Real question: how did they observe land-ocean temperature in 1880? Edit: and how does it compare to how it's observed now?
There are some long-standing weather stations going back over 100 years. And they almost all show a distinct lack of warming:
What's Really Warming the World?
441–450 of 549 posts
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#442Does it bother anyone else that only the Global temperate has its axis labelled? What is the orbital wobble measuring? What is the volcano line measuring? Is that decreased forests or decreased land use? Should be be using more aerosols? Is that meant to be suns temperature or sun activity, or sun colour? I realise that the actual data is from reliable carefully measured models but it makes this illustration so point…
> What is the orbital wobble measuring? What is the volcano line measuring? Read the bottom of the page; it explains that the colored lines measure the modeled expected impact from orbital wobble/whatever on climate. That is, all of the lines measure global temperature.
All of the lines model global temperature. Except the temperature line... right?
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#443Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The real trick is to see how well your model extrapolates from the data you have out into the future." That is the most common way to show the modeller is not shamelessly overfitting.:-| Another way, though, is less common but not vanishingly uncommon: the model may be so much simpler than the data it fits that overfitting is not a plausible explanation. (Roughly there are too many bits of entropy in the match to th…
Do you happen to have this one to five pages of QM equations somewhere as reference? I would be very interested in reading that.
I think you can do it, but you'd probably want to start with density matrices, or use the Heisenberg picture to keep your wavefunction super-simple. If we're talking to geniuses then maybe we can include a one-off statement, 'if det ρ = 0 so ρ = ψ ψ† for some "column vector" ψ, then the squared magnitudes of ψ's components are probabilities to be in that component's corresponding state.' to get the gist of it.
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#444Earlier quoted context omitted.
Though I wouldn't accept #5 and #6 exactly as phrased, it does seem like positive effects ought to be balanced against the negative, and the uncertainty of future technological developments ought to inform our current decision of how much to spend addressing climate change. Does that make me a climate change denier?
Yes, it does. I am quite happy saying, "Climate change is a plausibly serious problem and the current best solution is to build nuclear (fission) power plants today to replace base load coal, to shift from income taxes to carbon taxes and tarifs immediately , to build solar power and storage immediately , and to phase in regulations that will make it essentially impossible for new thermal coal development. We should…
> We should also have public subsidies for nuclear and solar to ensure rapid deployment."
Can you elaborate on the relation between the nuclear energy industry and insurance companies? Even as someone who sympathizes with the goal of "smashing global capitalism," I would find it interesting to know what the free market has to say in this respect.
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#445Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Why do you want to debate instead of learn?" I do learn. I learn by looking at all evidence and facts rather than just the ones that tell me what I want to hear. Even when it's been shown that evidence has been doctored (like during Climate gate and more recently with the temperature readings), it's just explained away to further write the narrative that man has caused Climate change and anybody that questions it is…
You just crossed the Poe's Law boundary for me. In case you are actually in earnest, I'll make this easy for you. https://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/SYR_AR5_FI...
How do you think the IPCC gets funded? Do you honestly think they would publish a report that bites the hand that feeds them? We need more independent studies.
If this were a big corporation funding a study on Climate change and it didn't fit the narrative, this is exactly what you would be saying.
When Money and Politics gets involved, the facts get muddied and hidden.
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#446Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bring up some simple questions and I am immediately silenced. I guess I didn't realize HN was anti-science and anti-intellectual.
Some advice: there is definitely an acceptable way to challenge the mainstream here, but I don't think you've succeeded at it. Since all of your points have appeared here before, my suggestion is not to make them all at once (which encourages people who disagree with you not to bother responding and just to downvote) but rather to pick one or two of the most relevant points and back them up with extreme detail, meani…
"And unfortunately, no community can completely avoid politics and groupthink at all times. So if you see a large number of people who seem like they will violently disagree with any but the most tactful of arguments then you can always just let them have their echo chamber and move on."
This was my entire point of posting everything, and the HN community made it quite nicely: real science can't be accomplished because group think and politics are getting in the way.
Silencing political opinions (this has become a political opinion now) is never the answer.
Thanks HN, I just wanted to thank you all for making my point for me, so I didn't really need to.
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#447Helpful when reading this thread to keep in mind Michael Mann's six stages of climate change denial: 1. CO2 is not actually increasing. 2. Even if it is, the increase has no impact on the climate since there is no convincing evidence of warming. 3. Even if there is warming, it is due to natural causes. 4. Even if the warming cannot be explained by natural causes, the human impact is small, and the impact of continued…
The first four stages have always baffled me. Anyone who knows basic chemistry understands how carbon dioxide interacts with infrared radiation. Combine that with the fact that human activity is releasing tens of billions of tons of CO2 every year, which does not magically disappear. In fact, it's quite measurable. The climate is complex, but the basic facts of the situation are incredibly simple and unavoidable. And…
Well, carbon dioxide's interaction with infrared radiation would be more studied by physics than chemistry.
Also, I kind of hate these types of statements. I could say something like, "Anybody that knows anything about music should know that parallel minor of A Major is F# minor," but it's not like I would be adding anything to any discussion by saying such.
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#448Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't call a paper whose lead author is a well-established denier with no scientific training ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Monckton,_3rd_Visc... ), and which is co-authored by a known practitioner of large-scale scientific fraud for pay ( http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Willie_Soon ) particularly reputable.
> co-authored by a known practitioner of large-scale scientific fraud for pay ( http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Willie_Soon ) particularly reputable. Flagged for libel. It is one thing to argue a position you believe, it is quite another to smear another's character.
It wasn't libel the last time you brought it up and it isn't libel this time. Soon failed to disclose non-trivial amounts of funding that he received from parties who have a vested interest in deriding climate science. Given how often his work has failed to pass muster when scrutinized by climate scientists and skeptics, it is hard to fathom how any of this can amount tosimple incompetence.
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#449Cool visualization. It's worth keeping in mind that the modeled data lines up with reality because it's supposed to. That's how you calibrate your model, by making sure it fits reality. The real trick is to see how well your model extrapolates from the data you have out into the future. As in, if you feed it data up to, say, 1990, will it correctly spit out 2015 temperatures that fit the reality of 2015, or will it s…
I have absolutely no knowledge about this field, but from what I understand people who study the Sun wouldn't agree as much with the numbers about the suns temperature. I will see if I can find the numbers.
Really, I think from what I've read, there was some talk about sun-spots, which actually lower the sun's temperature or something. I'm really not convinced that they are measuring the correct value there at all.....
Re: What's Really Warming the World?
#450Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a serious problem in multiple areas in society these days; the inability to ask simple questions that may go against the "accepted" narrative without being personally attacked. Science, religion, politics, sports, it's everywhere. It's a seriously sad state of affairs, but nothing new really, if you think about it. The reach of modern communications has inflated the problem in my opinion.
Here's the thing: honest enquiry is something that should be encouraged. Sea-lioning[1], JAQing off[2] and Gish gallops[3] should not. When you are buried to your eyeballs in bullshit, it's hard to see who is really someone willing learn, and who is just shoveling on more. [1] - http://simplikation.com/why-sealioning-is-bad/ [2] - http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions [3] - http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/G…
It boggles my mind that people use the term sealioning unironically. How can it possibly be that a sensible person thinks it's ok to make a hateful statement in a public place and when someone asks clarification about it they are the harassers?!
You are not a priest preaching to the ignorant congregation, if you don't want to deal with the bullshit get off the fucking podium.