All Forums > The Pit > The Pit > How about that.....
4/9/2013 5:49 PM
Posted by toddcommish on 4/9/2013 1:39:00 PM (view original):
Geez, do you want me to go into my psychotic rant about what a tiny sample size is covered by accurate thermometers?  It's been awhile since I've trotted it out, so if you're going to persist with this "global warming" (which has since been co-opted by "climate change" to give environmental wackos a two-way hedge), I may have to go to my "condense the history of the planet into a day" comparison.
Id love to hear your rant.  Fill us in with your wisdom Todd.
4/9/2013 6:40 PM

OK, let's consider just SOME of the history of the planet.  I'll restrict it to the beginnings of life, say, 350 million years ago or so (mid-Paleozoic).

If we telescope those 350 million years of life on the planet into ONE DAY, roughly every second represents 4000 years of real time.  Mankind's WRITTEN history would start around 11:59:57 p.m. at the best.  We've had thermometers since 11:59.59.9 p.m.  You're a complete (statistical) moron if you are pre-supposing that in that 0.1 of second of our planetary history that you understand all of the climatalogical changes that have taken place and that your MICROSCOPIC sample size represents an accurate representation of "global climate change".

That's like judging how good a day will be by taking a sample of ONE SECOND from your day.  Which would be idiotic, if it didn't mean that some equally idiotic politicians would hand you money if you assume the worst case scenario.  In which case, it makes perfect selfish sense.

Not my full rant, but you get my drift.

p.s. I don't watch Fox News, so take that little generalization and stuff it in your liberal piehole.

4/9/2013 8:05 PM
Have you forgotten that scientists have gotten awfully good at looking at ice cores and lake beds and layers of rocks and determining what things were like throughout pretty well every era?  I suppose that we cant be 100% accurate there, but I think they are pretty certain that they are awfully close.

You seem relatively intelligent Todd, Im sure you get my point.

From past conversations that we have had Todd I had the impression that you arent the typical Fox watching mouth breathing birther repug  like so many of your fellow righties here.  But its still fun to poke fun at you all, paint you with the same brush as it were.   :)

4/9/2013 8:20 PM
Remember, they're estimating climatological changes based on soil samples and carbon-14 dating (which they conveniently control).  But even assuming they're 100% noble and honest, if their estimations of temperature are off by even 5%, it blows the entire apocalyptic "global warming" theory to hell.  Even so, carbon dating is only considered even remotely accurate up to maybe 40,000 years ago, or beginning at roughly 11:59:50 p.m. 

So best case, they're basing "global warming" on a sample size equivalent to 10 seconds of ONE DAY.  Like I said... idiotic.
4/9/2013 8:39 PM
Thankfully we have much more to use then just carbon 14 dating, we also have radioactive dating measuring uranium -235, uranium -238 and several others that have half lives ranging from 704 million to 49 billion years.

But from what I know they dont use carbon dating to figure out temperature, they use it for determining the age of animals that died thousands of years ago.  They use Paleoclimatology to figure out what the climate was like for millions of years.  Ice cores have been used to figure out climate data from up to about 800,000 years ago.

Here is an interesting graph for you to ponder:

Ice core data for the past 400,000 years. Note length of glacial cycles averages ~100,000 years. Blue curve is temperature, green curve is CO2, and red curve is windblown glacial dust (loess). Today's date is on the left side of the graph.


4/9/2013 8:43 PM
But if you operate under the notion that scientists are not to be trusted then whats they point in us talking?   I dont want to waste my time with some religious waco that wants to disprove science every chance he gets!   :)
4/9/2013 9:46 PM
Posted by greeny9 on 4/9/2013 5:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jclarkbaker on 4/9/2013 10:10:00 AM (view original):
Posted by greeny9 on 4/8/2013 9:44:00 PM (view original):
Thats basically what you and Todd are referring to.

Now Baker, you like to spread misinformation about how the global temperature hasnt warmed in the past 20 years, if that is true why is it that the Arctic ice pack has been at its lowest 9 of the last 10 winters?  And last summer was THE record for lowest amount in recorded history?  And this is all according to NASA.  Riddle me that Baker

If you want to ignore the latest news reports on the temp the last two decades, fine.  It just makes you look like a blindly following cultist.
You mean the news reports fed to you by Fixed news?  no thank you.  I will listen to the vast majority of scientists out there that explain in vivid detail how climate change is real.  Im tired of arguing this with you.  You call me a blindly following cultist?  At least Im not a blindly ignorant Fixed news watcher.
Hey *******, how about you get your head out of your *** and do a little research. This story has been covered by numerous outlets, and one of the main sources is James Hansen, the godfather of your cult.

From here on out, I will refer to you as "The Denier".
4/9/2013 10:11 PM
Hey Baker, no need to be dropping swears like that is there?  Can we not be civilized?

Yah, James Hansen is the godfather of our cult.  Just like GE, News Corp, Disney and Coca-Cola are the God fathers of your cult?

As I have said people will change their minds on virtually anything if you wave enough dollar bills in their face. 

You are the denier my friend.  The vast majority of scientists still agree that humans are the key ingredient in todays climate change.

4/10/2013 11:39 AM
Was told to look up bees dying. I did.

The basic theory is there is some kind of problem with chemicals and it is killing bees and it is raising costs.

Not a disaster according to my short research.

They seem to be on it and are fixing the problem and in the meantime costs are going up slightly because of having to rent bees.

Is there a sight that makes this seem worse?
4/10/2013 11:42 AM
Greeny said that he never called for the end of Western Capitalism and it is true he never used the words, but that is what he wants.

3 points...

1 If this is really the disaster that the left says simple plans like Kyoto cannot really fix it.

2 Again if this is really a disaster we would be asking China, India, Indonesia and the other emerging nations to help, but we cannot because it really would destroy them.

3 So ask yourself this...If you were heading off a cliff would you really be asking for a plan to slow your movement towards the cliff by 15%?
4/10/2013 4:39 PM
Posted by greeny9 on 4/9/2013 10:11:00 PM (view original):
Hey Baker, no need to be dropping swears like that is there?  Can we not be civilized?

Yah, James Hansen is the godfather of our cult.  Just like GE, News Corp, Disney and Coca-Cola are the God fathers of your cult?

As I have said people will change their minds on virtually anything if you wave enough dollar bills in their face. 

You are the denier my friend.  The vast majority of scientists still agree that humans are the key ingredient in todays climate change.

Hansen has not changed his mind on climate change.  But he has admitted, as have many others, that the temp has not increased in two decades.  And him and the rest of the true believers don't know why.
4/11/2013 7:45 PM
4/12/2013 2:42 PM
"According to Connie Hedegaard, the European Union’s commissioner for climate action, 'People should believe that [wind power] is very, very cheap.'  In fact, this is a highly problematic claim. While wind energy is cheaper than other, more ineffective renewables, such as solar, tidal, and ethanol, it is nowhere near competitive. If it were, we wouldn’t have to keep spending significant sums to subsidize it."

www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/gone-with-the-wind#A29AIGpbsWbWQcOu.99  (written by another godfarther of the global warming movement)

And on the same subject:

"Compared to current rates, it's estimated that Cape Wind power -- at 18.7 cents per kilowatt-hour, rising 3.5 percent annually -- will cost about $2 billion more than conventional power under the National Grid contract."

www.necn.com/12/13/10/Cape-Wind-project-faces-more-challenges/landing_business.html

And you know last summer when the climate change wackos were screaming that the drought in the midwest was caused by, of course, climate change.  Well, no, it wasn't:

www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/apr/12/climate-change-not-2012-drought  (The Guardian, perhaps the most left-wing major Brit paper)

So, we have two sources saying what any rational person already knows: green energy is expensive as ****.  And we have yet another climate change claim shot down.

But don't worry, greeny will be here soon spouting nonsense, claiming the sources aren't to his liking, etc.  You see, he is a true believer, and will not in any circumstance accept any argument or facts to the contrary.  And he wants all of us to pay out the *** for energy.
4/13/2013 2:25 PM
All the right wants is the left to admit this issue isnt settled. All we want is more research and a more careful analysis of the facts.

Seems simple enough.

Except in the case of Global Warming "The Debat is Over"!

And I am not saying because if we discuss it more they will lose their chance to gut Western Capitalism.

It just seems like their side is acting a little strange...
4/15/2013 2:02 PM
Etc.....

"The latest ice-core analysis from the Antarctic shows that nothing unusual in terms of melting is occurring.  In research published yesterday, a large team of scientists used a deep ice core from the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet Divide to produce records going back some 2,000 years. Their analysis shown that recent melting in that area, which has caused a good deal of hysteria* in climate alarmist circles, is in fact normal."

www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/15/western_antarctic_melting_nothing_unusual/

 

of 28
All Forums > The Pit > The Pit > How about that.....

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.