Global Warming General Thread

flalande

Re: Global Warming General Thread

Postby flalande » Tue Oct 06, 2015 7:56 am

Greybear has a sensible way to check clamate changes ; in France we tend to use vinecorp picking time which hes been regulated and decided upon by vintners ...and noted on church records and other places for nearly a thousand years in some places
firs apppearance of various flowers ( lilac among others) has been noted in numerous diaries at least for a hundred years and sometimes more
has any appempt be made to make a table of such recors

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8168
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Global Warming General Thread

Postby Dardedar » Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:06 pm

1998 canard now toast:
"...the famously deceptive 1998 chart doesn't work anymore. I suspect that we're going to see a sudden lack of interest in 1998 charts from the denialists. They'll have to move on to swindling the rubes with something else."
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2 ... ign=buffer

Image
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8168
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Global Warming General Thread

Postby Dardedar » Tue Dec 15, 2015 10:41 pm

National Review puts out a fantastically dishonest climate science denier chart:

Image

One response:
Image

"By setting the upper and lower boundaries of the chart at minus 10 degrees and 100 degrees Fahrenheit -- two extremes that the planet won't have to get anywhere near before the catastrophic effects of climate change become apparent -- National Review and Power Line are essentially zooming so far out on the problem that it's impossible to see.
Here's a chart from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies showing the same information:"
Image

Huff Po
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8168
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Global Warming General Thread

Postby Dardedar » Sun Jan 03, 2016 3:45 pm

It is commonly claimed that 97% of climate scientists accept human caused climate change.
Climate change deniers have always vehemently deny this and it turns out they are right. The 97% number is not correct.
From my latest issue of Skeptical Inquirer.
---
The Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming.
"In 2013-2014, only four of 69,604 publishing climate scientists rejected anthropogenic global warming. The consensus
on anthropogenic global warming is not 97 percent, as is widely claimed; it is above 99.9 percent"
-
"I used the Web of Science to review the titles and abstracts of peer-reviewed articles from 2013 and 2014, adding the search topic "climate change" to "global climate change" and "global warming."
Of 24,210 abstracts, only five--one in 4,842 or 0.021 percent--in my judgement explicitly rejected AGW. Two of the articles had the same author, so four authors of 69,406 AGW. That is one in 17,352, or 0.0058 percent.
This result would allow the claim that 99.99 percent of scientists publishing today accept AGW. To be conservative, I prefer to say above 99.90 percent.
Excluding self-citatons, only one of the five rejecting articles has been cited and that article only once.
Remember that the 99.9 percent figure does not represent what we usually mean by consensus: agreement of opinion. Rather it is derived from the peer-reviewed literature and thus reflects the evidence therein. It tells us that there is virtually no publishable evidence against AGW. That is why scientists accept the theory.
The consensus on AGW is not 97%. Instead, publishing scientists are close to unanimous that "global warming is real, man-made, and dangerous" as President Obama put it."
"Anthropogenic global warming is as much the ruling paradigm of climate science as plate tectonics is of geology and evolution is of biology."
---
James Lawrence Powell is executive director of the National Physical Science Consortium. He has been president of three colleges and of the Franklin Institute and the Lose Angeles County Museum of Natural History. He is also a former member of the National Science Board.
Excerpt from article: "The Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming." Published in Skeptical Inquirer, Nov/Dec 2015, pg 42.
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8168
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Global Warming General Thread

Postby Dardedar » Mon Mar 07, 2016 10:33 pm

"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8168
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Global Warming General Thread

Postby Dardedar » Fri May 20, 2016 7:14 am

"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8168
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Global Warming General Thread

Postby Dardedar » Fri May 12, 2017 8:23 am

For the science deniers too stupid or dishonest to read a thermostat right, we have this:
---
US Glacier national park losing its glaciers with just 26 of 150 left
"Farge said glaciers started to shrink from around 1910 and then entered “rapid and continual” melting from the 1970s onwards. The environmental conditions now experienced in the region are a marked departure from historical norms.

“The glaciers have waxed and waned with different climate fluctuations but this is the first time they are heading for almost certain extinction,” Farge said.

“This is the first time in 7,000 years they’ve experienced this temperature and precipitation. There’s no hope for them to survive. We’d need a major reversal where it would get cooler, not just stop getting warmer. There’s nothing to suggest that will happen.”
The Guardian
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer

User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8168
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Re: Global Warming General Thread

Postby Dardedar » Sat Jun 03, 2017 10:20 am

Re: scientific consensus.

"All... [scientific organizations] concur that AGW is in fact real. Why?
It is not because of the sheer number of scientists. After all, science is not conducted by poll. As Albert Einstein said in response to a 1931 book skeptical of relativity theory entitled 100 Authors against Einstein, “Why 100? If I were wrong, one would have been enough.” The answer is that there is a convergence of evidence from multiple lines of inquiry—pollen, tree rings, ice cores, corals, glacial and polar ice-cap melt, sea-level rise, ecological shifts, carbon dioxide increases, the unprecedented rate of temperature increase—that all converge to a singular conclusion. AGW doubters point to the occasional anomaly in a particular data set, as if one incongruity gainsays all the other lines of evidence. But that is not how consilience science works. For AGW skeptics to overturn the consensus, they would need to find flaws with all the lines of supportive evidence and show a consistent convergence of evidence toward a different theory that explains the data. (Creationists have the same problem overturning evolutionary theory.) This they have not done." --Why Climate Skeptics Are Wrong
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... are-wrong/
"I'm not a skeptic because I want to believe, I'm a skeptic because I want to know." --Michael Shermer


Return to “Science”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest