NOAA: last decade was warmest, global warming "undeniable"

[braincell]

700 researchers can't be wrong. Fight the A-Hole conservatives!

"The American Geophysical Union plans to announce that 700 researchers have agreed to speak out on the issue. Other scientists plan a pushback against congressional conservatives who have vowed to kill regulations on greenhouse gas emissions."

Full article:

http://tinyurl.com/27mb7t7

[garyb]

wow!
good for YOUR side!
winning is WAY more important than what is reality!

we'll ignore the fact that the author of the article fudged the story a bit and had to issue a "clarification". like so many climate articles, there's a pretty provocative title, and then a slightly less powerful story.

i suppose statements like this are totally unreasonable right?
"People who ask for and accept taxpayer dollars shouldn't get bent out of shape when asked to account for the money," said James M. Taylor, a senior fellow and a specialist in global warming at the conservative Heartland Institute in Chicago. "The budget is spiraling out of control while government is handing out billions of dollars in grants to climate scientists, many of whom are unabashed activists."

it sure is inconvienient when people recieving billions have to be accountable...

[dawman]

parrots_and_hand2.jpg

[valis]

Not only parrot, but he still seems to think science is based on consensual agreement on 'facts'. Consensual 'reality' is unfortunately more present in science than it would be in some abstract idealized sense (defending pet theories & ontological turfs connected to income or tenure or etc.) but that isn't how the actual 'methodology' works for science.

It's the reverse, the onus is on peer review to show flaws in theory. Even one peer who can show a flaw invalidates the theory so that it must either be revised to account for the flaw(s) or discarded or etc...precisely because as apes our want is to build little agreements that support our prejudices and preconceptions.

[garyb]

Not only parrot, but he still seems to think science is based on consensual agreement on 'facts'. Consensual 'reality' is unfortunately more present in science than it would be in some abstract idealized sense (defending pet theories & ontological turfs connected to income or tenure or etc.) but that isn't how the actual 'methodology' works for science.

It's the reverse, the onus is on peer review to show flaws in theory. Even one peer who can show a flaw invalidates the theory so that it must either be revised to account for the flaw(s) or discarded or etc...precisely because as apes our want is to build little agreements that support our prejudices and preconceptions.

that's about it...

[Zer]

They even dind`t manage a modern way of energy transmission, although prices for electric current are rising up only to gain more money out of a crippled instable old wire system to serve the shareholders. Next big electrical power outage is guaranteed.

[dawman]

Our leaders prefer investing in Military strength over infrastructure.
Besides outages are a chance for well coordinated looting crews to strike Banks and business.
As a hedge bet I have stock in Kansas City Power & Lights, which is a very profitable low ranked stock that sells to areas in the Southeast hit by hurricanes.
So outages are something I look forward to.
I have cased A1 audios' warehouse where several old consoles and racked hardware is collected from the major tours, and just for good measure I've considered a graffitti strike team for the local tax collectors building.
Since the Hoover Dam provides power for the back up of the Casinos, the decadant gambling and entertainment will continue, but the warehousing areas are ripe as their alarm systems are antiquated, and even if they work on UPS batteries, law enforcement will be overstretched.

We need to keep the antiquated infrastructure so us peasants can regain some of our home equity we transfferred to Shanghai....

[garyb]

what a joke!
right now, there's more co2 coming out of a certain mountaintop in the Phillipines than from almost any one source, but we'll ignore that.

so the GAO is talking about methods to remove co2 and to absorb the sun's energy so that it doesn't heat the atmosphere, what a boondogle! another ripoff....geoengineering, another pipe dream.

sometimes i wonder what kind of reading comprehension a guy like stardust really has. he's talking about the US government being a bad guy in encouraging business to ignore "warming" concerns, when in reality the link he posted is all about moving forward with ridiculous and expensive plans to mess with things that aren't even understood, are likely impossible, and could easily do more harm to humanity than good. what they are NOT doing is anything that stardust posted.

[next to nothing]

to be honest i sometimes question the comprehension of others that stardust as well.

[garyb]

to be honest i sometimes question the comprehension of others that stardust as well.

ok, i've got my problems too....

did you read that statement by the GAO?

[next to nothing]

Honestly, i didn't!

