more from you.

Oh BTW, looks like the “collective”  miscalculated the age of the universe by about a billion years.

If you don't mind, what's the comparison you're trying to make with Langley?

[brenthutch 383]

20 minutes ago, DJL said:

If you don't mind, what's the comparison you're trying to make with Langley?

https://www.facebook.com/notes/capitalism/the-birth-of-aviation-a-story-of-government-subsidy-vs-private-enterprise/278315268856608/

[DJL 232]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/capitalism/the-birth-of-aviation-a-story-of-government-subsidy-vs-private-enterprise/278315268856608/

I think we can find better examples of wasted federal dollars than an instance 100 years ago.  Was the government wrong to invest in this technology?  Seems like we're using a lot of airplanes these days.  Do you know that the engine produced for Langley's work and paid for by these grants achieved a thrust to weight ratio far exceeding the Wright Brothers and at 50 hp vs their 12hp?

EDIT:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manly–Balzer_engine

Edited May 22, 2019 by DJL

[brenthutch 383]

6 minutes ago, DJL said:

I think we can find better examples of wasted federal dollars than an instance 100 years ago.  

It is more a critique of the blind faith in the “experts”

[DJL 232]

On 5/20/2019 at 10:02 PM, brenthutch said:

Two words...,,

Samuel Langley

And to keep this on topic even more regarding Langley, he invented the Bolometer, a device used to measure precise changes in radiated temperature.  This is what what further developed for use by another scientist in experiments as to how atmospheric CO2 changes temperature readings from the moon and thus in the Earth's atmosphere.  He was literally the first scientist to show that CO2 in the quantities created by mankind could lead to a greenhouse effect.

https://skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-co2-enhanced-greenhouse-effect.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius

 

[DJL 232]

8 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

It is more a critique of the blind faith in the “experts”

And the DeHavilland Comet was a commercial failure, and the Tucker car, and the many many many other privately funded engineers out there who tried to make flying machines.

I mean, look at this second one, they're trying to use the side of a barn as a landing strip!

 

Edited May 22, 2019 by DJL

[billvon 2,400]

10 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

It is more a critique of the blind faith in the “experts”

Well, given that "blind faith" in the "experts" gave us airplanes, computers, the Internet, spaceflight, and pretty much every technological advance we enjoy today - that's not such a bad thing.  That same "blind faith" also saved the ozone layer, despite predictions that the Montreal Protocol would mean the end of air conditioning and refrigeration.

[brenthutch 383]

4 minutes ago, billvon said:

Well, given that "blind faith" in the "experts" gave us airplanes, 

You should read before you post.  The expert, backed by government funds, FAILED

[Coreece 190]

13 minutes ago, DJL said:



 

Two things I find interesting about this video:

1.  Many people today still seem too stupid/lazy to achieve even that level of "dumb."

2.  Everything we know about technology today and how we went about developing it will likely look just as "dumb" to those in the very distant future.

Edited May 22, 2019 by Coreece

[DJL 232]

5 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

You should read before you post.  The expert, backed by government funds, FAILED

I know you read my post...while the airplane design he chose was a flop the engine created in his program REVOLUTIONIZED FLIGHT.

[billvon 2,400]

49 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

You should read before you post.  The expert, backed by government funds, FAILED

So did most airplanes before the Wright Brothers.  So did most spaceflight at first.  (Google the meme "our rockets always blow up.")  Fortunately we kept trying - we had "blind faith" in our ability to achieve those things even when it cost a lot of money.

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

So did most airplanes before the Wright Brothers.  So did most spaceflight at first.  (Google the meme "our rockets always blow up.")  Fortunately we kept trying - we had "blind faith" in our ability to achieve those things even when it cost a lot of money.

Robert Goddard's attempts had failures, and setbacks

I don't think his money was wasted.