Teenager Thunberg angrily tells U.N. climate summit 'you have stolen my dreams'

[brokenbone]

1 hour ago, DrTuner said:

Actually world would look pretty nice if the ice age ended: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/09/rising-seas-ice-melt-new-shoreline-maps/

 

I'd be living on a large island off the coast of Thailand. Bring it on!

but besides co2 not driving temperature,

we wont be seeing an average 'of perhaps 26 degree c' either.

the planets natural state is actually without any ice at all,

with an average of just below 20 degree c, but the core of the earth has cooled,

todays average is 14.5 degree c, if and when we come out of the long ice age,

it will likely resume at around 18 degree c.

if you look at it, this cold period has been dragging on longer then is typical,

but before that finally happens, we will drop into another umpteen

ice ages within the long ice age that has now been dragging on for 25/1.65 million years, depending on severity.

on this large scale, there is no correlation at all between temperature & co2,

and over short time periods, there is no correlation either,

for some reason, you can only see a correlation with the milankovitch cycles

that pulses every 20k-100k years, the ice ages within the big ice age

 

[DrTuner]

29 minutes ago, brokenbone said:

for some reason, you can only see a correlation with the milankovitch cycles

that pulses every 100.000 years

First time I saw the long term CO2 & temp graphs I started thinking a-ha, that's where the planet got green and sucked the carbons out, that's where it died out and rotted.. no idea if vegetation correlates with those cycles. Given photosynthesis needs energy, probably yes. 

 

Here's some proof of that:

[Scott]

Post with trolling memes removed.   It's a discussion forum; not a comic book.  

 

[brokenbone]

NASA testify before congress on climate

https://www.youtube.com/user/TonyHeller1/videos?view=0&sort=dd&shelf_id=1

 

[rabas]

22 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

Arguing with a climate denier is like playing chess with a pigeon.......... they knock over the piece, poop all over the table and then claim they've "won".

 

Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts. . . you MUST doubt the experts.

 

[Airbagwill]

1 minute ago, rabas said:

 

Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts. . . you MUST doubt the experts.

 

I suspect you don't understand the basics of Skepticality and critical thinking - it is a thing, you know.

[rabas]

1 minute ago, Airbagwill said:

3 minutes ago, rabas said:

 

Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts. . . you MUST doubt the experts.

 

I suspect you don't understand the basics of Skepticality and critical thinking - it is a thing, you know.

Oh, sorry. I forgot the attribution.

 

Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts. . . you MUST doubt the experts. —Richard Feynman

 

One of the finest scientific minds of our times, on the same level as Albert Einstein. In case you don't know...

[Airbagwill]

19 minutes ago, rabas said:

Oh, sorry. I forgot the attribution.

 

Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts. . . you MUST doubt the experts. —Richard Feynman

 

One of the finest scientific minds of our times, on the same level as Albert Einstein. In case you don't know...

As I said you are clearly incapable of critical thinking as you fail to understand the quote you have posted. You think also that science is some hierarchical league table that allows you to cherrypick quotes without understanding the context.

To understand the context you need to understand SKEPICALITY which is the basic nature of science - ytthis is quite different from DENIAL or GAINSAYING the 2 favourite tools of climate deniers. Science is always changing and checking itself but trying to say that change is not happening is the deniers" way.

[Airbagwill]

People don't seem to understand that in times of ultra high CO2 or oxygen - e.g. permian times the flora nd aunt was quite different - no humans lived then of could have lived..... giant insects could due to high oxygen levels.......but all this is known to climate science and is taken into account which is why we are now certain that the current changes in climate are man made.

[rabas]

12 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

As I said you are clearly incapable of critical thinking as you fail to understand the quote you have posted. You think also that science is some hierarchical league table that allows you to cherrypick quotes without understanding the context.

I suspect you have little understanding of what real science is, which is why you don't understand the quote.  I am a real research scientist, long career.

 

I say this because the real role of science is absolutely critical to the future of climate science and to the future well being of mankind. Everyone needs to understand this. It is not the media circus that Greta's followers see.

 

[RideJocky]

As I said you are clearly incapable of critical thinking as you fail to understand the quote you have posted. You think also that science is some hierarchical league table that allows you to cherrypick quotes without understanding the context.

Why don’t explain the meaning of the quote for all of us.

[Scott]

Troll post reported and removed.  

 

[rabas]

Another Richard Feynman quote relevant to today's problems particularly climate science:

 

"I think we live in an unscientific age in which almost all the buffeting of communications and television--words, books, and so on--are unscientific. As a result, there is a considerable amount of intellectual tyranny in the name of science." --Richard Feynman

 

And this was 50 years ago! I suspect he would turnover in his grave if he saw the internet.

 

[overherebc]

Last nights UK news saying she has just had a beetle named in her honour.

[Crazy Alex]

5 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

People don't seem to understand that in times of ultra high CO2 or oxygen - e.g. permian times the flora nd aunt was quite different - no humans lived then of could have lived..... giant insects could due to high oxygen levels.......but all this is known to climate science and is taken into account which is why we are now certain that the current changes in climate are man made.

Actually, even NASA is not "certain" (emphasis added):

 

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals¹ show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

 

From a scientific standpoint, "extremely likely" isn't certain at all. Can you imagine NASA putting men into rockets and sending them to outer space if it were "extremely likely" the rocket fuel was in fact rocket fuel in those rockets? Water is H20. That is scientific certainty.

 

[Crazy Alex]

5 hours ago, Airbagwill said:

As I said you are clearly incapable of critical thinking as you fail to understand the quote you have posted. You think also that science is some hierarchical league table that allows you to cherrypick quotes without understanding the context.

To understand the context you need to understand SKEPICALITY which is the basic nature of science - ytthis is quite different from DENIAL or GAINSAYING the 2 favourite tools of climate deniers. Science is always changing and checking itself but trying to say that change is not happening is the deniers" way.

I don't know of anyone who questions climate science who claims change within the scientific community isn't happening. It's the direction of that change that we take issue with. This is precisely why this topic is so thoroughly debated. Greta Thunberg's rant isn't science at all. It's propaganda and unfortunately represents the direction "science" has taken in recent years. The "science" has become political activism, propaganda and coercion. Actual science doesn't engage in such tactics.

[Airbagwill]

45 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

I don't know of anyone who questions climate science who claims change within the scientific community isn't happening. It's the direction of that change that we take issue with. This is precisely why this topic is so thoroughly debated. Greta Thunberg's rant isn't science at all. It's propaganda and unfortunately represents the direction "science" has taken in recent years. The "science" has become political activism, propaganda and coercion. Actual science doesn't engage in such tactics.

...and you've totally let my point unanswered.

[Crazy Alex]

2 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

...and you've totally let my point unanswered.

Sir, I answered a portion of your post I found disagreement with. And given you started your point with a personal attack, I feel I was and continue to quite generous and civil.

[rabas]

18 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

22 minutes ago, Airbagwill said:

...and you've totally let my point unanswered.

Sir, I answered a portion of your post I found disagreement with. And given you started your point with a personal attack, I feel I was and continue to quite generous and civil.

 

@Airbagwill. Your post was addressed to me. I gave you a clear, polite, and succinct answer in my post 2279. It was an important answer. Please read it. Thank-you. 

 

 

[RideJocky]

 
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals¹ show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree...
 

Yes, everyone that makes a living publishing climate change papers agrees....

[CharlieH]

Reported post removed. Please do not post entire articles such as a 199 point list. A few line summary and a link to the original is all that is required. Posts of excessive length will be removed.

 

Edit:  Numerous propaganda videos removed.  

--Scott

[Credo]

Here's a little update on her:

 

Greta Thunberg Issues Rallying Cry Against Facebook Over Lies, Death Threats

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/greta-thunberg-facebook-threats_n_5db2ebace4b0a8937403632c?fbclid=IwAR3UMupeUAqK2OZMYywqsjS1PsmQsA3Dxv_OGfXTMmsVO3tI0n4bYaqhoVA

[Crazy Alex]

6 hours ago, Credo said:

Here's a little update on her:

 

Greta Thunberg Issues Rallying Cry Against Facebook Over Lies, Death Threats

 

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/greta-thunberg-facebook-threats_n_5db2ebace4b0a8937403632c?fbclid=IwAR3UMupeUAqK2OZMYywqsjS1PsmQsA3Dxv_OGfXTMmsVO3tI0n4bYaqhoVA

So Facebook is lying about her and sending her death threats? I find that incredibly difficult to believe. I'm fascinated as to why so many people blame someone, anyone other than the perpetrators for malfeasance.

[RideJocky]

“In the USSR, we know the future, it’s that past that keeps changing.”


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Scott]

Posts violating Fair Use Policy and replies removed.    Continuing to post screen shots and memes that violate that policy will earn suspensions.   It's a discussion forum, not a comic book.

 

[canuckamuck]

 Climate scientist says our climate models are Mickey Mouse Mockeries of the real world.

Link

Quote

Dr. Mototaka Nakamura received a Doctorate of Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and for nearly 25 years specialized in abnormal weather and climate change at prestigious institutions that included MIT, Georgia Institute of Technology, NASA, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, JAMSTEC and Duke University.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 10/26/2019 at 2:57 PM, Airbagwill said:

As I said you are clearly incapable of critical thinking as you fail to understand the quote you have posted. You think also that science is some hierarchical league table that allows you to cherrypick quotes without understanding the context.

To understand the context you need to understand SKEPICALITY which is the basic nature of science - ytthis is quite different from DENIAL or GAINSAYING the 2 favourite tools of climate deniers. Science is always changing and checking itself but trying to say that change is not happening is the deniers" way.

You keep mentioning "deniers". What do you mean by that?

Exactly what are we denying?

Climate change- no, anyone with a brain cell knows climate changes. Always has, always will.

Global warming- didn't they change that to climate change because the world wasn't actually getting much warmer?

[thaibeachlovers]

On 10/26/2019 at 2:24 AM, DrTuner said:

Ah. I guess they didn't play with the melting ice as kids. Was every spring up north. It's sticky and slushy.

Nothing to do with melting. The theory is that the ice sheets break off, float northwards and melt when they reach warmer seas. Australia might actually like that to happen, as they could then irrigate the entire country if an ice sheet washed up on Australian shores.

If it happened, it would actually raise sea levels ( depending on how big a bit broke off ) as it's not sea ice, but ice flowing outward from the continent.

Will it happen? Perhaps, but a big comet might hit the planet too. <deleted> happens.

[DrTuner]

7 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

 Climate scientist says our climate models are Mickey Mouse Mockeries of the real world.

MIT would be one of the places where they understand computer models and automation. No wonder they are pointing the flaws out.

 

I like his take on it, seems legit:

Quote

Today’s ‘global warming science’ is akin to an upside down pyramid which is built on the work of a few climate modelers. These AGW pioneers claim to have demonstrated human-derived CO2 emissions as the cause of recently rising temperatures and have then simply projected that warming forward. Every climate researcher thereafter has taken the results of these original models as a given, and we’re even at the stage now where merely testing their validity is regarded as heresy.

 

[Sujo]

And yet its already settled science with a consensus that man made pollutants are contributing.