Southern Ocean Heating - re: "Irreversible" on SA headline

B

bgytr

Super Anarchist
5,128
707
Bagheera said:
@bgytr looks like you found a supporter that belongs in the 0.003% group that does not support anthropogenic climate change evidence.

Let me ask you a question. You come up on a bridge over a ravine that you need to cross. The 200 year old wooden bridge is in a very dubious state, pilings have fallen over, support beams are missing, some planks in the bridge deck are gone and there is a lot of rot visible. The alternative is that you need to drive three hours extra to reach your destination if you take an alternate route. All of a sudden there are 100.000 engineers/surveyors stepping out of the woods. They have all surveyed the bridge, measured everything there is to measure and made millions of calculations. Out of those 100.000 engineers there are 99.997 that say that the bridge will not support the weight of your truck and you will crash and die in the ravine, there are only 3 out of the 100.000 that have come to the conclusion that they don't think 'it is that bad'.

Which group would you listen to and would you cross the bridge or not.
Click to expand...
Having a masters degree in structural engineering from the top 15 structural engineering program in the country, and 32 years of structural engineering experience, I would do the structural assessment myself.

And with that 32 years experience in an R and D environment and seeing how funding gets apportioned, I would not trust anyone to give an honest answer.
 
B

bgytr

Super Anarchist
5,128
707
Bagheera said:
So you are basically saying that 99.997% of al scientists are full of shit without providing a reason why?
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure I did provide a reason on why a good number of folks in sponsored R and D scientist and engineering community will compromise their analysis to slant conclusions.
If you watch the full video, his commentary is not all black and white. The title of the youtube video is misleading. Christy does address motivations of alarmism in the video- because alarming people gets money. He also does temper those comments with real data and admits to people doing harmful stuff to the environment.

A bio of Dr Christy:
In 1989 Dr. Roy W. Spencer (then a NASA/Marshall scientist and now a Principal Research Scientist at UAH) and Christy developed a global temperature data set from microwave data observed from satellites beginning in 1979. For this achievement, the Spencer-Christy team was awarded NASA's Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement in 1991. In 1996, they were selected to receive a Special Award by the American Meteorological Society "for developing a global, precise record of earth's temperature from operational polar-orbiting satellites, fundamentally advancing our ability to monitor climate." In January 2002 Christy was inducted as a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society.

So he does have credibilty in the field, having developed the tools to create the data sets upon which climate models are based. He does not jump all in on one side or the other, and that seems to lend some sensibility to what he says in my interpretation. Perhaps further investigation into his motivations might yield something different, but the data is the data, and he is THE GUY that created the process to have the data in the first place.
 
Bagheera

Bagheera

Member
220
331
Alaska
I can't help but read between the lines that you are now saying that 99.997% of all Scientists in the field of climate research are corrupt?
How do you think that corruption is organized and setup? It goes as deep as 90.000 studies from all continents, all countries and a far majority of all universities worldwide. Who pays everybody off? Which organization is so powerful and so big that can possibly have an agenda that is so far reaching that virtually all scientists in the entire world are corrupted by it? Who pays those bills with what intention?

Or could it just be that the other 0.003% is just wrong? Maybe not even wrong, maybe some of them are just bought by the oil and gas industry to come with a different voice so that the propagandists have some ammo to shoot with? Or is that to much of a stretch?

I have mentioned it a few times before on SA, I have been facilitating research in the arctic for a long time. 'my scientists' do not know where the funding for their research comes from, but they somehow derive these conclusions all by themselves. That doesn't rime with what you are suggesting, or is your suggestion implying that I'm driving the corruption in my case?
 
B

bgytr

Super Anarchist
5,128
707
Bagheera said:
I can't help but read between the lines that you are now saying that 99.997% of all Scientists in the field of climate research are corrupt?
How do you think that corruption is organized and setup? It goes as deep as 90.000 studies from all continents, all countries and a far majority of all universities worldwide. Who pays everybody off? Which organization is so powerful and so big that can possibly have an agenda that is so far reaching that virtually all scientists in the entire world are corrupted by it? Who pays those bills with what intention?

Or could it just be that the other 0.003% is just wrong? Maybe not even wrong, maybe some of them are just bought by the oil and gas industry to come with a different voice so that the propagandists have some ammo to shoot with? Or is that to much of a stretch?

I have mentioned it a few times before on SA, I have been facilitating research in the arctic for a long time. 'my scientists' do not know where the funding for their research comes from, but they somehow derive these conclusions all by themselves. That doesn't rime with what you are suggesting, or is your suggestion implying that I'm driving the corruption in my case?
Click to expand...
not here to argue with you. I feel I sufficiently answered your initial questions, you did not address any points I raised.
We can disagree to a degree without being disrespectful.
Good luck in your endeavors.
 
Goodvibes

Goodvibes

under the southern cross I stand ...
1,495
444
bgytr said:
not here to argue with you. I feel I sufficiently answered your initial questions, you did not address any points I raised.
We can disagree to a degree without being disrespectful.
Good luck in your endeavors.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you have fucking bullshit beliefs and we have science!

You are so stupid and gullible that you accept the science that your doctor provides but not what climatologists provide?

Come on, tell us that you go to Faith Healers at the Pentecostal Church.

EDIT: and as far as being polite goes, fuck that, how is that going so far? Stupid stupid cunts like you are dangerous to every living organism on the planet. And you expect me to be civil to you?
 
Bagheera

Bagheera

Member
220
331
Alaska
bgytr said:
I feel I sufficiently answered your initial questions, you did not address any points I raised.
Click to expand...
I don't see a single question answered and I don't see a single point raised. You are the one questioning established science. The only thing that can disprove science is better science. Not your opinion, not your mothers opinion, not the opinion of your favorite politician nor the opinion of your pastor. Only better science can do that. So unless you can provide references to peer reviewed reports that indicate why science has it all wrong, than you are just full of it.
 
H

huey 2

Super Anarchist
3,716
1,881
syd
Just a note about weather events that will have a Cost.....the last big freeze in Texas was huge, as were the costs..... It will be the information from the Insurance companies that will raise our insurance premiums until we can no longer afford Insurance against climate events....This is now impacting many well off communities from protecting against financial ruin from these climate events ....the communities that cant afford insurance become the casualties after these events.

And here is another event
 
Goodvibes

Goodvibes

under the southern cross I stand ...
1,495
444
bgytr said:
A bio of Dr Christy:
In 1989 Dr. Roy W. Spencer (then a NASA/Marshall scientist and now a Principal Research Scientist at UAH) and Christy developed a global temperature data set from microwave data observed from satellites beginning in 1979.
Click to expand...

Yep, then they sold out and both went on to become two of the most corrupt cunts on the planet. Two of the best known Climate Change Deniers on the planet.

Yet stupid stupid people like you suck it up. Astounding but there is a reason an IQ plot of a population is a bell curve. Half are below average in intelligence, so you clearly belong to the lower half.
 
D

dogwatch

Super Anarchist
17,533
2,002
South Coast, UK
bgytr said:
He does not jump all in on one side or the other, and that seems to lend some sensibility to what he says in my interpretation.
Click to expand...

You bring out my inner pedant (not so hard to achieve). I don't think you said what you meant. Sensibility means being attunement to emotional or aesthetic overtones. It's more or less the opposite of "sensible". Hence the title of Jane Austen's novel contrasting two sisters of opposite temperaments.

sense-and-sensibility.jpg
 
Steam Flyer

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
46,638
10,865
Eastern NC
bgytr said:
not here to argue with you. I feel I sufficiently answered your initial questions, you did not address any points I raised.
We can disagree to a degree without being disrespectful.
Good luck in your endeavors.
Click to expand...

Disagreeing about science can either be utterly pointless and oppositional, or it can actually be part of scientific process itself. In fact disagreement among scientists is necessary for science to advance in the first place.

What you're doing is not part of the scientific process.

First, measurable facts have to be collected. Your guy begins by shouting "your facts are ka-ka!!" and going on from there. When the very first step is jumped over in the rush to prove oneself superior, what else has been skipped?
 
Goodvibes

Goodvibes

under the southern cross I stand ...
1,495
444
bgytr said:
We can disagree to a degree without being disrespectful.
Good luck in your endeavors.
Click to expand...

NO!

Stupid dumb as fuck fuckwits like you are the problem.

Time for respecting stupid fucking Opinions is over.

Where ever you have been getting your education (fb & Youtube) change it you stupid cunt.
 
H

huey 2

Super Anarchist
3,716
1,881
syd
Last edited:
H

huey 2

Super Anarchist
3,716
1,881
syd

all time low​

February 16, 2023


all-time-low2-300x166.jpg
The Environment
Antarctic sea ice cover has hit a record low level, according to Germany’s Alfred Wegener Institute, and the melt season is not yet over. As of February 8, Antarctic sea ice cover stood at 850,000 square miles, the lowest extent in forty years of recordkeeping.
“Since the sea ice melting in the Antarctic will most likely continue in the second half of the month, we can’t say yet when the record low will be reached or how much more sea ice will melt between now and then,” said Prof. Christian Haas of the Alfred Wegener Institute’s Helmholtz Centre. “The rapid decline in sea ice over the past six years is quite remarkable since the ice cover hardly changed at all in the thirty-five years before.” Read on.

From The Front Page


www.maritime-executive.com

Antarctic Seasonal Sea Ice Cover Hits Record Low

Antarctic sea ice cover has hit a record low level, according to Germany's Alfred Wegener Institute, and the melt season is not yet over. As of Fe...
www.maritime-executive.com www.maritime-executive.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts





Top