Somebody should be compiling a list of these scientists so 2 decades from now when temperatures go down, we can ruin their careers.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
One More Time, For the Stupid People
Seeing the true Nazis of our generation have seemed to make it to the front headlines, I find it necessary to once again, repost this seemingly overlooked fact that the temperature of the Earth, going back 400,000 years is chaotic and volatile and that we are fools to require 6 billion people and 35 trillion dollars worth of economies come to a halt and change their lifestyles for a bunch of childish socialists and their conspiracy theory.
Somebody should be compiling a list of these scientists so 2 decades from now when temperatures go down, we can ruin their careers.
Somebody should be compiling a list of these scientists so 2 decades from now when temperatures go down, we can ruin their careers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
34 comments:
Is that graph supposed to mean something to us? What is the latest point on that graph, and the associated uncertainty?
Cap'n, if that was a stock chart I'd bet the farm on it.
The vertical axis is the change in temperature in degrees C. According to this chart, the average change in temperature in Vostok is about 5 degrees C colder each year for the last 40,000 years.
Either 40,000 years ago was too hot for any life to exist in Vostok or Vostok is currently about 200,000 degrees below absolute zero.
I've been meaning to do a correlation of CO2 ppm vs temperature. That seems like something you are likely to view as valid [Not to mention I think it would be neat]. I'll make a tall effort to find the time.
I found the source data. The vertical axis is the difference in temperature from today, not an annual change.
I retract my criticism.
Are you a climatologist? Or do you have any training in meteorology/atmospheric science? How about leaving the climate science to people who know what they're talking about.
Anon,
So you leave it to the "experts" only because you're too lazy to get informed or you're afraid of opposing someone's opinion. That's a weak argument.
Show some interest in this topic and join the discussion with plausible arguments!
"Are you a climatologist? Or do you have any training in meteorology/atmospheric science?"
Analysis of data trends is a pretty big strong point for economists, so when a group of people start going against thousands of years of climate trends while pushing a political agenda, an economist like the Captain here is in a damn good position to call them on it.
How about we get a bronze plaque made up; names, predictions, warnings and the like. Because, for a fact, twenty years from now lefty idiots are going to excuse this by saying the computer models weren't good enough.
What's so hard to understand? The data displayed simply shows the fairly regular changes in temperature that the earth has always gone through. At a minimum it should lead one to at least question the mass-hysteria surrounding the claims that global warming is mostly the result of human activity. Come-to-think: if humans are the cause then those previous warmings are obviously the result of previously unknown advanced civilizations.
"How about leaving the climate science to people who know what they're talking about."
That's right - don't question your betters or think independently about any issue in which you are not an expert. Best leave that to those who can tell you what to think.
Hey anonymous (11:53 am), are you a professional critic? If not, why don't you SHUT THE HELL UP!!!
Seriously though, think about the idiocy needed to make your comment?
If the vertical axis is the difference in temperature between the time on the horizontal axis and today, and the average temperature on that graph is -5 degrees C, then today's temperature is 5 degrees C *warmer* than the average temperature over the last 400,000 years.
So far, I fail to see how this graph debunks anything. Cap'n seems to be saying "if you don't agree you must be stupid", which disappoints me, because he's one of the few people whose writing on the topic I would actually spend time reading.
Ryan,
And even I can't claim to this chart. I had done one on the 49,000 year ice bore data simply because I only had MS Excel at the time and it can only handle 64,000 data points.
A good Canadian friend pulled this chart together.
In one of P.J. O'Rourk'e books (I own it, but can't find it offhand), he points out that the same individuals who are now running around screaming about global warming as though it was a proven hypothesis and that our human civilization (which has, you know, made us successful and enabled humanity to live longer and healthier lives) is destroying the earth, are the same bunch of people who, thirty years ago, were predicting a global catastrophe in the form of a new Ice Age, thanks to all the pollutants we were releasing.
What hasn't changed? Their incessant call for restrictions on human freedom and the continued intrusion of ever-increasing government. It appears they've managed to sway scientific consensus to their side as well, with the help of the media. This will be a difficult fight to win.
The graph is only an interesting backdrop to the cimate change we are experiencing at the moment. It's a good comparison between the curreant, mostly-human made global warming, and the global temperature in geological time.
Of course, it tells us *nothing* about the potential impact of the global warming we are experiencing.
PS: In regards to the claims that today's GW crowd was a "global COOLING" crowd 30 years ago, it needs to be said that the global cooling folks were mostly on the green fringe, and that the earlier fad never had the scientific backing that global warming has today.
Thank you, Mahan.
I couldn't have put it better myself. When I was Up North last summer, I read a fascinating article from a National Geographic (ca. 1975) that talked about "the food crisis" and specifically in terms of how, since the world is getting COLDER, crops will be able to produce less.
I really wish I had swiped the magazine, since it seemed so timely. Damn Catholic guilt!
TBS
Cap, if you're so sure that temperatures will decline in 20 years, why not put your money where your mouth is and put a bet on it? Real climate scientists have been trying to get GW deniers like Fred Singer and Richard Lindzen to do that for years, and so far there have been no takers. Is is possible that the "experts" on your side have been lying to you?
http://www.jamstec.go.jp/frcgc/research/d5/jdannan/betting.html#lindze
I almost feel sorry for those who buy into the Al Gore view of the world. But rather, I am enjoying their misery.
Stupidity deserves suffering. I only wish their stupidity was accompanied by an equal amount of physical pain.
While the Left tries to defy the solar winds and sun flares in an effort to reform an entire planet, (not sure to what or how ... populations continue to multiply) I will continue to smoke my little Cuban Romeo and Juliette Puritos, (Cuban cigars are legal in Canada) and sip a single male while sailing around the lovely Georgia Strait.
The best revenge against these merchants of fear is to live well.
After all humanity has been through to allow me this grand life-style, it would be rude and disrespectful to not enjoy it.
So, to help repay my debt to those who have fought the ignorance of the various collectives and despots, I say thank you for what I have been able to do with the freedom and opportunity in my life because of you.
If it gets too hot, I will buy an air conditioner, if it gets cold I will by some warmer clothes.
Whatever else happens, I will adapt.
No fear!
Life is to be enjoyed. Those who cannot enjoy their lives ... try harder or enjoy your misery.
Everyone knows that the Russians are controlling the weather.
I backfired though ... they became so obsessed with it that it cost them cold war.
They should have tried to get an economy going instead.
Now that we are obsessed with the weather ... it will cost us our economy.
And it goes.
There is a difference between the science that indicates recent global warming and the predictive models used to guess about the future. How accurate are weather forecasts? There is no empirical record of success in climate modelling either.
The real question is how one might gain economically from all this hysteria.
A graph without supporting information is useless, as is this one.
What you see by the big peaks are normal peaks in an ice age which we are in. What you need to look at is all the red at the far right where temperatures ar no longer dropping. You haven't stumbled across hidden proof of no climate change just a graph that needs to be interpreted. The planet goes through ice ages and hot houses. Like I already said this is an ice age, where average global temperaures are around 2 celsius ( an average of temperatures from all over the planet including arctic/antarctica and equatorial regions for the whole year). When you go from an ice age to a hot house average temperatures will rise to an average of 30 celsius.
All the red on the right hand side of the graph shows a sytem that is changing. Temperatures are no longer dropping like they are supposed to in a natural cycle. These temperatures will increase over the next few centuries to peaks higher than you currently see at any point in the last 400,000 years. Its like saying last week was so cold in comparison to a year. This is just 400,000 years out of 6 billion.
If you go back several billion years you will see we had acid falling from the skies and no Oxygen and iron never rusted. Would you use this to justify doing nothing about acid rain?
Hope that clarifies this graph for everyone. Its nothing new if you ever studied earth sciences.
How to gain economically? Ask David Suzuki or the heads of a hundred other eco-NPOs that are making a killing out of this.
Duke: Perhaps you should consider sipping a single MALT instead of what you're proposing in your previous post (see the excerpt below)...not that there is anything wrong with that. ;)
"...I will continue to smoke my little Cuban Romeo and Juliette Puritos, (Cuban cigars are legal in Canada) and sip a single MALE while sailing around the lovely Georgia Strait..."
I found this through a link at SDA. If you'd care to read the comments of someone who has actually read the article, on which that chart is based, I encourage you to head over there.
Warmly,
Mith,
There was no article this chart was based on.
The chart was sent to me my a Canuck that had the software to handle over 62,000 data points about 4-6 months ago.
I pulled the data from a Greeland ice core sample which went back 49,000 years, thus, 49,000 data points and could be handled in Excel.
I lament the inability of Excel to handle more points because the Vostok bore sample went back 429,000 years.
______________________
Oh, and to the smutz face who is an environmentalist that wanted to make a post about how the chart seems to show persistent warming during the last part of the chart (and then goes on to blather on about how he is an expert blah blah blah) three things;
1. That "persistent warming in the last part of the chart" is the last 3,000 years. So don't tell me the Romans were producing menthane and CO2 or that somehow because you took stool samples that makes you a better mathematician than economists or kindergartners.
2. I like to post opposing views, but I have a rule that if the opposing view is based in stupidty, I won't post it (which your's was)
3. I have many gay friends, I am pro-gay marriage, but dude, your profile is SOOOO femmie. And something tells me you're not gay, you're just really femmie. Enjoy dating the non-shaven granola crowd.
Cripes
"To reduce the population
We must licence copulation."
No doubt, we are experiencing a period of global warming right now but, there's no way to predict when it will end. Those exquisitely accurate predictions from computer models are based on data ranging in quality from dubious to conjectural.
Unfortunately, the alarmist propagandists have been very successful at inducing mass hysteria. As if we didn't have some really serious global problems to worry about!
You want people to take seriously a graph "made by your buddy"?
PS. Looks like your "buddy" simply recreated a graph that can already be found at
http://www.grida.no/climate/vital/02.htm
...where rather different conclusions are drawn.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=climate+cancelled&search=Search
So if were to leave this to the scientists should we Ignore al gore and listen to these folk?
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p37.htm
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
Listen to them the consensus of 19,700 in one country alone.
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p357.htm
Of the 19,700 signatures that the project has received in total so far, 17,800 have been independently verified and the other 1,900 have not yet been independently verified.
Now if global warming was real why doesn't China have to do anything? Other than the hundreds of new coal plants.
Funny you should mention Nazis at the beginning of your post. This article from Ellen Goodman of the Boston Globe proclaims that “global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers”.
If you would like to let Ellen know how much she should be ashamed of herself, you can email her at goodman@globe.com.
BTW - We are coming off a 7 year sunspot cycle. These 7 year cycles are demonstrated to coincide with warming trends. Will the next 3 to 4 years be continuously cooling?
Anyone who posts anonymously should be disregarded and especially when they jump into something like this without any contribution the credibility factor is non-existent!
Also - the last spike on the chart appears to be about 200 years.
The thick top of this spike likely reflects the increased amount of data available for that period.
Which CC can probably verify!
That appearance of extended warm time is most likely due to that preponderance of data.
NOAA, a bastion of right wing conspirists.
Post a Comment