Drexel University study on AGW deniers

[gnarlylove]

A very fair reply.

I totally agree if I am waging a jihad against personal issues (like more people should ride a bike or stop throwing trash out car windows) science plays a relatively small part in my reasoning behind it. Your correct to identify this and that personal reasons play a major role, but aiming to pollute less doesn't seem bad to anything except that dirty word profit. A partial jk there...

But I will caution you that personal interests applies to you and any potential jihads you might be presently engaged in just like it does to me (hint hint: AGW denial can only go so far scientifically, some of the reasoning must come from above or below and the only genuine incentive to categorically deny AGW is profit. Not claiming this is your reason but I am suspect of major think tanks that exist to distort science for profit (and that works on both sides but seems to heavily favor AGW denial).

 

[flacaltenn]

A very fair reply.

I totally agree if I am waging a jihad against personal issues (like more people should ride a bike or stop throwing trash out car windows) science plays a relatively small part in my reasoning behind it. Your correct to identify this and that personal reasons play a major role, but aiming to pollute less doesn't seem bad to anything except that dirty word profit. A partial jk there...

But I will caution you that personal interests applies to you and any potential jihads you might be presently engaged in just like it does to me (hint hint: AGW denial can only go so far scientifically, some of the reasoning must come from above or below

"but aiming to pollute less doesn't seem bad to anything..... "
Not so actually.. There is a quantifiable amount of pollution that IS acceptable. While in Silicon Valley, I got a chance to drink $30/gallon PURE water.. It's HIGHLY overrated. And the rationale for having it EXIST is truely limited. Only SCIENCE really has a use for prescription clean water.

I can assure you that I BUST MYSELF enough each week on holding faulty theories and bad ideas. I'm kinda a pro at juggling ideas and theories and hurting myself with the fall-out. I have NO personal stake in the fact that MOST theories have very short lives and are flawed. Having juggled for a couple decade now -- I've built up some intuitions about fraudulent science. Can smell it a couple miles out.. Kinda like when I thought that Milli Vanilli just might be a fraud. Or my hunch that Elmo just might have an unhealthy child fetish. My only vested interest is in TESTING and VERIFYING ideas. The very fact that AGW has turned into such a political circus and become a MOVEMENT sickens me because the rules for scientific validation have been jacked and replaced with hype and smokescreens.

 

[gnarlylove]

It is a political circus but as a scientist you must know there's a difference between legitimate claims that potentially threaten our species or resources and that of simple nonsense. As you say, you have a nose for it. But you know it doesn't help AGW's politics when extreme deniers (not you but dumbies with no backgrounds and big mouths) shout insane, verifiably false information on a daily basis. In fact, I think this is your complain about AGW. I agree AGW has those same people, but I guess since you see what you look for, one side is magnified while the other is cool as a cucumber. This doesn't mean of course that both sides are wrong or that the side you oppose has bad ideas, it's just the people that are inadequately trained. America tends to churn out 100 loud mouths for every 1 sensible person. Luckily we were gifted to be sensible, eh? Good night.

 

[bripat9643]

And, Walleyes, you are full of shit. The only period we have enough data on to state that it was warmer or colder than the present, was the MWP. And it was cooler;

How does the Medieval Warm Period compare to current global temperatures?

In geological history, periods of rapid temperature change, whether warmer or colder, have been periods of extinction. From the PT Extinction from rapid warming, to the Ordivician extinction period from rapid cooling, depletion of CO2 from the weathering of the ancient Appalachian Mountains, rapid change is very dangerous to life.

Michael Mann's Hockey Stick Graph has been proven to be a fraud, but here you are referring to it as if it was a scientific fact.

 

[Abraham3]

Here you go referring to it as a fraud without presenting a sliver of evidence. Let's see what you've got.

 

[gnarlylove]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJUA4cm0Rck]Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Kosh]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

I don't believe in AGW because I know it is not based on any science.

It is based on a religious belief and the AGW scribes who dole out the grant money make sure it goes to prove AGW. More money has been spent on proving AGW that it has on finding out what actually does drive our climate. Trillions have been spent while only a few hundred million has been spent on anything natural.

Thus once again proving AGW is not based on any type of science.

 

[Kosh]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

I don't believe in AGW because I know it is not based on any science.

It is based on a religious belief and the AGW scribes who dole out the grant money make sure it goes to prove AGW. More money has been spent on proving AGW that it has on finding out what actually does drive our climate. Trillions have been spent while only a few hundred million has been spent on anything natural.

Thus once again proving AGW is not based on any type of science.

 

[Abraham3]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

Excellent. I love hearing from the truly smart ones - they just sit there and information pours out of them that explains processes and phenomena and causes and results. I once saw Buckminster Fuller give a talk and in all the rest of my life, no other hour included as much information being simply poured into my ear. Chomsky's like that but he talks slower. After "Bucky" had been going for about 45 minutes non-stop, a student (this was at UNM where my sister taught) walked up on stage and poured a glass of water from the pitcher sitting there untouched. He offered the glass to Fuller, who up to that point had not noticed what the kid was doing. "I never touch the stuff", he said and turned right back to the audience and kept on rolling.

 

[Abraham3]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

Excellent. I love hearing from the truly smart ones - they just sit there and information pours out of them that explains processes and phenomena and causes and results. I once saw Buckminster Fuller give a talk and in all the rest of my life, no other hour included as much information being simply poured into my ear. Chomsky's like that but he talks slower.

 

[Kosh]

And the AGW cult continues to post their propaganda and can not post one link to datasets with source code that proves CO2 drives climate.

 

[gnarlylove]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

Excellent. I love hearing from the truly smart ones - they just sit there and information pours out of them that explains processes and phenomena and causes and results. I once saw Buckminster Fuller give a talk and in all the rest of my life, no other hour included as much information being simply poured into my ear. Chomsky's like that but he talks slower. After "Bucky" had been going for about 45 minutes non-stop, a student (this was at UNM where my sister taught) walked up on stage and poured a glass of water from the pitcher sitting there untouched. He offered the glass to Fuller, who up to that point had not noticed what the kid was doing. "I never touch the stuff", he said and turned right back to the audience and kept on rolling.

Yeah, you spend half a minute on this board and you are bored because the posts are equivalent to third graders. But you can't exceed that level either because they just can't get it. God, is this really how bad America is intellectually?

Chomsky has definitely become a personal hero of mine in the past couple weeks despite knowing about him for years...should looked into him sooner!

 

[Kosh]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

Excellent. I love hearing from the truly smart ones - they just sit there and information pours out of them that explains processes and phenomena and causes and results. I once saw Buckminster Fuller give a talk and in all the rest of my life, no other hour included as much information being simply poured into my ear. Chomsky's like that but he talks slower. After "Bucky" had been going for about 45 minutes non-stop, a student (this was at UNM where my sister taught) walked up on stage and poured a glass of water from the pitcher sitting there untouched. He offered the glass to Fuller, who up to that point had not noticed what the kid was doing. "I never touch the stuff", he said and turned right back to the audience and kept on rolling.

Yeah, you spend half a minute on this board and you are bored because the posts are equivalent to third graders. But you can't exceed that level either because they just can't get it. God, is this really how bad America is intellectually?

Chomsky has definitely become a personal hero of mine in the past couple weeks despite knowing about him for years...should looked into him sooner!

Yep if the AGW cultists would want to discuss actual science then maybe this board would be better.

However maybe you want to post at least one link to datasets with source code that prove the AGW church correct that CO2 drives climate, can you post just one?

 

[bripat9643]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

Oooooooh! Those evil corporations have bamboozled everyone!

Same shit, different day.

Check the temperature outside, Sherlock. Do you think it's unusually warm?

 

[bripat9643]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

Excellent. I love hearing from the truly smart ones - they just sit there and information pours out of them that explains processes and phenomena and causes and results. I once saw Buckminster Fuller give a talk and in all the rest of my life, no other hour included as much information being simply poured into my ear. Chomsky's like that but he talks slower. After "Bucky" had been going for about 45 minutes non-stop, a student (this was at UNM where my sister taught) walked up on stage and poured a glass of water from the pitcher sitting there untouched. He offered the glass to Fuller, who up to that point had not noticed what the kid was doing. "I never touch the stuff", he said and turned right back to the audience and kept on rolling.

Yeah, you spend half a minute on this board and you are bored because the posts are equivalent to third graders. But you can't exceed that level either because they just can't get it. God, is this really how bad America is intellectually?

Chomsky has definitely become a personal hero of mine in the past couple weeks despite knowing about him for years...should looked into him sooner!

That says all we need to know about you. Chomsky is the biggest numskull to ever get a PHD.

 

[bripat9643]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

Excellent. I love hearing from the truly smart ones - they just sit there and information pours out of them that explains processes and phenomena and causes and results. I once saw Buckminster Fuller give a talk and in all the rest of my life, no other hour included as much information being simply poured into my ear. Chomsky's like that but he talks slower.

Chomsky pours out pure horseshit, not information.

 

[Kosh]

For decades this NASA graph based on the database of Great Britain's Climate Research Unit shows a dramatic increase in temperature was accepted by scientists as proving that there was a dramatic increase in earth's temperature starting in the late 1970s. CO2 levels also increased during this period starting in the late 1940s, leading to the conclusion that man was responsible for the temperature increase. However, this data is corrupted with the heat island effect. Also, note that the increase in atmospheric CO2 started in the late 1940s, just when earth was going through a cooling period. The heat island effect is supposed to have been mostly removed from the United States data set, which accounts for one-fourth of the worlds measuring stations. However, in the fall of 2009 and into the winter of 2010, it was revealed that rather than removing the heat island effect, NASA and NOAA may have actually amplified it. Also, the main temperature data base at the Climate Research Unit in Great Britain has deliberately corrupted the database used in producing the graph.

A serious error was found in the NASA temperature data for the United States in 2007. When corrected, it was determined that the warmest year in the past 100 years was not in 1998 and 2006 as previously believed, but was 1934, followed 1998. 1921 became the third hottest year, followed by 2006 and 1933. Out of the five hottest years, three occurred in the 1920s and 30s and only two were in the past 10 years. Notice that the US data do not have the same steep increase in temperature shown in the corrupted data of Britain's Climate Research Unit's data in the graph above. This dramatically changes scientists understanding of the importance of the warming that has occurred since 1975. The period between 1995 and 2009 is no warmer than the period between 1920 and 1935. This error in the NASA data has lead to discoveries of other errors in the data which are raising concern about data integrity of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies.

More at: Lesson 1 Graphs n' Charts

 

[gnarlylove]

I'm sorry you feel that way bri, many don't agree with you. I wish there was a PhD program for you and that you were given the chance to study academic rigor instead of the tripe the comes from the tube and press.

 

[flacaltenn]

Helpful insights into why few Americans believe AGW.

Noam Chomsky: How Climate Change Became a 'Liberal Hoax' - YouTube

Excellent. I love hearing from the truly smart ones - they just sit there and information pours out of them that explains processes and phenomena and causes and results. I once saw Buckminster Fuller give a talk and in all the rest of my life, no other hour included as much information being simply poured into my ear. Chomsky's like that but he talks slower. After "Bucky" had been going for about 45 minutes non-stop, a student (this was at UNM where my sister taught) walked up on stage and poured a glass of water from the pitcher sitting there untouched. He offered the glass to Fuller, who up to that point had not noticed what the kid was doing. "I never touch the stuff", he said and turned right back to the audience and kept on rolling.

Yeah, you spend half a minute on this board and you are bored because the posts are equivalent to third graders. But you can't exceed that level either because they just can't get it. God, is this really how bad America is intellectually?

Chomsky has definitely become a personal hero of mine in the past couple weeks despite knowing about him for years...should looked into him sooner!

You JUST DISCOVERED Chomsky? What kind of liberal arts fraud are you man? You escaped doctrination camp or what? You mooning over this guy is equivalent to Paris Hilton saying " I know smart when I see it"...

 

[flacaltenn]

Iwasted a lot of time voluntarily sucking up to Chomsky. That was before I learned skills in logic and reason. His rant you posted is the ONLY rant that Dr Chom has. Its recycled from topic to topic and always has the same cast of evil doers and villians. All he did there was to toss in a pot shot at metereologists, while not similiarly chastizing climate scientists for giving the 2044 weather forecast.. Glad to see he is still sucking the air out of reasoned discussion and replacing it with progressive dogma for the masses.