08-18-2011, 09:03 PM | #191 | |
40th Level Warrior
Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Quote:
Monetary income is one of the least important things in that law. In fact, even when the EPA discusses monetary matters it is not focused on income from fines but rather trying to put valuations on the economic benefit of the harm prevented. |
|
08-19-2011, 12:00 AM | #192 | |
Drow Priestess
Join Date: March 13, 2001
Location: a hidden sanctorum high above the metroplex
Age: 54
Posts: 4,037
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Quote:
I will admit that this is not entirely the fault of government because we all know corporations, especially Big Oil--it doesn't matter if they are making $1 billion every quarter like they have for years, they will absolutely refuse to build anything that meets the current standards because they will cry that it costs too much. This gets us to the real "man behind the curtain" of climate change--money. Governments have figured out that if they can legislate emissions standards on corporations they can make a little money from the fees levied for statutory infractions; meanwhile, corporations pay lobbyists for special exception clauses so they can drag their heels and continue making money on older yet established technology and laugh all the way to the bank. Meanwhile, people like us are left arguing about who's right and who's wrong or whether or not there is anything about which we need to worry. Notice that I am not saying "corporations are evil". I am simply stating their nature for what it is. Bees collect pollen, cats eat mice, and corporations lust after another dollar no matter what they have to do to get it.
__________________
Everything may be explained by a conspiracy theory. All conspiracy theories are true. No matter how thinly you slice it, it's still bologna. |
|
08-19-2011, 08:33 AM | #193 | ||||||
Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice
Join Date: November 15, 2001
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,253
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Quote:
It's not true that the data isn't evaluated. Some of the data that the IPCC uses comes from previously peer-reviewed literature. It has already been pre-screened if you will. To suggest that the IPCC didn't sift thru the data sets without some form of screening is silly imo. It's also not true that the IPCC members stand to lose money if they don't toe the IPCC line. Scientists who participate in the IPCC assessment process do so without any compensation other than the normal salaries they receive from their home institutions. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
On the issue of sharing data, there are some well documented instances, at least two of which directly tied to CRU and the IPCC reports, where a very limited number of researchers have seemingly taken great pains to restrict availablity of their data sets. The CRU was cited specifically for that in several investigations. Although the data sets were ultimately provided as requested, the delay was significant. It should be noted that almost every major journal requires its authors to make their data available to other researchers. In at least one notable case tied back to CRU, the request for data came before the actual publication of the journal article. In that case, the delay was warranted. It should also be noted that the vast majority of climate data is publicly available thru government agencies and universities. That does not invalidate the rest of the research. As for manipulation of data sets, there are absolutely no documented instances that data has been falsified. None. Have some data sets been excluded? Yes, sometimes with good reason; othertimes, maybe not. One of the basic truths of science is that your conclusions are only as good as your data. It shouldn't surprise anyone that recording sensors frequently fail or that equipment malfunctions. In both cases, that can result in data records which are only partially accurate. Rather than throw out the entire data set, scientists will eliminate the questionable portion of the data and keep the reliable data. As I stated before, a great deal of the IPCC data came from peer-reviewed literature. Here's a quote from Roger Pielke Jr., a noted climate scientist (google him if you don't know who he is or want more details) Quote:
Quote:
Some of the folks here seem to think that the IPCC report represents "some sort of sacred text" or "to denigrate it as a sham". Pielke says "Our work suggests neither. Instead, from the perspective of its assessment products it is a valuable if imperfect organization."
__________________
“Every tavern’s an opportunity, I say.” |
||||||
08-19-2011, 11:15 AM | #194 | |
Zartan
Join Date: July 18, 2001
Location: America, On The Beautiful Earth
Age: 51
Posts: 5,373
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Wow.... here perhaps is a waste of time and money
http://www.tgdaily.com/unbalanced/57...r-alien-attack Quote:
__________________
Support Local Music and Record Stores! Got Liberty? |
|
08-19-2011, 11:17 AM | #195 |
Zartan
Join Date: July 18, 2001
Location: America, On The Beautiful Earth
Age: 51
Posts: 5,373
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Thanks for the free educational experience Micah. Your contributions to this thread are simply top-notch.
__________________
Support Local Music and Record Stores! Got Liberty? Last edited by Chewbacca; 08-19-2011 at 11:23 AM. |
08-19-2011, 11:23 AM | #196 | |
Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice
Join Date: November 15, 2001
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,253
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9-oQSpWdsQ You're welcome and Thanks.
__________________
“Every tavern’s an opportunity, I say.” Last edited by Micah Foehammer; 08-20-2011 at 03:54 PM. |
|
08-19-2011, 01:39 PM | #197 | ||
Drow Priestess
Join Date: March 13, 2001
Location: a hidden sanctorum high above the metroplex
Age: 54
Posts: 4,037
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Quote:
If they are putting out possibilities based on assumptions then two things immediately become clear: 1) quit basing things on assumptions and 2) they are wasting time and money by extrapolating possibilities that they admit might be inaccurate. In short, the IPCC is telling us that we may ignore their findings due to the inherent uncertainty. As I noted to you elsewhere, my struggle is against faulty science that begins with a presumption (human beings are disrupting the climate) and then looks for data to fit the presumption.
__________________
Everything may be explained by a conspiracy theory. All conspiracy theories are true. No matter how thinly you slice it, it's still bologna. |
||
08-19-2011, 02:06 PM | #198 |
Zartan
Join Date: July 18, 2001
Location: America, On The Beautiful Earth
Age: 51
Posts: 5,373
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Wait!!! the vast alarmist conspiracy is full of people who have...scientific uncertainty? Chicken little wasn't running around crying "Maybe!!!".
However I have noticed this new trend of chickens running around yelling "Alarmists"! Man, are they CERTAIN! They make a nice harmony with the ones yelling "Global Warming!" Like nails on a chalkboard meets squeaky brake-pads. And where would we be without scientific assumption? It's clear in layman's terms it makes an ass out of me and U in certain situations.
__________________
Support Local Music and Record Stores! Got Liberty? Last edited by Chewbacca; 08-19-2011 at 03:54 PM. |
08-20-2011, 06:20 AM | #199 | |||||
Xanathar Thieves Guild
Join Date: March 17, 2001
Location: Wichita, KS USA
Age: 61
Posts: 4,537
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The unfortunate thing here is that yes, when taken in context with the general premise of GCC science, that mankind is responsible for CC, it does tend to invalidate most of the science. After all, that's not how science works, and we all know that. That we are a contributing factor cannot be denied, but that doesn't mean we're the root cause, and frankly, that's what GCC scientists are out to prove. In the process, they hope we'll ignore the fact that the earth has been through much more radical changes in it's climate that anything they are predicting. In fact, they are gambling on most of their audience not knowing that at all. While the IPCC may not get paid, the people that actually do the research they evaluate do. Quote:
__________________
To those we have lost; May your spirits fly free. Good Music: Here. Interesting read, one of my blogs. |
|||||
08-20-2011, 10:54 AM | #200 | ||||||
Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice
Join Date: November 15, 2001
Location: Asheville, NC
Posts: 3,253
|
Re: New NASA Data Debunks Global Warming
Quote:
I believe you are referencing the quote you provided earlier in post # 81. Actually the most serious objection that you cited is from Fred Singer. Singer wasn't a member of IPCC; so his claims aren't based on first hand involvement. Can he really properly evaluate what the IPCC does? Since you raise the issue of agendas, I suggest you check out the following link and go down and read the sections on Global Warming and SEPP funding. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._Fred_Singer You don't think there might be a little conflict of interest there? Maybe Singer is right, but I think a little skepticism might not be out of place. As has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the only criticisms around the IPCC involved reluctance to share data, and perhaps the statistical rigor of the analysis. (See Secret Master's posts # 33 and 35 and my intervening post #34). Quote:
"They compile everyone's data, and then it's edited by people that don't even evaluate the data given, some of whom can lose money if the reports are too conservative, or too liberal." Excuse me, but the context seemed to be refering to the IPCC and that you are linking the funding to the people compiling the data and editing the report. No mention of governments in that sentence. Not my fault if you combined two separate ideas into one and then expect people to figure out what you really meant. If IPCC authors are being defunded by their governments then it's an issue with the governments NOT the IPCC. Quote:
The appeal to validation based on consensus doesn't ring 100% true. Science isn't done by consensus - skepticism IS a natural part of the process and that's how science advances. If the history of science has shown us anything, as Cerek pointed out, it's that the consensus doesn't always get it right. That doesn't mean that the claims that a consensus does exist are invalid. Nor does it mean that the consensus is wrong. Check out the link SM proved back in post #24. If you follow that link, you will see that that it's within the general public where the biggest divergence from consensus exists. That is simply proof that one side, the skeptics, have been remarkably more effective in getting their message out. It doesn't prove that message is right. There is a half truth buried in the assertion of scientific agreement though. The basic underlying science is well understood and agreed upon even by some dissenting scientists. The dispute lies in some of the details of climate change mechanisms. Even Azred's climate skeptic blog site agrees with the basic premise that manmade CO2 results in warming; the site's author simply disputes the mechnism and the extent of warming. Not the underlying science. And yes there are some folks who totally deny the effects of CO2 warming regardless of the source. Seriously, I would have though that all of this would be relatively obvious. I don't understand why we are continuing to rehash this. Quote:
Quote:
I think it's simply a convenient excuse for you to dismiss ALL of the research being done that supports the theory. Rather than attacking the facts by presenting solid scientific arguments, you attack the source. You have never actually proven the case that the science itself is invalid let alone that the IPCC engaged in fraud. The IPCC does NOT represent the entire scientific community. It is one voice. Perhaps that voice is too loud or even off-key, but it is one voice nonetheless. To dismiss an entire group and body of research based on one voice simply fails any normal standard of logic. Azred said: Quote:
__________________
“Every tavern’s an opportunity, I say.” |
||||||
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Talk about global warming, eh? | Link | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 19 | 07-16-2004 12:25 PM |
Global Warming: Who's to blame? | Avatar | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 31 | 09-03-2003 10:50 AM |
News for anyone interested in Global Warming. | MagiK | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 56 | 09-27-2002 10:17 PM |
Global Warming (time to stir the pot) | MagiK | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 22 | 05-16-2002 09:28 AM |
Global Warming! Please read and answer | Moridin | General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) | 51 | 04-11-2001 08:01 AM |