Being European i didn't even know wtf GAO was, but i googled it and found the report (i think)

being two-year sick of the word "fiscal", I skipped through it and found the allways helpful wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

i guess, as with global warming, longer periods puts things into perspective nice graphs there, here are some examples:

[garyb]

there is nothing more capitalistic than the Communist party. that statement does NOT necessarily reflect the views of individuals in the party, but those of the ones who finance and run the show. it'd be better to drop such useless rhetoric.

the GAO is 100% accepting of the idea of carbon based warming and is looking to spend billions of dollars on Buck Rodgers solutions that will likely never work, even assuming carbon based warming to be real.

the whole climate issue is a scam.

it's not an unprovable "ultimate truth" to say the the little ice age ended in the mid 1800's and that a warming trend would HAVE to follow the end of an ice age.

[garyb]

Honestly, i didn't!

Being European i didn't even know wtf GAO was, but i googled it and found the report (i think)

being two-year sick of the word "fiscal", I skipped through it and found the allways helpful wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

i guess, as with global warming, longer periods puts things into perspective nice graphs there, here are some examples:

yeah, funny graphs about money loaned by a cadre of bankers who charge interest even though the money they loan was created from nothing. boy, are we suckers.

[next to nothing]

i may have misinterpreted why you asked me if i read it? i thought it was to illustrate how the public debt had increased the last years, as illustrated in the document. I admit making a pun of showing the graphs over a longer term (as a link to the original topic, sort of (graph discussions etc)).

Anyways, i see GAO allready in 2007 made it clear that the US economy is unbearable after 2030. I did, however, try to google the name of the authors of the report, tried the first two names, but got like zero hits? i might be doing something wrong though, but thats pretty scary

[braincell]

Thankfully, the deniers are all in the lunatic fringe; although they can be quite loud on the net!

[garyb]

i may have misinterpreted why you asked me if i read it? i thought it was to illustrate how the public debt had increased the last years, as illustrated in the document. I admit making a pun of showing the graphs over a longer term (as a link to the original topic, sort of (graph discussions etc)).

Anyways, i see GAO allready in 2007 made it clear that the US economy is unbearable after 2030. I did, however, try to google the name of the authors of the report, tried the first two names, but got like zero hits? i might be doing something wrong though, but thats pretty scary

no, stardust had link to a GAO report saying that studies needed to be made for the purpose of spending money on climate manipulation, basically, but stardust had said that the report showed that the US is unwilling to spend that money(which is the opposite of what the report said)....

[dante]

Thankfully, the deniers are all in the lunatic fringe; although they can be quite loud on the net!

I was beginning to see the wisdom of your scientific evidence on climate change, but since you described Reason as a virtual modular synthesizer I have been having doubts about your credibility.

Modular Parrot

modular_parrot.JPG (32.02 KiB) Viewed 2920 times

[garyb]

i still think there's a comprehension problem here.

i'm not a libertarian, nor do i follow any libertarian philosophy. i'm not that one dimensional, i don't limit my thinking to a political party. i've liked them all, including the communists and i'm over that type of thinking entirely. i'm old now, and i've seen what polytrick is all about. i can't be fooled by such rhetoric, though i might enjoy playing with that rhetoric from time to time, but i can't take ANY of it seriously. the same goes for economics, EXCEPT the economics of everyday life in such a silly system(ignoring such a thing would be at my own peril). your encapsulization of what you think i'm about shows me that you misunderstand me. i only speak(write) about everyday things that we all see and experience. the emotional connotations and paranoia are all yours.

second, "the root causes"? just because YOU are sure that YOU know what that means, doesn't make it so, in the same way that my opinion doesn't matter. this thing is not subjective, there's a clear right and wrong answer here or you wouldn't be able to speak of such a thing as "the root causes". i'm only speaking about well documented reality like the little ice age ending. can we not agree that the reality of the end of a little ice age would indicate the beginning of at least a little warm age? isn't it interesting, at least, that the little ice age ended about mid 1800's? who's the man with all ultimate wisdom who can state with certainty, that this is not all pretty normal and that it's even a good idea to make assumptions about what is right or wrong with climate? isn't "the root cause" just a reason to hate people?

which brings me to the third point, why so angry?

[garyb]

look, stardust, ntn, i understand that your awesomeness makes it easy for you to lose patience with all the other monkey men in the world. luckily, there's always that solution....

i know some others in history who thought that there were too many of the wrong kind of people and what they did about it....

[braincell]

Rand Paul has revealed to the world that Libertarians are even more insane than average Republican wingnuts and I would have thought this to be hardly possible. Conservatives don't need facts. They make up their own.