Remember me
▼ Content

What if everything alarmist say is true.



Page 1 of 212>
What if everything alarmist say is true.30-01-2020 15:24
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
I'm a skeptic of catastrophic global warming. But after years of debates that don't change anyone's mind, I've approached alarmists with the question; what if everything you believe is true. Then what?

What is your solution? What must we do to save the planet? Their answers are telling. They suggest we do just enough to harm the poor and crush the economy, but not enough to alter the climate. If these climate alarmists were on the Titanic, after it hit the iceberg, they would be screaming at passengers, telling them to grab a bucket and start bailing water, knowing the outcome would be that the ship was still going to sink.

Should the U.S. quit mining coal while China burns more coal than every other nation combined? China is also expecting to manufacture close to 30,000,000 automobiles, 99% of which run on fossil fuels. India is also rapidly expanding their use of fossil fuels, building thousands of miles of new highways and adding more and more cars and trucks to those roads. Developing nations demand the same standard of living as people in the U.S. have had for generations and they know energy production is the key, primarily using fossil fuels.

The U.N. is selling a scheme to redistribute wealth and using bad climate science to generate fear, in hopes of gaining support. The imagined existential threat cannot be mitigated, don't allow politicians an opportunity to reach down into our pockets and rob us so they can address income inequality.
30-01-2020 15:31
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
Jethro Bodine wrote:
...; what if everything you believe is true. Then what? ...

That's a really good question I don't hear much.

Are you a fan of Bjørn Lomborg?
30-01-2020 16:05
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
Are you a fan of Bjørn Lomborg?

Sure, but when confronting alarmists, they tend to dismiss someone with the title; economist.

When alarmists use vague terms like saying they trust the experts, I suggest they actually go find an expert, preferably someone we can all agree is one of the smartest people on the planet, like Freeman Dyson;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=JTSxubKfTBU&feature=emb_logo
30-01-2020 16:07
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
Jethro Bodine wrote:I'm a skeptic of catastrophic global warming.

But you're a huge fan of vanilla Global Warming.

Aside from the doctrine of "the inevitable climate catastrophe" ... how does your version of Global Warming differ?


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
30-01-2020 16:22
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
I'm not sure what vanilla global warming is. Does it look like this;

https://chiefio.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/dbstealeyco2vst.png?w=640

New to this site. Is there a way to post this graph so it shows up, rather than a link to it? I tried using the image feature and it didn't work.
Edited on 30-01-2020 16:25
30-01-2020 16:30
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
Jethro Bodine wrote:I'm not sure what vanilla global warming is.

Do you believe in "Greenhouse Effect"?

Jethro Bodine wrote:New to this site. Is there a way to post this graph so it shows up, rather than a link to it? I tried using the image feature and it didn't work.





Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
30-01-2020 17:03
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
You didn't explain what you meant by vanilla warming and you didn't explain how to make the image appear. Adding an attachment results in "no file selected". Same thing happened when I attempted to add an avatar.

OK. I guess one of the images appeared.

I believe the planet is warming slightly. I suspect the planet warms coming out of an ice age and it cools as it descends into an ice age. The current warming seems to be within natural variability, and it does not seem to be global.

My turn to quiz you: Approximately what is the temperature of the visible surface of the sun, in Kelvins?

https://www.americanthinker.com/legacy_assets/articles/old_root/%232%20SourcesGreenHouseGas.gif



http://www.heinzlycklama.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/total-percentage-of-greenhouse-gases1.jpg


Edited on 30-01-2020 17:06
30-01-2020 17:34
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
Jethro Bodine wrote:You didn't explain what you meant by vanilla warming

I did. I asked if you believe in Greenhouse Effect.

Jethro Bodine wrote:OK. I guess one of the images appeared.

You can always click on the "quote" button of anyone's post to see what he did to get something to work.

Jethro Bodine wrote: I believe the planet is warming slightly.

Why do you believe this? No one has presented you any science indicating an increase in the earth's average global temperature.

Jethro Bodine wrote: I suspect the planet warms coming out of an ice age and it cools as it descends into an ice age.

The question has to do with what is happening right now. Why do you believe what you believe?

Jethro Bodine wrote: The current warming seems to be within natural variability, and it does not seem to be global.

How did you arrive at the conclusion that there is current warming?

Jethro Bodine wrote:
My turn to quiz you: Approximately what is the temperature of the visible surface of the sun, in Kelvins?

That is a trick question. There is no visible surface.



.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
30-01-2020 18:08
Third world guy
★☆☆☆☆
(73)
Jethro:

Please do not let the moron named IBDaMan (or his clone Into the Night) make you leave the forum. Me and many others think just like you.

This guy is annoying everyone and destroys all the threads. He doesn't allow anyone to expose their ideas.

Since I look at this forum, dozens of people come in, and get disappointed and leave it. It seems that this is the goal of IBDaMan.

I am reading you with interest, but please do not get involved in defending yourself against a troll. Keep contributing.


There are three kinds of climate change: that generated by natural factors; that generated by man; and that generated by economic interests.
30-01-2020 18:15
Third world guy
★☆☆☆☆
(73)
Jethro:

I just read your contribution about Freeman Dyson and his biography.

I differ from him in that global warming is anthropogenic, but otherwise he seems very located. I also think that the IPCC is biased and manages hidden interests.

My interest in this forum is not to get involved in politics or alarmism, but to understand the reality of what is happening with the climate.

Again: do not be disappointed at this site and keep contributing.


There are three kinds of climate change: that generated by natural factors; that generated by man; and that generated by economic interests.
30-01-2020 18:36
gfm7175Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(313)
Third world guy wrote:
Jethro:

Please do not let the moron named IBDaMan (or his clone Into the Night) make you leave the forum. Me and many others think just like you.

They cannot make you leave the forum.

Third world guy wrote:
This guy is annoying everyone

Nah, just the people who can't support their positions. He doesn't annoy me any. In fact, I think he's a cool dude.

