AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaiJin
The problem goes on and on and on with the trust of the data, is it robust or is it bunk even though its peer reviewed? There are a lot of credible people calling bull on the warming data who have no financial or political skin in the game. Some of these people are just stats junkies who have repeatedly shown the warming data or the timeline of warming to be skewed. Climateaudit.org is an interesting site to read to dig down below the headline grabbing nonsense that is often pushed out.
Really? A quick look and I see that this blogger is employed by an energy company. This whole blog appears to be a misinformation campaign imo - one of many climate skeptic sites pitting ideological doubt-casters against climate scientists.
The Following User Says Thank You to AltaGuy For This Useful Post:
Really? A quick look and I see that this blogger is employed by an energy company. This whole blog appears to be a misinformation campaign imo - one of many climate skeptic sites pitting ideological doubt-casters against climate scientists.
Read much? He is , for the most part a semi retired mining executive. He has made a lot of enemies in the statistical analysis world, mainly by just asking to see the data, and see the work to back up claims. For a lack of better of term, he has owned some of the big name climate researchers in their own field by just finding mistakes in their data, and in some cases the manipulation of the data. You can go back and read his posts prior to climategate, in which he was right about data set errors and influencing.
If you just want to make up your mind over glossy headlines in the media instead of immersing yourself in the data, thats up to you. Admittedly it's dry and hard to follow. That guy puts up all his data sets, all his work, for all to see and pick at. Something even the publically funded researches refuse to do even though they are claiming their work is for the greater good.
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaiJin
Read much? He is , for the most part a semi retired mining executive. He has made a lot of enemies in the statistical analysis world, mainly by just asking to see the data, and see the work to back up claims. For a lack of better of term, he has owned some of the big name climate researchers in their own field by just finding mistakes in their data, and in some cases the manipulation of the data. You can go back and read his posts prior to climategate, in which he was right about data set errors and influencing.
If you just want to make up your mind over glossy headlines in the media instead of immersing yourself in the data, thats up to you. Admittedly it's dry and hard to follow. That guy puts up all his data sets, all his work, for all to see and pick at. Something even the publically funded researches refuse to do even though they are claiming their work is for the greater good.
Honestly, I'm no scientist or data cruncher. Don't care. The whole point of my post is that you are presenting a false equivalency: actual scientists who can evaluate such things give no credence to such bunk, so neither will I. There is no debate on the science and "data sets", and you seem to be trying to make us believe there is by pointing at a former energy security trader's blog that has been discredited by people trained in such things.
Its the big tobacco method and its serving them well, even though its so incredibly obvious if you step back and look at those "skeptics" of climate change, the money inevitably leads back to fossil fuel interests.
We know trees and plants can remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Why can't we?
Startups have figured out how to remove carbon from the air. Will anyone pay them to do it?
Three startups, Carbon Engineering, Global Thermostat and Climeworks, are making strides with technology that can directly remove carbon dioxide from the air. What they need now is a viable business model
The Calgary-based company is one of a crop of startups placing bold bets on technology designed to directly capture CO2 from the air.
All three companies talk about a hypothetical future in which CO2 will be harvested from the sky and transformed, using renewable energy, into low-carbon fuels
If direct air capture of CO2 is to emerge as a meaningful climate solution, it would have to be built out at a global, industrial scale, costing billions of dollars.
Still, while direct air capture won’t be ready for deployment any time soon, climate experts say negative emissions technologies merit more attention. In a detailed review of climate intervention technologies published in February, The National Academies of Sciences described direct air capture as “an immature technology” and called on the government to invest in research “to improve methods of carbon dioxide removal and disposal at scales that would have a significant global climate impact”.
Given how low atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are, I'd imagine this would take a massive effort. Just look at how big forests are for an idea of scale...I would think capturing at the source would still be he most efficient way.
These supernovae weren’t close enough to incinerate life on Earth. But all that iron in the air may have changed the planet’s climate. The timing of the explosions happens to correspond to the transition into the Pleistocene epoch, the icy glacial period dominated by mastodons, mammoths, and saber-toothed cats.
The Following User Says Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
NASA’s comments came after Bill Nye posted a story about himself asking a prominent climate change denier to put his money where his mouth is. Nye, “the science guy,” offered two $20,000 bets to leading climate change denier Marc Morano, during an interview Morano himself had requested, that this year will be in the top 10 hottest years on record and this decade will also be the hottest on record. Alas, Morana declined the wagers.
Unsurprisingly, Nye posting the story to his Facebook page created a rumble and summoned the keyboard-wielding trolls to the comments section below the article. Perhaps after a late-night binge on YouTube conspiracy videos, many people accused NASA of being a leading voice in promoting the “scam” of man-made climate change by skewing figures and lying to the public about its data. A few commenters also wrongly cited, or just simply made up, some previous claims of NASA.
In a rebuttal, the NASA Climate Change Facebook page begun commenting back in a cool, calm and bluntly straight-to-the-point fashion to set the record straight. They even brought charts and everything.
Enjoy!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to troutman For This Useful Post:
Climate change is making the Antarctic blue—and that might be good news for the rest of the planet. Seafloor communities are flourishing beneath newly ice-free Antarctic seas, and as they grow, they are turning into carbon sinks, gobbling up carbon that might otherwise end up in the atmosphere.
2014 was the hottest year ever, until 2015 beat it by a wide margin. 2016 may beat that record by an even wider margin. It was the hottest January ever and the average global temperature in February was a full fifth of a Celcius degree higher than January.
The "average global temperature" is an average of all the temperatures over seas and land in both summer and winter hemispheres. It is normally very stable, changing no more than a few hundredths of a degree from year to year.
But March was not only hotter than February. It was hotter by an even wider margin than February was over January. Indeed, each of the past 11 months has beaten the highest previously recorded average temperature for that month.
Fire has long been a natural part of the Canadian boreal forest ecosystem, but when an out-of-control raging fire threatens to wipe out a Canadian city, it opens up the question of just how "natural" this disaster is.
Dr. Mike Flannigan, professor of wildland fire at the University of Alberta, thinks this might be just a taste of things to come. Fire is a normal part of many ecosystems but the fire regime is changing in Canada, as warmer, dryer conditions, due to global warming, increase the chances of more frequent and intense wildfires. We're also putting ourselves more at risk from fire by moving into naturally fire-prone environments in ever larger numbers.
Both of these factors will oblige us to learn to live and co-exist with fire, and find ways to reduce our risk and exposure when it comes.
How is a discussion about climate change devoid of weather manipulation? It's been documented and there are federal conferences held in the US discussing their weather modification technology. Here's a video of senators and the military discussing it. The snap reaction is to claim conspiracy but it's verified by the government itself to exist, yes the climate is changing and the government has a direct hand in it.
Yes the general population needs to be more conscious of our footprint but there's another huge element most can't even acknowledge. There are many similar videos of US officials discussing weather modification technology that's been utilised since the 90's.
Climate change is a foregone conclusion; why, what and who are the driving influences at this point in time is very much up for debate. High intensity EMR waves into the ionosphere is only one of several things the government is using.
5 Solomon Islands have been lost to increasing sea levels in the past 6 or so decades. Several other islands lowing significant area causing people to move.
A taste of things to come?
