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

Discussion in 'Environment' started by Dante, May 12, 2012.

  1. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    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. :eusa_whistle:


    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
     
  2. wirebender
    Offline

    wirebender Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,723
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NC
    Ratings:
    +120
    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.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    :eusa_whistle:

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

    wirebender Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,723
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NC
    Ratings:
    +120
    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:

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    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.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Old Rocks
    Offline

    Old Rocks Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2008
    Messages:
    46,440
    Thanks Received:
    5,409
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    Portland, Ore.
    Ratings:
    +10,294
    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.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    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.
     
  7. wirebender
    Offline

    wirebender Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,723
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NC
    Ratings:
    +120
    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.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: May 13, 2012
  8. wirebender
    Offline

    wirebender Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    1,723
    Thanks Received:
    120
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    NC
    Ratings:
    +120
    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.
     
  9. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    81,156
    Thanks Received:
    14,900
    Trophy Points:
    2,210
    Ratings:
    +36,885
    Old Rocks lacks the courage and intellectual capacity to question authority
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. peach174
    Offline

    peach174 Gold Member Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    20,457
    Thanks Received:
    4,030
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    S.E. AZ
    Ratings:
    +7,306
    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!!!!!!!!!!
     
    Last edited: May 13, 2012

Share This Page