Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... 28
Send Topic Print
Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings. (Read 16824 times)
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #90 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:34pm
 
MOTR wrote on Dec 30th, 2012 at 6:29pm:
I'm sure you all remember this thread, http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1355784035/0#0

It's progs, breathlessly claiming that the IPCC has admitted ACC is false. Of course it wasn't true, but that wasn't the point. The point of such headlines throughout the denier blogosphere, and unfortunately also in the mainstream press, is to keep the average punter disengaged. The strategy is to create the impression that the science is largely unresolved and lull us into a false sense of security. Many, including myself, have been quite complicit. We're happy not to think about it because we really don't want to face the enormity of the problem. We really don't want to face the huge risks we are almost certainly creating for our children.

Well what does the lead author of the chapter in question say about this particular claim.

Quote:
Professor Steve Sherwood is a director of the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of New South Wales.

He is also a lead author of chapter seven of the IPCC report, which happens to be the one the sceptics are claiming for their side.

But Professor Sherwood is scornful of the idea that the chapter he helped write confirms a greater role for solar and other cosmic rays in global warming.

STEVE SHERWOOD: Oh that's completely ridiculous. I'm sure you could go and read those paragraphs yourself and the summary of it and see that we conclude exactly the opposite, that this cosmic ray effect that the paragraph is discussing appears to be negligible.

MARK COLVIN: They're saying that it is the first indication that the IPCC recognises something called solar forcing.

STEVE SHERWOOD: It's not the first time it recognises it. What it shows is that we looked at this. We look at everything. The IPCC has a very comprehensive process where we try to look at all the influences on climate and so we looked at this one.

And there have been a couple of papers suggesting that solar forcing affects climate through cosmic ray/cloud interactions, but most of the literature on this shows that that doesn't actually work.

MARK COLVIN: So you're saying that you've managed to basically eliminate this idea that sunspots or whatever are more responsible for global warming than human activity.

STEVE SHERWOOD: Based on the peer-reviewed literature that's available now, that looks extremely unlikely.

MARK COLVIN: So what have these people done? Is this just a case of cherry-picking a sentence?

STEVE SHERWOOD: Yeah, it's a pretty severe case of that, because even the sentence doesn't say what they say and certainly if you look at the context, we're really saying the opposite.



elizabeth kubler-ross!


lol, the world is at a series of cross-roads... not just climate change! THESE WILL BE INTERESTING TIMES INDEED  Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked Shocked
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #91 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:40pm
 
Panic, in the very concrete form of resource bottlenecks, will occur as everyone-read, the worlds governments- finally realise that they actually don't want to leave a poo-sandwich as a legacy for their children: as outlined by that bloke from BEYOND ZERO!



Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 74520
Gender: male
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #92 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:41pm
 
gold_medal wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:14pm:
John Smith wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:08pm:
gold_medal wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 12:32pm:
John Smith wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 10:06am:
Denialists don't want to believe no matter how much evidence you provide ...  there is no amount of evidence that would satisfy them.

Like the old saying goes, 'you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink' ... in the case of progs and longlooser, it's more jackass' than horses.


the problem is that in the words of one of the worlds leading climate scientists 'THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT AGW'


which is the opposite to what the majority of climate scientists are saying ... you choose to quote that and ignore the others simply because it's what you want to believe.


you choose to believe there are ANY climate scientists that disagree and yet here are some. and as has been comprehensively demonstrated, the standard of research of the rest has been strongly criticised and frankly the ethics of a lot has been lamblasted as well. the hockey stick for example is the new generations Piltdown man. it was so ridiculoudly obvious that it was way wrong and yet even today most still believe it.

the science is far from settled. The actual science points away from AGW - not toward it.


A - I never said the science is settled
B - I never said that no climate scientists don't believe in AGW
C- the only thing comprehensively demonstrated is your complete inablity to reason without prejudice or bias...

I'm pretty sure you are not a climate scientist, in fact I doubt you even know what the temperature is outside. I also am not a climate scientist and I don't pretend to be. As such I  DO NOT google one or two stories and conclude that I know it all ... as a layman, I have to listen to the experts. You will always find experts that disagree with the mainstream, that doesn't prove anything. Until general consensus from the experts say otherwise I have to listen to the majority. If ten doctors are telling you that you need to remove a growth because it could kill you, and give you their reasons, and two doctors tell you no need to remove it, you'll be right, citing their reasons  ... who are you going to listen to? I'm betting you wouldn't dare leave it.
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #93 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:57pm
 
...goldy specialises in the shattering of minds maaaaan: he has smoked so much boring meth he reckons he can control people with the written word maaaaaan!

GO SICKNESS: GO AUSSIE: GO THE CLEVER COUNTRY MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!

Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #94 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:59pm
 
OH, GOLDY ALSO HATES THE FACT CHINA IS ROLLING OUT FIBRE-TO-THE-HOME MAAAAAAAAAAAN!


  Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #95 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 2:45pm
 
Maqqa wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 11:12am:
progressiveslol wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 9:40am:
MOTR wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 9:37am:
FRED. wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 9:17am:
progressiveslol wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 9:14am:
MOTR wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 9:12am:
As long as it sounds sophisticated and appears to create doubt about warming or an anthropogenic forcing, progs will paste it.


Yeh thats a good rebuttal. So tell us all how ice floating on water and melting, changes the water level. Would love to hear this new scientific evidence.


Don't put ICE in your  drink when it  melts  it flows all over the bar  Wink


Looks like you've got a buddy, progs. If you read what the scientists are saying you'll find this particular analogy doesn't fit the situation.

Never does follow science or laws of physics does it.



Interesting isn't it?

The alarmists are saying that global warming cause the polar ice caps to melt - therefore sea level will rise

but if melting ice does not overflow the glass then how does that increase sea level?

if you filled a cup to 7/10 full and freeze it - chances are the resulting ice would reach nearer to the rim of the cup. Lets say its now 9/10 of the cup

If we melt it sitting inside the same cup - does it go down to 7/10?

If so - would this then translate into the real world where melting ice actually reduce sea level rather than increasing it?


The level of the world's oceans will rise. But this is not the real problem, the problem is that these white ice caps reflect sunlight, much of which is reflected back into space, in turn cooling earth, but with the ice caps melting, the only reflector is the ocean, darker color absorbs sunlight causing further warming of the earth which can be up to 80 °C which is fatal and can cause extinction of all living organisms.

    If all the ice melted, north and south pole, Antarctica, Greenland, and all, sea levels would rise between 175 and 225 feet.
    Coastal areas would essentially disappear, and roughly a third of the earth's existing landmass would be submerged. it is estimated that 60% of the world's population lives in the coastal plains.
    Many inland areas would be affected as well, as water tables, rivers, and lakes would all rise from their previous heights.

The melting of the north polar cap would not appreciably increase the volume of water in the oceans, since the north polar cap is resting on the water and not on the land. It would decrease the salinity of the oceans, however, and this would cause some serious problems. The melting of the south polar cap, which rests on the continent of Antarctica, would add a great deal of water to the oceans and help to raise sea level, as well as contributing to lower salinity. The melting of the glaciers of Greenland would also significantly raise sea level.

When the whole North Pole is melted, the water will rise not at all, because floating ice doesn't change sea level, but when Greenland and Antarctica melt it may raise sea levels around 7 or 8 metres. This will flood sea countries like the Netherlands so that half of the Netherlands will disappear under the sea level.

    The sea levels will start to rise
    If the ice-caps melt the ecosystem will go out of balance
    Temperature will get hotter in the coldest places in the world.


Link -
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_will_happen_if_ice_caps_melt
============================
You're exposing yourself, AGAIN!
Or, at least, you're exposing your lack of knowledge!

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #96 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:10pm
 
perceptions_now wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 2:45pm:
The level of the world's oceans will rise. But this is not the real problem, the problem is that these white ice caps reflect sunlight, much of which is reflected back into space, in turn cooling earth


climate alarmists are saying sunlight has nothing to do with it

AND

reflected or not - the extra 50ppm in carbon is keeping the heat in

ie if there's 1,000,000 escape holes for heat to go through - 350 carbon plugs will some how keep enough heat in to warm the earth
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #97 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:12pm
 
MOTR wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:28pm:
Maqqa wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:21pm:
Maqqa wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 12:37pm:
Interesting to note:

(1) If the ice and the water it floats in are of different composition then the water is displaced ie freshwater ice in salt water. The pictures we've been seeing is from Antarctica and Greenland (freshwater ice)

(2) Does anyone know what the IPCC say about recent rises in sea-level and how much it contributes to Antarctica and Greenland?

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf

Antarctic and Greenland ice sheet mass contributed to sea level rise between 1993 and 2003

Antarctica ==>> 0.21 ± 0.35 mm/year
Greenland ==>> 0.21 ± 0.07 mm/year


things to note:
(a) This is an estimate
(b) The rise is in millimetres
(c) The Antarctic margin of error wipes out the Antarctic contribution as well as offsets the Greenland contribution



not one leftie commented on this IPCC finding?

you don't know what 0.21mm looks like? - look in your pants and multiply that by 1,000

talking about multiplying by 1,000

if we multiply 0.21mm by 1,000 years = 210mm = 21cm in 1,000 years???



Give me time, Maqqa.

Have you thought about using a metric other than your penis size. It doesn't seem to match any standard I'm aware of.


penis size is about the only measurement lefties understand

you guys haven't discovered the Empirical Measurement let alone the Metric
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #98 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:48pm
 
Maqqa wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:10pm:
perceptions_now wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 2:45pm:
The level of the world's oceans will rise. But this is not the real problem, the problem is that these white ice caps reflect sunlight, much of which is reflected back into space, in turn cooling earth


climate alarmists are saying sunlight has nothing to do with it

AND

reflected or not - the extra 50ppm in carbon is keeping the heat in

ie if there's 1,000,000 escape holes for heat to go through - 350 carbon plugs will some how keep enough heat in to warm the earth


At least the writer of the article, knew what was going to happen with melting ice & why, UNLIKE YOU!!!

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_will_happen_if_ice_caps_melt
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gold_medal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #99 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 4:06pm
 
MOTR wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:21pm:
gold_medal wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:14pm:
John Smith wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 1:08pm:
gold_medal wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 12:32pm:
John Smith wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 10:06am:
Denialists don't want to believe no matter how much evidence you provide ...  there is no amount of evidence that would satisfy them.

Like the old saying goes, 'you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink' ... in the case of progs and longlooser, it's more jackass' than horses.


the problem is that in the words of one of the worlds leading climate scientists 'THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT AGW'


which is the opposite to what the majority of climate scientists are saying ... you choose to quote that and ignore the others simply because it's what you want to believe.


you choose to believe there are ANY climate scientists that disagree and yet here are some. and as has been comprehensively demonstrated, the standard of research of the rest has been strongly criticised and frankly the ethics of a lot has been lamblasted as well. the hockey stick for example is the new generations Piltdown man. it was so ridiculoudly obvious that it was way wrong and yet even today most still believe it.

the science is far from settled. The actual science points away from AGW - not toward it.


That's why there is not a single scientific body of national or international standing that agrees with you. That's why surveys have shown somewhere around 97% of climate scientists believe that our planet is warming and humans are responsible for this climate change.



wow...  bang goes your 'critical reasoning' claim BIG TIME! your 97% claim is so bogus yet you continue to use it hoping no one knows it means a MERE 76 people in the entire world!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
gold_medal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3897
Gender: male
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #100 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 4:08pm
 
do you notice how MOTR runs away from discussion of any claim about no temperature rises once an opponetn shows facts???

you are a huge disappointment MOTR. I thought you might be a credible debater but instead you are justa cheer-squad member and and ideology to support.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #101 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 5:07pm
 
perceptions_now wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:48pm:
Maqqa wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:10pm:
perceptions_now wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 2:45pm:
The level of the world's oceans will rise. But this is not the real problem, the problem is that these white ice caps reflect sunlight, much of which is reflected back into space, in turn cooling earth


climate alarmists are saying sunlight has nothing to do with it

AND

reflected or not - the extra 50ppm in carbon is keeping the heat in

ie if there's 1,000,000 escape holes for heat to go through - 350 carbon plugs will some how keep enough heat in to warm the earth


At least the writer of the article, knew what was going to happen with melting ice & why, UNLIKE YOU!!!

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_will_happen_if_ice_caps_melt



If the Antarctic and Greenland Ice Sheets melt then it will increase sea levels by about 70 meters

So what's your point about the Sun?
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 16000
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #102 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 5:08pm
 
gold_medal wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 4:08pm:
do you notice how MOTR runs away from discussion of any claim about no temperature rises once an opponetn shows facts???

you are a huge disappointment MOTR. I thought you might be a credible debater but instead you are justa cheer-squad member and and ideology to support.


and the unwise one
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
MOTR
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6646
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #103 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 6:12pm
 
Maqqa wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 3:10pm:
perceptions_now wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 2:45pm:
The level of the world's oceans will rise. But this is not the real problem, the problem is that these white ice caps reflect sunlight, much of which is reflected back into space, in turn cooling earth


climate alarmists are saying sunlight has nothing to do with it

AND

reflected or not - the extra 50ppm in carbon is keeping the heat in

ie if there's 1,000,000 escape holes for heat to go through - 350 carbon plugs will some how keep enough heat in to warm the earth


That's a strawman argument, Maqqa. Climate scientists are not denying that the sun is a driver of climate. They're saying it should be having a cooling effect at this present point in time.

...

Just because 390ppm might not sound like a lot to a lay person, means diddly squat. Just because you are swayed by such juvenile arguments doesn't mean they have any substance whatsoever.
Back to top
 

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."
 
IP Logged
 
MOTR
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6646
Re: Deniers nailed misrepresenting IPCC findings.
Reply #104 - Dec 31st, 2012 at 6:15pm
 
Maqqa wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 5:08pm:
gold_medal wrote on Dec 31st, 2012 at 4:08pm:
do you notice how MOTR runs away from discussion of any claim about no temperature rises once an opponetn shows facts???

you are a huge disappointment MOTR. I thought you might be a credible debater but instead you are justa cheer-squad member and and ideology to support.


and the unwise one


I'll always answer a direct question when I notice it. I don't recall any direct evidence that suggests their is a downward trend in global temperatures. Since the 1950s, every decade has been warmer than the last. The most obvious way to look for the trend is to take away known short term drivers. Take the short term noise away and we a left we a very clear trend. The argument that there has been a plateauing or a reversal in the long term trend is very weak indeed.

...

I know progs will froth at the adjusted data because he doesn't seem to believe in the El Niño effect either.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 31st, 2012 at 6:25pm by MOTR »  

Hunt says Coalition accepts IPCC findings

"What does this mean? It means that we need to do practical things that actually reduce emissions."
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 ... 28
Send Topic Print