Greta Hates You All

[billvon 2,400]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Yes - I mean - Anyone can OBVIOUSLY tell that the people on the ISS are paid participants and are obligated by finances to photoshop the pictures they take of the flat earth and make them into a spheroid!

You raise a good point.  We must go to the media and have them present both sides on an equal footing, and then let the people decide.  And no matter what, they must show no bias towards the round earther alarmists or the people with the plain truth.

[airdvr 197]

5 hours ago, billvon said:

Yep.  There are a fair number of people who think the Earth is flat.  Doesn't change the consensus at NASA, either.

But we don’t know why it’s round. 

[turtlespeed 212]

13 minutes ago, airdvr said:

But we don’t know why it’s round. 

That a standard deniers stance - 

Where is you unbiased backup?  PROVE we don't know why its round.

[airdvr 197]

Angry teen demands zero emissions. 

From Davos...

We demand at this year’s World Economic Forum, participants from all companies, banks, institutions and governments:

Immediately halt all investments in fossil fuel exploration and extraction.

Immediately end all fossil fuel subsidies.

And immediately and completely divest from fossil fuels.

We don’t want these things done by 2050, 2030 or even 2021. We want this done now.

M'Kay

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by airdvr

[wmw999 2,122]

2 hours ago, airdvr said:

Angry teen demands zero emissions. 

....

We don’t want these things done by 2050, 2030 or even 2021. We want this done now.

M'Kay

Kind of like wanting all the illegal immigrants gone, huh? I’ve certainly heard that more than once. 

Wendy P. 

[kallend 1,623]

16 hours ago, airdvr said:

But we don’t know why it’s round. 

It’s an oblate spheroid with a rough surface. Generally minimizing the potential energy of the matter contained. 

[JoeWeber 2,299]

16 hours ago, timski said:

OK Happy Valley guy,  Answer me this: in your time on this planet, have you not personally experienced milder winters? Spring and autumn that don't last like they used too???   I've only been here for 50 turns around the system but I can speak from what I've seen for myself. 

To be in TOTAL denial of OUR impact on climate is... PFD  

Tim,

In fairness Brent is not in total denial. He's in total don't give a shit mode because we'll soon have petunias in the Sahara and Hurricanes that spin so fast they'll actually take off and head for outer space. Also, technological advances in all of those newly freed to succeed third world countries, advances that lazy BillVon has so far failed to produce, will give new meaning to the term climate control and we'll be saved. I'm betting it'll be something simple like an app.

[brenthutch 383]

16 hours ago, timski said:

OK Happy Valley guy,  Answer me this: in your time on this planet, have you not personally experienced milder winters? Spring and autumn that don't last like they used too???   I've only been here for 50 turns around the system but I can speak from what I've seen for myself. 

To be in TOTAL denial of OUR impact on climate is... PFD  

Yes, I have experienced milder winters, I have also experienced harsher winters, it's called weather.  It has been warmer in the past and it has been colder in the past.  Sea level has been lower sea level has been higher.  Deaths from climate related disasters are a fraction of what they used to be.  Whatever impact anthropogenic influence has on the climate is dwarfed by natural variability and remains undetectable. I know the press is full of emotionally charged antidotes, breathlessly reporting on ever bit of bad weather as "proof" of AGW so I understand your confusion.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

13 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Whatever impact anthropogenic influence has on the climate is dwarfed by natural variability and remains undetectable.

Undetectable? Is that actually your position?

[brenthutch 383]

29 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Undetectable? Is that actually your position?

All current meteorological phenomena are well within the range of natural variability.  For the past few years Michael Mann has been up in his office frantically P hacking his ass off looking for a defensible example of attribution, and has not been able to provide a single one.

Edited January 29, 2020 by brenthutch

[DJL 232]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

All current meteorological phenomena are well within the range of natural variability.  For the past few years Michael Mann has been up in his office frantically P hacking his ass off looking for a defensible example of attribution, and has not been able to provide a single one.

What do you think of the "natural phenomenon" that the 10 hottest years on record have all been so close together and so recently with no relationship to the causes/events from the past that you've pointed to as being as hot?

[brenthutch 383]

You mean the warmest ten since the early 2000s.  (Prior to deployment of the Argo system, we did not have sufficient data on ocean temperature to make any sort of valid comparison,  and prior to that, global surface temperature data was not comprehensive enough to be of any value until the mid 20th century.)

[JoeWeber 2,299]

2 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

You mean the warmest ten since the early 2000s.  (Prior to deployment of the Argo system, we did not have sufficient data on ocean temperature to make any sort of valid comparison,  and prior to that, global surface temperature data was not comprehensive enough to be of any value until the mid 20th century.)

So you are actually saying that you can't know for sure either. Basically you are hoping you are right. Are you a base jumper?

[brenthutch 383]

Temperature data can be incomplete, missing and miss/maladjusted.  What is important is not the number on the computer screen, but rather the real world impact of that number.  NOAA can manipulate a number, but they can't create hurricanes, floods or droughts or tornadoes  (arsonists CAN start wildfires though)

[DJL 232]

2 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Temperature data can be incomplete, missing and miss/maladjusted.  What is important is not the number on the computer screen, but rather the real world impact of that number.  NOAA can manipulate a number, but they can't create hurricanes, floods or droughts or tornadoes  (arsonists CAN start wildfires though)

If your proof is a hypothetical then your argument is a zero sum since I can hypothetically say literally anything and have equal proof to the contrary.  You need to do better than "because it might be wrong for a reason I'm unable to demonstrate or prove."

[brenthutch 383]

It's called the Null Hypothesis

 

"the null hypothesis is a general statement or default position that there is nothing significantly different happening, like there is no association among groups or variables, or that there is no relationship between two measured phenomena.[1][2][3] Testing (accepting, approving, rejecting, or disproving) the null hypothesis—and thus concluding that there are (or there are not) grounds for believing that there is a relationship between two phenomena (e.g. that a potential treatment has a measurable effect)—is a central task in the modern practice of science; the field of statistics, more specifically hypothesis testing, gives precise criteria for rejecting or accepting a null hypothesis within a confidence level.[3]

The null hypothesis is generally assumed to be true until evidence indicates otherwise"

[turtlespeed 212]

3 hours ago, kallend said:

It’s an oblate spheroid with a rough surface. Generally minimizing the potential energy of the matter contained. 

HEY!  I got spheroid correct.

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

You mean the warmest ten since the early 2000s.  (Prior to deployment of the Argo system, we did not have sufficient data on ocean temperature to make any sort of valid comparison,  and prior to that, global surface temperature data was not comprehensive enough to be of any value until the mid 20th century.)

Ahhh - I see we have a new tactic here - 

Lik as in the OJ trial - 

If the glove doesn't fit, you must aquit!

You must think that OJ is really innocent.

[billvon 2,400]

3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

You mean the warmest ten since the early 2000s.

Nope.  I'll let you do the work there.

5 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Yes, I have experienced milder winters, I have also experienced harsher winters, it's called weather.  It has been warmer in the past and it has been colder in the past.  Sea level has been lower sea level has been higher.  Deaths from climate related disasters are a fraction of what they used to be.  Whatever impact anthropogenic influence has on the climate is dwarfed by natural variability and remains undetectable.

Unless you have a high school level understanding of science, and can read a thermometer. 

[brenthutch 383]

48 minutes ago, billvon said:

Nope.  I'll let you do the work there.

Unless you have a high school level understanding of science, and can read a thermometer. 

That is just what the "hottest ten years on record" crowd does, I take a deeper dive.

[DJL 232]

16 hours ago, brenthutch said:

That is just what the "hottest ten years on record" crowd does, I take a deeper dive.

You're the one who started posting the NOAA data as your proof of one month not being significantly hotter than the previous.  And yes, this does come down to simple thermometer reading.  In the 60's my uncle gathered that exact information from ships around the globe.  In the 50's my grandfather collected that data from his geological survey of the great lake while taking core samples.  Weather and temperature data has been meticulously recorded for a long time and now we have the tools to fill in the gaps from things like ice samples and growth pattern on trees to validate historical information.

Where did this come from?  You're making shit up.

Edited January 30, 2020 by DJL

[billvon 2,400]

4 hours ago, DJL said:

You're the one who started posting the NOAA data as your proof of one month not being significantly hotter than the previous.  And yes, this does come down to simple thermometer reading.  In the 60's my uncle gathered that exact information from ships around the globe.  In the 50's my grandfather collected that data from his geological survey of the great lake while taking core samples.  Weather and temperature data has been meticulously recorded for a long time and now we have the tools to fill in the gaps from things like ice samples and growth pattern on trees to validate historical information.

But by who?  Educated factinistas on the nerd patrol, that's who!  Not regular hardworking Joes, that's for sure.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

2 hours ago, billvon said:

But by who?  Educated factinistas on the nerd patrol, that's who!  Not regular hardworking Joes, that's for sure.

And, let's not forget that they aren't doing it for free, so they are getting paid to tell a story.

[billvon 2,400]

4 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

And, let's not forget that they aren't doing it for free, so they are getting paid to tell a story.

Exactly.  It's like with doctors.  Doctors are paid to tell you a story!  The only place to get unbiased, truthful medical advice is via Facebook posts.

[turtlespeed 212]

5 hours ago, billvon said:

Exactly.  It's like with doctors.  Doctors are paid to tell you a story!  The only place to get unbiased, truthful medical advice is via Facebook posts.

Why do you hate instagram?