Third world guy wrote:
and destroys all the threads.

How is he "destroying" threads?

Third world guy wrote:
He doesn't allow anyone to expose their ideas.

...yet here you are exposing your ideas... hmmmmmm...

Third world guy wrote:
Since I look at this forum, dozens of people come in, and get disappointed and leave it.

That's on them. They can do whatever they wish.

Third world guy wrote:
It seems that this is the goal of IBDaMan.

Nah, he just seems to want to correct the misinformation that people spout off without knowing what they are talking about.

Third world guy wrote:
I am reading you with interest, but please do not get involved in defending yourself against a troll. Keep contributing.

Not what a troll is.
30-01-2020 18:36
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
@ Jethro,

Ignore Third world guy. He's here to scam you into a wacky cult. You'll notice that he isn't interested in engaging you in any discussion. He will try to tell you that people who would warn you about him can block you from posting.

Third world guy wrote: . He doesn't allow anyone to expose their ideas.

Obviously you are welcome here and the majority of posters here will be happy to discuss your ideas.

Always be wary of scammers who complain about people asking questions.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
30-01-2020 18:43
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
I'm not a mind reader. I was not able to know that vanilla warming means do I believe in the greenhouse effect.

How do you know who has or hasn't presented me with science showing a slight warming of the planet? I am not a climate scientist, are you? Judith Curry is one and she can explain why she feels there is some warming going on. Freeman Dyson is one of the smartest humans on our planet as well as a brilliant scientist who has studied climate change since the 1970's. He states the science shows some warming, but not global, and some sea level rise.

Here are some quotes from skeptical climate scientists who seem to accept there is some warming, but it is not catastrophic. Are you suggesting they are wrong?

"I'm sure the majority (but not all) of my IPCC colleagues cringe when I say this, but I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see." - John R. Christy

"A number of studies point to sources other than greenhouse gases as explanations for the modest warming trend of the late 20th century." - Patrick J. Michaels

"Given that the evidence strongly implies that anthropogenic warming has been greatly exaggerated, the basis for alarm due to such warming is similarly diminished." - Richard S. Lindzen

"As a climate researcher, I am increasingly convinced that most of our recent global warming has been natural, not manmade." - Roy W. Spencer

"We see no evidence in the climate record that the increase in CO2, which is real, has any appreciable effect on the global temperature." - S. Fred Singer

_____________________________________________________________

Right now, we are in an interglacial period. An interglacial period is a geological interval of warmer global average temperature lasting thousands of years that separates consecutive glacial periods within an ice age.

Do you believe we are in an interglacial period of warming?


How did you arrive at the conclusion that there is current warming?


There are alarmist scientists and there are scientists skeptical of alarm. I have read research from both sides and put my trust in the skeptical scientists who say there is some warming going on. If you believe there is no warming going on, how did you come to that conclusion?

My quiz was not a trick question. The sun does have a visible surface. The photosphere's average temperature is 5800kelvin. Part 2 of the quiz is; as you travel away from the visible surface of the sun (photosphere) to the corona, does the temperature fall in accordance to the second law of thermodynamics?

I'm new here. As a skeptic of AGW or CAGW, I have been banned from sites moderated mostly be alarmists. I'm testing the waters here. It seems like a very small group of people discussing this topic. You seem to be one of 5 or 6 people who have much interest. If you were to visit WUWT.com you'd see they have over 417 million hits. There are dozens of sites that are popular for people interested in this topic. Social media sites like this one can attract people with some knowledge or no knowledge of the subject. It can also attract people who are certain they alone know the whole truth, yet they chose to set up shop at this site rather than a site full of well educated people who do actual climate research. You get my point. Social media is often a cesspool of angry people venting on others they determine are their enemies. I'm guessing you fall into a category of people who want to display erudition. You are a skeptic of the alarmist views. So am I. But you also rely on information you have read some place to help you form your opinions. Where do you turn for reliable climate information? Name a few climate scientists that you trust.

After my last comment, I now have 5 total comments, making me the 199th ranked person posting comments here. I'm curious why this site shows up on a search when it appears to be viewed and used by so few people.
Edited on 30-01-2020 18:45
30-01-2020 19:12
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
Jethro Bodine wrote: How do you know who has or hasn't presented me with science showing a slight warming of the planet?

Because there isn't any.

Jethro Bodine wrote: I am not a climate scientist, are you?

There is no branch of science "climate science."

Jethro Bodine wrote: Judith Curry is one and she can explain why she feels there is some warming going on. Freeman Dyson is one of the smartest humans on our planet as well as a brilliant scientist who has studied climate change since the 1970's.

... but you have never heard either of them being cross-examined by someone like me. If you will bring either of them to this site to participate in discussion here I'll be happy to pick them apart for you.

Jethro Bodine wrote: He states the science shows some warming, but not global, and some sea level rise.

... but he didn't show you this supposed "science," especially not in front of someone like me who would call him on his BS.

Jethro Bodine wrote: Here are some quotes from skeptical climate scientists who seem to accept there is some warming,

I really don't care what any political activists claim about what science says. I only care what science says.

But that's just me.

Jethro Bodine wrote: Are you suggesting they are wrong?

They might be correct. They might be mistaken. They have no science to support their positions. They have no valid datsets to support their conclusions.

Jethro Bodine wrote: Do you believe we are in an interglacial period of warming?

I see no reason to believe that. Do you?

Jethro Bodine wrote: There are alarmist scientists and there are scientists skeptical of alarm.

... and none of the above beliefs have any sort of rational basis, i.e. they are not based on science.


Jethro Bodine wrote:I have read research from both sides

There are more sides than those two.

Jethro Bodine wrote: and put my trust in the skeptical scientists who say there is some warming going on.

I submit that you shouldn't be trusting anyone on what science does or does not say. You should find out what the science says for yourself.

NOBODY's opinion matters when it comes to science.

Jethro Bodine wrote: If you believe there is no warming going on, how did you come to that conclusion?

I do not affirmatively believe that there is no warming. I simply do not know, and there is certainly no "warming" that I can perceive and there is no science supporting such a position, therefore I have no reason to believe such.

Jethro Bodine wrote:My quiz was not a trick question. The sun does have a visible surface.

Then you are mistaken. The sun does not have a any surface. Ergo, the sun has no visible surface.

Jethro Bodine wrote: I'm new here. As a skeptic of AGW or CAGW, I have been banned from sites moderated mostly be alarmists.

You won't be banned here; all views are welcome. Just don't try to silence anyone else's

Jethro Bodine wrote: You seem to be one of 5 or 6 people who have much interest.

I like discussing science.

Jethro Bodine wrote: If you were to visit WUWT.com you'd see they have over 417 million hits.

I typically dismiss that site. They don't have too many people who know what they are talking about.


Jethro Bodine wrote: Name a few climate scientists that you trust.

None. I go directly to science. If I could I'd eat one climate scientist per day before lunch.

Jethro Bodine wrote: I'm curious why this site shows up on a search when it appears to be viewed and used by so few people.

I know, right? Why does the internet even allow such sites to exist?


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
30-01-2020 19:41
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1642)
Nothing lasts forever, it's a dynamic world we live on. Nothing lives forever either, everything will one day die. Some species go extinct. Can't save everyone, or everything. We have no control over it, but we are pretty good at figuring out how to adapt to a hostile environment, which should continue to be focus, rather than wasting time and resources fighting phantoms. There is more to life, that sitting in an IPCC computer lab, playing a simulation video game. Which is essentially, all there is to climate 'science'. This is actually our first inter-glacial period, we could do measurements and observe. We don't know what is normal, so how can we know if the changes are catastrophic? We do suspect, that an ice age will eventually follow the inter-glacial period. Seems to me, that warming, would mean, it'll take longer to cool and freeze. Most everyone, and everything, prefer the warmer climate. Plants do incredibly well in a warmer climate, and much higher level of CO2. More plants, more food...
30-01-2020 20:13
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Nothing lasts forever, it's a dynamic world we live on. Nothing lives forever either, everything will one day die.

All we are ... is dust in the wind, dude. - Ted


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
30-01-2020 20:45
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11285)
Third world guy wrote:
Jethro:

Please do not let the moron named IBDaMan (or his clone Into the Night) make you leave the forum. Me and many others think just like you.
Neither me nor IBDaMann have the capability to make anyone leave the forum.
Third world guy wrote:
This guy is annoying everyone and destroys all the threads. He doesn't allow anyone to expose their ideas.
Neither me nor IBDaMann have the capability to prevent you from posting.
Third world guy wrote:
Since I look at this forum, dozens of people come in, and get disappointed and leave it. It seems that this is the goal of IBDaMan.
Neither of us can make anyone leave.
Third world guy wrote:
I am reading you with interest, but please do not get involved in defending yourself against a troll. Keep contributing.

Yet another lame insult fallacy (YALIF).


The Parrot Killer
30-01-2020 21:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11285)
Jethro Bodine wrote:
I'm not a mind reader. I was not able to know that vanilla warming means do I believe in the greenhouse effect.

How do you know who has or hasn't presented me with science showing a slight warming of the planet? I am not a climate scientist, are you? Judith Curry is one and she can explain why she feels there is some warming going on. Freeman Dyson is one of the smartest humans on our planet as well as a brilliant scientist who has studied climate change since the 1970's. He states the science shows some warming, but not global, and some sea level rise.

Here are some quotes from skeptical climate scientists who seem to accept there is some warming, but it is not catastrophic. Are you suggesting they are wrong?

"I'm sure the majority (but not all) of my IPCC colleagues cringe when I say this, but I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see." - John R. Christy

"A number of studies point to sources other than greenhouse gases as explanations for the modest warming trend of the late 20th century." - Patrick J. Michaels

"Given that the evidence strongly implies that anthropogenic warming has been greatly exaggerated, the basis for alarm due to such warming is similarly diminished." - Richard S. Lindzen

"As a climate researcher, I am increasingly convinced that most of our recent global warming has been natural, not manmade." - Roy W. Spencer

"We see no evidence in the climate record that the increase in CO2, which is real, has any appreciable effect on the global temperature." - S. Fred Singer

_____________________________________________________________

Right now, we are in an interglacial period. An interglacial period is a geological interval of warmer global average temperature lasting thousands of years that separates consecutive glacial periods within an ice age.

Do you believe we are in an interglacial period of warming?


How did you arrive at the conclusion that there is current warming?


There are alarmist scientists and there are scientists skeptical of alarm. I have read research from both sides and put my trust in the skeptical scientists who say there is some warming going on. If you believe there is no warming going on, how did you come to that conclusion?

My quiz was not a trick question. The sun does have a visible surface. The photosphere's average temperature is 5800kelvin. Part 2 of the quiz is; as you travel away from the visible surface of the sun (photosphere) to the corona, does the temperature fall in accordance to the second law of thermodynamics?

I'm new here. As a skeptic of AGW or CAGW, I have been banned from sites moderated mostly be alarmists. I'm testing the waters here. It seems like a very small group of people discussing this topic. You seem to be one of 5 or 6 people who have much interest. If you were to visit WUWT.com you'd see they have over 417 million hits. There are dozens of sites that are popular for people interested in this topic. Social media sites like this one can attract people with some knowledge or no knowledge of the subject. It can also attract people who are certain they alone know the whole truth, yet they chose to set up shop at this site rather than a site full of well educated people who do actual climate research. You get my point. Social media is often a cesspool of angry people venting on others they determine are their enemies. I'm guessing you fall into a category of people who want to display erudition. You are a skeptic of the alarmist views. So am I. But you also rely on information you have read some place to help you form your opinions. Where do you turn for reliable climate information? Name a few climate scientists that you trust.

After my last comment, I now have 5 total comments, making me the 199th ranked person posting comments here. I'm curious why this site shows up on a search when it appears to be viewed and used by so few people.


You will find that this forum doesn't ban anyone unless they are harming the forum itself or trying to sell something (we occasionally get idiots trying to sell fake ID's and such). Ideas on all sides are welcome here. This forum is moderated by a single person, which also constructed the software. He is fair and open minded, tolerant of every view.

Neither me nor IBDaMann have the capability to prevent people from posting, block any thread, destroy any thread, or destroy any post except our own.

As with most forums on this topic, discussion often falls to name calling and false accusations. While useless, it's also tolerated here.

Like many forums, there are few that post here regularly, and most just lurk reading posts. Concentrating on the climate debate, this forum is smaller than general political forums, which concentrate on all things political, or religious forums, which concentrate on all things religious.

Welcome to the forum.


The Parrot Killer
30-01-2020 23:06
keepit
★★★★☆
(1070)
I've noticed that gfm7175 sounds very much like "into the night". Are both of you the same person?
30-01-2020 23:46
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
IBdaMann wrote:
Jethro Bodine wrote: How do you know who has or hasn't presented me with science showing a slight warming of the planet?

Because there isn't any.
________________________________________________________________
Suppose I say there is. Who is right? It's customary for those making such claims as yours to provide evidence to support those claims. People on the internet don't always tell the truth. Include links as well.
________________________________________________________________


Jethro Bodine wrote: I am not a climate scientist, are you?

There is no branch of science "climate science."
________________________________________________________________
Are you a climatologist? Are you a scientist? What degrees do you hold? Does your resume look anything like this;

"Given that the evidence strongly implies that anthropogenic warming has been greatly exaggerated, the basis for alarm due to such warming is similarly diminished." - Richard S. Lindzen

Richard S. Lindzen, A.B. Physics Magna Cum Laude, Harvard University (1960), S.M. Applied Mathematics, Harvard University (1961), Ph.D. Applied Mathematics, Harvard University (1964), Research Associate in Meteorology, University of Washington (1964-1965), NATO Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Institute for Theoretical Meteorology, University of Oslo (1965-1966), Research Scientist, National Center for Atmospheric Research (1966-1967), Visiting Lecturer in Meteorology, UCLA (1967), NCAR Outstanding Publication Award (1967), AMS Meisinger Award (1968), Associate Professor and Professor of Meteorology, University of Chicago (1968-1972), Summer Lecturer, NCAR Colloquium (1968, 1972, 1978), AGU Macelwane Award (1969), Visiting Professor, Department of Environmental Sciences, Tel Aviv University (1969), Alfred P. Sloan Fellowship (1970-1976), Gordon McKay Professor of Dynamic Meteorology, Harvard University (1972-1983), Visiting Professor of Dynamic Meteorology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1975), Lady Davis Visiting Professor, Department of Meteorology, The Hebrew University (1979), Director, Center for Earth and Planetary Physics, Harvard University (1980-1983), Robert P. Burden Professor of Dynamical Meteorology, Harvard University (1982-1983), AMS Charney Award (1985), Vikram Amblal Sarabhai Professor, Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad, India (1985), Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science Fellowship (1986-1987), Distinguished Visiting Scientist, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, NASA (1988-Present), Sackler Visiting Professor, Tel Aviv University (1992), Landsdowne Lecturer, University of Victoria (1993), Bernhard Haurwitz Memorial Lecturer, American Meteorological Society (1997), Fellow, American Academy of Arts & Sciences; Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science; Fellow, American Geophysical Union; Fellow, American Meteorological Society; Member, Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters; Member, Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society; Member, National Academy of Sciences; ISI Highly Cited Researcher; Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1983-Present), Lead Author, IPCC (2001)
_______________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: Judith Curry is one and she can explain why she feels there is some warming going on. Freeman Dyson is one of the smartest humans on our planet as well as a brilliant scientist who has studied climate change since the 1970's.

... but you have never heard either of them being cross-examined by someone like me. If you will bring either of them to this site to participate in discussion here I'll be happy to pick them apart for you.
_______________________________________________________________

Have you worked alongside Edward Teller, or given a a lifetime appointment at the Institute for Advanced Study by Robert Oppenheimer? Did you ever work on climate studies conducted by the JASON defense advisory group? Freeman Dyson has. He even worked with Albert Einstein. He has won many awards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_Dyson Have you won many awards in your study of science?
_____________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: He states the science shows some warming, but not global, and some sea level rise.

... but he didn't show you this supposed "science," especially not in front of someone like me who would call him on his BS.
_____________________________________________________________

And you haven't shown me any science that falsifies his claims. You should understand where you currently reside and why others should not simply take your word for something.
_____________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: Here are some quotes from skeptical climate scientists who seem to accept there is some warming,

I really don't care what any political activists claim about what science says. I only care what science says.

But that's just me.
_______________________________________________________________

Science doesn't say anything. Scientists share the results of their research data. Where do you go to find your information, be specific.
_______________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: Are you suggesting they are wrong?

They might be correct. They might be mistaken. They have no science to support their positions. They have no valid datsets to support their conclusions.
_____________________________________________________________

They have a lot of science to support their positions. Peer reviewed science. Do you have any peer reviewed science to support your positions?
______________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: Do you believe we are in an interglacial period of warming?

I see no reason to believe that. Do you?
_______________________________________________________________

If you believe the planet has had ice ages and that much of North America was under a mile of ice, you should probably agree that it is warmer now than it was then. That seems like a very valid reason to believe we are in an interglacial period.
_______________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: There are alarmist scientists and there are scientists skeptical of alarm.

... and none of the above beliefs have any sort of rational basis, i.e. they are not based on science.


Jethro Bodine wrote:I have read research from both sides

There are more sides than those two.
_______________________________________________________________

What are the other sides?
_______________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: and put my trust in the skeptical scientists who say there is some warming going on.

I submit that you shouldn't be trusting anyone on what science does or does not say. You should find out what the science says for yourself.

NOBODY's opinion matters when it comes to science.
____________________________________________________________

YES it does. See, I can also capitalize my claims. Does that make them more truthful than yours? Scientific research is conducted by scientists. For science to say anything, scientists have to do research and compile data and then share it with fellow scientists for peer review. How do you gather your science, osmosis?
_____________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: If you believe there is no warming going on, how did you come to that conclusion?

I do not affirmatively believe that there is no warming. I simply do not know, and there is certainly no "warming" that I can perceive and there is no science supporting such a position, therefore I have no reason to believe such.
_____________________________________________________________

So you need to feel the slight warming in order to believe it? Each day the temperature rises as much as 30 degrees where I live. If it begins rising 30.2 degrees, am I suppose to notice?

Are you suggesting there is no science that can prove late portions of the planet were once covered in ice and that much of that ice is now melted?
____________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote:My quiz was not a trick question. The sun does have a visible surface.

Then you are mistaken. The sun does not have a any surface. Ergo, the sun has no visible surface.

What appears to us as a visible surface of the sun is called the photosphere. So the question remains; the temperature of the photosphere is approx. 5800 Kelvin. As you travel away from the photosphere to the corona, the temperature drops, according to the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Only it doesn't drop, it increases. Not just a little. It rises more than 200 times the temperature of the photosphere to 1 million to 3 million Kelvin. Why is this? How does heat increase as you move away from the source of the heat. I mention this because it seems to indicate that we don't fully understand how the sun radiates heat toward the earth. There might be dozens of variables involved in what controls the earth's climate and it's my opinion that alarmists ignore many of them and focus on a trace gas as having a significant influence. I believe they are wrong.
_______________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: If you were to visit WUWT.com you'd see they have over 417 million hits.

I typically dismiss that site. They don't have too many people who know what they are talking about.
______________________________________________________________

Again, what are your go-to sites for reliable science?
____________________________________________________________

Jethro Bodine wrote: Name a few climate scientists that you trust.

None. I go directly to science. If I could I'd eat one climate scientist per day before lunch.

Jethro Bodine wrote: I'm curious why this site shows up on a search when it appears to be viewed and used by so few people.

I know, right? Why does the internet even allow such sites to exist?
_____________________________________________________________

So why do you choose to spend time here? You could sign up on Disqus and debate ten times more people about this topic. You could spend time on sites where scientists exchange ideas and have a much more informed debate. Did you purposely seek out a small site where there is less chance of being challenged?


So why do you choose to spend time here? You could sign up on Disqus and debate ten times more people about this topic. You could spend time on sites where scientists exchange ideas and have a much more informed debate. Did you purposely seek out a small site where there is less chance of being challenged?
31-01-2020 00:26
gfm7175Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(313)
keepit wrote:
I've noticed that gfm7175 sounds very much like "into the night". Are both of you the same person?

Nope, we are very different people.

ITN hails from the State of Washington, and I hail from the State of Wisconsin. He is a successful business owner and enjoys aircraft. I do not own a business and I never want to step foot in any aircraft if I don't have to. I am also an avid hiker (Wisconsin has a WONDERFUL trail system for hiking/biking/skiing, horse riding, etc...) and I also enjoy occasionally taking photography of nature while out on my hikes.

However, we both do share an interest in Logic and Mathematics, and we both do speak the English language. I've started to appreciate science a lot more (and gained understanding about science and religion that I didn't have beforehand) due to my correspondence with him.

So no, we aren't the same person.
31-01-2020 00:29
gfm7175Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(313)
Jethro Bodine wrote:
So why do you choose to spend time here? You could sign up on Disqus and debate ten times more people about this topic. You could spend time on sites where scientists exchange ideas and have a much more informed debate. Did you purposely seek out a small site where there is less chance of being challenged?

If I recall correctly, IB has participated in numerous online forums. I have participated in numerous forums myself. I don't participate in this particular forum as often as I do other ones, but I do like this forum very much and come back to it from time to time to see what's being discussed.
31-01-2020 01:22
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(11285)
keepit wrote:
I've noticed that gfm7175 sounds very much like "into the night". Are both of you the same person?

YALSA.


The Parrot Killer
31-01-2020 02:12
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
Jethro Bodine wrote:...one of the smartest people on the planet, like Freeman Dyson;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=8&v=JTSxubKfTBU&feature=emb_logo
Just watched this that's good stuff! So he said Oakridge was one of the only places worried about CO2 and it was 20 years ago in 2007? So 1987?
I didn't really understand the forest measuring towers he was saying were needed.

To post an img use the "img" button. You needed to trim off the "?w=640" at the end of the link.

Adding an avatar I think it needs to be a jpg and it has to be 300x300 pixels. I'm happy to help you with that, PM me.

Jethro Bodine wrote:
I believe the planet is warming slightly. I suspect the planet warms coming out of an ice age and it cools as it descends into an ice age.
So this was my attempt to summarize the consensus (Bill Nye, Neil Degrasse Tyson, All Gore) theory on global warming:
do-i-have-the-co2-calamity-math-right

gfm7175 wrote:
Third world guy wrote:
Please do not let the moron named IBDaMan (or his clone Into the Night) make you leave the forum.

They cannot make you leave the forum.
No one can make you leave a restaurant or anywhere else. But stinking a place up and constant harassment can make you want to. This is why most boards are moderated. Also why ITN was banned from debatepolitics.com (which is moderated).

Jethro: We line up in our "skeptical" view which sadly means we're not likely to do much more than reinforce our own perspective in discussing the issue.

So I have a more interesting proposition for you: I really want to find another issue in the past which parrallel's the Global Warming Hysteria well. I had mentioned vaccinations in past threads (hugely invasive government program, science that regular folks were likely skeptical off). Let me know if you can think of any.


"Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper
ITN/IBD Fraud exposed:  The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is ever valid for them
31-01-2020 03:40
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
tmiddles wrote: So I have a more interesting proposition for you: I really want to find another issue in the past which parrallel's the Global Warming Hysteria well.

That's what I'm talking about.

We should totally talk about the Global Cooling of the 70's. I can't think of a more direct parallel.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-01-2020 03:49
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: So I have a more interesting proposition for you: I really want to find another issue in the past which parrallel's the Global Warming Hysteria well.

That's what I'm talking about.
We should totally talk about the Global Cooling of the 70's. I can't think of a more direct parallel.
OK that's a good one! Especially if you had NASA, the IPCC, top scientists and so on jumping in. I'll try to learn more.

Something somewhat analogous is the notorious news report of:
"Researchers say that ______ is actually good/bad for you!" Where there is real research being referenced that was just published in a peer reviewed journal, and a headline that has a confidence level of _____.
Maybe it's that cigarettes are really bad for you or that a glass of red wine makes you live longer.
31-01-2020 04:18
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
tmiddles wrote: Especially if you had NASA, the IPCC, top scientists and so on jumping in.

Good one! For a moment I thought you were serious, but you made it so extremely antithetical to honest information that I knew you had to be facetious.

Excellent sense of humor.

tmiddles wrote: .... being referenced that was just published in a peer reviewed journal

Another good one! You're on a roll. If you weren't completely aware that "peer review" means "judged to be helpful to the financial bottom line" I would have had to mock you.

Another good one.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-01-2020 04:28
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
IBdaMann wrote:
For a moment I thought you were serious,
I am, I'm going to work on it.
31-01-2020 14:57
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
Not unlike other forums I've spent time on, it takes maybe one or two comments before a thread is hijacked to another topic. Maybe the reason nobody commented on a solution to the perceived problem of global warming is because this site has no alarmists claiming there is an existential threat. If that's the case, I probably won't hang around very long, just to sing to the skeptical choir.

I do have one observation, but it is early on and I could be mistaken. I'm not seeing any links to sites that provide evidence for the claims being made here. It's as though if someone makes a claim and says we can trust them because they are really smart, that somehow means anything. I'm not just trying to pick on IBdaMann, but for anyone to suggest they have superior knowledge to Freeman Dyson tends to make the person making that claim delusional. Sadly, that is quite common on social media.

31-01-2020 15:39
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(2265)
Jethro Bodine wrote:...this site has no alarmists claiming there is an existential threat. ...



I'm skeptical but find the potential threat serious enough.

Having a sudden and violent change in environment can destroy life that would normally have a chance to adapt to the same change given time.

Also the argument against "slowing our roll" as it were, and dialing back industrial fossil fuel use, is pretty weak. It seems all we hear is that it'll be expensive (which is really to say it'll be a less lucrative path). In terms of human wealth the present day is unrivaled. Claims we need to really get the global economy going or we'll face hardship are only justifiable based on new record setting standards for human wealth. We don't face a struggle to feed, clothe or equip the global population.

In the case of fossil fuels that may run out in the near future (oil) it's also a case of stealing from the future.

The temperature history isn't alarming at this point but the change in CO2 concentration certainly is.
31-01-2020 16:54
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
tmiddles wrote:

The temperature history isn't alarming at this point but the change in CO2 concentration certainly is.


The change in Co2 levels is only alarming if you are looking at only recent rises and ignoring historical levels.

31-01-2020 17:17
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
Jethro Bodine wrote: I'm not just trying to pick on IBdaMann, but for anyone to suggest they have superior knowledge to Freeman Dyson tends to make the person making that claim delusional.

Hey, I'm not trying to pick on you, but anyone who worships Freeman Dyson despite not even understanding his positions or thoughts isn't someone who should be judging anyone else's position ... or even pretending to interpret other people's positions.

It happens that Dyson has adopted Into the Night's view, as well as my own, that no one knows the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere, that it is not evenly distributed and that no one knows if it is increasing or decreasing or what. He has run "models" but acknowledges that the results are only as good as the model and the input, neither of which we have that are any good.

If you ever find Dyson claiming "Greenhouse Effect" then yes, I'll pick him apart ... but he'll probably emerge from his stupor first and ask you to just bitch-slap him.

You should probably get a better understanding of the specifics of Dyson's positions if you are going to tout him as your "authority" so that you can properly address any questions that you generate by using him as a reference.


.


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-01-2020 17:48
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
IBdaMann wrote:

You should probably get a better understanding of the specifics of Dyson's positions if you are going to tout him as your "authority" so that you can properly address any questions that you generate by using him as a reference.


There is no doubt that parts of the world are getting warmer, but the warming is not global.
Freeman Dyson

We have no reason to think that climate change is harmful if you look at the world as a whole. Most places, in fact, are better off being warmer than being colder. And historically, the really bad times for the environment and for people have been the cold periods rather than the warm periods.
Freeman Dyson

We do not know how much of the environmental change is due to human activities and how much [is due] to long-term natural processes over which we have no control.
Freeman Dyson

It makes very little sense to believe the output of the climate models.
Freeman Dyson

Vegetation is really controlling what happens...whereas the emphasis in the climate models has always been on the atmosphere.
Freeman Dyson
___________________________________________________________

Tell me what degrees you have and what awards you have received. Name five sites you go to for credible information about climate change. Tell me what caused the mile of ice over North America to melt. And about that quiz of mine, what causes the temperature to rise from 5800 Kelvin to 3 million Kelvin as you travel away from the sun?

A wonderful story about the genius Freeman Dyson;

At Jason, taking problems to Dyson is something of a parlor trick. A group of scientists will be sitting around the cafeteria, and one will idly wonder if there is an integer where, if you take its last digit and move it to the front, turning, say, 112 to 211, it's possible to exactly double the value. Dyson will immediately say, "Oh, that's not difficult," allow two short beats to pass and then add, "but of course the smallest such number is 18 digits long." When this happened one day at lunch, William Press remembers, "the table fell silent; nobody had the slightest idea how Freeman could have known such a fact or, even more terrifying, could have derived it in his head in about two seconds." The meal then ended with men who tend to be described with words like "brilliant," "Nobel" and "MacArthur" quietly retreating to their offices to work out what Dyson just knew.
Edited on 31-01-2020 17:49
31-01-2020 18:01
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)
RE: This is what alarmists ignore31-01-2020 18:09
Jethro Bodine
☆☆☆☆☆
(13)




31-01-2020 18:30
gfm7175Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(313)
tmiddles wrote:
Jethro Bodine wrote:
I believe the planet is warming slightly. I suspect the planet warms coming out of an ice age and it cools as it descends into an ice age.
So this was my attempt to summarize the consensus (Bill Nye, Neil Degrasse Tyson, All Gore) theory on global warming:
do-i-have-the-co2-calamity-math-right

Well, the "consensus theory" rejects logic, science, and mathematics. For me, that's an issue.

tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
Third world guy wrote:
Please do not let the moron named IBDaMan (or his clone Into the Night) make you leave the forum.

They cannot make you leave the forum.
No one can make you leave a restaurant or anywhere else.

Sure they can. They can physically remove you (or have you physically removed) from the restaurant.

tmiddles wrote:
But stinking a place up

Odor cannot be transmitted through an online forum.

tmiddles wrote:
and constant harassment can make you want to.

What "harassment"? In my experiences with them, they've been very helpful and knowledgeable individuals, answering questions for those who wish to learn.

tmiddles wrote:
This is why most boards are moderated.

This board is moderated as well, just not near as strictly as most other boards are moderated. If you wish for more moderation, there are other boards available which do that.

tmiddles wrote:
Also why ITN was banned from debatepolitics.com (which is moderated).

Doesn't surprise me any. I was also banned from debatepolitics.com ... In my case, a select few of the moderators there already didn't like me knowing more about their own forum rules than they did (and my challenging their sub-par intellect on numerous occasions), but then they especially didn't like my calling out their bullshit about their lame joke that they attempted to pull on another forum member (they thought that joke was the greatest thing since sliced bread).

Immediately after I called them out for their bullshit, they made an announcement within that thread that "there is a sock amongst us" and to "guess who it is" and that they'd be banned soon. Thus, they made my banning into a game as well, completely fabricating the story that I was a "sock" (even though I have never made any sock accounts) so that they could subsequently ban me under their "multiple accounts" forum rule (since others don't have access to verify their claims about it).

They banned me because they did not like me, plain and simple. No different than a high school clique. But, there are other forums out there which won't fabricate stories out of thin air to ban people, and I make use of those forums instead.

tmiddles wrote:
Jethro: We line up in our "skeptical" view which sadly means we're not likely to do much more than reinforce our own perspective in discussing the issue.

So I have a more interesting proposition for you: I really want to find another issue in the past which parrallel's the Global Warming Hysteria well. I had mentioned vaccinations in past threads (hugely invasive government program, science that regular folks were likely skeptical off). Let me know if you can think of any.

[Insert any religion-based hysteria here].
31-01-2020 18:46
gfm7175Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(313)
Jethro Bodine wrote:
Not unlike other forums I've spent time on, it takes maybe one or two comments before a thread is hijacked to another topic.

Commonplace among any forum.

Jethro Bodine wrote:
Maybe the reason nobody commented on a solution to the perceived problem of global warming is because this site has no alarmists claiming there is an existential threat. If that's the case, I probably won't hang around very long, just to sing to the skeptical choir.

I don't have any solutions because I see no "problem" to solve. It is all just religious hysteria. There is no science here.

Jethro Bodine wrote:
I do have one observation, but it is early on and I could be mistaken. I'm not seeing any links to sites that provide evidence for the claims being made here. It's as though if someone makes a claim and says we can trust them because they are really smart, that somehow means anything. I'm not just trying to pick on IBdaMann, but for anyone to suggest they have superior knowledge to Freeman Dyson tends to make the person making that claim delusional. Sadly, that is quite common on social media.

The problem I have with your request here is that it is committing a logic error (a "fallacy") known as the False Authority Fallacy. The only authoritative source for any theory of science is the theory itself. No "holy link" to any website nor any "holy governmental agency" can be used as a substitute for science.

Jethro Bodine wrote:

This is just a bunch of random numbers.
31-01-2020 18:46
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(5955)
Jethro Bodine wrote: There is no doubt that parts of the world are getting warmer, but the warming is not global.
Freeman Dyson

... except that there is doubt. Are you prepared to support your certainty that parts are warming?

Jethro Bodine wrote: We have no reason to think that climate change is harmful if you look at the world as a whole.

In fact, there is no Climate Change whatsoever until it is unambiguously defined.

Are you prepared to unambiguously define Climate Change?

Jethro Bodine wrote: Most places, in fact, are better off being warmer than being colder.

You have to say "would be" because you don't know that they are warming.

Jethro Bodine wrote: We do not know how much of the environmental change is due to human activities and how much [is due] to long-term natural processes over which we have no control.

This is a goalpost shift. This is about environmental change, not about any undefined Climate Change.

Jethro Bodine wrote: It makes very little sense to believe the output of the climate models.

Exactly. There aren't any good models and there isn't any valid data supporting any conclusions.

Jethro Bodine wrote: Vegetation is really controlling what happens

Not when the process isn't defined.

Jethro Bodine wrote: Tell me what degrees you have and what awards you have received.

Nope. You tell me what it is that I don't know.

Jethro Bodine wrote: Name five sites you go to for credible information about climate change.

Another one of your trick questions. There are no credible sites for Climate Change. In fact, being a Climate Change site removes all credibility.

Jethro Bodine wrote: Tell me what caused the mile of ice over North America to melt.

The same thing that caused the mile of ice over Greenland to form.

Jethro Bodine wrote: And about that quiz of mine, what causes the temperature to rise from 5800 Kelvin to 3 million Kelvin as you travel away from the sun?

Frankly, I don't take those temperatures on face value. It's not like anyone has ever verified those temperatures which are, after all, speculation. There really is no way to confirm temperature "behind" another temperature if our source is light.



