Great Day for the Skeptics

[IanC]

CLOUD experiment released- vindicates Svendsmark

Mann emails released to outside source but not public yet (yesterday's pre-emptive vindication of Mann couldnt be coincidental, could it?)

Sea level data show large correction downward

let the spluttering begin at Real Climate! this should be interesting.

 

[ScienceRocks]

CLOUD experiment released- vindicates Svendsmark

Mann emails released to outside source but not public yet (yesterday's pre-emptive vindication of Mann couldnt be coincidental, could it?)

Sea level data show large correction downward

let the spluttering begin at Real Climate! this should be interesting.

We're finding that there is some pretty powerful negatives. I sure as hell wouldn't forecast more then 1c in the next 89 years. Hell, I'm not even sure if it is a good idea to make a 90 year forecast with as little as we know about the climate system.

 

[wirebender]

CLOUD experiment released- vindicates Svendsmark

Mann emails released to outside source but not public yet (yesterday's pre-emptive vindication of Mann couldnt be coincidental, could it?)

Sea level data show large correction downward

let the spluttering begin at Real Climate! this should be interesting.

We're finding that there is some pretty powerful negatives. I sure as hell wouldn't forecast more then 1c in the next 89 years. Hell, I'm not even sure if it is a good idea to make a 90 year forecast with as little as we know about the climate system.

Considering what we "know" about the climate, and considering what climate science has already shown us, I would say that predictions even a year in advance are pushing the boundries.

 

[gslack]

I have to hand it to you wire, after reading your posts and doing a little research on my own, I have a much better understanding of just how greenhouse effect works on a fundamental level.

That being said the entire field of climate research (or at least as we are told) runs on a false premise on the fundamental level. Therefore just as you stated before, all other theories, predictions, claims either direct or indirect will all have that same fundamental flaw. And whats worse is there is a whole generation of scientists that have been trained and conditioned to accept it as fact, run with it, and don't look back.

I have been taking my oldest daughter to colleges lately, and at every single one they make sure and tell us they have a very robust environmental science/research department. They take several minutes explaining all the research they have going on regarding climate change and ALL of it runs on this same pretense...

When scientists teach the young to stop asking the obvious questions about everything, and just follow the system, we are in dire times....

 

[wirebender]

I have to hand it to you wire, after reading your posts and doing a little research on my own, I have a much better understanding of just how greenhouse effect works on a fundamental level.

That being said the entire field of climate research (or at least as we are told) runs on a false premise on the fundamental level. Therefore just as you stated before, all other theories, predictions, claims either direct or indirect will all have that same fundamental flaw. And whats worse is there is a whole generation of scientists that have been trained and conditioned to accept it as fact, run with it, and don't look back.

I have been taking my oldest daughter to colleges lately, and at every single one they make sure and tell us they have a very robust environmental science/research department. They take several minutes explaining all the research they have going on regarding climate change and ALL of it runs on this same pretense...

When scientists teach the young to stop asking the obvious questions about everything, and just follow the system, we are in dire times....

It starts waaaaayyyyy before college. Kids aren't taught critical thinking skills any more and haven't been for a very long time. I recognized that deficiency in education (public and private) when my own kids were in school and took it on myself to teach them to think critically. It isn't hard, but you have to work at it constantly. Now both my kids and myself are teaching the same skills to my grandkids except we started way earlier with them than I did with my kids.

If you have strong critical thinking skills, you can overcome the obvious deficiencies in academics that are present through all levels of education now.

If your daugher is old enough to be looking at colleges here is a place that both you and her might visit:

http://www.criticalthinking.org/aboutCT/definingCT.cfm

Here is a clip from the front page that cuts to the very heart of the issue:

"Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1) a set of information and belief generating and processing skills, and 2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior. It is thus to be contrasted with: 1) the mere acquisition and retention of information alone, because it involves a particular way in which information is sought and treated"

The highlighted passage goes to the foundational flaw that has resided within our educational system for a very long time. Since the fed got into education way back when and standardized tests became the norm, teachers and school systems in general have been teaching for the tests, not for the purpose of education. Kids are taught to simply aquire and retain information in order to pass a test and that doesn't equal education. It is from that sort of system that you get people like rocks and rolling thunder. People who have wheelbarrows full of information on a topic, but aren't able to think critically about it. They hold a belief based on their political leaning and then go about aquiring information that supports that belief. They aren't able to examine that information; turn it over and look at it from various directions and compare it with the real world or examine it critically against other information in their wheel barrow. It supports what they believe so they accept it, apparently without reservation.

On a personal level, I think that liberal thought supports and promotes non critical thinking as opposed to the natural critical nature of conservative thought. Or maybe those not disposed to thinking criticaly for physiological or psychological reasons simply drift naturally into liberal thought as a way to maintain a certain comfort level. At any rate, liberals almost universally hold certain positions which demonstrate a shockingly casual lack of any critical thought. For example:

Most liberals maintain that no single culture is superior to another, except our Judeo-Christian free market culture here in the west which is singularly bad.

Most liberals believe in free speech; as long as it is speech they agree with, otherwise the fairness doctrine and net neutrality are necessary.

Most liberals believe that there is no such thing as objective morality; except of course for conservatism, Christianity and capitalism, which are all, by definition, inherently evil

Most liberals believe that all people are equal, except, of course, male white conservatives, who are inferior to everyone.

And on the topic of climate science, most liberals believe that science has to rely on the revered scientific method, except, of course, when the scientific method demands honesty in presenting results, openness of code and data, experimentation to verify hypotheses, admissions regarding uncertainty, or anything else which detracts from a slavish adherence to the "devine consensus".

All that, however, is fodder for a different conversation.

 

[gslack]

I have to hand it to you wire, after reading your posts and doing a little research on my own, I have a much better understanding of just how greenhouse effect works on a fundamental level.

That being said the entire field of climate research (or at least as we are told) runs on a false premise on the fundamental level. Therefore just as you stated before, all other theories, predictions, claims either direct or indirect will all have that same fundamental flaw. And whats worse is there is a whole generation of scientists that have been trained and conditioned to accept it as fact, run with it, and don't look back.

I have been taking my oldest daughter to colleges lately, and at every single one they make sure and tell us they have a very robust environmental science/research department. They take several minutes explaining all the research they have going on regarding climate change and ALL of it runs on this same pretense...

When scientists teach the young to stop asking the obvious questions about everything, and just follow the system, we are in dire times....

It starts waaaaayyyyy before college. Kids aren't taught critical thinking skills any more and haven't been for a very long time. I recognized that deficiency in education (public and private) when my own kids were in school and took it on myself to teach them to think critically. It isn't hard, but you have to work at it constantly. Now both my kids and myself are teaching the same skills to my grandkids except we started way earlier with them than I did with my kids.

If you have strong critical thinking skills, you can overcome the obvious deficiencies in academics that are present through all levels of education now.

If your daugher is old enough to be looking at colleges here is a place that both you and her might visit:

CriticalThinking.org - Defining Critical Thinking

Here is a clip from the front page that cuts to the very heart of the issue:

"Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1) a set of information and belief generating and processing skills, and 2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior. It is thus to be contrasted with: 1) the mere acquisition and retention of information alone, because it involves a particular way in which information is sought and treated"

The highlighted passage goes to the foundational flaw that has resided within our educational system for a very long time. Since the fed got into education way back when and standardized tests became the norm, teachers and school systems in general have been teaching for the tests, not for the purpose of education. Kids are taught to simply aquire and retain information in order to pass a test and that doesn't equal education. It is from that sort of system that you get people like rocks and rolling thunder. People who have wheelbarrows full of information on a topic, but aren't able to think critically about it. They hold a belief based on their political leaning and then go about aquiring information that supports that belief. They aren't able to examine that information; turn it over and look at it from various directions and compare it with the real world or examine it critically against other information in their wheel barrow. It supports what they believe so they accept it, apparently without reservation.

On a personal level, I think that liberal thought supports and promotes non critical thinking as opposed to the natural critical nature of conservative thought. Or maybe those not disposed to thinking criticaly for physiological or psychological reasons simply drift naturally into liberal thought as a way to maintain a certain comfort level. At any rate, liberals almost universally hold certain positions which demonstrate a shockingly casual lack of any critical thought. For example:

Most liberals maintain that no single culture is superior to another, except our Judeo-Christian free market culture here in the west which is singularly bad.

Most liberals believe in free speech; as long as it is speech they agree with, otherwise the fairness doctrine and net neutrality are necessary.

Most liberals believe that there is no such thing as objective morality; except of course for conservatism, Christianity and capitalism, which are all, by definition, inherently evil

Most liberals believe that all people are equal, except, of course, male white conservatives, who are inferior to everyone.

And on the topic of climate science, most liberals believe that science has to rely on the revered scientific method, except, of course, when the scientific method demands honesty in presenting results, openness of code and data, experimentation to verify hypotheses, admissions regarding uncertainty, or anything else which detracts from a slavish adherence to the "devine consensus".

All that, however, is fodder for a different conversation.

I have pretty much tried to do the same thing with my kids. I have 3 one a senior in HS, one a sophomore, and the last one in 7th grade. It seems to have worked, they ask the questions and treats what they are taught in school as a tool, knowing that their real knowledge will have to come from their own studies and work.

It's sad it is like that though.

I agree with your assessments of liberals 100%.

 

[waltky]

I've noticed that grass cutting season is longer and leaves turning seems to be later than I remember as a kid...

Is Climate Change Affecting Fall Foliage?
6 Oct.`11 – Clocks may not be the only thing falling back: That signature autumn change in leaf colors may be drifting further down the calendar.

Scientists don't quite know if global warming is changing the signs of fall like it already has with an earlier-arriving spring. They're turning their attention to fall foliage in hopes of determining whether climate change is leading to a later arrival of autumn's golden, orange and red hues. Studies in Europe and in Japan already indicate leaves are changing color and dropping later, so it stands to reason that it's happening here as well, said Richard Primack, professor of biology at Boston University. "The fall foliage is going to get pushed back," Primack warned.

Down the road, scientists say there could be implications not just for ecology but for the economy if duller or delayed colors discourage leaf-peeping tourists. Phenology is the study of timing in nature, whether it's crocuses emerging in the spring, leaves falling from trees, or Canada geese heading south for the winter. And it's tricky business for fall foliage. The budding of plants each spring is tied almost exclusively to warming temperatures, while fall's changing colors are linked to cooling temperatures, decreasing sunlight and soil moisture.

The brilliant colors associated with fall happen when production of chlorophyll, the green pigment in plants that's crucial to photosynthesis, slows down as the days get shorter and the nights grow longer. That exposes leaves' yellow, red and orange pigments that are normally hidden from view. How and when that happens depends on temperatures and moisture levels. In some years, the colors are more vibrant than others. Further complicating matters: A tree that's stressed may simply drop its leaves, with no color change, or brown leaves. "Fall is still an enigma," said Jake Weltzin, executive director of the National Phenology Network in Arizona and an ecologist with the U.S. Geological Survey.

Scientists caution that heavy rain, drought-like conditions or temperature extremes can cause dramatic year-to-year fluctuations that don't establish a long-term trend. For example, heavy rainfall in New England this spring, followed by a deluge caused by Irene, is causing fungal growth that's causing some trees' leaves to turn brown and drop earlier than normal. William Ostrofsky, forest pathologist with the Maine Forest Service, is skeptical about whether there's a proven link between fall foliage and climate change. "I just don't know that there's any evidence to indicate there's a trend one way or the other," said Ostrofsky, who points out that year-to-year fluctuations make it difficult to discern long-term trends. "I really don't think we've seen any long-term trend, as far as I can tell."

MORE

See also:

Fall colors depend on weather changes
10/15/2010 4:42 PM | So, why do the leaves change color each fall?

"Every autumn across the Northern Hemisphere, diminishing daylight hours and falling temperatures induce trees to prepare for winter," says Bassam Shakhashiri, chemistry professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Broadleaf, green trees turn to brilliant shades of yellow, orange, and red. Their color changes because the tree's growth factory shuts down for the winter. Winter is a bad time for growing: too little water, too little sun, and too much cold. So the tree stops producing chlorophyll, stores sugars for antifreeze protection, and sheds tender leaves.

"During summer, the leaves of trees are factories producing sugar from carbon dioxide and water by the action of light on chlorophyll [photosynthesis]," says Shakhashiri. To get energy, the large chlorophyll molecules absorb red and blue light from sunlight and reflect green light. That's why trees look green during summer. Chlorophyll molecules use the light energy to change carbon dioxide and water into oxygen, sugars, and starches. The leaves exhale the waste oxygen and keep the food. Water and nutrients flow up from roots through branches and into the leaves. Sugars manufactured during photosynthesis flow out from the leaves to the rest of the tree and the chemical energy of the sugar fuels tree growth. The tree stores any excess energy.

Chlorophyll, however, breaks down easily in bright sunlight. So leaves constantly churn out chlorophyll all summer long and the leaves stay green. The leaves of many trees (for example, birches) also contain the yellow pigment, carotene, which traps blue-green and blue light. As the nights get shorter and cooler, the tree must protect itself for winter. Its stems, twigs, and buds are tough enough to withstand winter, but not so its fragile broad, thin leaves. The watery sap in leaf cells freezes easily. So the tree seals off its leaves and sheds them.

To begin the sealing-off process, the tree grows a corky membrane between each branch and leaf stem. The membrane hinders the flow of nutrients into the leaf which stops the leaf from making new chlorophyll. The old chlorophyll quickly decomposes and the leaf's green color fades. If the leaf contains carotene, birch trees for example, the fading leaf changes from green to yellow. Carotene, a more stable compound than chlorophyll, persists in leaves even after all the chlorophyll is gone. The leaves of those trees now look yellow. The birches, aspens, and cottonwoods in the forest shimmer gold.

MORE

 

[skookerasbil]

I have to hand it to you wire, after reading your posts and doing a little research on my own, I have a much better understanding of just how greenhouse effect works on a fundamental level.

That being said the entire field of climate research (or at least as we are told) runs on a false premise on the fundamental level. Therefore just as you stated before, all other theories, predictions, claims either direct or indirect will all have that same fundamental flaw. And whats worse is there is a whole generation of scientists that have been trained and conditioned to accept it as fact, run with it, and don't look back.

I have been taking my oldest daughter to colleges lately, and at every single one they make sure and tell us they have a very robust environmental science/research department. They take several minutes explaining all the research they have going on regarding climate change and ALL of it runs on this same pretense...

When scientists teach the young to stop asking the obvious questions about everything, and just follow the system, we are in dire times....

It starts waaaaayyyyy before college. Kids aren't taught critical thinking skills any more and haven't been for a very long time. I recognized that deficiency in education (public and private) when my own kids were in school and took it on myself to teach them to think critically. It isn't hard, but you have to work at it constantly. Now both my kids and myself are teaching the same skills to my grandkids except we started way earlier with them than I did with my kids.

If you have strong critical thinking skills, you can overcome the obvious deficiencies in academics that are present through all levels of education now.

If your daugher is old enough to be looking at colleges here is a place that both you and her might visit:

Defining Critical Thinking

Here is a clip from the front page that cuts to the very heart of the issue:

"Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1) a set of information and belief generating and processing skills, and 2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior. It is thus to be contrasted with: 1) the mere acquisition and retention of information alone, because it involves a particular way in which information is sought and treated"

The highlighted passage goes to the foundational flaw that has resided within our educational system for a very long time. Since the fed got into education way back when and standardized tests became the norm, teachers and school systems in general have been teaching for the tests, not for the purpose of education. Kids are taught to simply aquire and retain information in order to pass a test and that doesn't equal education. It is from that sort of system that you get people like rocks and rolling thunder. People who have wheelbarrows full of information on a topic, but aren't able to think critically about it. They hold a belief based on their political leaning and then go about aquiring information that supports that belief. They aren't able to examine that information; turn it over and look at it from various directions and compare it with the real world or examine it critically against other information in their wheel barrow. It supports what they believe so they accept it, apparently without reservation.

On a personal level, I think that liberal thought supports and promotes non critical thinking as opposed to the natural critical nature of conservative thought. Or maybe those not disposed to thinking criticaly for physiological or psychological reasons simply drift naturally into liberal thought as a way to maintain a certain comfort level. At any rate, liberals almost universally hold certain positions which demonstrate a shockingly casual lack of any critical thought. For example:

Most liberals maintain that no single culture is superior to another, except our Judeo-Christian free market culture here in the west which is singularly bad.

Most liberals believe in free speech; as long as it is speech they agree with, otherwise the fairness doctrine and net neutrality are necessary.

Most liberals believe that there is no such thing as objective morality; except of course for conservatism, Christianity and capitalism, which are all, by definition, inherently evil

Most liberals believe that all people are equal, except, of course, male white conservatives, who are inferior to everyone.

And on the topic of climate science, most liberals believe that science has to rely on the revered scientific method, except, of course, when the scientific method demands honesty in presenting results, openness of code and data, experimentation to verify hypotheses, admissions regarding uncertainty, or anything else which detracts from a slavish adherence to the "devine consensus".

All that, however, is fodder for a different conversation.

Gslack...........I'll just add to that..............

There is also a component to liberal thinking that is clearly a pathology. If you study the thinking patterns of anybody who promotes far left views, there is a pronounced lack of an ability to intellectually weigh necessary trade-offs. Ive always found it fascinating.......a concept so crystal clear to the conservative mind unable to at all be embaced by the liberal mind. So its more than education.

For any conservative, the prime questions which must be answered when problem solving are:

1) As compared to what?

and

2) At what cost?

The liberal mind NEVER factors this into their thinking = fascinating. Its not material in any debate on any subject. Necessary tradeoffs are not weighed intellectually.


As applied to the debate about climate change...........consider................

The UN recently estimated the cost of all world economies going green at 71 trillion dollars. This number is not at all important to the liberal mind............as if all we all have to do is collectively get the mindset to all go down to the bank one day and withdraw the funds to eliminate fossil fuels. To them, its simply a matter of making up our minds to accomplish the feat. No unintended consequences to be concerned with.


Fascinating shit...............but could one imagine our world if these people were making all the decisions for us!!

 

[FurthurBB]

I have to hand it to you wire, after reading your posts and doing a little research on my own, I have a much better understanding of just how greenhouse effect works on a fundamental level.

That being said the entire field of climate research (or at least as we are told) runs on a false premise on the fundamental level. Therefore just as you stated before, all other theories, predictions, claims either direct or indirect will all have that same fundamental flaw. And whats worse is there is a whole generation of scientists that have been trained and conditioned to accept it as fact, run with it, and don't look back.

I have been taking my oldest daughter to colleges lately, and at every single one they make sure and tell us they have a very robust environmental science/research department. They take several minutes explaining all the research they have going on regarding climate change and ALL of it runs on this same pretense...

When scientists teach the young to stop asking the obvious questions about everything, and just follow the system, we are in dire times....

It starts waaaaayyyyy before college. Kids aren't taught critical thinking skills any more and haven't been for a very long time. I recognized that deficiency in education (public and private) when my own kids were in school and took it on myself to teach them to think critically. It isn't hard, but you have to work at it constantly. Now both my kids and myself are teaching the same skills to my grandkids except we started way earlier with them than I did with my kids.

If you have strong critical thinking skills, you can overcome the obvious deficiencies in academics that are present through all levels of education now.

If your daugher is old enough to be looking at colleges here is a place that both you and her might visit:

Defining Critical Thinking

Here is a clip from the front page that cuts to the very heart of the issue:

"Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1) a set of information and belief generating and processing skills, and 2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior. It is thus to be contrasted with: 1) the mere acquisition and retention of information alone, because it involves a particular way in which information is sought and treated"

The highlighted passage goes to the foundational flaw that has resided within our educational system for a very long time. Since the fed got into education way back when and standardized tests became the norm, teachers and school systems in general have been teaching for the tests, not for the purpose of education. Kids are taught to simply aquire and retain information in order to pass a test and that doesn't equal education. It is from that sort of system that you get people like rocks and rolling thunder. People who have wheelbarrows full of information on a topic, but aren't able to think critically about it. They hold a belief based on their political leaning and then go about aquiring information that supports that belief. They aren't able to examine that information; turn it over and look at it from various directions and compare it with the real world or examine it critically against other information in their wheel barrow. It supports what they believe so they accept it, apparently without reservation.

On a personal level, I think that liberal thought supports and promotes non critical thinking as opposed to the natural critical nature of conservative thought. Or maybe those not disposed to thinking criticaly for physiological or psychological reasons simply drift naturally into liberal thought as a way to maintain a certain comfort level. At any rate, liberals almost universally hold certain positions which demonstrate a shockingly casual lack of any critical thought. For example:

Most liberals maintain that no single culture is superior to another, except our Judeo-Christian free market culture here in the west which is singularly bad.

Most liberals believe in free speech; as long as it is speech they agree with, otherwise the fairness doctrine and net neutrality are necessary.

Most liberals believe that there is no such thing as objective morality; except of course for conservatism, Christianity and capitalism, which are all, by definition, inherently evil

Most liberals believe that all people are equal, except, of course, male white conservatives, who are inferior to everyone.

And on the topic of climate science, most liberals believe that science has to rely on the revered scientific method, except, of course, when the scientific method demands honesty in presenting results, openness of code and data, experimentation to verify hypotheses, admissions regarding uncertainty, or anything else which detracts from a slavish adherence to the "devine consensus".

All that, however, is fodder for a different conversation.

Hmmm ... I think teaching critical thinking skills is paramount to an a child's education, but I believe you should have found someone qualified.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ol' Bent is, well, bent.

 

[gslack]

Talking to yourself again socks?