|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
 Posted - 09/13/2007 : 22:31:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Kil
The strawman is that Avery implies that because there have been past warming trends that we have nothing to worry about. Problem is, this ignores the data that clearly shows that the current warming, at the rate it is happening, is not consistent with earlier trends.
|
And how is this a straw man? Avery is making a claim about the future based on the past. He is not defining someone else's argument.
|
Okay then. He is just lying. By waving away the current data, he is a liar. Lying is good for business I guess...
And by the way, I'm a bit tired of you twisting what others say to fit your needs Jerome as you did with Humbert. You get so riled when you are called a liar, but in fact you do lie by taking words out of context.
Quote mining is lying also. We are now seeing the old Jerome. The one who got punted.
Take this as a warning Jerome even though I haven't yet made it official. Keep it up and you will be history here…
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 09/14/2007 : 03:27:49 [Permalink]
|
I noticed that the other day over at Dembski's little dunce-wallow. I didn't think much of it; they lie so blatently about so many things over there.
Thus I must confess that I failed to give it the attention I'd normally give to something I found at a legitiment, scientific site, nor indeed, do I intend to. Here, evidently, is where UD found it. Don't bother to open the link; it's much the same as the OP's, almost word for word.
I got the impression that there were several hundred folks who did something of a reevaluation on existing data. Not one of them, correct me if I'm wrong, added anything to current thought nor put forth any sort of a case in favor of abandoning that thought. Therefore, all we have is rhetoric from claimed scientists.
Furthermore, no one seems to have bothered listing any names nor qualifications, nor any reference beyond this: Avery and Singer noted that there are hundreds of additional peer-reviewed studies that have found cycle evidence, and that they will publish additional researchers' names and studies. They also noted that their book was funded by Wallace O. Sellers, a Hudson board member, without any corporate contributions.
Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years is available from
Amazon.com:
http://www.amazon.com/Unstoppable-Global-Warming-Every-Years/dp/0742551
172/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-6773465-0779318?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189603742&sr=1
-1
For more information, please contact Dennis Avery, Hudson Institute
Senior Fellow and co-author of Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500
Years, at 540-337-6354: Email: cgfi@hughes.net
|
Which, needless to say, woke up my bullshit detector. These guys are flogging a book, not doing science. I don't blame 'em; hell, I'd probably do the same thing.
Ok, as I have written before, NOBODY is claiming that global warming is not cyclic. All anyone is saying is that we are aggravating the problem by our emmissions; shitting where we eat, so to speak. It's really very simple, isn't it? Why then, is there such difficulty in understanding it?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
| Edited by - filthy on 09/14/2007 03:31:56 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 04:30:35 [Permalink]
|
I take no heed at all of promises to list scientists' names and studies, especially coming from someone with a reason to lie about it. We've likewise had promises of actual research from the Discovery Institute, but nothing's ever come of that, either.
Wallace O. Sellers, Texas petrochemical
Chairman, paymaster of fake "science."
BTW, Wallace O. Sellers' reason to lie about MMGW is that he's the Chairman of Natural Gas Services.
Jerome, from all appearances, you are going for the Trifecta of Spreading Easily-Exposed Lies.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 09/14/2007 05:36:04 |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 04:33:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
The author of this article states: | No one asserts that the present-day warmth is a calamity |
This is a blatantly false statement giving doubt to other assertions. |
Really? Can you find any statement arguing that present-day warmth is a calamity?
The statement closely following the one you quoted was | The projected temperature for 2100 under business-as-usual is another matter entirely, warmer than the Earth has been in millions of years. |
. The implication is that in ca. 50-100 years, it could be a calamity, which is what people are saying. So you're wrong and should at least say something to the effect of "oh, I misunderstood, so I'll withdraw that objection." |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 05:34:25 [Permalink]
|
Statements of MMGW calamity.
Two thousand scientists, in a hundred countries, engaged in the most elaborate, well organized scientific collaboration in the history of humankind, have produced long-since a consensus that we will face a string of terrible catastrophes unless we act to prepare ourselves and deal with the underlying causes of global warming.
