Sins of a Solar Empire : Real-Time Strategy. Unrivalled Scale.
© 2003-2016 Ironclad Games Corporation Vancouver, BC. All rights reserved.
© 2006-2016 Stardock Entertainment

What happened to Global Warming?

By on June 20, 2013 9:54:31 AM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

ZombiesRus5

Join Date 02/2009
+325

What happened to Global Warming?

When I put my first above ground pool in around the late 90's we were able to open it in April and start swimming in May.

Now my pool is just opened and still not warm enough to swim in

 

I'd like some global warming back...

 

2913 Replies +1 Karma
Search this post
Subscription Options


Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
GeomanNL
October 15, 2013 2:42:42 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Quoting GeomanNL,

Well ok... this discussion with you is completely pointless and I'm outta here.

Just wait a few decades until more data are gathered. Maybe it'll become clearer then. I think it's already pretty clear... by then it should be fucking obvous.

A few decades probably won't hurt much. Maybe it'll get a bit warmer here in the Netherlands.

I'm fine with doing nothing, but that wasn't the point of my last few posts. 

It was to show that YOUR solutions don't logically follow from YOUR opinion. Even if I agreed with you and all the others that AGW was the defining problem of our age the supposed solutions make no sense. The nuclear power question is the perfect example of this.  Nuclear isn't considered an alternative, yet it is the single best hope humans have right now of dramatically reducing CO2 generation as quickly as possible. 

There is an inherent logical inconsistency to the AGW movement in this area that no one ever addresses and when it is brought up the reaction is often "fine, do nothing and you'll get what you deserve", which is really just an elaborate way of avoiding the question and bailing on the discussion. 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 2:44:44 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GeomanNL,
No one has said GW doesn't exist. We have said we're not convinced that humans are the major cause behind it. Big difference.

I am impressed with your conclusion. We're pumping hundreds of times more CO2 in the air than all volcanous on the world combined. How can that be insignificant... the rate of increase of CO2 at the moment surpasses that of extinction events... I'm amazed that you don't appreciate such things. But hey, where does all that CO2 come from? From major extinction event volcano eruptions? Hey, I don't see any! Oh... but that are millions of power plants! Hah, maybe just maybe that could be the cause ???

Bigger question for you then: do you think the increase in CO2 will magically go down in the future? Do you think the exponential increase in CO2 in the atmosphere will suddenly drop to pre-industrial levels, even if we continue as we are?

Quoting Kantok,
A simpler, less "pulling all kinds of crap arguments from my ass" question for you. If the problem is so immediate and so end-of-the-world bad and given that you've already admitted that your "Get everyone on solar" won't work because you're modeling after Germany who won't be there for 100 years and because you're relying on national common sense (which won't work, obviously) then why isn't nuclear an option?

I've already written that. Right now about 5% of energy is produced from nuclear, maybe less. That means 20x more nuclear plants everywhere on the world. Many countries don't have enough money to pay for good security, or their security personel are corrupt, increasing chances 100-fold that someone gets their hands on nuclear material. Some countries have dictators (maybe not now, but in the future) that could choose to abuse the might of nuclear power. I think the risk is just too big to go all nuclear.

And anyway... Germany is doing fine, it's a rich nation. It shows that one can invest in cleaner energy without ruining the economy (like you seem to think... you're all doom and gloom there).

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 2:49:56 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Kantok,
Nuclear isn't considered an alternative, yet it is the single best hope humans have right now of dramatically reducing CO2 generation as quickly as possible.

WTF is that kind of argument.

It's only the so-called "economically viable alternative"

It's not the best one if you consider the consequences of placing nuclear power plants all over the globe!

For example... take Zimbabwe with the dictator Mugabe. He has some peculiar ideas about the disease of AIDS.

Now... he's completely irrational... would you like to see such a person leading a country that has nuclear reactors running non-stop to provide very cheap and very clean energy ? Do you trust that such a person wouldn't think, even for a moment, of using the waste for a bomb?

