A Study Offers Clues...will conservatives deny the science?

[Procrustes Stretched]

A Study Offers Clues on a California fault's mystery...will conservatives deny the science?

Seriously. The media is reporting (damn them) that scientists (damn liberals) are again using terms like new method of modeling and may now understand why to make a case for earthquake science.

The key terms that should alarm conservatives are contained in the statement "data collected by sensors on the ground and in space and combining them with observations from laboratory physics experiments, Caltech researchers conducted a computer simulation..."

Sounds too much like the scientific arguments backing global warming.


A new modeling method has helped Caltech researchers better understand why the Parkfield segment of the San Andreas fault has been behaving oddly in recent years.

Quake study offers new clues on a California fault's mystery - latimes.com

 

[wirebender]

A Study Offers Clues on a California fault's mystery...will conservatives deny the science?

Seriously. The media is reporting (damn them) that scientists (damn liberals) are again using terms like new method of modeling and may now understand why to make a case for earthquake science.

The key terms that should alarm conservatives are contained in the statement "data collected by sensors on the ground and in space and combining them with observations from laboratory physics experiments, Caltech researchers conducted a computer simulation..."

Sounds too much like the scientific arguments backing global warming.


A new modeling method has helped Caltech researchers better understand why the Parkfield segment of the San Andreas fault has been behaving oddly in recent years.

Quake study offers new clues on a California fault's mystery - latimes.com

In typical fashion, you get it wrong via misrepresntation. Conservatves have no problem with data collected from sensors. It is the deliberate alteration of that data to torture it into agreeing with a predetermined outcome that raises eyebrows.

As to moleling. Do the modellers actually know what forces govern earthquakes and precisely what triggers them? If so, then models can be usefull. If not, then like climate pseudoscience, the models will be based on assumptions and the biases of the modellers and like climate models, the earthquake models will be a useless waste of money.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

A Study Offers Clues on a California fault's mystery...will conservatives deny the science?

Seriously. The media is reporting (damn them) that scientists (damn liberals) are again using terms like new method of modeling and may now understand why to make a case for earthquake science.

The key terms that should alarm conservatives are contained in the statement "data collected by sensors on the ground and in space and combining them with observations from laboratory physics experiments, Caltech researchers conducted a computer simulation..."

Sounds too much like the scientific arguments backing global warming.


A new modeling method has helped Caltech researchers better understand why the Parkfield segment of the San Andreas fault has been behaving oddly in recent years.

Quake study offers new clues on a California fault's mystery - latimes.com

In typical fashion, you get it wrong via misrepresntation. Conservatves have no problem with data collected from sensors. It is the deliberate alteration of that data to torture it into agreeing with a predetermined outcome that raises eyebrows.

As to moleling. Do the modellers actually know what forces govern earthquakes and precisely what triggers them? If so, then models can be usefull. If not, then like climate pseudoscience, the models will be based on assumptions and the biases of the modellers and like climate models, the earthquake models will be a useless waste of money.

the arguments given here @ USMB involve attacks on modeling, space science (NASA-NOAA?), predictions, terms like 'may now' and more.

 

[wirebender]

the arguments given here @ USMB involve attacks on modeling, space science (NASA-NOAA?), predictions, terms like 'may now' and more.

As I said, with regards to climate science, the models have proven worthless. We have far too limited an understanding of the energy budget to even begin to develop meaningful models. Aside from that, the present models are based on terribly flawed understandings of physical laws, deliberate corruption of physical laws, and an overall bias towards output that agrees with preconcieved notions.

The scientists at NOAA are guilty of manipulating the temperature record in order to fabricate the appearance of warming. It is being done by cooling the past. For example:

Feel free to believe what you are fed by agencies that have been caught red handed cooking the books in an effort to create the warming that they have predicted in spite of the fact that it never came to pass but don't expect any thinking person with more than basic knowledge of math and science to join you in your belief. Anyone who attempts to defend that sort of politically motivated pseudoscience is either abysmally stupid, or genuinely pathetic.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ah yes, everybody is trying to decieve poor ol' Bent. But he knows the truth. No matter how many scientists from all the countries in the world present data, evidence, he knows that they are all lying in a nefarious scheme to poison his gonads.

 

[Truthmatters]

why cant they understand that cherry picking a couple of sceintists in the entire feild so that they can back a redicules political opinion IS USING science for political purposes.



The right will believe ANYTHING their masters tell them to believe.

what I cant figure out is WHY they are so easy to dupe.

 

[wirebender]

Ah yes, everybody is trying to decieve poor ol' Bent. But he knows the truth. No matter how many scientists from all the countries in the world present data, evidence, he knows that they are all lying in a nefarious scheme to poison his gonads.

No rocks, I am not the one they are trying to decieve. That would be a waste of energy since I am actually capable of examining the evidence, applying the laws of physics and doing the math myself.

It is you who is the target of the deception because, face it, you aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer. Propaganda is always directed to those who aren't particularly good at thinking. The mere fact that you believe the hoax is supported by "most" scientists is sufficient evidence to prove that you don't think well enough to avoid being a victim of the propaganda.

You aren't bright enough to even see that you just made my point for me. You looked right at blatant evidence of data tampering and it made no impression whatsoever upon you. Not tampering by some individual, but tampering by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and you simply can not see it. Interesting rocks. Very damned interesting indeed.

 

[wirebender]

The right will believe ANYTHING their masters tell them to believe.

what I cant figure out is WHY they are so easy to dupe.

You, like rocks, just saw evidence of blatant data tampering and remain unable to grasp the meaning of what you saw. Talk about believing whatever your master tells you. You see the evidence, your master tells you to be blind to it and presto, you are blind.

I hate to break it to you, but you are the dupe here.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Ah yes, everybody is trying to decieve poor ol' Bent. But he knows the truth. No matter how many scientists from all the countries in the world present data, evidence, he knows that they are all lying in a nefarious scheme to poison his gonads.

Old Rocks lacks the courage and intellectual capacity to question authority

 

[peach174]

They didn't get it right in the 1970's and sold us all into believing that we were going into a mini ice age.
Why should we believe them now?
The Earth's tilt has changed, and that effects our weather.

Our Solar System is changing and it's not mankind's pollution doing it.
Our Earth is changing just like the rest of the outer space.

TRANSFORMATION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM

1.1.6 A series of Martian atmosphere transformations increasing its biosphere quality. In particularly, a cloudy growth in the equator area and an unusual growth of ozone concentration.

Update Note: In September 1997 the Mars Surveyor Satellite encountered an atmospheric density double that projected by NASA upon entering a Mars orbit. This greater density bent one of the solar array arms beyond the full and open stop. This combination of events has delayed the beginning of the scheduled photo mission for one year.

1.1.7 A first stage atmosphere generation on the Moon, where a growing natrium atmosphere is detected that reaches 9,000 km in height.

1.1.8 Significant physical, chemical and optical changes observed on Venus; an inversion of dark and light spots detected for the first time, and a sharp decrease of sulfur-containing gases in its atmosphere.

The following processes are taking place on the distant planets of our Solar System. But they are, essentially speaking, operationally driving the whole System.

Here are examples of these events:

1.1.1 A growth of dark spots on Pluto.

1.1.2 Reporting of auroras on Saturn.

1.1.3 Reporting of Uranus and Neptune polar shifts (They are magnetically conjugate planets), and the abrupt large-scale growth of Uranus' magnetosphere intensity.

1.1.4 A change in light intensity and light spot dynamics on Neptune.

Our whole solar system is changing and we aren't getting any answer's from the scientist's on this.
When the solar system changes that changes the Earth also.


IN OTHER WORDS, IT'S NOT POLLUTION FROM EARTHLINGS!!!!!!!!!!

 

[peach174]

Could the rise in CO2 actually be protecting us from the changes going on in our Solar System?

