Do you believe in "global warming?" - Page 167 - Alfa Romeo Bulletin Board & Forums
 318Likes
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #2491 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 08:53 AM
Registered User
 
ARwrench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Transplanted from Holland to The Armpit of New Jersey
Posts: 2,312
Garage
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez says that if we don't change our ways, the world will end in 12 years.

Al Gore backed her up saying, I've been telling people that for 30 years now.
101/105guy, Subtle and factotum like this.

“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough”
Oo--V--oO There is a fine line between "Hobby" and "Mental Illness".
ARwrench is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2492 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 08:56 AM
Registered User
 
nealric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,015
Garage
Few folks who believe in AGW actually believe the world will end, and most certainly not in 12 years. That includes AOC, who seems to be a favorite bete noir despite her total lack of actual political power as a junior congresswoman.

All this political wrangling seems to forget that solving climate change is more of an engineering problem than a political problem. You can not mandate more efficient technologies- they must be invented.
20yearoldspider and TimFlaco like this.

1986 Spider Veloce Turbo
nealric is offline  
post #2493 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 09:04 AM
Registered User
 
ARwrench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Transplanted from Holland to The Armpit of New Jersey
Posts: 2,312
Garage
<snip>The Green New Deal's botched rollout in February included the release of an official document by Ocasio-Cortez's office that promised economic security even for those "unwilling to work," as well as the elimination of "farting cows" and air travel.<snip>

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/oca...LsPvMd78kJcrAg

“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough”
Oo--V--oO There is a fine line between "Hobby" and "Mental Illness".
ARwrench is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2494 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 09:11 AM
Registered User
 
nealric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,015
Garage
There were quite a few false versions of the Green New Deal designed to rule up the conservative base. Be sure you read the actual proposal and not a doctored version. Even so, not a single Democratic Senator voted for it when it was up for a vote last week. Why obsess about a proposal that was never serious or had any significant political backing?

1986 Spider Veloce Turbo
nealric is offline  
post #2495 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 09:12 AM
Senior Member
Gold Subscriber
 
20yearoldspider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Space City, Texas
Posts: 379
The 12 year time frame does not represent when the world will end, it's an ESTIMATE of when the earth hits the point of no return based on the historical trend of emissions. You can double, triple or multiply that estimate by 10 if you'd like but it still should be concerning.

If you apply the same basis to maintaining your Alfa that you do for climate science, you should have the tow truck phone number on speed dial.

1986 Spider Grad (one owner) converted to 1973 2L w/dual Webers in 2018, 2007 Honda Spirit VT1100C, 1980 Honda CX500 Custom, 2017 Triumph Tiger Explorer XRt, 1971 VW Beetle Convertible (complete restoration in progress for the wife)
20yearoldspider is offline  
post #2496 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 10:19 AM
Registered User
 
101/105guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 6,590
Cool Pick one...

If you can, pick just one of these "estimates" that has proved to come true.....
Can you understand why a growing number of people aren't buying this ?
Attached Images
  
factotum likes this.

'64 Guilia Spider
'67 GTV
'68 Giulia Super

Conservatives-we work hard, so you don't have to !
101/105guy is online now  
post #2497 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 10:26 AM
Registered User
 
nealric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,015
Garage
The 1970s global cooling hypothesis has been discussed as nauseum in this thread. It was a hypothesis- not a consensus. Media reporting has a tendency to sensationalize things because sensation sells. Time magazine is not, and never had been, the arbiter of the scientific community.

1986 Spider Veloce Turbo
nealric is offline  
post #2498 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 10:40 AM
Registered User
 
101/105guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 6,590
Obviously, you have not read any of the GC articles from the '70s. I have and the exact same language was used then as now.

And again, consensus has nothing to do with science....
Attached Images
  

'64 Guilia Spider
'67 GTV
'68 Giulia Super

Conservatives-we work hard, so you don't have to !
101/105guy is online now  
post #2499 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 10:56 AM
Registered User
 
nealric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,015
Garage
No, consensus does not necessarily mean anything for science, but the existence of consensus generally means a hypothesis has been tested successfully quite a few times. Popular magazines from the 1970s likewise have little to do with science.

As I have said since I began commenting in this thread: read the actual data- the actual peer reviewed research if you want to confront AGW. Reading only newspapers and magazines for scientific understanding is a poor substitute for the source data.