Jethro Bodine wrote:
A wonderful story about the genius Freeman Dyson;

At Jason, taking problems to Dyson is something of a parlor trick. A group of scientists will be sitting around the cafeteria, and one will idly wonder if there is an integer where, if you take its last digit and move it to the front, turning, say, 112 to 211, it's possible to exactly double the value. Dyson will immediately say, "Oh, that's not difficult," allow two short beats to pass and then add, "but of course the smallest such number is 18 digits long." When this happened one day at lunch, William Press remembers, "the table fell silent; nobody had the slightest idea how Freeman could have known such a fact or, even more terrifying, could have derived it in his head in about two seconds." The meal then ended with men who tend to be described with words like "brilliant," "Nobel" and "MacArthur" quietly retreating to their offices to work out what Dyson just knew.


If that's the kind of thing that makes you a fan, you should follow Scott Flansburg:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgIICQvhqMc


Sea level varies from place to place in the world - keepit

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-01-2020 19:00
gfm7175Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(313)
tmiddles wrote:
Jethro Bodine wrote:...this site has no alarmists claiming there is an existential threat. ...



I'm skeptical but find the potential threat serious enough.

What "potential threat"?

tmiddles wrote:
Having a sudden and violent change in environment can destroy life that would normally have a chance to adapt to the same change given time.

What "sudden and violent change"?

tmiddles wrote:
Also the argument against "slowing our roll" as it were, and dialing back industrial fossil fuel use, is pretty weak.

What "fossil fuel" use? We don't burn fossils for fuel. Do you mean carbon based fuels?

tmiddles wrote:
It seems all we hear is that it'll be expensive (which is really to say it'll be a less lucrative path). In terms of human wealth the present day is unrivaled. Claims we need to really get the global economy going or we'll face hardship are only justifiable based on new record setting standards for human wealth. We don't face a struggle to feed, clothe or equip the global population.

What about the many trillions of dollars of debt that the USA alone is in, let alone the world?

tmiddles wrote:
In the case of fossil fuels that may run out in the near future (oil) it's also a case of stealing from the future.

We don't use fossils for fuel. Oil forms naturally underground and can be synthesized, so we're not going to "run out" of it.

tmiddles wrote:
The temperature history isn't alarming at this point but the change in CO2 concentration certainly is.

It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. It is not possible to measure the amount of CO2 in Earth's atmosphere. Temperatures are not uniform across the Earth. CO2 concentrations are not uniform across the atmosphere. We don't have near enough stations to accurately measure these things.
31-01-2020 19:31
James___
★★★★★
(2249)
Jethro Bodine wrote:
I'm a skeptic of catastrophic global warming. But after years of debates that don't change anyone's mind, I've approached alarmists with the question; what if everything you believe is true. Then what?

What is your solution? What must we do to save the planet? Their answers are telling. They suggest we do just enough to harm the poor and crush the economy, but not enough to alter the climate. If these climate alarmists were on the Titanic, after it hit the iceberg, they would be screaming at passengers, telling them to grab a bucket and start bailing water, knowing the outcome would be that the ship was still going to sink.

Should the U.S. quit mining coal while China burns more coal than every other nation combined? China is also expecting to manufacture close to 30,000,000 automobiles, 99% of which run on fossil fuels. India is also rapidly expanding their use of fossil fuels, building thousands of miles of new highways and adding more and more cars and trucks to those roads. Developing nations demand the same standard of living as people in the U.S. have had for generations and they know energy production is the key, primarily using fossil fuels.

The U.N. is selling a scheme to redistribute wealth and using bad climate science to generate fear, in hopes of gaining support. The imagined existential threat cannot be mitigated, don't allow politicians an opportunity to reach down into our pockets and rob us so they can address income inequality.



Please understand politics Sir. I live in Kentucky, Senator McConnell is the senior senator from my state. He has a significant say in US law and energy policy. The Republican congressman that represents my district is like Senator McConnell. Senator McConnell essentially dictates Republican policy and it's party line.
This is where posts like yours I don't understand. Other Republicans make the same comments and while the wealthy enjoy significant tax breaks, for everyone else, they get a smaller end of year refund because less is taken out of their paycheck. That's not a tax break.
Most people also do not understand yet miners that I have worked with who live in eastern Kentucky say that what has hurt coal/mining jobs isn't regulation but lower cost alternatives. How is it miners are aware of this but not the general public?
An example is if wind power is cheaper than coal, is that costing you money or is that a Free Market economy at work? If the cost of solar power is competitive with coal, is that costing you money or is that once again a Free Market economy creating opportunity for those who have a desire to be innovative?


This is an example of how much people like you and Harvey are paying for "green energy" tax breaks. Over a 10 year period, it's $4.012 Billion a year. Yet the US has consistent $1 Trillion budget deficits which are not a problem.

The U.S. Treasury estimates that the Production Tax Credit will cost taxpayers $40.12 billion from 2018 to 2027, making it the most expensive energy subsidy under current tax law.

https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/renewable/wind-and-solar-tax-credits/


Harvey, this isn't personal. I am pursuing opportunity so I will not need any government benefits. When you retire, both social security and Medicare benefits will probably need to be lowered. This is because the budget deficits will be lowered and fewer people will be paying into social security. One of the effects of the Baby Boom.
But most Americans aren't concerned about how the population in the US within specific age groups is changing. This will place a strain on any social benefit as well as tax revenue. Simply put, fewer people will be working because like you they'll be retired.
Edited on 31-01-2020 19:58
Page 1 of 212>





Join the debate What if everything alarmist say is true.:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Is it not true that brains shrink due to increase in CO2 displacing O2?208-11-2019 18:45
It's not true leftists are climate advocates201-05-2019 00:24
How is this even true? CO2e is now over 500 ppm this year?508-02-2019 23:42
The True Believers Revealed120-11-2017 20:03
The True Believers Are In Full Retreat1219-09-2017 03:54
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact