SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-29-23, 09:40 PM   #46
Dowly
Lucky Jack
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 25,035
Downloads: 32
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockstar View Post
. Ummm, no. topic isn’t about chemistry really.
Chemistry is widely used in climate science.
Dowly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-30-23, 06:13 AM   #47
Eichhörnchen
Starte das Auto
 
Eichhörnchen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: The Fens
Posts: 15,966
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by August View Post
We're on track to hit 9 Billion people on this planet very soon, far more than we have ever had. With those ever climbing numbers in an increasingly electrified and mobilized world we won't ever reduce our CO2 emissions down to almost zero no matter how efficient we become. 9 billion people will still continue to breathe, will still continue to eat, our livestock will still fart and our crop fields will still replace our forests and prairies.

All that I think will happen is the governments will continue to pander to climate changes whether they are natural or man made in order to increase it's power over our lives by issuing ever more more intrusive, unrealistic and expensive mandates until the population simply finds it impossible to support or afford it any further.

Then society will descend into chaos and war and human population numbers will crash as a result. Nature will equalize upon a new balance that reflects the how and why of how it all went down and we humans will reorganize into new societies that will eventually crumble for whatever the proverbial camel straw it was that causes their demise and the process will be repeated.

At least until something happens that wipes us ALL out. That one might be tough to recover from for our even our most resourceful species.
Have to say this is also my view, August
__________________
Eichhörnchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-23, 09:27 PM   #48
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dowly View Post
Chemistry is widely used in climate science.
So is misinformation


Remember the 97% consensus clown show?

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/20....299L/abstract

https://www.wmbriggs.com/public/Legates.etal.2015.pdf

Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 01:07 AM   #49
Ostfriese
The Old Man
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Northern Germany
Posts: 1,311
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

[QUOTE=Rockstar;2850637]
Nice, the Legates paper, haven't seen that one in a while, as it is already a decade old and the discussion about it long over. That paper actually is a response to a single paper by Daniel Bedford (about agnotology as a teaching tool) from 2010, which Legates et al. comprehensively misrepresent and deliberately misquotes.

This was addressed by Daniel Bedford an John Cook in an answer in "Science & Education" in 2013 (https://link.springer.com/article/10...191-013-9608-3 unfortunatly behind a pay wall).
Ostfriese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 09:21 AM   #50
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

And the polls? You of all people should know science is not a democracy. Did you use a poll to determine wether your work in chemistry was correct?

If we want to know the probability climate change is man-made you do a data analysis. We don’t poll scientists, because if 97.1% of scientists in a poll say they believe it's man-made, the risk is that the masses will think there's a 97.1% chance this is correct. And lord knows the masses will hold onto their cherished beliefs to the point they can't be bothered to think about new data because they contradict something they once claimed as the truth. If we rely on polls we have to factor in all those social and psychological problems too.

So, you might think I don’t like polls and you’d be right, I don’t. Couple that when I see every major media outlet walking lock step in reporting on the subject, and the opinions of politicians, their chosen & Hollywood personalities are heard above ALL. I begin to wonder if I’m being fed a line of b.s. and so begin digging around. And lo and behold even today there are still others presenting analysis and data which show it’s the planet just doing what planets do. It wouldn’t be the first time a global catastrophe wiped out a big chunk of life on this planet. If that is the case then the only thing we can do is adapt or perish.

There are three things I can be certain of and that’s planet earth’s geologic and climate history. And the ancient texts which I think clearly show that when man can’t explain why on a clear sunny day the sun was blotted out from the sky. The prophets blamed the masses telling them it was their fault because of some offense they committed. Centuries later we find out it was just the moon doing what moons do eclipsing the sun.

That’s my story and for now I’m sticking to it.

Last edited by Rockstar; 02-01-23 at 10:34 AM. Reason: just to irritate Dowly
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 10:25 AM   #51
mapuc
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 19,574
Downloads: 37
Uploads: 0


Default

In my theory this climate change we are in and it's just the beginning, is man made.

In our way of how we act towards mother Earth.

Markus
__________________

My little lovely female cat
mapuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 11:39 AM   #52
Dowly
Lucky Jack
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 25,035
Downloads: 32
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockstar View Post
I begin to wonder if I’m being fed a line of b.s. and so begin digging around. And lo and behold even today there are still others presenting analysis and data which show it’s the planet just doing what planets do.
Yet you still can't provide any alternatives to what's causing climate change.
Dowly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 11:39 AM   #53
Ostfriese
The Old Man
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Northern Germany
Posts: 1,311
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockstar View Post
And the polls? You of all people should know science is not a democracy. Did you use a poll to determine wether your work in chemistry was correct?
Experiments, peer reviews, discussion with other scientists and (something you seem to lack, at least judging from the words you write here) the understanding that I can and might be proven wrong, as well as the willingness to accept this.

Quote:
If we want to know the probability climate change is man-made you do a data analysis.
You completely miss the point. There's clear evidence, based on series of experiments which have been repeated dozens of times that mankind has heavily contributed to climate change since the dawn of industrialization. It doesn't really matter if it is entirely man-made (which it very likely is not) or if mankind has only heavily sped the entire process up (which it very likely did). There's more than enough evidence to support it, and it doesn't matter what the exact probability is.

Quote:
And lord knows the masses will hold onto their cherished beliefs to the point they can't be bothered to think about new data because they contradict something they once claimed as the truth.
Yep, just like religious fundamentalists (especially Christian), conspiracy theorists, flat earthers. Unfortunately you are doing just the same, just with a different belief.

Quote:
I begin to wonder if I’m being fed a line of b.s. and so begin digging around.
Which on the very basic level is completely ok and necessary. But you already have marked it down as bs, and you simply cannot (or don't want to, can't say which just from reading your words) accept that your verdict "bs" might simply be wrong.
Just because someone I don't like says something I don't like, don't understand or simply cannot fathom to be true that doesn't mean it's bs.

Quote:
And the ancient texts which I think clearly show that when man can’t explain why on a clear sunny day the sun was blotted out from the sky.
Which ancient texts are this supposed to be? (Please don't tell me it's "The Bible"...) The ancient Egyptians, the ancient Greek, the ancient Persians and the ancient Chinese all correctly attributed this to the moon moving in between the sun and the earth at least 2,500 years ago, and they all were capable of predicting eclipses reasonably accurate decades or even centuries before they would occur. Even other late bronze age civilizations (phoenicians, to name just one) likely knew this about 1,200 BC. The ancient Chinese might have known even as far back as 2,000 BC. Even in Central and Southern America classical drawings have been recovered that hint that the native people there knew about eclipses as far back as 2,000 years ago.

Quote:
That’s my story and for now I’m sticking to it.
The greenhouse effect as a principle was first described 200 years ago. The first known and published experiments measuring the influence of infrared radiation on atmospheric gases, especially carbon dioxide and water vapor, were done in the late 1850 by John Tyndall. Global warming is often said to be a topic that came up in the 2000s, but was actually first predicted by Svanthe Arrhenius in 1896, including several models showing different amounts of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere due to industrialization. Exxon correctly predicted the temperature rise due to massive carbon dioxide release back in the early 1970s.

All you have to offer is "I don't like what the mass media are telling".
Ostfriese is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 03:17 PM   #54
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ostfriese View Post
Experiments, peer reviews, discussion with other scientists and (something you seem to lack, at least judging from the words you write here) the understanding that I can and might be proven wrong, as well as the willingness to accept this.


You completely miss the point. There's clear evidence, based on series of experiments which have been repeated dozens of times that mankind has heavily contributed to climate change since the dawn of industrialization. It doesn't really matter if it is entirely man-made (which it very likely is not) or if mankind has only heavily sped the entire process up (which it very likely did). There's more than enough evidence to support it, and it doesn't matter what the exact probability is.


Yep, just like religious fundamentalists (especially Christian), conspiracy theorists, flat earthers. Unfortunately you are doing just the same, just with a different belief.


Which on the very basic level is completely ok and necessary. But you already have marked it down as bs, and you simply cannot (or don't want to, can't say which just from reading your words) accept that your verdict "bs" might simply be wrong.
Just because someone I don't like says something I don't like, don't understand or simply cannot fathom to be true that doesn't mean it's bs.


Which ancient texts are this supposed to be? (Please don't tell me it's "The Bible"...) The ancient Egyptians, the ancient Greek, the ancient Persians and the ancient Chinese all correctly attributed this to the moon moving in between the sun and the earth at least 2,500 years ago, and they all were capable of predicting eclipses reasonably accurate decades or even centuries before they would occur. Even other late bronze age civilizations (phoenicians, to name just one) likely knew this about 1,200 BC. The ancient Chinese might have known even as far back as 2,000 BC. Even in Central and Southern America classical drawings have been recovered that hint that the native people there knew about eclipses as far back as 2,000 years ago.


The greenhouse effect as a principle was first described 200 years ago. The first known and published experiments measuring the influence of infrared radiation on atmospheric gases, especially carbon dioxide and water vapor, were done in the late 1850 by John Tyndall. Global warming is often said to be a topic that came up in the 2000s, but was actually first predicted by Svanthe Arrhenius in 1896, including several models showing different amounts of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere due to industrialization. Exxon correctly predicted the temperature rise due to massive carbon dioxide release back in the early 1970s.

All you have to offer is "I don't like what the mass media are telling".
I’ve brought up more current up to date theories and possibilities such as Mantel plumes warming Pacific Ocean currents, Atlantification, melting of Arctic and Greenland ice caps from the bottom up. And you’re stuck on something Exxon said in the 70’s and you accuse me of being a flat earther? Oh that’s rich. Hold on tight to your cherished beliefs go out and convert the infidel. Anyway, I think my point was just proven what happens when people base their belief on polls and refuse to look at anything else. thank you.

Last edited by Rockstar; 02-01-23 at 03:52 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 03:35 PM   #55
Catfish
Dipped Squirrel Operative
 
Catfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky
Posts: 17,032
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockstar View Post
Hold on tight to your cherished beliefs and go out and convert the infidel. You pretty much just proved my point, thank you.
All you have proven is this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ostfriese View Post
All you have to offer is "I don't like what the mass media are telling".
And i am not trying to even convince anyone anymore, if people want to believe something there is no fact nor argument nor pure data that will ever convince them or even make them think it through. Conspiracies rule and are so much more interesting than having to prove it. If anyone proves a conspiracy wrong you can just shift your view a bit to make you comfortable again.
It is predominantly this why i think humanity is neither intelligent nor will it survive very long
__________________


>^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.

Last edited by Catfish; 02-01-23 at 04:04 PM.
Catfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 03:58 PM   #56
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

You come on here all high and mighty speaking about proof and evidence like you know something others don’t. When fact you don’t know any more than I or anyone else. But you do have your beliefs just don’t push them on me. Isn’t that what we say to religious zealots?

All those natural occurring phenomena warming our planet I mentioned in the post above. And who is it at the podium giving speeches? The modern day prophets of doom WEF, AlGore, Greta, Prince Harry and Leonardo DiCaprio telling us it’s our fault. God forbid if people think for themselves don’t do that, that’s sin and we’ll all die.

Meanwhile you, me and everyone here is responsible for 7 million deaths each year from air pollution. People in the poorest of nations suffering death, misery, hardship everyday single day to provided your eco-friendly computers, phones, vehicles and appliances so we can all feel good about ourselves ‘saving the planet’.

Last edited by Rockstar; 02-01-23 at 06:52 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 04:50 PM   #57
mapuc
Fleet Admiral
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Denmark
Posts: 19,574
Downloads: 37
Uploads: 0


Default

I can only conclude that there will not be an unification on this matter.

Some expert say it isn't climate change but something else and here they have different theory.

Some expert say we have a climate change and even here they have different theory most of them is accusing Homo Sapiens Sapiens for this.

You can say what you want-You have taken a standpoint either for or against climate change and I RESPECT this...None of us if fully expert on Climate..With 20,30 or 40 years of experience

After having seen a 4-5 minutes discussion on Danish News channel between two climate expert, I decide to stay neutral and develop my entire own theory.

I think it was Skybird who many month ago posted a link to a documentary on YT I think the title was Planet of the Humans by Michael Moore.

I say you should watch it it's worth a watch.

Markus
__________________

My little lovely female cat
mapuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 09:01 PM   #58
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

Let it burn into your brain so you never forget. YOU, Greta, Prince Harry, Leonardo DiCaprio and Al Gore and that stupid crusade to save the planet is what’s causing this. But don’t worry you’re not alone like them and you as long as I can the latest iPhone I really don’t care either. IMO as long as it’s them the risks are worth it. Plus I feel so much better about myself when I’m told by Greta I’m saving the planet.

POLLUTION CAUSING BIRTH DEFECTS IN CHILDREN OF DRC COBALT MINERS
MAY 6, 2020 COPPERBELT KATANGA NEWS


https://copperbeltkatangamining.com/...cobalt-miners/



CBS News finds children mining cobalt for batteries in the Congo

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cobalt-...investigation/

I find this U.N. article hilarious. Climate change is linked to an increase in child slave labor. Well no **** Sherlock ya think? The crusade to save the planet under the leadership of the WEF has only increased the need for mining rare earth metals.

https://news.un.org/en/audio/2015/06/601402

And this is from 2015.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-23, 09:35 PM   #59
Dowly
Lucky Jack
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 25,035
Downloads: 32
Uploads: 0


Default

You complain in this very thread that you don't believe in AGW because it is politicized, yet you are the only one in this thread politicizing it.

Most of this thread is just you projecting onto others what you are doing yourself. Politicizing, blind belief, bad science and on and on.
Dowly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-23, 04:17 PM   #60
Rockstar
In the Brig
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Zendia Bar & Grill
Posts: 12,575
Downloads: 10
Uploads: 0


Default

I’m just asking questions and making statements admittedly mockingly at times though not directed at any one person.. But in no way projecting. But if after what I wrote you insist I’m projecting. Then I would insist you are in denial.

Last edited by Rockstar; 04-04-23 at 04:52 PM.
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting 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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.