AL GORE, speech at National Sierra Club Convention, Sept. 9, 2005 |
All across the world, in every kind of environment and region known to man, increasingly dangerous weather patterns and devastating storms are abruptly putting an end to the long-running debate over whether or not climate change is real. Not only is it real, it's here, and its effects are giving rise to a frighteningly new global phenomenon: the man-made natural disaster.
BARACK OBAMA, speech, Apr. 3, 2006 |
Global warming is a current reality and it is driven, in part, by humankind. All but a handful of climate–related scientists, worldwide, are convinced of this reality.
Temperature increases and warming–induced change are progressing faster than had been predicted in some regions, suggesting a potential non–linear rapid response to changes in climate, as opposed to the predicted slow linear response to climate change. The greatest increases in warming are predicted to occur and are occurring in northern hemisphere upper latitudes, and evidence exists in melting glaciers, longer growing seasons, larger and more severe fire seasons, and changes in species assemblages at upper altitudes and latitudes.
There is currently much to be learned about the interactive processes that force and feedback within our climate system, and in this venue, there is much debate. This is not a gloom and doom prognostication, but a reality that we must mindfully and responsibly address today. Climate change is not some future possibility. Climate change is apparent today.
Amber Soja is a research scientist with the National Institute of Aerospace, currently resident in the Climate Dynamics branch of NASA Langley Research Center. |
Global climate change is no longer just a threat on the distant horizon. It is with us today, and it is already affecting the lives of people around the world. We can do something about it, but now is the time for nations everywhere to begin those efforts in earnest. The more we delay, the more we increase the probability of abrupt and truly significant changes in climate that would have enormous social and economic consequences.
Alan R. Townsend is the Associate Director for the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research at the University of Colorado in Boulder. |
| The global warming skeptics are going the way of the dodo bird – to extinction. The evidence is in. We're definitely living in a warming world and headed into unknown, dangerous territory. The future of our civilization is at stake! It's time for each and every one of us to change was |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 06:06:06 [Permalink]
|
Jerome:
This is a small selection of quotes. |
And not a single one says that “present-day” climates are a calamity.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 06:57:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Jerome:
This is a small selection of quotes. |
And not a single one says that “present-day” climates are a calamity.
|
I know, Kil. It's strange. Do you think he doesn't get it, or is this just real trolling. On the one hand, it's too lame to be trolling, but then again, I don't know how we can be any more clear. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 07:15:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Jerome:
This is a small selection of quotes. |
And not a single one says that “present-day” climates are a calamity.
|
The folks down New Orleans way might beg to differ....
Jerome, who are we to take at their word; the people who study this stuff for a living, or the likes of Bush/Dembski/Avery & the other one, and so forth? Remembering that the work & research of science is open for all to see (and distort), and most of the denyers hardly do any research at all.
I don't think that's a very difficult choice.
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist!
|
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 07:17:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Kil
The author of this article states: | No one asserts that the present-day warmth is a calamity |
This is a blatantly false statement giving doubt to other assertions.
|
Present day warmth, Jerome. That is right now. He was addressing a strawman argument.
|
He was addressing this:
| Human populations of Europe and India thrived during the medieval warm time, so clearly warming is good for us. |
This is his paraphrase. Where is the straw man and what was accurately said?
|
(bolding mine)
Yes, they may have strive in medieval times, when no combustion engines, factories, air conditioning, SUV´s, etc. existed.
Today, weather getting warmer is not such a good thing (and it means people turning on more air-conditioners).
PD: I am not stating that GW is caused by air conditioners... SO DON´T EVEN TRY STRAW MEN ATTACKS!  |
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 08:23:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by Kil
Jerome:
This is a small selection of quotes. |
And not a single one says that “present-day” climates are a calamity.
|
I know, Kil. It's strange. Do you think he doesn't get it, or is this just real trolling. On the one hand, it's too lame to be trolling, but then again, I don't know how we can be any more clear.
|
I know. It is as though he thinks we will forget about the source material so he can get away with reframing the argument. And really, by now, he should know better than that. He spent whatever time it took him to find sources that are completely irrelevant, if what he wanted to do was show that some scientists think the current climate that we are experiencing is already a calamity.
I suspect that Jerome's style is very effective when arguing his points at work, or with friends who hold armchair opinions. And it has not dawned on him yet (and may never) that the folks he is playing with here are better informed and skilled in recognizing fallacious arguments. He has so far not been able to adapt and is probably frustrated that we don't just cave to his presentation of the “facts” as he sees them and that once went pretty much unchallenged.
I get the impression that Jerome was/is a big fish in a small pond at home and has not come to terms with the fact that his opinion based debating style (he frames his opinions as facts and probably believes that they are) will not work here. That would explain his lack of humility.
Oh well…
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 09:13:16 [Permalink]
|
The author created a paraphrase "Human populations of Europe and India thrived during the medieval warm time, so clearly warming is good for us." to rebut.
The paraphrase is obviously talking about the past in comparison.
The authors response to his paraphrase was:"No one asserts that the present-day warmth is a calamity".
The author is not even responding to his own created paraphrase. He is answering a phantom straw man.
Nowhere does the paraphrase make the claim that "currently" or otherwise there is calamity being spouted.
An honest response to the paraphrase would be something like: The fact that past human populations thrived in medieval times during warming has no bearing on today situation because...
Instead he created a straw man that is being knockdown.
One can certainly make the valid argument that the quotes I posted did speak of current deep distress.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 09:20:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
The author created a paraphrase "Human populations of Europe and India thrived during the medieval warm time, so clearly warming is good for us." to rebut.
The paraphrase is obviously talking about the past in comparison.
The authors response to his paraphrase was:"No one asserts that the present-day warmth is a calamity".
The author is not even responding to his own created paraphrase. He is answering a phantom straw man.
Nowhere does the paraphrase make the claim that "currently" or otherwise there is calamity being spouted.
An honest response to the paraphrase would be something like: The fact that past human populations thrived in medieval times during warming has no bearing on today situation because...
Instead he created a straw man that is being knockdown.
One can certainly make the valid argument that the quotes I posted did speak of current deep distress. |
Oh, Jerome. You didn't read the whole thing. Earlier, we find a paraphrase (?) of the anti-Global Warming article:| The existence of the medieval warm and the Little Ice Age climate intervals, and the 1500 year D-O cycles in glacial climate, proves that the warming in the past decades is a natural phenomenon, not caused by human industry at all. |
That is, this current warming trend is just part of a cycle called the medieval warm time, and it's not going to get worse, and look how well it was for people in Europe and India!
The counter-argument is that it's not the current level of warmth at all that's a problem, it's that this isn't some little cycle but a much larger trend that will get worse. Got it? |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 09:31:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
The author created a paraphrase "Human populations of Europe and India thrived during the medieval warm time, so clearly warming is good for us." to rebut.
The paraphrase is obviously talking about the past in comparison.
The authors response to his paraphrase was:"No one asserts that the present-day warmth is a calamity".
The author is not even responding to his own created paraphrase. He is answering a phantom straw man.
Nowhere does the paraphrase make the claim that "currently" or otherwise there is calamity being spouted.
An honest response to the paraphrase would be something like: The fact that past human populations thrived in medieval times during warming has no bearing on today situation because...
Instead he created a straw man that is being knockdown.
One can certainly make the valid argument that the quotes I posted did speak of current deep distress.
|
I agree with Jerome´s above statements. |
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend
275 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 09:35:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
The author created a paraphrase "Human populations of Europe and India thrived during the medieval warm time, so clearly warming is good for us." to rebut.
The paraphrase is obviously talking about the past in comparison.
The authors response to his paraphrase was:"No one asserts that the present-day warmth is a calamity".
The author is not even responding to his own created paraphrase. He is answering a phantom straw man.
Nowhere does the paraphrase make the claim that "currently" or otherwise there is calamity being spouted.
An honest response to the paraphrase would be something like: The fact that past human populations thrived in medieval times during warming has no bearing on today situation because...
Instead he created a straw man that is being knockdown.
One can certainly make the valid argument that the quotes I posted did speak of current deep distress. |
Oh, Jerome. You didn't read the whole thing. Earlier, we find a paraphrase (?) of the anti-Global Warming article:| The existence of the medieval warm and the Little Ice Age climate intervals, and the 1500 year D-O cycles in glacial climate, proves that the warming in the past decades is a natural phenomenon, not caused by human industry at all. |
That is, this current warming trend is just part of a cycle called the medieval warm time, and it's not going to get worse, and look how well it was for people in Europe and India!
The counter-argument is that it's not the current level of warmth at all that's a problem, it's that this isn't some little cycle but a much larger trend that will get worse. Got it?
|
And that is basically the counter-argument I had in mind (but my slow brain had not finished puting it together).
Thanks Cuneiformist! |
"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott
"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott
"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott |
|
|
|
The Rat
SFN Regular
Canada
1370 Posts |
Posted - 09/14/2007 : 19:11:15 [Permalink]
|
Jerome, I can't be bothered to go through all the stuff in this thread right now, this cut and paste from my blog explains my feelings.
Global Warming? Screw the Facts!
Did I just say that? The card-carrying skeptic who believes that evidence should be collected and examined with a scientific eye? Screw the facts?!
Yes, I said it. Maybe it's my unwillingness to wade through reams of paper trying to find out who's right, perhaps it's just acceptance of the consensus of more than 90% of the world's climatologists, but I no longer care about the facts, as if I ever did. I long ago came to the conclusion that there are four undeniable, inarguable facts that relate to this issue, facts which simply cannot be denied. (There I go again, displaying the dogmatism that skeptics should avoid.) But here they are:
1) The environment is the most important issue in the world simply because it is the world, without it we are dead. If you deny that then you deny your own existence. We evolved in a specific set of conditions, and even though our intelligence has forged technological means of staying alive and flourishing in everything from the tropical deserts to the arctic snows and into Earth orbit, we can only, as yet, engineer our immediate environments with heaters, air conditioners, and clothing. We cannot hope to quickly counteract large-scale weather patterns which are the result of the warming of our planet.
2) There is no way of knowing, and no way of predicting, how much damage we can do to the environment before we reach the ‘tipping point', and things become irreparable. We know that everything is interconnected, again, denying that is denying the very ecosystems which keep our planet healthy and able to sustain us. Maybe we can lose 90% of the species on Earth and still be fine, but maybe as I'm writing this there is a logging company working in a rain forest and wiping out the last colony of a species of beetle which will cause the whole system to collapse around us. The system is far too complex for us to ever predict when that might happen.
3) If, and I will grant that it's an ‘if', the worst case scenarios are true we are in very serious trouble. If some of the less dire predictions are true we could still be in for some very profound changes to our societies and way of life.
4) None of the measures being proposed to alleviate global warming will harm the environment. It doesn't matter if the hypothesis is a misinterpretation, miscalculation, an exaggeration, or an outright bare-faced bloody lie, the environment benefits anyway!
But the ECONOMY! people will scream, it will ruin our economy! I doubt it. If there's anything which can evolve faster than a bacterium it's a system which makes people lots of money. Maybe a few short-sighted companies will go under, but who needs them? Their place will quickly be taken by people with vision and hope, just the sort of people we need anyway.
I have used these arguments before, and have been accused of indulging in an environmental version of Pascal's wager. I can see the comparison, but the world around us is a living, breathing system for which we have ample evidence just by looking out the window; deities, on the other hand, are conspicuous by their absence.
They certainly don't seem to be cooling the Earth. |
|
Bailey's second law; There is no relationship between the three virtues of intelligence, education, and wisdom.
You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church? - The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Blackadder II
Baculum's page: http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=3947338590 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Consensus Falling Apart by the Day
