EnviroLink Forum

This forum is very small, but I feel some come here to educate themselves on environmental matters. For those fence sitters and those who have not made up their minds on this topic I offer this lecture. It starts out in German, but the lecture is conducted in English. Enjoy and learn.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ROw_cDK ... ded#at=199

Don't be put off by clumsy attacks to follow. This is a real scientist discussing environmental science. Watch this video and decide for yourself. Now the regulars here are about to attack this guy with everything they have. Don't be fooled. Examine the content of this video and decide for yourself.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.

Decide for yourself if the good professor's math is correct? Or decide for your self if his understanding of the carbon cycle is accurate? Or whether the continual reduction in timescale is a problem for the comparisons being made.

The simple question is whether the current ~400 ppmv concentration of CO2 would be strongly tied to the amount of carbon, which has not been in the carbon cycle for millions of years, being released by the use of fossil fuels. Granted the amounts differ, as the amount released is almost twice that required to change the concentration from 280 ppmv prior to the use to 400 in the atmosphere at the present time.

Or an even more simple analogy is a fountain with a recirculation pump that keeps an amount of water in the upper layers. Now if you pour more water into the top layer it begins to fill because the water does not leave as fast as you pour. If someone compares the amount of water you pour to the amount being pumped and determines the water you add does not impact the rise in the upper water levels, does that really make sense?

That is what you are being told here in this video and it is not correct, which is why the good professor is not on the list to win the Nobel prize for his groundbreaking work in his for profit book.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

Maybe I didn't give the video a fair shake but since I'm no math whiz and frankly didn't want to wade through all the muddle so I confined myself to the first and last 15 minutes. Just a few observations.
1. Like with a lot of skeptics his graph of recent earth heat levels is wrong. The highest temperatures were in 2005 and 2010 not 1998, corrected by James Hansen. The average temperature per decade has gone up regularly since the 1960s.

2. A standard rookie error is to say since in the past solar energy increase led to CO2 increase that mode continues. In fact in modern times it is CO2 increase due to humans that has proceeded the capture of solar energy and so is the initial driver. That should be obvious but the good professor appears to be clueless on that point.

3. To the extent there has been some leveling off of observed surface temperature recently most of that has now been traced to deep ocean capture of energy. In any case due to lots of reasons surface temperature has always deviated around CO2 rise so frankly I don't know why he should make a big deal concerning some sort of recent leveling out of a relatively short duration.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.

From Goose5 ..... so who could question the accuracy of the representation of the graphs or even the claim of it being the last 44 climate models from reputable sources.

photobucket.com/albums/c56/Goose5/graphs/last44climatemodels_zpsbeca692e.jpg

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

So, it looks like Milton Banana is really that goose b*stard from TES. A cherry picking denialist if there ever was one, and below a cow pie in my opinion!



For the rotted banana;
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Using-S ... eracy.html

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”
― Chief Seattle

All you fence sitters please review your logical fallacies. Ad hominem to be specific. And here is a few quotes.

http://www.c3headlines.com/quotes-from- ... ptics.html







Just a few. Please follow the link for many more. And, this to add. Please review.

http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot ... -ipcc.html



CO2 is a trace gas, and cannot do what the religious environ-METAL-ists say that it does. No way.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.

I really would like to also live in a fantasy world where AGW and its future impacts, among others, sooner, do not exist. We are all sustainable and happy on this ever larger planet, or maybe become a video game addict, or something like that.
Maybe this 20% lesser effects will make you feel better;
http://desmog.ca/2013/07/11/world-we-ha ... n-anderson

_________________
"With every decision, think seven generations ahead of the consequences of your actions" Ute rule of life.
“We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children”
― Chief Seattle

So why post logical fallacies if you know they are fallacies unless you are trolling?




An astrophysicist who seems to purposefully attempt to mislead? Venus has an atmosphere which is mostly CO2 and has a significant amount of GHE warming.



For those too ignorant of the science to understand there has never been a claim of a direct correlation with just CO2 concentrations. the rest of us understand.

.

So how DO you explain the GHE since the temperature of the planet is far warmer than it should be with just a blackbody radiation heating?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

Okay fence sitters. Ever wonder what other countries think of this debate. Find out with this Der Spiegel offering.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 57713.html



This wild and dramatic forecast failed just like all the others. And, some stalwarts here wonder why they have a hard time convincing people.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.

You mean the actual statement or the strawman you referenced in the quote? The truth means so little to some.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

What ever your beliefs this is how science should be conducted.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/poli ... s-policies

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.

You confuse science with proposing actions to deal with the conclusions drawn from the science. There is no "neutral" position on anything once the data has shown the trends and causes are determined. There is an open mind to any new data, but that is not what has been the driving force with climate change. The same dissension exhibited in the tobacco studies by the tobacco companies and the creationists against evolution has been evident in this debate. The questioning of every bit of minutiae, the demand for some kind of projection, and the follow up saying the projections are not accurate enough are all used to imply the whole of the science is wrong. Scientists should never be neutral when the science points them even if the money and politics do not want to go in that direction.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein

Michael Mann Ph.D.

_________________
Potato chip enthusiast.

Correct, as science seeks evidence which either supports an hypothesis or it does not. In any case is does not ever prove the hypothesis because other evidence may modify it. Mathematics on the other hand are different and they have proofs for their theorems.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein