• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

What will it take to convince you of climate change?

Yakoo752 said:
It will be interesting to see what data the RAVAN CubeSat satellites deliver. They've been operational for about a year now.

here's a presentation on it
http://lasp.colorado.edu/media/proj...Session 7/g_Swartz_RAVAN_Sun-Climate_2015.pdf
Click to expand...

:wtf
Thanks for sharing that.
Whenever I read/see something like that I feel like a caveman. The material science required to make the nano tubes is boggling my mind (I'm sure it's easy now but the idea and making it happen are light years beyond me).
 
I may come back to this later, but I will just leave this here for contemplation, rather than the usual holier-than-thou diatribe that fills this thread. Tic-Toc.

Five_Myr_Climate_Change.png
 
CoorsLight said:
The problem is that's NOT how it's all done. Models are a small part of the total picture. Most of the work is field and lab work.

What "data collection methods" are you referring to that are so problematic?
Click to expand...

Agree at there's lots of field and lab work.

As a person who has filled out census forms for large corporations (a form of data collection), I can say that data collection of any sort is mostly bullshit. Not reliable due to many reasons. And if the underlying data is not true, then all the lab work and computer models don't help.

Measurements over the last 50 or so years, even if I buy them all, is far too short a time to extrapolate any meaningful information about CC. And frankly anything over 50 years old is incredibly suspect. No proper tools, training, etc etc........

Don't get me wrong, we must needs take care of our environment. I'm just not buying the BS. Too many people have their hand in the till on this one, so they need to perpetuate the "science".
 
CoorsLight said:
Nope. If we all went hippy it wouldn't really make a difference. It would just slightly extend the time we'll be extracting shale oil until hydrocarbon fuel is no longer available. It would move the needle, sure. But probably not enough to really matter.

What we need is to overcome the incredibly well-funded propaganda campaign that has people actually believing there is a "scientific debate" about climate change. Once people understand that the only dissent comes from propagandists and the blind sheep they've fooled, then they can start to process the scope and severity of the problem.

This is an issue we engineered ourselves into, and we have to engineer our way out. It will take R&D and investment from the public and private sectors. It will take willingness of greedy politicians to end the graft and subsidy of the fossil fuel industry. We have most of the tech we need already. It just requires courage to stand up to industry to change the course we are on.
Click to expand...

I agree that becoming grass eating naturalist with no energy needs would not fix this. The earth generally has been warming for a while.
Today's hot news would agree as many scientist already have.

To that affect I think man's modern ERA has had some impact, but it did not create the problem. We exacerbated it. We are not going to engineer our way out of it. We are not that smart and there are too many countries that don't give a shit to the big picture.

Mother Earth is the only one that can fix it.. like she has multiple times already. A massive volcano, asteroid hit from hell etc. will cool the planet. We don't need the politicians to make that happen. It will sometime.

However.. I agree we should be doing all we can to minimize the affect it, as we continue to add to the problem.
 
UDRider said:
And this is a problem in a nutshell. Deniers: some out of context graphic with assinine comment. Rebuttal a scientific article that when people see their eyes glaze over. The former has much better persuasion power in current times of short attention spans.
Click to expand...

yeah but it's behind a subscription wall, that's how you know it's #FakeNews
 
budman said:
I agree that becoming grass eating naturalist with no energy needs would not fix this. The earth generally has been warming for a while.
Today's hot news would agree as many scientist already have.

To that affect I think man's modern ERA has had some impact, but it did not create the problem. We exacerbated it. We are not going to engineer our way out of it. We are not that smart and there are too many countries that don't give a shit to the big picture.

Mother Earth is the only one that can fix it.. like she has multiple times already. A massive volcano, asteroid hit from hell etc. will cool the planet. We don't need the politicians to make that happen. It will sometime.

However.. I agree we should be doing all we can to minimize the affect it, as we continue to add to the problem.
Click to expand...

Actually, from the geological cycles standpoint, we are supposed to be in a cooling phase right now.

Yakoo752 said:
yeah but it's behind a subscription wall, that's how you know it's #FakeNews
Click to expand...

Long story short: mobility of bubbles in the ice cores can cause an apparent lag in CO2-temp correlations of up to 100-1500 years.
 
mrmarklin said:
Agree at there's lots of field and lab work.

As a person who has filled out census forms for large corporations (a form of data collection), I can say that data collection of any sort is mostly bullshit. Not reliable due to many reasons. And if the underlying data is not true, then all the lab work and computer models don't help.

Measurements over the last 50 or so years, even if I buy them all, is far too short a time to extrapolate any meaningful information about CC. And frankly anything over 50 years old is incredibly suspect. No proper tools, training, etc etc........

Don't get me wrong, we must needs take care of our environment. I'm just not buying the BS. Too many people have their hand in the till on this one, so they need to perpetuate the "science".[/QUOTE]

:thumbup

Besides the money there are several other agendas at work, the least of which is not control.

Lithium batteries for sale-$5000

No takers

Lithium batteries for sale, stop climate change, save the planet...SOLD!

You must buy LEDs to replace your incandecent bulbs.

No way.

LEDs help reduce climate change...give me 100. How much? Only 10x the price? Give me 200, what a bargain.
Click to expand...
 
That pesky renewable energy source cabal has boatloads of cash they're using to skew results everywhere.
 
Schnellbandit said:
mrmarklin said:
Agree at there's lots of field and lab work.

As a person who has filled out census forms for large corporations (a form of data collection), I can say that data collection of any sort is mostly bullshit. Not reliable due to many reasons. And if the underlying data is not true, then all the lab work and computer models don't help.

Measurements over the last 50 or so years, even if I buy them all, is far too short a time to extrapolate any meaningful information about CC. And frankly anything over 50 years old is incredibly suspect. No proper tools, training, etc etc........

Don't get me wrong, we must needs take care of our environment. I'm just not buying the BS. Too many people have their hand in the till on this one, so they need to perpetuate the "science".[/QUOTE]

:thumbup

Besides the money there are several other agendas at work, the least of which is not control.

Lithium batteries for sale-$5000

No takers

Lithium batteries for sale, stop climate change, save the planet...SOLD!

You must buy LEDs to replace your incandecent bulbs.

No way.

LEDs help reduce climate change...give me 100. How much? Only 10x the price? Give me 200, what a bargain.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that scientists are colluding with manufacturers of green products to create a hoax of climate change?

Don't you think it's more realistic that fossil fuel industry--one of the most powerful and subsidized industries on the planet--is funding propaganda groups to spread misinformation about how their product is ruining the habitability of the planet?

Koch Industries alone has funneled over $100,000,000 to climate disinformation groups in the last 20 years. And that's all documented. You are suggesting that a worldwide conspiracy of scientists are getting even more money than that for publishing bogus research? Why is the work of the handful of scientists who deny AGW so frequently funded by organizations like this?

These propaganda groups have been so effective as to get people to align their politics and identities to serve them and further spread propaganda. So effective that people would believe in such a vast conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...
 
Speaking of renewables, just what is going to happen to all those lithium batteries and that giga-mess factory when the industry moves away from using them, as it most likely will within the next 5-10 years?

And those renewable energy solar panels you bought and threw up on your roof? PG&E is laughing all the way to the bank as they move to time of use billing. Now, you rates for electric will go up just when your nice panels aren't harvesting anything. Then, since the rates will be lower during sunlight hours, you'll benefit even less when they do harvest.

That was all planned out decades ago.

Attend some utility planning meetings and see what goes on. They pushed CFLs just before LEDs became the rage, to save the planet. Now they push LEDs to save the planet. Next, micro-laser pulsed lights...see the pattern? And none of that stuff is renewable or recyclable nor do they last anywhere near as long as claimed.

Climate change happens, yes, we contribute to it. Mass extinctions have happened before, climate change isn't what will do us in, unless there is no money in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top