Commentary #6: Global Warming

[Mark Rippetoe]

I don't know anything about global warming. I understand the basic radiation-based argument; increased atmospheric absorption results in less radiation into space. The system is obviously more complicated than that and the complexities of how the system evolves in these circumstances is something I know absolutely nothing about.

Then learn about it.

So I suggest you all shut the fuck up and flush your wet wipes down the toilet instead of smearing your dumb shit all over the place.

No.

[Yngvi]

Really triggered zft with this one.
Maybe he co-authored the paper that predicted half of Florida's land mass would be under water by 2020.

Our predictions so far have played out; meanwhile, the global warming alarmist predictions have failed to come true time and time again.
It is not difficult in this situation to determine which side is factually correct.

[Jovan Dragisic]

This isn't really a good argument, or even a good-faith argument. Giving big numbers to try and impress upon the reader how inconsequential a little carbon can be isn't a sound argument and you definitely know it's not a sound argument. There are many things that are really small in the presence of things that are really big that can fuck those big things right on up.

I don't know anything about global warming. I understand the basic radiation-based argument; increased atmospheric absorption results in less radiation into space. The system is obviously more complicated than that and the complexities of how the system evolves in these circumstances is something I know absolutely nothing about.

But your retard sycophant posse just replies to this shit with YEAH IT'S NOT REAL---with the same certainty as people who say it is real. You guys are at least just as bad. Just admit you don't understand and you don't know. Because you don't. And even if you did know, you're powerless to change any of it, so who cares. Imagine being so narcissistic that you think that if you buy a Tesla you're well on the path to saving the planet.

So I suggest you all shut the fuck up and flush your wet wipes down the toilet instead of smearing your dumb shit all over the place.

This is needlessly negative. Are you having a bad week or month or something?

[Barry Charles]

But your retard sycophant posse just replies to this shit with YEAH IT'S NOT REAL---with the same certainty as people who say it is real. You guys are at least just as bad. Just admit you don't understand and you don't know. Because you don't.

You would be well served to learn the basic principles of how science works. Determining right or wrong is not a vote (consensus). If one person makes a claim, it’s fair for another person to say “show me”. It is not fair for the person making the claim to demand being proven wrong.

Man made global warming due to increasing man made CO2 is the claim. The show-me part is the forecasting (modeling) matching to future measurements. Since the predictions have been partly to mostly wrong, the claim is partly to mostly wrong also.

And, as someone who does know, despite your insult, I remind people that the effects of global warming theory could be MUCH WORSE than predictions and the theory would still be wrong. (Ironically or nefariously, the theory almost always over-predicts)

[Mark Rippetoe]

Really triggered zft with this one.
Maybe he co-authored the paper that predicted half of Florida's land mass would be under water by 2020.

Our predictions so far have played out; meanwhile, the global warming alarmist predictions have failed to come true time and time again.
It is not difficult in this situation to determine which side is factually correct.

I challenged his Faith. Global warming/anthropogenic climate change is not falsifiable, as actual theories are. It is therefore properly defined as a religion, and only the priests are allowed to discuss it. The rest must merely accept it on Faith. Our friend zft is just a member of the congregation.

[Chiaki Nitya]

Just listened to the recent podcast and the discussion about wind turbines sounded exactly like the discussion I just had with a friend. We were driving somewhere and passed a tractor trailer hauling solar panels, and I said, "You know, obviously I haven't looked into this, but I bet you that the carbon generated from the manufacturing, installation, and maintenance of these solar farms and wind turbines will never be offset by the solar farms and wind turbines themselves."

Obviously this shit isn't cost effective, but based on everything I know about how leftist rackets work, I doubt it's even accomplishing the goal they claim they want (net reduction in carbon emmissions.)

[Mark Rippetoe]

It is widely known that wind turbines do not amortize over their life span, and in the absence of federal tax money they wouldn't exist. Your tax contribution is intended as an Offering at the altar.

[mkm5]

It is widely known that wind turbines do not amortize over their life span, and in the absence of federal tax money they wouldn't exist. Your tax contribution is intended as an Offering at the altar.

Yes, and those wind turbines look like shit when they're pasted across otherwise absolutely beautiful landscapes. Fortunately, the few that were built here have since been removed.

Otherwise, enjoying a nice snowy May 1st here up north!

Oh yeah, and FJB.

[my_back_hurts]

You would be well served to learn the basic principles of how science works. Determining right or wrong is not a vote (consensus). If one person makes a claim, it’s fair for another person to say “show me”. It is not fair for the person making the claim to demand being proven wrong.

Man made global warming due to increasing man made CO2 is the claim. The show-me part is the forecasting (modeling) matching to future measurements. Since the predictions have been partly to mostly wrong, the claim is partly to mostly wrong also.

And, as someone who does know, despite your insult, I remind people that the effects of global warming theory could be MUCH WORSE than predictions and the theory would still be wrong. (Ironically or nefariously, the theory almost always over-predicts)

My favorite conspiracy theory, right up there with coffee denial, is that global warming is WORSE than advertised. Glad to see someone else raise this point. I'm still working on the details but basically if you look at old timey pictures people couldn't possibly dress like that if it was as warm back then a it is now. Think Clint Eastwood wearing 3 layers in southern Spain in the summer. Or pictures of people walking around in suits all the time in the 19th and early 20th centuries (or even further back) - if you read period literature there's no mention of everyone fucking stinking which means it wasn't hot and they weren't sweating all day. I'm saying there's been 30 to 40 degrees of warming in the past 150 years, not 3 to 4.

[IlPrincipeBrutto]

There were several periods of global glaciation during the Silurian and Devonian when the atmospheric CO2 was 5-6000 ppm.

I realise this is very late in the day, but would you have a reference for this?
Thanks in advance,

IPB