The benefits of the rise in CO2, not being discussed;

http://www.co2science.org/education/book/2011/55BenefitsofCO2Pamphlet.pdf

 

[starcraftzzz]

The right will believe ANYTHING their masters tell them to believe.

what I cant figure out is WHY they are so easy to dupe.

You, like rocks, just saw evidence of blatant data tampering and remain unable to grasp the meaning of what you saw. Talk about believing whatever your master tells you. You see the evidence, your master tells you to be blind to it and presto, you are blind.

I hate to break it to you, but you are the dupe here.

yes the right trampering data means the scientists and left are lying

 

[starcraftzzz]

Could the rise in CO2 actually be protecting us from the changes going on in our Solar System?

The benefits of the rise in CO2, not being discussed;

http://www.co2science.org/education/book/2011/55BenefitsofCO2Pamphlet.pdf

WHen you tell us that increasing life expectancy over the lat 100 yera sis due to more CO2 in the atmosphere you are automatically a dumbass

 

[wirebender]

Could the rise in CO2 actually be protecting us from the changes going on in our Solar System?

Nope. CO2 has no power to do anything other than absorb IR in a very narrow band and then emit exactly what it absorbed. That's it. Now you name some damage or protection that could be gained by simple absorption and emission and you might be on to something. Otherwise......

 

[wirebender]

yes the right trampering data means the scientists and left are lying

Half right. The scientists are lying. The left, as a group simply lack the intellectual wattage to draw a conclusion from the blatant lying of a small group of scientists.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Warming Shmarming....

Can anyone out there possibly defend pumping more pollution in to our environment?

Cleaner is better. The rest shouldn't matter. It's common courtesy... WE should be willing to give up profits in the now so that our kids have less of a mess in the future. And it's not like those to whom the profits in question matter the most couldn't stand to loose a few pounds.

 

[peach174]

Could the rise in CO2 actually be protecting us from the changes going on in our Solar System?

The benefits of the rise in CO2, not being discussed;

http://www.co2science.org/education/book/2011/55BenefitsofCO2Pamphlet.pdf

WHen you tell us that increasing life expectancy over the lat 100 yera sis due to more CO2 in the atmosphere you are automatically a dumbass

It wasn't me that said it. It was Drs. C.D. & S.B. Idso
Craig D. Idso is the founder and chairman of the board of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.
Now who is against scientists?

 

[peach174]

Warming Shmarming....

Can anyone out there possibly defend pumping more pollution in to our environment?

Cleaner is better. The rest shouldn't matter. It's common courtesy... WE should be willing to give up profits in the now so that our kids have less of a mess in the future. And it's not like those to whom the profits in question matter the most couldn't stand to loose a few pounds.

Yes, we all want cleaner fuel.
It's just that the technology isn't there yet. We are getting there, it's just going to take about 15 or 20 years (maybe a little less) but we will get cheap and cleaner fuel, just not right now.
Forcing the ones that we have now (like solar and wind) is just too expensive and most do not really work very well.

 

[starcraftzzz]

Could the rise in CO2 actually be protecting us from the changes going on in our Solar System?

The benefits of the rise in CO2, not being discussed;

http://www.co2science.org/education/book/2011/55BenefitsofCO2Pamphlet.pdf

WHen you tell us that increasing life expectancy over the lat 100 yera sis due to more CO2 in the atmosphere you are automatically a dumbass

It wasn't me that said it. It was Drs. C.D. & S.B. Idso
Craig D. Idso is the founder and chairman of the board of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.
Now who is against scientists?

It is amazing that you think claiming CO2 is respsonble for the increase in life expectances since 1900 is something intellegent

 

[Truthmatters]

The right will believe ANYTHING their masters tell them to believe.

what I cant figure out is WHY they are so easy to dupe.

You, like rocks, just saw evidence of blatant data tampering and remain unable to grasp the meaning of what you saw. Talk about believing whatever your master tells you. You see the evidence, your master tells you to be blind to it and presto, you are blind.

I hate to break it to you, but you are the dupe here.

Its right wing bullshit you disgruntled brained con