Finally, you need to separate the politics from the science. A lot of politicians engage in histrionics because that’s good politics. But good science is just data and understanding- there’s no value judgment or policy prescriptions in science. And there are most certainly not dire warnings in good science, though scientists may make such warnings when they put their political hats on.
TimFlaco likes this.

1986 Spider Veloce Turbo
nealric is offline  
post #2500 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 11:57 AM
Registered User
 
nealric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,015
Garage
accidental double post...

1986 Spider Veloce Turbo
nealric is offline  
post #2501 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 03:10 PM
Registered User
 
101/105guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 6,590
"No, consensus does not necessarily mean anything for science, but the existence of consensus generally means a hypothesis has been tested successfully quite a few times."

OK, so what climate change hypothesis has been tested successfully quite a few times?
Take your time......

'64 Guilia Spider
'67 GTV
'68 Giulia Super

Conservatives-we work hard, so you don't have to !
101/105guy is online now  
post #2502 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 03:55 PM
Registered User
 
nealric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,015
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by 101/105guy View Post
"No, consensus does not necessarily mean anything for science, but the existence of consensus generally means a hypothesis has been tested successfully quite a few times."

OK, so what climate change hypothesis has been tested successfully quite a few times?
Take your time......
The reason you likely thought the task was difficult is because you are reading secondary sources engaging in motivated reasoning, and not primary source materials.

First, a primer from the folks who brought you the moon landing:

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2743/t...ientists-know/

Now lets look at some of the hypotheses made way back when concerning climate change. In 1979, a consensus report predicted an increase in temperature of about 2-3 degrees if the c02 content is doubled.

https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12181/ca...fic-assessment

It wasn't a precise or perfect prediction, but tracking global temperatures vs C02 levels in the air has shown that prediction to not be terribly off.

https://climate.nasa.gov/

Polar ice studies have likewise continued to confirm prior hypotheses over time. For example, here is a 1997 study that confirmed hyotheses about ice melt made 20 years prior.

Observed Hemispheric Asymmetry in Global Sea Ice Changes | Science

Here's a more recent study confirming sea ice melt modeling:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5673867/

I'm sure you will find plenty of political articles and non-published blogs that claim all the data in these studies is made up. But I challenge you to find published research contradicting these studies. In the case of sea ice, companies are making actual business decisions based on the known fact that sea ice levels have receded significantly over the past decades. Shipping over the Northwest passage has finally started to become viable:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45527531

Again, I understand that the politics surrounding AGW is problematic for many folks. That's why there's so much motivated reasoning around it. But to the extent we have a solution, it will be an engineering one- not a political one. And that solution will take over because it is better (from an end-user experience- not just environmentally) than what we have today. I say this all as dyed in the wool petrolhead who earns his living in the oil and gas industry.

1986 Spider Veloce Turbo
nealric is offline  
post #2503 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 04:19 PM
Senior Member
Gold Subscriber
 
Subtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver, B C
Posts: 6,243
Good grief!
That's as painful as reading arguments by Medieval Scholastics proving that there is a god.
The best long-term evidence against CO2 causing warming is the Vostok Ice Core. Purely empirical and very simple.
Some 400,000 years of data that shows that the turns to climate warming precede the rise in CO2 concentrations by some 600 to 800 years. These major rend changes have been associated with changes in orbital mechanics of the solar system.
Understanding this is not difficult. All you have to do is read the laws about the ability of the ocean to dissolve a gas such as CO2 depends upon the temperature of the ocean.
Also, the rate of deposition into rock varies with temp.
Then its been exciting to follow the renaissance going on in climate studies with the work done by Svensmark and Shaviv. That's on the cosmic ray stuff.
The last such renaissance came out of the early 1600s when the Church enforced its theories through the not always kind persuasions of the Department of the Inquisition.
Reading about Galileo and today's threats to those who are skeptical about AGW is remarkably similar.
It is ironical that yet again the Vatican is on the wrong side of discovery.

Bob,
Avatar is the 68 Super, bought new.
Subtle is offline  
post #2504 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 05:37 PM
Registered User
 
101/105guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 6,590
What he said!

'64 Guilia Spider
'67 GTV
'68 Giulia Super

Conservatives-we work hard, so you don't have to !
101/105guy is online now  
post #2505 of 2918 (permalink) Old 03-28-2019, 07:16 PM
Registered User
 
nealric's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,015
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Subtle View Post
Good grief!
That's as painful as reading arguments by Medieval Scholastics proving that there is a god.
The best long-term evidence against CO2 causing warming is the Vostok Ice Core. Purely empirical and very simple.
Some 400,000 years of data that shows that the turns to climate warming precede the rise in CO2 concentrations by some 600 to 800 years. These major rend changes have been associated with changes in orbital mechanics of the solar system.
Understanding this is not difficult. All you have to do is read the laws about the ability of the ocean to dissolve a gas such as CO2 depends upon the temperature of the ocean.
Also, the rate of deposition into rock varies with temp.
Then its been exciting to follow the renaissance going on in climate studies with the work done by Svensmark and Shaviv. That's on the cosmic ray stuff.
The last such renaissance came out of the early 1600s when the Church enforced its theories through the not always kind persuasions of the Department of the Inquisition.
Reading about Galileo and today's threats to those who are skeptical about AGW is remarkably similar.
It is ironical that yet again the Vatican is on the wrong side of discovery.
You've unwittingly stumbled into an interesting lesson in motivated reasoning.

Why did the Medieval scholastics attempt to prove there was a God? Well, the Medieval church depended on the acceptance of revealed truth. With most of the population uneducated and illiterate, they were dependent on authority figures to tell them what as true. This provided tremendous power to church leaders. However, there were a class of educated clergy that were learned by the standards of the day and had read the ancient Greeks and Romans enough to know there was a lot more to truth than what the elders said. But they knew they were in no position to challenge the authority of the church. But proving the existence of God? Well, the church elders could hardly argue with that as an academic pursuit- notwithstanding that it was an exercise in independent reason. It was also relatively safe because only the clergy and a few noblemen could read what they wrote anyways.

Fast forward to Copernicus. Likewise, he exercised independent reason and pursuit of knowledge outside the Church, but he wasn't clergy. Now, a much wider swath of the population could read given the expanding merchant class, and his ideas could potentially get traction in the broader population. Why did the church care though? There's not much in Christian theology that has anything to do with planetary movements. It wasn't so much what he said as the fact that he exercised independent reason from the Church on a matter that was not in service to the church. Thus, his investigations were forbidden. The Church, in a fit of motivated reasoning, called his ideas blasphemous- but it was only because the method of his ideas challenged the authority of the clergy.

As an aside, the Medieval Scholastics laid the foundation for the modern scientific method. Descartes heavily relied on Medieval philosophers like St Ansalem. Prior to writing the Cogito ("I think therefore I am") he started with a similar argument to the scholastics, and went beyond with powerful statement of self identity. But there was a problem: Descartes relied on what was later called "pure reason." He did not perform any observations to perform his conclusions and believed knowledge could be rationally derived. Scholars like Hume across the English Channel pointed out some of the significant limitations to rationalism and advocated empiricism (only knowledge based on observation). Kant effectively merged rationalism and empiricism and laid the foundation for the modern scientific method, which evolved in fits and starts over the 19th century (Kant wrote in the late 18th century). Without the scientific method, the internal combustion engine would have never been invented, and we'd be stuck at the level of discourse about climate change exhibited in this thread.

Now on today. In a vacuum, the fact that the earth is warming should be free of any value judgment. It's a fairly simple fact. But to accept AGW is a threat to certain power structures and political convictions- and that cannot stand. Thus, AGW deniers must invent reasons why it cannot be true. To be clear, it is good and healthy to challenge AGW, but it must be done with science, not with politics.

To answer your point above. The fact that the earth's climate has change over geologic time is well known to scientists and fully accounted for in climate change studies. It's important to understand, however, that the rate of change far exceeds any prior natural change absent those caused by calamity like meteor strikes. A great illustration (supported by published scientific studies) can be found here:

https://xkcd.com/1732/

Additionally, what you've done is answer science with anecdote and conjecture. Your idea of oceans absorbing C02 according to temperature might be an interesting hypothesis, but you need to present evidence that the hypothesis has been successfully tested to be persuasive.

1986 Spider Veloce Turbo

Last edited by nealric; 03-28-2019 at 07:27 PM.
nealric is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Alfa Romeo Bulletin Board & Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may 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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome