Secrets of the City

I got your porn right here…Tom Emmer is a fucking jack-off.

FWIW my favorite climate porn consists of large swells lapping at exotic shores.

Embrace global warming.

here’s another video showing Tom Emmer being being laughed at when he couldn’t answer whether the Earth is thousands or billions of years old.

I suppose that’s better than denying it exists. But no.

When jeff grows up and has to start paying an Xcel Energy bill, he’ll embrace global warming too.

I pay an Xcel energy bill. It’s small because I don’t use very much energy. Oh, and I voluntarily pay extra to support their wind program.

Whatever Climate Porn is, it’s off line. But I don’t know why anyone would want to see Minnesota agriculture turn into Missouri or Oklahoma agriculture.

For some reason the phrase “climate porn” makes me think of hippie porn.

That’s a good idea…. naked hippies doing the nasty for the earth!!!!!

Someone needs to start a nonprofit hippie porn site.

“I suppose that’s better than denying it exists.“

That would just be foolish. Anyone can clearly see, in the verifiable data, the long-wavelength variations and the present point on that graph.

But, move into the “it’s caused by man” realm, and I’ll probably just be sort of overly polite to you and change the subject, and I’ll try hard to make a discreet exit, exactly as I do when I end up next to someone complaining that evolution shouldn’t be taught without the biblical balance, and for the exact same reason.

Because when someone’s firmly-held beliefs are shown to lack foundation, and their response is not to re-examine those beliefs but to attack the messengers as faithless and evil blasphemers, you’re better off leaving them in their soiled little ecstasy, even as you bleakly consider the state of the mind in a society where educators, even those educators supposedly dedicated to science, to the scientific method, to empiricism, can weigh that dedication against political gain and easily and without inner conflict chuck that dedication into the compost and go on to “teach” a new generation that, if we hate enough, we doan need no steenken science.

But, move into the “it’s caused by man” realm, and I’ll probably just be sort of overly polite to you and change the subject, and I’ll try hard to make a discreet exit,

So, bobby_b: are you saying that taking steps to reduce things like carbon emissions are just not worth the effort and expense?

Things are going to slide just as far as they’re going to slide and there’s nothing really to do about it?

Climate out of control?

ummm. Global warming may be occuring, but isn’t this due to the sun warming up? I mean, Mars is losing its polar ice cap and I seriously doubt if we’re responsible for that.

are you saying that taking steps to reduce things like carbon emissions are just not worth the effort and expense?

How many carbon-absorbing trees are being destroyed by printing the Strib? When are they going to do their part to save the planet and quit killing so many trees?!

Oh boy, out come the global warming deniers. *sigh*.

Let’s just put it this way. Do you people honestly think you have original ideas that none of many thousands of professional scientists who have dedicated their lives to studying climate science haven’t thought of? Does that make any sense at all? Do you think right now, there’s some PhD at Princeton who’s reading this and thinking, “Mars!! shit!! never thought of that one!! Better publish a highly original paper and advance my career by being the first one to steal this idea from a few uneducated libertarians!”

It’s a complicated world, and we need to have a certain degree of trust in various experts. No blind, stupid, unyielding trust, but reasonable trust. The ins and outs of the science behind this is complicated, and may take a person years to fully understand. It’s certainly not my area of expertise; I only know the very basics and I’m not in any position to verify global warming science on my own. But I know how the system works, and I know when people have nothing to gain by lying. I’m sure Maz is an expert at some damn thing, and if I ever need to know how to be old and crotchety, I’ll go to him.

against political gain
How can I make this most clear? Science. Doesn’t. Work. That. Way. There is no conspiracy. There is no benefit to a cabal of scientists hiding the truth. Scientists are rewarded for exposing the truth. You’re conflating science with politics, and they are different. They’re rewarded for original insights that go against the common accepted truth, so long as those stand up to the rigorous scrutiny of the rest of the community.

There’s no political gain to be had. Do you think us damn dirty hippies like conserving energy? If I had it my way, I’d leave my computer on all night because I hate waiting for it to turn on in the morning. Nobody gains from making necessary sacrifices. We do it because we’re responsible adults.

“So, bobby_b: are you saying that taking steps to reduce things like carbon emissions are just not worth the effort and expense?“

Not at all. Dirty air sucks. Pollution sucks. They need to be addressed. All I’m sayin’ is, they’re not causing the earth to get warmer.

So, am I an evil blasphemer now? Are you saying that, if someone doesn’t think global warming is caused by Hummers, he thinks pollution is okay?

‘Cuz, that would be an impressive display of intelligent design.

Here jeff, cary, et al. Read this. And quit wringing your hands because there’s nothing you, Algore, Mrs. Bill Clinton or the federal government can do about it.

… studies by Stott [2003] and Journal of Climate [2004] estimate that as much as 36 to 40% of the net increase in global temperature since 1900 is due to solar forcing.

From the wikipedia article you just linked to:

“More recently, a study and review of existing literature published in Nature in Sept. 2006 suggests that the evidence is solidly on the side of solar brightness having relatively little effect on global climate, and downplays the likelihood of significant shifts in solar output over long periods of time.”

I refer you to my previous post. ahem.

They predicted that continued greenhouse gas emissions would cause additional future temperature increases “at a rate similar to that observed in recent decades”. It should be noted that their solar forcing included “spectrally-resolved changes in solar irradiance” and not the indirect effects mediated through cosmic rays for which there is still no accepted mechanism  these ideas are still being fleshed out.[32] In addition, the study notes “uncertainties in historical forcing”  in other words, past natural forcing may still be having a delayed warming effect, most likely due to the oceans.[33] A graphical representation[34] of the relationship between natural and anthropogenic factors contributing to climate change appears in “Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis”, a report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).[35]

In other words, there is no “consensus science,” only consensus politics.

I’m surprised no one mentioned defending the earth with handguns…

There’s no political gain to be had.

There’s no political gain to be had by destroying the u.s. economy? Why are the chinese exempt from the kyoto provisions?

How many carbon-absorbing trees are being destroyed by printing the Strib? When are they going to do their part to save the planet and quit killing so many trees?!

Are you getting so lame that you are answering my question with more question?

That was a joke, son.

“Do you people honestly think you have original ideas that none of many thousands of professional scientists who have dedicated their lives to studying climate science haven’t thought of? Does that make any sense at all? Do you think right now, there’s some PhD at Princeton who’s reading this and thinking, “Mars!! shit!! never thought of that one!! Better publish a highly original paper and advance my career by being the first one to steal this idea from a few uneducated libertarians!”“

Does it ever bother you that you would never dream of discussing properties of mass or the measurement of radio emissions using the kind of sloppy, factless, “you shouldn’t go against all these beeelyeeons and beeelyeeons of really nice, honest, completely nonideological people with Degrees . . . in SCIENCE! . . . like . . . uh . . . me!”?

“It’s a complicated world, and we need to have a certain degree of trust in various experts. No blind, stupid, unyielding trust, but reasonable trust. The ins and outs of the science behind this is complicated, and may take a person years to fully understand. It’s certainly not my area of expertise; I only know the very basics and I’m not in any position to verify global warming science on my own. But I know how the system works, and I know when people have nothing to gain by lying.“

Years from now, when you’re no longer (presumably) teaching, come back to these words. Maybe your reaction will come close to mine. I’ll just say that if any of my profs had spoken of their own subjects in these kinds of terms, they’d have been sent packing, by us students. (”Hydrology is, like, complicated, dude, and none of us are smart enough to even figure out what a sverdrup is, much less design experiments that will be used to produce data that will eventually be reproduced by other scientists as a way of gathering more knowledge about current fluctuation in the Weddell Sea, so, let’s just accept whatever Foldvik and Gammelsrod printed up and nail that puppy down right there! Now, let’s have a show of hands . . .?!”)

It doesn’t take a postdoc in stats to understand a defense, and a refutation, of a statistical model, and to see obvious flaws – so obvious, either an author was unqualified or had his conclusions drawn prior to data collection – or to understand the venality when over 100 “scientists” who should know stats blithely cite to that study to “prove” point one of their own study (”Okay, now everyone has accepted the hockey stick . . .”). It doesn’t take 12 lab-years to understand that extrapolation of an extrapolation of a math-model probably shouldn’t be used to verify the model itself, especially when the model fails every reality-check. It doesn’t take years sitting at Wolff’s feet to understand that scientific knowledge is built, not on faked data and continuous and continual extrapolation, but by the determination and testing of new ideas built on other ideas that have equally survived the logical heat and test.

If someone ever says to you, just take my word for it, and don’t look at those numbers, they’re too hard – run away. I’m hoping you don’t present your field to your students with the same aura of necromancy and consensus you used here.

There’s no political gain to be had by destroying the u.s. economy?
None that I can think of.

Why are the chinese exempt from the kyoto provisions? The whole, “Moooom, Timmy can stay up until 11″ thing is, well, juvenile.

In other words, there is no “consensus science,” only consensus politics. I’m not really sure what you’re expecting. “And lo, God sayith, ‘the Global Warming is coming’”? All we can do is have our most qualified people interpret the best available evidence and make the best possible judgements. Why should the answer be completely obvious? It’s not trivial, and yet, it has made itself plenty clear for action.

I will start the non-profit climate porn site (dirty hippy girls and pretty punk rock girls shagging on internet video to save the Earth) as soon as someone can hook me up with a serious lawyer and throw a fundraiser.

Until then, I’ll stick to impeachment porn!

Why are the chinese exempt from the kyoto provisions? The whole, “Moooom, Timmy can stay up until 11″ thing is, well, juvenile.

In other words, you don’t know. Doesn’t it seem rather odd, indeed, political and not so scientific that China and India, two of the world’s top pollutors, are exempt from the Kyoto Protocol?

You college boys are terminally naive.

Dennis, you’re so predictable. The best part is that you think you’re actually proving something.

Actually, I’m disproving something.

China is going green, Maz.

I’m starting to think Maz has control issues.

Here (Stop Being Controlling and Critical) is some good advice for Maz from Dr Phil!

Actually, Simpleton, your diagnosis is 180 degrees out of phase. I resist and resent all efforts to control me. That’s different than what Dr. Phil is talking about at that link. Maybe it’s an indian thing. You know, rezs and such. I don’t succumb to the easy path of general consensus and popular belief.

Mazasapa -

My guess is that you are in your teens with a grade school education at best. Your parents are Jesus freaks with no education who drilled into you that the LORD supports everything Exxon does.

The Earth is warming, and your hot air is the main cause. Shut the hell up.

Booby_b

The same goes for you too. Shut the hell up with the Exxon talking points. You lying right wing nut jobs should be put on trial for treason.

Maz, I DO know why they are exempt. Because they are not voluntarily submitting to them. So they’re fuckers who are not doing their part. So what? That doesn’t exempt us. They’ll get there soon enough. They have a lot of problems to deal with that we do not.

bobby,

The version of my argument you presented was so twisted it’s fairly pointless to respond. But I’ll try. Nobody’s saying “never go against people with degrees in SCIENCE”. The claim is that you’re in no position to argue with them as it stands any more than I’m in a position to argue with a biologist about why pandas are black and white because I have no freakin’ clue and I’m willing to admit it. If you have a serious refutation of accepted climate science, here’s what you need to do: Take some classes or spend a significant amount of time teaching yourself all of what’s relevent to have an intelligent conversation about the topic. If you still have your question – and I really doubt you would – then go to a professor or other expert in the field and explain your question. If at that point, it’s STILL not answered, then maybe you’re on to something. Until then, we shouldn’t base important policy on things you don’t understand.

In other words, my attitude isn’t “dude, nobody’s smart enough to figure it out”. My attutide is, accept the fact that we live in a world where people are specialized and often spend their entire lives becoming knowledgable about something, and then ask yourself what that means about your position to accuse thousands upon thousands of them of simultaneously of hiding a truth they have no motivation to hide.

Think back to high school, or college if it’s relevent. Whenever you were taught something, and you didn’t understand it or something seemed funny about it, what was your initial reaction? “This probably seems funny because I don’t understand it yet, I should probably study it some more”, or “there’s a huge international conspiracy hiding the truth and only I know it!!” Which seemed more likely at the time?

I’m going to avoid a discussion of your various accusations of math flaws because I need to get to work and I don’t have time to go through all of the relevent papers and start a big discussion about all these details. Suffice it to say, I would be very surprised if you were right about anything but I’m glad you’re interested in the topic. But I’ve tried to avoid the science argument because I’m more interested in making an agrument about understading various systems in an attempt to avoid getting derailed by every denier I meet with an infinite supply of questions I can’t answer and they make no effort to answer themselves. It’s just like talking to an evolution denier.

Scientists are humans who certainly have ideologies. And not only that but they’re often wrong. But you have to realize you’re suggesting something that is INCREDIBLY UNLIKELY, and in the real world where we have to make real decisions NOW, I trust experts, not you. And I should hope everyone else would do the same.

I’m not too concerned, Bob. Like Lincoln, I believe that alcohol is an essential good with a great potential for abuse, and, like most Americans, I believe that Prohibition was an insane experiment that failed catastrophically, created a massive criminal underworld, put poison into the hands of American drinkers, popularized binge drinking, and ruined the American wine industry for a half-century,

Of course, one of the principle differences between drinking and smoking is that, when I have a cocktail, I don’t spit it all over the person sitting next to me. And Maz, who proclaims himself a libertarian, obviously wouldn’t actually support a government ban on alcohol. He’s just being contrary for the sake of argument, and deliberately obtuse. Drinking might kill the drinker, but it won’t kill the person next to him, unless the drinker hops in a car and drunkenly drives.

And guess what? That’s illegal.

I may not agree with Maz or BB, but propaganda techniques are hardly the proper methods to lend credibility to your own point of view.

Dang, can’t fool yu there Juniebug. Yer rite, yer alot smarter then me.

Whoah. Wrong thread.

and deliberately obtuse.

Does that mean “fat?” I better ask junebug. She’ll know.

Did anybody actually follow that Stanford Solar Center link that Maz posted, and notice that it completely disproves his point about the sun causing global warming? Even the folks at the Stanford Solar Center believe it is primarily caused by greenhouse gasses.

For what it is worth, there are a number of scientists who are questioning some of the worst-case predictions for global warming, and a smaller number who question how much warming can be attributed to mankind and how much can be attributed to the natural order of things.

On the other hand, a couple of noteworthy studies that have been published in the last two months indicate that things are happening a lot faster than had been previously predicted.

There is no question that these questions have significant political and financial elements. Nevertheless, I think it would be sensible for the USA to be a world leader in the struggle to control pollution of all kinds (including CO2 emissions) for three reasons:

1) It has been unquestionably shown that we can have a lasting impact on our environment and it’s the only one we’ve got.

2) Global warming may have fringe benefits to some, but it highly likely to be far more damaging to humanity overall. I would not want to live in Africa at all, for example, if temperatures increase another 4 degrees.

3) If any of the bad or worst-case scenarios come about, you can bet that the United States will be shown to be the bad guy and we don’t even have the excuse of a developing economy. There will be lawsuits. Enormous ones, even.

Selective quoting, part two: from the Slott study Maz quoted above:

In the latter half of the century, we find that anthropogenic increases in greenhouses gases are largely responsible for the observed warming, balanced by some cooling due to anthropogenic sulphate aerosols, with no evidence for significant solar effects.

and

Stott’s 2003 work mentioned in the model section above largely revised his assessment, and found a significant solar contribution to recent warming, although still smaller (between 16 and 36%) than that of the greenhouse gases.

Maz -

Like dude, you hate women too?

I don’t think you qualify, so what’s your point?

My only point jonny, and thanks for making it for me, is that this isn’t settled science. There is no “consensus” as some would have you believe.

What do Al Gore and I have in common?

We both got our meterological Ph.Ds at the same place.

There will be lawsuits.

hahahahahahahahahah. that’s hilarious.

there are a number of scientists who are questioning some of the worst-case predictions for global warming

If it were science, there wouldn’t be any predictions.

wow…I had no idea that climate porn was so boring. guess it’s back to amputee porn for me.

Maz -

Besides hating both women and the planet, that makes you a gay Exxon stooge…..

there are a number of scientists who are questioning some of the worst-case predictions for global warming, and a smaller number who question how much warming can be attributed to mankind

This is true. Nobody’s claiming there’s no doubt about anything. I’m trying to relate appropriate action to the best information we have. And of the minority that do have issues, they’re probably more legit than “but what about MARS, man?”

If it were science, there wouldn’t be any predictions.
This is why we need better science education. That was one of the more morinic things I’ve ever read.

What do Al Gore and I have in common?
Al Gore is not a scientist, he’s a messanger. The difference between you and him is he knows who to be a messanger for.

Not that there is anything wrong with that….

I’m sure Mpls Simpleton doesn’t hate women. Why do you put up with all this gay bashing on this site, Matt?

Global warming may have fringe benefits to some, but it highly likely to be far more damaging to humanity overall.

Right! Says Whom? The National Resources Defense Council in L.A. (run by left wing celebrities) or your local National Weather Service office.

The difference between you and him is he knows who to be a messanger for.

No, since Gore lives in a huge energy guzzling home and constantly flies around the country on jet airplanes spewing tons of carbon, the difference between us is that I’m not a hypocrite.

I get tired of all the corporate stooges (like Maz – the gay exxon messenger) trying to destroy the planet for profit….

Then lay down and take a nap and rest that overworked brain of yours.

Maz: Am I missing something? You don’t find the prospect of long, onerous and highly expensive lawsuits levied against American companies (if not the American people) a depressing one?

Junebug: Something wrong with being gay or working for Exxon?

AAAAAHHHHHHH! So the left wing profits financially by combating global warming…now i get it. How exactly?

Barbra Streisand is heavily investing in solar panels, and want to discredit honest, hard-working Exxon oil executives? What are you, an idiot?

How does the left-wing profit from this ‘attack’ on global warming? Why don’t you put down your ‘Gays for Big Oil’ magazine Maz, and answer that one…..

HEY! HEY GUYS!

STRAWMAN ARGUMENT! IRRELEVANT DIG ON SOMEONE’S CHARACTER! MAKING UP SOME FACTS!

(WHO AM I? GIVE UP? MAZ!)

Big G: Are NASA a bunch of lefties in your eyes? Let me know if you consider that organization a credible one, and I’ll give you the cites.

you can bet that the United States will be shown to be the bad guy

Nonsense. The U.S. leads the world in environmental breakthroughs. Since Richard Nixon created the EPA 35 years ago, this nation’s air and water have never been cleaner. Our environmental standards and advanced environmental technologies lead the world. China and India are the dirtiest places on earth. People there still burn wood and coal for residential fuel. They use rivers and streams for toilets. They spew tons of particulate from their smokestacks.

Yet we’re the bad guy? I don’t think so.

AAAAAHHHHHHH! So the left wing profits financially by combating global warming…now i get it. How exactly?

D00d, Michael Crichton totally wrote a book about it, that’s why he’s President Bush’s BFF and climate advisor now, even though he’s just an author that never studied anything about climate when he got his PhD in something completely different. But, like, he’s got a PhD so he must be smart and know about everything, right? He wrote the dinosaur book!

Al Gore does more good by flying around to spread the message than he does damage. I wish he didn’t have an energy-spewing house. He’s arguably a hypocrite. But he’s right and he’s been an important part of making people aware of this problem.

Wait, so being cleaner than India and China is cause for celebration?

We have a tiny fraction of their population density, tard. If you compare us to the rest of the developed world we’re a fucking mess. It’s like saying “Hey, I might not be as smart as everyone else, but at least I’m smarter than that kid with FAS!”

We have 5% of the world’s population but 24% of the carbon emission, and we don’t have the excuse of being a manufacturing powerhouse or a developing nation that has fewer alternatives. Maz, this country is the poster child for CO2 emissions.

Republican Rule #1 on arguing: Shoot the messenger.

As many times as you can. Shoot him until his character looks like swiss cheese and then say “his argument holds no water because he’s a bad man!”

Because obviously the the choice in messenger is more important than the actual ideas or facts they’re espousing.

If it were science, there wouldn’t be any predictions.
This is why we need better science education. That was one of the more morinic things I’ve ever read.

Jeff,
My mom is a science teacher.

If we were truly talking about science, we wouldn’t be debating predictions, we’d be doing experiments to verify them. But that can’t really happen with global warming. You can make study the past and make observations and then form a hypothesis, but you can’t prove it to be true what the climate will be in 50, 80, 100 years or more, unless there is some sort of proven scientific calculation I don’t know about that is able to reveal an exact solution based on a set of values in the function. Perhaps this is the secret behind the Valenzetti Equation, which would render Paul Douglass et all irrelevant. Hey, I’m starting to like that angle!

Because that’s really what this is all about, isn’t it? We know X happened, so that means Y will happen unless we Z. Oh, and Z just happens to be our political agenda as well. But nevermind that. Do you want Y? DO YOU WANT Y? Then by God you’d better Z.

Uh huh.

I’ve got some ocean-front property in Arizona I’d like to sell you, too.

Why do you hate america, wayne?

Besides hating both women and the planet, that makes you a gay Exxon stooge…..

Get off the crack Junebug!

I’m fairly certain that straight men hate women to a much greater degree than gay men. When was the last time a woman ended up at the safe house after her gay friend beat her for interrupting the Ice Dancing finals after he drank 10 or 12 Smirnoff Ices?

Has anybody wondered how much of the carbon emissions are caused by airline travel versus auto travel? hmmmm. Maybe we should shut down airline travel!

Mazasapa -

Hate America? You are willing to through it down the gutter for a few bucks. Who are you kidding?

Wow that’s such a great comeback! It’s like you spent hours crafting such a finely tuned response that would cut to the very core of my being with such obvious truth that I could never deny it!

Wait, no.

I wonder if maz considered how much cleaner per persos rail travel is. But somehow we’re still subsidizing and bailing out the airline industry and not rebuilding high-speed rail networks.

Hrum. I wonder who could possibly be opposed to spending money on something like trains … hummm … hrummm …. let me think …

Wayne. Trains have tracks. That limits their use. Get a clue.

I think “junebug” is an attempt by raindog to make a re-entrance into this space. But her writing (lack of) style is betraying her.

So true Mpls Simpleton….

Maz: Unlike a 747, which you can put down right outside your house if you like.

*tch*

Uh, cars drive on highways. That limits their use. Get a clue.

“If it were science, there wouldn’t be any predictions.”

I agree with Jeff. This is a completely idiotic statement. I think you need to take some remedial science classes Kevin.

Science is all about predictions. The whole point of science is to make observations about what is/has happened, and then develop a hypothesis that will predict what WILL happen. If the hypothesis can’t predict what will happen, it’s discarded and a new hypothesis is devised.

My car doesn’t need a highway. But since you don’t have a car, I suppose you’re not expected to know that.

WHERE ARE THE FLYING CARS?

Kevin I want to shake you like an unwanted child right now and explain the realities of modeling to you, but I still don’t think you’d get it. Your mind is too poisoned by working for pols.

kwatt,

If your mom is a science teacher, then she should have taught you science isn’t about proof. The fact that we can’t flawlessly predict the future is incredibly obvious and perfectly useless.

Well maz, I’d like to see you take an off-road trek across the country without using any public infrastructure. Go on! Do it!

Good luck with that, asshat.

When their models can’t predict the past’s weather with 100% accuracy, I’d say they have a problem with their models.

When was the last time a woman ended up at the safe house after her gay friend beat her for interrupting the Ice Dancing finals after he drank 10 or 12 Smirnoff Ices?

Probably never, but now I am ROTFL

Who the hell is ‘raindog’?

Hey Maz, why don’t you go to Iraq and fight for Exxon instead of wasting your time here? Or maybe you like hiding under the bed like Bush and Cheney did during Viet Nam?

When their models can’t predict the past’s weather with 100% accuracy, I’d say they have a problem with their models.

Get a fucking clue and read up on modeling, you dipshit! It doesn’t work that way!

You get a fit that has a certain level of confidence, but it’s never perfect!

Every model has to make some assumptions, otherwise the computational power to run it simply doesn’t exist. We can scale up the complexity as more computing power becomes available, but as it is now the weather and climate are so goddamned complex that they’re still forced to make some assumptions that can screw with the accuracy. Just because you’re not spot-on for numbers, though, doesn’t mean you can’t reliably predict trends. You might be overshooting or undershooting a bit, but you can at least say “it’s very likely going in this direction with this amount of certainty.”

Ugh, call me back when you know jack shit about computational modeling.

No model is going to be 100% accurate. That’s just silly.

The fact that we can’t flawlessly predict the future is incredibly obvious and perfectly useless.

Yet you want to bring this nation’s economy to its knees … just in case. Do yourself a favor jeff … stay in the cocoon that is academia for as long as you can. You wouldn’t like it out here in the real world.

Well if anyone knows anything about advanced computational modeling, it’s apparently not moi, who taught weather modeling with the Cray. No, it’s the cereal man who measures packaging damage tolerances, fer sure. heh.

You have no idea what I actually do, fuckwad, and it’s pretty obvious you’re a long way removed from whatever you may have done ‘back in the day when dinosaurs roamed the earth.’

If you ever had any idea about the concepts behind modeling, you’ve obviously forgotten it. Oh, right, but i’m just a wee pup! In my first job! What do I know! Fresh out of school with all those liberal lies still filling me head about how these sort of things work!

C’mon, do you still remember the Lorenz Equations? Without googling them?

Maz: *grin* Vector-tastic. Nevertheless, in that case you more than most here must be keenly aware of the difference between “flawed” and “good enough” in modeling, not to mention the difference between “meteorology” and “climatology”. And I doubt any model of real-world behavior ever run was 100% accurate. If it were, it wouldn’t be a model, would it?

I would also suggest that the war in Iraq is far more likely to bring the nation’s economy to its knees than the Kyoto protocols, which other countries seem quite able to implement.

Is Maz really accusing the envrionmentally minded of trying to bring the economy to its knees? We’ll guess who’s succeeding at bringing the economy to its knees?

Whatever, doughboy.

Mazasapa -

What the hell are you talking about? You don’t have a clue.

THIS IS THE ONLY PLANET WE HAVE MORON!

If there is even the slightest indication we are causing this, we should stop.

Quit supporting the oil industy!

Way to go Wayne my man!

whatever, senile old man.

Longfeller, it’s useless trying to talk sense into him. If it contradicts his political worldview, he’ll just make shit up and ignore facts until it makes sense to him. Obviously he’s so much smarter and better informed than the rest of us, so he’s just talking down to us anyway. Heh.

Also can we keep in mind what maz actually does? he makes training programs. You don’t have to be an expert in a subject to do that. He never said he actually knew how to do any weather modeling.

Not that it’s anything like climate modeling anyway.

The whole point of science is to make observations about what is/has happened, and then develop a hypothesis that will predict what WILL happen. If the hypothesis can’t predict what will happen, it’s discarded and a new hypothesis is devised.

That’s exactly what I said. Then I went the next step. So let’s see the hypothesis and how you plan to verify it.

“Is Maz really accusing the envrionmentally minded of trying to bring the economy to its knees? We’ll guess who’s succeeding at bringing the economy to its knees?”

And never mind the economic benefits of being the ones that actually develop new environmentally friendly technologies. We’re going to be stuck with antiquated fossil fuel technology and economies. Meanwhile, Germany is now the world’s leader in solar technology, Denmark leads in wind, and France has far more advanced nuclear technology.

To paraphrase, it’s not that my liberals friends are ignorant, it’s just that so much of what they know to be true, isn’t.

That’s funny coming from a man who regularly spews crap forth that is almost immediately disproven with sourced material by others around here.

Actually, isn’t the problem with the current climate models the fact that they are UNDERestimating? All of the data indicates that the climate is warming much faster than we thought.

“That’s exactly what I said. Then I went the next step. So let’s see the hypothesis and how you plan to verify it.”

That’s not what you said. You said “If it were science, there wouldn’t be any predictions.” If you want the hypothesis, all you have to do is pick up any copy of “Science” that has a climate related paper in it, or any one of the many climate related journals.

Obviously, final absolute verification will require us to wait 50-100 years. Until then, as has been stated, we have to rely on compouter modeling, and those models can be verified to various degrees of certainty using past and present climate data.

To paraphrase, it’s not that my conservative friends are ignorant, it’s just that so much of what they know to be true, isn’t.

Boy do I want to be that guy who said “I told you so!” about the end of the world.

What a bittersweet triumph that would be.

That’s not what you said. You said “If it were science, there wouldn’t be any predictions.”

You’re right and I should have articulated more clearly. I didn’t mean to say science doesn’t have predictions. That would be a stupid thing to say. What I meant was what you said at the end plus the results of these models are being held up as reason for all sorts of things that, I think, are quite drastic and not always rooted in what’s best for the planet.

Earth is my favorite planet, by the way.

I’m more of a Venus man, myself.

I always enjoy the “you hate America” argument when all else fails.

I don’t hate America, I hate Americans.

I say heat this baby up!

Does the earth care if it’s warmer?

I think not!

In a million years (A blink of the eye to our 4.5 billion year old mother) she will only fondly remember humans for the nuclear waste we were good enough to collect and deposit in a few places.

Some people think mother earth twitches with pain whenever someone flicks a cigarette butt. I’m not one of those people.

If someone flicks a cigarette butt to the side of a road and DeRusha doesn’t hear it, did it really get flicked?

Maz is just out to destroy the environment because he isn’t in touch with his supposedly native american roots. Yea, I just went there. The true native americans are supposedly all about being in touch with the planet (at least in some tribes) but the character bashing in this thread has boiled down to one thing. Maz is against anything he can’t see with his own eyes. Just because you can’t see it with your cataract-ridden eyes doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. Just try to have an open mind, it’s far less taxing than being a crusty old curmudgeon who shouts down everything that you don’t agree with.

Let us formally welcome Brian to MNSpeak.

Jerry Falwell just died…Maz might be mourning off-line for a few days.

Kwatt, the problem with your “Give me a hypothesis” stand is profound. My hypothesis is: If we burn all the fossil fuels in the earth and put it in the atmosphere all of humanity will die.

Now, let’s test it! Excellent point of view there.

Since the Earth is warming and so is Mars, how are Venus and Mercury doing? Gosh, I would think they would be getting warmer too. After all, they are both closer to the sun. They are not getting warmer? I wonder how significant that is?

Welcome Brian. You know everything you need about Maz. Now, you can go about ignoring him! You’ll be glad you did.

Maz -

My sympathies on Jerry Falwell. The world will miss his keen insight. Like when he blamed 9/11 on homosexuality.

What a dumb ass…good riddens and say hi to Lucifer for me…..

If there is any justice in this world or the next, Jerry Falwell is taking it in the ass from John “The Wad” Holmes right now and for the next 6-7 millennium.

Haheherhehehooo! And sadly, at least evidenced from this dude’s comment, neither does Darwin’s theory of survival of the fittest. Haheheherheh!

Cat: took him/her that long to come up with such a stinging comment!

Why was dude deleted? Are trolls a thing of the past? Boo!

I know I haven’t been around a lot lately, but I think I may be able to come up with a decent burn in less than two-years.

SOTC has the Change Thing going.

Yeah, why was he deleted? Now these follow-up comments make no sense!!!

Has MNspeak?SOTC ever made sense, Jane?

I miss the days of trolls and epic meltdowns though.

*tear*

Please don’t respond to trolls. It just makes that many more comments I have to delete.

Anyone who gets on just to call people fags is going bye-bye.

Fag? An Englishman would wonder why anyone would want to call someone else a cigarette.

Cat, remember morning p*rn? Wait, was that just something we hoped for?

Oh Jane. Don’t remind me of things unrealized.

I was hopeful for morning porn and was amazingly disappointed.