Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > The Paris Climate Disagreement

The Paris Climate Disagreement (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 07:05 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
I can't change what we were taught in school. (Madison #2, Madison school district #38, Phoenix AZ)
No but you could decide to acknowledge that if you were taught that you were taught wrong?
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 07:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Makes sense to me, but I have to wonder when the remaining conservatives not profiting will come to the same conclusions? It's been years and years and years of debating this stuff, the debate should have been over a long time ago.
When their voters let them.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 07:15 PM
 
Listen the important lesson here is if something you were taught in 7th grade is wrong, never trust scientists ever again.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 08:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
This is how it works:
Pseudo science peddler: Look 1,2,3,4

Evidenced based replies: sigh. No, 1,,2,3,4

PSP: Ah but 5,6,7,8
EBR: sigh, no 5,6,7,8

etc

PSP: Ah but 113,346
EBR: I have a life
PSP: I WIN! Your evidence refuted ALL my other points but this one point made after I drowned you in nonsense WINS TEH EVERYTHING!


What intrigues me though is what fuels this persistence. Dakar's theory about the profit motive keeping this alive makes sense from the perspective of the anti-climate change propaganda, but what fuels these arguments with regular citizens? Is it just stubbornness?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 08:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
What intrigues me though is what fuels this persistence. Dakar's theory about the profit motive keeping this alive makes sense from the perspective of the anti-climate change propaganda, but what fuels these arguments with regular citizens? Is it just stubbornness?
Right wing media.

The real irony here is a lot of US business has dropped its disbelief and opposition to global warming. Unfortunately its going to take a while to unravel it from politics.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 09:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
This administration doesn't hold singular opinions.

I'm not saying that as snark, or taking a shot. It's meant purely as a neutral observation.
Ignoring the semantic argument, no one will explain what Trump's opinion is. In fact, they make it sound like they're going out of their way not to find out. Which is a bit of answer unto itself.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 09:34 PM
 
Chongo, your pope is for addressing global warming. Are you against both scientist consensus and your pope?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 09:52 PM
 
Do you guys know any conservatives that have changed their tune on global warming over the years?

Maybe some of them don't want to acknowledge that Al Gore was right 2309423094 years ago when his movie came out?
     
The Final Shortcut
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 10:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Ehhhhh AIDS wasn't diagnosed until the 1980's. You can't teach about what hasn't been discovered. Super Gonorrhea wasn't on the radar either.
Ok sure, AIDs may have been early 80s, but don't ignore my point: in the 70s climate science was still in its infancy compared to where it is now. Holding on to predictions made back then - particularly ones that were in a small fringe minority even in those days - is completely disengenuous at best, complete and utter fraud at worst. And in your case, you've been repeating this same garbage for so long it's frankly embarrassing.

Even ars techica posted an article that said although there were studies claiming warming and cooling, the press was pushing global cooling.
First off, there's no better way to establish yourself as a terrible person than to bash the "erroneous MSM" at every opportunity, and then fall back on "the MSM said it" when you make a garbage statement and get called on it.

Secondly, I'm not sure that article lends much support to your argument:

Ars Technica: That ’70s myth—did climate science really call for a “coming ice age?”:
One of the undying, zombie-like arguments against climate change is that you can’t trust climate scientists because they started out making doom and gloom claims about global cooling in the 1970s. But this, along with many other things comedian Dennis Miller has said on late night talk shows, needn’t be taken seriously.
....

But while it’s fair to say there were real questions about aerosol pollution in the 1970s, it’s simply not true that climate scientists are a bunch of know-nothings (or worse) who prophesied death by ice when the temperatures were dropping, then switched to death by fire when temperatures started rising. Regardless of what someone may remember hearing about at the time, global warming had been a topic of scientific concern for decades already.

That concern crystallized in the 1970s as the foundation was laid for modern climate science. In any case, being mistaken about 1970s science is no basis for ignoring all the science done in the decades since.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 10:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I don't even care anymore, they are hopeless causes at this point, and I think we'd be better off if we just chastised them rather than giving them any possible validation and attention.

We spent years and years hearing them out and entertaining this debate, and we are still here. Patience has not worked, maybe abuse will.
Abusing people out of frustration is likewise repellent.

I shouldn't need to be pointing these things out.
     
The Final Shortcut
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 5, 2017, 10:51 PM
 
Sorry, bit of a mistake on my part to take the bait on GW claims. Discussing the Paris agreement would be more appropriate, but unfortunately I don't anticipate that will be a productive use of anyone's time (particularly mine lol).
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 12:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Abusing people out of frustration is likewise repellent.

I shouldn't need to be pointing these things out.

Repeating these same arguments after all of these years is repelling me, and I'm very important.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 03:23 AM
 
Why are the northern glaciers shrinking while the southern are growing, all at an equal rate? Very possibly because we're due for a magnetic swap in the poles, the results of which would almost perfectly mimic the changes in climate we're seeing now. The difference is, a swap in poles isn't something we can do a damned thing about, and Climate Change has become big business.

PS. There's no excuse for calling anyone names, that's schoolyard garbage and shouldn't be tolerated.
( Last edited by Cap'n Tightpants; Jun 6, 2017 at 03:41 AM. )
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 06:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Why are the northern glaciers shrinking while the southern are growing, all at an equal rate? Very possibly because we're due for a magnetic swap in the poles, the results of which would almost perfectly mimic the changes in climate we're seeing now. The difference is, a swap in poles isn't something we can do a damned thing about, and Climate Change has become big business.

PS. There's no excuse for calling anyone names, that's schoolyard garbage and shouldn't be tolerated.
oooh a new theory. Please do link to some compelling mechanism that links magnetic pole swapping and glacier melt/formation. I'd love to see some proof that one is a sign of the other.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 10:11 AM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
oooh a new theory. Please do link to some compelling mechanism that links magnetic pole swapping and glacier melt/formation. I'd love to see some proof that one is a sign of the other.
You know that CTP is an expert of everything, right?
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 01:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
You know that CTP is an expert of everything, right?
Yes, that's why I'm looking forward to the enlightening link.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 02:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Why are the northern glaciers shrinking while the southern are growing, all at an equal rate?
The vast majority of glaciers are shrinking worldwide. The Patagonian ice sheet is expanding, but it's like the 5th largest and all the larger ones are shrinking.

You're referring to the southern sea ice anomaly, where the Antarctic sea ice has been growing during southern winter. However, the southern growth is smaller than the northern losses. You can track sea ice at Cryosphere Today with graphs going back decades. This graph plots global-vs-anomaly over time. It's erratic, but the global track is reliably downwards. The grey line is the average over the period. So you can easily see how the real track (blue) compares over time. Red is the global deviation from average.

Wikipedia does cover Geomagnetic Reversal. The magnetic field drops to 5% or less of modern normal. Since this hasn't happened, we are not about to experience a reversal.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 03:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Rising slowly, just as predicted. Ask the residents of Miami. Increasing public works are going into holding back the tide. They may need dikes.

The increasing incidence of wilder weather swings are with us too. No single storm can be blamed on global warming, but the higher incidence can be.

Then there's all the glaciers vanishing from Glacier National Park. We may have to rename the park.
confusing weather with climate? Ever heard of erosion? Look at the US east coast and the damage done over time from hurricanes hitting them. Look how Mt. St. Helens eruption caused a change in the jet stream after so much forest was destroyed, and the changes in weather for a few years. We don't know in detail just what has driven the climate or the exact causes. Anyone want to speculate what caused the planet to warm and cool repeatedly?
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 04:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
This is how it works:
Pseudo science peddler: Look 1,2,3,4

Evidenced based replies: sigh. No, 1,,2,3,4

PSP: Ah but 5,6,7,8
EBR: sigh, no 5,6,7,8

etc

PSP: Ah but 113,346
EBR: I have a life
PSP: I WIN! Your evidence refuted ALL my other points but this one point made after I drowned you in nonsense WINS TEH EVERYTHING!
I must admit I found this amusing, but didn't give it enough credit at the time.

So now repeated record-hot summers are from an upcoming geomagnetic reversal, before it happens. And erosion in Miami is dropping everything. At an even pace, rather than the sea level rising. You'd think road crews using GPS could detect the road bed dropping. Erosion under buildings would seem to be a detectable concern too.

And yes, I was confused between weather and climate. I thought climate was long-term weather, but perhaps I was wrong.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 04:08 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
confusing weather with climate? Ever heard of erosion? Look at the US east coast and the damage done over time from hurricanes hitting them. Look how Mt. St. Helens eruption caused a change in the jet stream after so much forest was destroyed, and the changes in weather for a few years. We don't know in detail just what has driven the climate or the exact causes. Anyone want to speculate what caused the planet to warm and cool repeatedly?
Why should we speculate? Why not just ask actual climate scientists about this?

Why do you distrust the scientific process? Seriously, do you think there is some sort of massive global conspiracy going on?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 04:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Why should we speculate? Why not just ask actual climate scientists about this?

Why do you distrust the scientific process? Seriously, do you think there is some sort of massive global conspiracy going on?
The Tone Police approve this post.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 05:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The Tone Police approve this post.
Screw you, you bearded goon.
     
Waragainstsleep
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 10:03 PM
 
So California has signed their own climate deal with China. bold move from Brown and a big FU to Trump. I'm a fan obviously.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 10:14 PM
 
I voted for Brown in my first presidential primary, so I have a certain fondness, but even back then I knew he was little batshit.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 10:30 PM
 
subego, I would like to apologize for calling you a bearded goon. It was not a good tone and I like you.
     
The Final Shortcut
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 10:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Anyone want to speculate what caused the planet to warm and cool repeatedly?
Is.....is this a joke?
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2017, 10:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
subego, I would like to apologize for calling you a bearded goon. It was not a good tone and I like you.
I like you too!

Joe Versus the Volcano is underrated.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 10:35 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Shortcut View Post
Is.....is this a joke?
Just answer the question. Give us your facts, not opinions.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 10:41 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Just answer the question. Give us your facts, not opinions.
Your post is too confused to respond adequately to.
(Probably around 345,346 or 347 of the Pseudo Science game)
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 12:33 PM
 
FWIW Trumps approval took a beating after leaving the agreement. Flirted with his worst numbers ever.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 12:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Chongo, your pope is for addressing global warming. Are you against both scientist consensus and your pope?
Get back to me when it has been declared a dogma of the Church. Until then, Pope Francis may as well said that David Beckhem (Michael Jordon) isn't worthy to smell Diego Maradona's(Kareem's) jock.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 12:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
FWIW Trumps approval took a beating after leaving the agreement. Flirted with his worst numbers ever.
I feel the elephant in the room is... there was a time he was sucking more?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 12:58 PM
 
By one point on each. I'm guessing it was the first attempt at the AHCA but I'd have to check the dates
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 01:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
oooh a new theory.
If by "new" you mean >20 years old, yeah.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 01:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
You know that CTP is an expert of everything, right?
I have to admit, when you disagree with me it makes me feel better.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 06:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
If by "new" you mean >20 years old, yeah.
Still waiting for the enlightening link.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 06:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Just answer the question. Give us your facts, not opinions.
Why do you distrust the scientific process? Seriously, do you think there is some sort of massive global conspiracy going on?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 08:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doc HM View Post
Still waiting for the enlightening link.
I didn't realize your Google was broken.

https://watchers.news/2011/03/15/abo...and-poleshift/
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
el chupacabra
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 10:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Apples and bowling balls: this has nothing to do with climate change and is all about being able to use cheaper labor in other countries. Lowering wages won't help, because that will significantly diminish local consumption. Aspiring to keep an old system on life support is quite useless, most types of manufacturing are simply no longer competitive in industrialized nations with high wages.
Another great point that backs what Im saying 110%. IF we lower consumption (which may or may not happen), that would be great for lowering our carbon foot print. It would also mean less resource extraction and processing in general; less mining, logging, fishing etc.. That would be great for the whole environment! Not just climate change. The worthless treaty didnt address any of this, or anything logical at all. It's just a feel good dog and pony show to a certain class of people.

Aspiring to keep an old system on life support is quite useless, most types of manufacturing are simply no longer competitive in industrialized nations with high wages.
So what happens when every nation becomes industrialized? I mean isnt that another goal leftists are always aspiring to?
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 11:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
I didn't realize your Google was broken.

https://watchers.news/2011/03/15/abo...and-poleshift/
There seem to be errors in the article, which is from 2011. It's light on explaining how magnetic field effects will cause all these disruptions. Then there's this:
As of March 2010, NASA space weather tells us two things. The first is that the Earth's magnetic field is almost at zero strength overall, broken into hundreds of small coupled fields. The sun for the moment is relatively quiet according to what is observed by aural activity on Earth. These magnetic zones are shifting continually and presage change. It appears that the field will be globally neutral on or about 2012.
Apparently the magnetic field vanished in 2012. However, there is hope. A later article on the same site gives the definitive answer in 2015:
A group of researchers have studied ancient volcanic rocks to conclude that Earth's magnetic field is a long time away from "flipping" even if the magnetic field's intensity is reducing fairly fast. This is because Earth's current magnetic field intensity is double the long term average and it will take many thousand years for the poles to "flip" again.
     
The Final Shortcut
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2017, 11:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Just answer the question. Give us your facts, not opinions.
Answer the question as to why climate change has happened in the past? How about that old adage of you reading a book for once? Or how about simply spending a few hours on Wikipedia?

But, ok, since you asked the ridiculous question:
Milankovitch cycles
Tectonic activity
Volcanic activity
Solar variation
Ocean currents
Greenhouse gas feedback mechanisms

Those are the "just the facts" reasons why. Now that I've answered your question, I can't wait for you to be inspired and run off to inform yourself on this issue.
     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 8, 2017, 05:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
I didn't realize your Google was broken.

https://watchers.news/2011/03/15/abo...and-poleshift/
I was more interested in what YOU thought was a compelling link.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Jun 8, 2017, 06:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by el chupacabra View Post
Another great point that backs what Im saying 110%. IF we lower consumption (which may or may not happen), that would be great for lowering our carbon foot print. It would also mean less resource extraction and processing in general; less mining, logging, fishing etc.. That would be great for the whole environment! Not just climate change.
With modern renewables, you can have your cake and eat it: it is cheaper than fossil fuels, doesn't pollute, and if we get better at conserving resources, then our living standards don't have to regress.
Originally Posted by el chupacabra View Post
The worthless treaty didnt address any of this, or anything logical at all. It's just a feel good dog and pony show to a certain class of people.
Sounds as if you are not very familiar with the treaty.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 8, 2017, 08:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Shortcut View Post
Answer the question as to why climate change has happened in the past? How about that old adage of you reading a book for once? Or how about simply spending a few hours on Wikipedia?

But, ok, since you asked the ridiculous question:
Milankovitch cycles
Tectonic activity
Volcanic activity
Solar variation
Ocean currents
Greenhouse gas feedback mechanisms

Those are the "just the facts" reasons why. Now that I've answered your question, I can't wait for you to be inspired and run off to inform yourself on this issue.
The warmings and coolings don't require any human intervention then?
Astronomy was a hobby of mine so much of the list is familiar to me. Its the conclusions being made with very little accurate data.
     
The Final Shortcut
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 8, 2017, 08:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
There seem to be errors in the article, which is from 2011. It's light on explaining how magnetic field effects will cause all these disruptions. Then there's this:

Apparently the magnetic field vanished in 2012. However, there is hope. A later article on the same site gives the definitive answer in 2015:
That's because it's a nonsense theory made up by the usual anti-GW lobby to fearmonger and confuse the climate change discussion for the skeptical layperson. Shaddim tends to casually toss out these types of arguments at convenient times and then disappear or plead innocence when they're debunked.

Of course, a rational or informed person who believes in logical thinking might stop and say, "huh...if these magnetic pole reversals have happened in the past, I wonder if we can find out about them in the geological record and compare that to the past climate and sediment and archaeological records that we have?"

And yes in fact, we do know about geomagnetic reversals. The last one occurred a bit less than 800k years ago and before that they happened a bit more often, and our corresponding proxy records don't show that significant climate change events occurred contemporaneous or seemingly as a result of the geomagnetic reversal.

So yeah. It could happen, and your compass and maybe your birds are really going to be confused. There will likely be some other totally weird things we find out about if it happens.

But there's really no evidence at all that climate change is happening because of geomagnetic reversal. Other than, of course, than postulated by the Chicken Littles who consistently ignore the preponderous amount of evidence we do have, and repeatedly seize on the latest, greatest "there must be some other explanation" theories (at least until, oh, about 5-10 years after they are disproven).

     
Doc HM
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 8, 2017, 09:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
There seem to be errors in the article,
NO!. really???
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 8, 2017, 09:50 AM
 
Even if the idiots who still believe global warming is some sort of global scientific conspiracy never change their tune (and sorry, subego, for my bad tone), I hope that at some point they'll realize that there are other reasons for us to go after clean renewables, including the creation of new jobs.

They'll probably say that the free market should take care of this without government intervention and blah blah blah, but maybe in some respects this would be an upgrade over hearing their arguments where they pretend to know better than climate scientists.
     
The Final Shortcut
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 8, 2017, 09:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
The warmings and coolings don't require any human intervention then?
Astronomy was a hobby of mine so much of the list is familiar to me. Its the conclusions being made with very little accurate data.
Of course global warmings and coolings don't require human intervention. That's a fundamental tenant of climate science.

There is an enormous amount of accurate data generated by climate science. That is incorrect.
     
el chupacabra
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2017, 01:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
With modern renewables, you can have your cake and eat it: it is cheaper than fossil fuels, doesn't pollute, and if we get better at conserving resources, then our living standards don't have to regress.
When someone presents an argument based on "having your cake and eating it too" or "If we get better at ...." it either means they aren't knowledgeable or 2) there simply isn't any other good argument to be made in their favor. I already know you are very knowledgeable on most subjects like this, so that leaves us with case 2. The only reason solar is cheaper now is because Asian prison slaves are manufacturing the parts in unregulated factories now. Not really a sustainable solution.

I've been consistent with my stance; in other threads I denounce the "IF's" and assumptions presented by republicans that we will automatically become more energy efficient or find new alternatives to fossil fuel - when confronting them with the fact that fossil fuels are a non-renewable resource that we should be saving. To me the biggest waste is burning into oblivion a resource that we will need to make the super polymers of the future. I think the main reason we're sold on these "things always getting better" concepts is because we happen to be living through one of civilization's rare technology revolutions at the moment which has inspired a state of world wide over confidence in the true state of our progress. We invented the computer decades ago, since then they've been getting smaller & we've found new ways to use them. Thats it. Meanwhile we're still dependent on the combustion engine, slavery, and battery tech which is a disaster.

What we really see is when society becomes more efficient at something it is compensated for by the fact we use that efficiency to simply consume more. If people really care about the environment the single most important thing they can do is buy. less. stuff. Not worry about jobs, the ecomy or any other stuff they dont understand in the 1st place. Few people are going to be satisfied with a single piece of cake or even 2 pieces of cake. We live in a society where people need a starbucks coffee every day - a massive strain on the environment.

Sounds as if you are not very familiar with the treaty.
Well I know it lacks enforcement.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/andersc.../#6747cb573313
Not that we really need a link for this as there's no way to enforce such a thing. Without enforcement it's like the feds saying marijuana is illegal.
( Last edited by el chupacabra; Jun 18, 2017 at 02:03 PM. )
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 18, 2017, 05:09 PM
 
Inflation adjusted price of gas:




World oil consumption:




Oil is a finite resource with consistently increasing consumption, yet a gallon of gas costs about as much as it did in the 70s.

This happens with almost every raw material. We keep using more and more, but the price drops or remains stable. Note, a stable price in the face of increasing demand is ultimately a price drop.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:50 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,