HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
<<  <  Page 41/54  >  >>
jeffbiss
User Rank
Gold
Re: CO2 is a minor constituent of Greenhouse gases
jeffbiss   2/8/2012 4:05:46 PM
NO RATINGS
Ivan Kirkpatrick,

Do yourself a favor and read up on water vapor. The fact is that while water vapor is an important greenhouse gas, it's a feedback and not a forcing.

Once that fact is understood by the denier community, maybe we can have genuine discussion.

Non-mag
User Rank
Silver
Re: CO2 is a minor constituent of Greenhouse gases
Non-mag   2/8/2012 3:58:09 PM
NO RATINGS
Ivan,

Your post is such an Inconvenient Truth. Be prepared for incessant badgering and ridicule for your comments. The GW crowd (at least the militant faction of it) doesn't seem to understand that they shoot themselves in the foot by their "holier than thou" attitude.

Personally, I feel this is an important topic and action should be taken in measured, rational way. The problem is dealing with people who adopt a cause and then look at enough websites to make themselves "experts".

Cassiopeia
User Rank
Silver
Re: CO2 is a minor constituent of Greenhouse gases
Cassiopeia   2/8/2012 3:36:33 PM
NO RATINGS
This is only 34 in the charts are we going to have to go through all of the 173 myths, are you going to be bothered to read them?

  http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
34 Water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas"
Rising CO2 increases atmospheric water vapor, which makes global warming much worse.


Ivan Kirkpatrick
User Rank
Platinum
CO2 is a minor constituent of Greenhouse gases
Ivan Kirkpatrick   2/8/2012 3:15:25 PM
NO RATINGS
By far the most significant contributor to the greenhouse effect is water vapor.  CO2  makes up a very minor portion of the total effect.  A few percent at best.

Once that fact is recognized one has to look elsewhere for the causes of "climate change".

jeffbiss
User Rank
Gold
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
jeffbiss   2/8/2012 2:06:15 PM
NO RATINGS
Watashi,

Working engineers don't respect scientists? Wow.

What worthless and misguided research did you see? Where's the evidence? Why do you insist on making claims without any supporting evidence?

Have you ever contacted any othe climatologists with your "concerns"? Where can we read these, in what journal? Where is your work that refutes what they've shown? for example, you're claiming that their hard science isn't straight forward, so where have you found them wrong? Post your work that explains why you lost respect for climatologists.

Where have you seen that the process is "hostile" to outsiders? Where's the evidence?

Where is this data that supports your claim that there is raw data indicating that solar activity is heating all planets? I suggest that you read Global warming on Mars?.

Also, please explain your hypothesis and support it that global warming occurs while the sun was at an extended solar minimum (as posted previously). You'll find hany graphs to use for your correlation at the links provided.

We're waiting!

Watashi
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Global warming: are the skeptics correct?
Watashi   2/8/2012 12:04:40 PM
NO RATINGS

I will go look at those sites, albeit with my "skeptical" eye.  I found your declaration at the end very honorable, and I respect you for it.

My problem, and I think many others on my side, is that we don't respect climatologists.  Academic resumes are not nearly as impressive to working engineers as they are to other academics and policy makers.  Many of us saw a great deal of worthless and misguided research during our time in school and realize that just because a PhD or two have been part of it doesn't make it right.  Especially in a field where the application of 'hard' science is not necessarily strait forward. 

From a skeptic point of view it is sort of a 'perfect storm' in which the credibility of the source is questionable, the methodologies are suspect, the claims are over sensationalized, and all findings must be accepted without question or you will be branded a heretic.  It is not that all of those climate researchers are incompetent or even wrong in their findings.  But one cannot even question their methods, findings, or conclusions.  The climate "scientific" process is the only one I know of that is not just closed, but openly hostile to outsiders.

Like I stated in a previous post, I have seen raw data pointing to planetary heating and cooling cycles, solar-system wide (Earth, Mars, and, I think, Venus), correlating to solar activity.  I found the collection methods credible and pretty much made up my mind there then went on about my business.  The data available from "climatologists" back then did not come from actual measurements, but extrapolations and/or 'modeled' data, which is simply ludicrous, scientifically.  When respect is lost, it is very hard to earn back.


 

jeffbiss
User Rank
Gold
Re: How about a timeout here?
jeffbiss   2/8/2012 11:14:26 AM
fatmanonabicycle,

So, the global warming industry is comprised of those who accept the strong scientifically derived evidence that human behavior has a negative affect and so develop and implement policies to mitigate that effect?

As for the "lie", see the discussion at The IPCC is not infallible (shock!). You really should do a little research on your own before you perpetuate right-wing talking points. Is this how you "engineer", not researching anything?

As for the emails, there's nothing there as nothing in the science that they performed has been refuted nor has any manipulation been shown.

Is this all you have? Where're the published refutations? Where's the evidence of wrong-doing? All I see are unsubstantiated allegations, which is easy to do and the modus operandi of the denier community.

jeffbiss
User Rank
Gold
Re: The Endless Dither
jeffbiss   2/8/2012 10:14:38 AM
NO RATINGS
Charles,

What's your point?

Glenn Tamblyn
User Rank
Silver
Re: How about a timeout here?
Glenn Tamblyn   2/8/2012 2:52:11 AM
NO RATINGS
So are you referring to the typo over declines in the glaciers of the West Himalaya - 2350 vs 2035? Or are you referring to the World Glacier Monitoring Service reporting declines in 80% of the worlds glaciers?

fatmanonabicycle
User Rank
Silver
Re: How about a timeout here?
fatmanonabicycle   2/8/2012 2:20:22 AM
My word. Can you see the rest of us from that high horse of yours? Self-righteous indignation is always a sign of groups that have lots to hide or no case to make, so thanks. LOL.

By global warming industry, I meen the loose agglomeration of people who, now the politicians have largely bought in on the grounds that it gives them extra control and excuses to raise taxes, can make a comfy living. Starting from the international climate change committee, working down to lots of QUANGOs (UK), University departments, people developing electric and hydrogen car technology when there is not the corresponding thrust to generate green electricity to power them and make them relevant. All those wonderful conferences. The list is long, and it's loose, but far more coherent than the old "military-industrial complex" we used to hear about.

To the examples- the blatant lie in the ICCC report exaggerating the erosion of glaciers. The chain of hacked e-mails from the English "University" demonstrating the suppression, selctuive publication and manipulation of evidence-read them, they're on the net. As an aside, in line with my obligations as a professional engineer, I have removed my name from reports for less. Finally, one I'm trying to make further headyway on understanding, the accusation that a positive trend was deliberately added into sea level data to give it a trend where there was none otherwise.

Reading your reponse makes the sceptics' case easier, and as I said, I'm not making a claim either way; when I support a cause, as I support the green actions we need to take here, I am always upset by dishonesty on the side of the cause.

 

 

<<  <  Page 41/54  >  >>


Partner Zone
Latest Analysis
The damage to Sony from the cyber attack seems to have been heightened by failure to follow two basic security rules.
Voting in Round 4 of our annual Gadget Freak of the Year contest is now open.
Reshoring is picking up steam, but it's not outpacing the overall continuing growth in outsourcing.
Here's a variety of views into the complex production processes at Santa's factory. Happy Holidays!
The Beam Store from Suitable Technologies is managed by remote workers from places as diverse as New York and Sydney, Australia. Employees attend to store visitors through Beam Smart Presence Systems (SPSs) from the company. The systems combine mobility and video conferencing and allow people to communicate directly from a remote location via a screen as well as move around as if they are actually in the room.
More:Blogs|News
Design News Webinar Series
12/11/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
12/10/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
11/19/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
11/6/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  67


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service