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 2:52:48 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Well anyway... I'm really outta this topic. You people are thinking too much in terms of economics, instead of in terms of a weighting of both economics AND risk. Or rather... not risk, but expected value which is: the risk times the potential for disaster. And nuclear plants end up waaaaay high on the risk/expected value scale.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 2:53:17 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Kantok,
No one has said GW doesn't exist. We have said we're not convinced that humans are the major cause behind it. Big difference.

I doubt you have actually read the evidence for it then. 

Quoting Kantok,
Either AGW is a pull-out-all-the-stops problem that we need to solve ASAP or its not. If it is then nuclear is far and away your best option, but for some reason AGW proponents never want to go with nuclear power despite the fact that ALL other alternatives are no where near viability. Any idea why? I have a thought why AGW as an industry is against nuclear,

AGW is not an "industry". I agree with you from my limited reading that nuclear power is one of the best options - thorium based nuclear reactors to be precise. There is no reason why there must be "one solution" though - you can tackle problems from multiple angles. Why do you think thorium reactors are not widespread currently? So far, it seems like the fact that they don't easily produce weapons grade material is one reason. They will also require more investment, money, research, etc. in order to catch up to uranium based reactors. The pros for them seem amazing though - especially for India and Australia, as they hold the lion's share of the natural reserves. Part of the problem might also be the misinformation spreading efforts of various groups and industries trying to cast doubt and confusion on the reality of AGW so that, in the end, no one feels inspired to make any change from the energy status quo.

 

 

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 3:00:47 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Quoting Ekko_Tek,


I doubt you have actually read the evidence for it then. 

More nonsensical rubbish to delegitamize your opponents opinion simply because they disagree with you.  

Quoting Ekko_Tek,


AGW is not an "industry". I agree with you from my limited reading that nuclear power is one of the best options - thorium based nuclear reactors to be precise. There is no reason why there must be "one solution" though - you can tackle problems from multiple angles. Why do you think thorium reactors are not widespread currently? So far, it seems like the fact that they don't easily produce weapons grade material is one reason. They will also require more investment, money, research, etc. in order to catch up to uranium based reactors. The pros for them seem amazing though - especially for India and Australia, as they hold the lion's share of the natural reserves. Part of the problem might also be the misinformation spreading efforts of various groups and industries trying to cast doubt and confusion on the reality of AGW so that, in the end, no one feels inspired to make any change from the energy status quo.
 

I disagree that it isn't an industry.  It is and it is an industry in which men and women have made billions.  

But that point aside, either this is a catastrophe in the making with a immediate timeline or it isn't.  Which is it?  Because it's sold as the former.  That's the reason for the need for these major worldwide solutions. 

And if that's the case "of the thorium variety" is silly.  You either solve the catastrophe or you don't.  It's called triage.  You don't worry about the patients foot when the alternative is that they die from blood loss. 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 3:18:24 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting GeomanNL,


Quoting Kantok, reply 726Nuclear isn't considered an alternative, yet it is the single best hope humans have right now of dramatically reducing CO2 generation as quickly as possible.

WTF is that kind of argument.

It's only the so-called "economically viable alternative"

It's not the best one if you consider the consequences of placing nuclear power plants all over the globe!

For example... take Zimbabwe with the dictator Mugabe. He has some peculiar ideas about the disease of AIDS.

Now... he's completely irrational... would you like to see such a person leading a country that has nuclear reactors running non-stop to provide very cheap and very clean energy ? Do you trust that such a person wouldn't think, even for a moment, of using the waste for a bomb?

 

You keep making ridiculous counter-arguments.  No one is going to build a free nuclear plant for unstable dictators.  Most of those countries are not major contributors to Global Warming anyhow, because they don't have anywhere near the industry of the first world.  If just stable first world countries transitioned to next generation nuclear reactors in the next 20-40 years, it would be very good for reduction of carbon emissions. 

The world is not going to transition to green power overnight, or even in the next 50 years.  I'm happy to see that the world is even exploring green alternatives in the last decade.  I also believe in AGW, but I am a realist about what kind of change can happen in a short time-span.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 3:25:04 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Did you see the latest complied data regarding this?  I believe it said over 70% of all scientists studying this all agree that climate change is happening, and humans are definitely the dominant cause at the moment.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 3:45:05 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Gammit10, did you hear the one about the guy who stumbled into a 30 page long thread without reading any of it?

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 3:55:03 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

This is why politics and science don't mix...

 

CO2 is a greenhouse gas, true.

CO2 is a contributor to the temperature of Earth, true.

CO2 will doom us all to a runaway greenhouse effect that destroys the planet, false.

 

There are a great many gaps between their claims and what we know to be true.  Many of them have already been gone over in this thread.  They discount or under-represent a great deal of warming caused by solar output, they falsified the temperature record to create our largely mythical industrial temperature rise, and they radically over-represent what is a minor, and already saturated greenhouse gas.  It's an agenda, nothing more.

 

And anyway... Germany is doing fine, it's a rich nation. It shows that one can invest in cleaner energy without ruining the economy (like you seem to think... you're all doom and gloom there).

 

That's funny.  Their idiotic surcharge is primarily affecting industry.  Industry takes time to move, it took a couple decades for it to leave the US when the morons over here screwed our corporate tax code and other regulations.  Despite powering through the recession, they've been kicking nuclear to the curb for a scant two years and have already taken a beating as a result.  .7% growth in 2012 wasn't doing fine, they managed 3% the year before.  They exempted a few of their major corporations, so those guys will stick around, but there's a major movement of production happening already.  When you add 50% to the amount of taxes being paid as an energy surcharge, it tends to drive them out of the country.

 

Ten years from now, should they stay the course, Germany will be Greece.  The only reason they aren't in a revolt over their green kick is because humanity is too fucking stupid to realize it.  They still think it's the recession from 2007 causing them problems, just like our idiots over here can't seem to grasp that it's our commie government piling up ten billion in additional regulation compliance costs every year.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 5:02:50 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting psychoak,
There are a great many gaps between their claims and what we know to be true. Many of them have already been gone over in this thread. They discount or under-represent a great deal of warming caused by solar output, they falsified the temperature record to create our largely mythical industrial temperature rise, and they radically over-represent what is a minor, and already saturated greenhouse gas. It's an agenda, nothing more.

Are you a climate scientist? You must be since you have been able to evaluate these gaps in their claims. When in doubt, fall back on "they're just making this shit up and lying?" The only gap in claims lies between your ears...

Yes, clearly it's all a grand conspiracy involving:

209 Lead Authors and 50 Review Editors from 39 countries and more than 600 Contributing Authors from 32 countries (the IPCC Report) as well as every single scientific academic body in every single country on the planet.

Even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists revised their stance from dissenting to non-committal on the issue of AGW in 2007.

But no, they are all wrong, and you, Psychoak, have seen through their lies and charades and number fudging! Such amazing insight without even being a climate scientist! But no, you're just parroting some crap canards that were debunked the moment they hit the blogosphere from whatever cesspool they crawled out of like 5+ years ago. Likely from the same type of cesspool that created billboards like the Heartland Institute's "The Unabomber believed in AGW - Do you?" Agendas...

But you're right, we've all already been here before...

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 6:22:02 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

You should actually look at the claims and check the information behind them.  They're pissing into the wind and claiming it's rain, none of the fools getting pissed on have bothered to check for clouds

 

Take the time to check the raw data of rural temperature stations, time stamps and all, against the original modifications the NOAA made for their first study.  Last time I checked you could still get the stuff, govt shutdown is blocking the sites right now though.  I checked tons of them, it was always the same result.  Of course, I'm not a climate scientist, so I probably just didn't understand the complexities behind mysteriously adding two degrees to station readings starting from seemingly arbitrary years.  I'm sure there was some strange reason they all started at different years too, but I'm not a climate scientist.  They smoothed out their additions in later versions for some reason, but I'm not a climate scientist so I can't understand the complexities behind that either.  I just thought it was hilarious.

 

Watts thought it was funny too, but he's not a climate scientist either, he's just a meteorologist.  Oh wait, neither is Hansen, he's a physicist...  Oh shit, I think I'm on to something here!  None of the climate scientists are climate scientists!  I guess they didn't understand either...

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 6:35:22 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Ekko_Tek,
Yes, clearly it's all a grand conspiracy involving:

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 7:06:58 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

If the Corbett Report and Alex Jones are where you get your daily dose of "reality", we might as well be on different planets.

Cognitive dissonance when being confronted with evidence does make people do strange contortions in their efforts to maintain their belief system though. And yes, I will side with the evidence summarized from the IPCC report rather than some cool story about trawling through raw data from the weather in Muskogee some month.

This is why I also don't think homeopathy is effective for anything, that vaccines don't cause autism, and that evolution is a better explanation for how we got here than Creationism. It's because facts and evidence and scientific consensus actually carry weight with me more than a belief system when it comes to what is real. I'll be happy to change my stance if there is evidence to the contrary but the "evidence" against AGW is laughable.

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 7:41:45 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums
Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 7:45:36 PM from WinCustomize Forums WinCustomize Forums

Quoting flagyl,


Quoting Hankers, reply 740
Thoughts?

http://notrickszone.com/2013/10/11/gross-scientific-negligence-ipcc-ignored-huge-body-of-peer-reviewed-literature-showing-suns-clear-impact/#sthash.9nVsXJNO.dpuf

 

What do I think?

YAWN.

Figures.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 7:46:23 PM from Sins of a Solar Empire Forums Sins of a Solar Empire Forums

Quoting Ekko_Tek,
If the Corbett Report and Alex Jones are where you get your daily dose of "reality", we might as well be on different planets.

You are the only one that mentioned Alex Jones, and to me, that is the same old weak sauce tactic to take away any relevance to facts you refuse to look at, and I doubt you even looked at the video. Any buffoon can argue like that.

EXACTY what facts did Jame put forth can you find fault with? Or am I correct in assuming that anything that does not support your views, you will not even consider and just insult the report and the person posting it.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 7:49:20 PM from WinCustomize Forums WinCustomize Forums

Quoting Ekko_Tek,
The only gap in claims lies between your ears...

Again a reminder....30-odd pages of debate so far and 'no' devolving into name-calling.

A person having an opposing view to yours does NOT make them 'mindless'.

Anyone resorting to personal insult can/will be removed from involvement with these forums.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 8:03:08 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Quoting Hankers,


Quoting flagyl, reply 741

Quoting Hankers, reply 740
Thoughts?

http://notrickszone.com/2013/10/11/gross-scientific-negligence-ipcc-ignored-huge-body-of-peer-reviewed-literature-showing-suns-clear-impact/#sthash.9nVsXJNO.dpuf

 

What do I think?

YAWN.

Figures.

 

You DID NOT figure.

 

If you did, you would have asked yourself this question before posting-WHY were those papers not used in the report?

 

If you had read the IPCC's summary, you would have seen that they took the time to grade the data they used (from very good to bad...something like that. I don't have the scale in front of me right now. The main point is that the evidence was graded). That is...all peer reviewed data is not equal.ALL credible meta-analyses MUST have a method of evaluating the data, otherwise all data is equal, which is not true (you wouldn't take Uncle Bob's advice over the advice of a doctor from Sloan Kettering on cancer treatment would you? While they both may have opinions, their opinions are NOT equal.).

 

If this guy wanted to prove that the IPCC was cherry picking, he would have used their grading scale to show that the papers contained good data and should have been included. He did not. He just found a bunch of papers that had key words in the title and then looked to see if they were in the IPCC's paper. If they aren't->conspiracy. Ridiculous!

 

He didn't even come up with his own grading scale. Just saying "Oohhh, look see...they left this out! They are hiding something!", which proves NOTHING!

 

He and people like him are time wasters and cloud the debate by bringing in pseudo-science/sloppy science and either do not know enough to understand why it is not good science, or they do know why it is not good science and are just blatantly trying to trick people.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 8:04:32 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

I noticed that no one has really addressed what was brought up yesterday which is: Ok, let's assume we all agree, 100% that AGW is happening and it's a serious problem we should do something about.  Ok. What then?

Solar doesn't work very well at night.

Kantok gave a very thorough yet straight forward walk through. Unless we begin immediate conversion to nuclear, there's really nothing that can be done in the next 50 or so years. Even if we all copied Germany's plan, which we won't, we'll still be using more CO2 in 2050 than today.

 

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 8:21:14 PM from WinCustomize Forums WinCustomize Forums

Quoting flagyl,
You DID NOT figure.

You are the one not figuring.

You dismiss everything that doesn't conform to your point of view.

No discussion, no debate. To you it's "if you don't believe in what I'm saying then you are wrong.

Nowhere did I say I took what was in the link as the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth and that also goes for the IPPC report.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 8:31:36 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

 

Quoting Hankers,


Quoting flagyl, reply 746You DID NOT figure.

You are the one not figuring.

You dismiss everything that doesn't conform to your point of view.

No discussion, no debate. To you it's "if you don't believe in what I'm saying then you are wrong.

Nowhere did I say I took what was in the link as the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth and that also goes for the IPPC report.

In edit-Bullcrap!

 

You asked for thoughts. My thoughts are this-this guy is no scientist, nor has he shown himself to be capable of deciding what is good data or bad. I think he is either unqualified to determine what is good data or that he does know what is good data, but he is depending on those who read what he writes to not be able to figure out for themselves that all papers are not created equally (bad experimentalists, bad hypotheses, bad modelling, etc) and will therefore take his "gotcha" moment as some sort of proof.

 

So yes, I dismiss that article because he does NO meta analysis, not because it doesn't conform to my POV. Let me ask YOU this-why should his opinion be valued when he provides no rationale for why those papers should be included? He just points out the papers that argue for other reasons for increased temperatures...but WHY should they have been included in the IPCC's report (see? I asked you a question that you can answer...so there is room for debate)?

 

Please tell me:why did you post it and ask for thoughts?

 

Don't try to put words in my mouth. I told you why I reject his article and it has NOTHING to do with my not agreeing with his thesis. Don't try to turn this into a "They are trying to silence me because I am skeptical" argument. I am making a case as to why that article is garbage and I told you why.

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
October 15, 2013 8:39:39 PM from Elemental Forums Elemental Forums

Quoting GeomanNL,

Well anyway... I'm really outta this topic. You people are thinking too much in terms of economics, instead of in terms of a weighting of both economics AND risk. Or rather... not risk, but expected value which is: the risk times the potential for disaster. And nuclear plants end up waaaaay high on the risk/expected value scale.

But I thought AGW was the end of days?  That's what we've been told over and over and over.  That's apparently the reason why I've had my intelligence snidely questioned for not taking the IPCC report verbatim.  Or was it because I hadn't actually read it?  Or I couldn't read it?  (I forget, let me ask my Koch brother sponsored secretary to check the previous posts). 

I'll again agree with your opinion for the sake of argument.  AGW is it.  We screw this up, it's game over humanity.  I'll also agree that nuclear ends up waaaaay high on risk/expected value scale (it doesn't, but I'll agree for now).  

We've already basically agreed that solar (or solar + other renewables) won't solve the problem large scale anytime before 2100.  If AGW is really Game Over Man, then doesn't it logically follow that we should be shedding carbon-based fuels in favor of nuclear as fast as possible while we wait for solar (or some other renewable) to show viability as a large scale power source? Shouldn't nuclear at least be a big part of the solution near term?  

But it's not.  Never has been. Mentioning nuclear power to an AGW propoent is met with nearly the same reaction as denying AGW exists.  Why is that?  

 

Reason for Karma (Optional)
Successfully updated karma reason!
Stardock Forums v1.0.0.0    #101114  walnut1   Server Load Time: 00:00:00.0000235   Page Render Time: