Bombshell study concludes there is no evidence for anthropogenic climate change...

[Cardinal Carminative]

You’re arguing strawman arguments now. A sure sigh that you’re lost. I never said “it can’t be humans” even if you misleadingly (ie, lyingly) put it inside quotations.

So if you agree it can be humans why do you think the vast majority of the earth's experts on this topic are incorrect?

When and if you get your shit together, I might be willing to continue with you. Until you stop yiur dishonesty, that won’t happen.

What is your malfunction?

 

[Crick]

My position has been And still is that where we KNOW that climate (world wide) has “changed” dramatically in the past without any possible human causation, that there is at least some reason to believe that any actual present-day global climate change is happening, it is just as POSSIBLE that it is not caused by human activity.

Just as possible? Are you rejecting the greenhouse effect?

 

[BackAgain]

Bombshell study concludes there is no evidence for anthropogenic climate change...

Floods are caused by nature but we put a lot of effort into dealing with them. The cause doesn't matter, only the effect. Even if it is natural CO2 causing most of the problem, I'd think limiting our emissions now would be easier and cheaper than leaving the problem to our children...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A pipeline that was solely for the use of Canadian companies to transport tar sands oil down to ports on the US Gulfcoast and other US ports for export out of North America.

That oil wasn't going to help us. And in fact that oil is EXCEPTIONALLY polluting. The damage possible to the aquifers from the Alberta tar sands is off the charts.



Biden outpaced Trump in terms of drilling permits on public lands



I love how some people have zero clue how complex oil markets are. It's so sweetly naive. Yeah, Biden is causing all of this. It COULDN'T possibly be due to a major energy exporter deciding that war crimes was going to be on the menu for March and April.

It's Biden. All Biden.

Why don't conservatives ever act like they actually understand anything related to economics?

A pipeline that was solely for the use of Canadian companies

Wrong.

to transport tar sands oil down to ports on the US Gulfcoast and other US ports for export out of North America.

To refineries on the Gulfcoast. To be refined.

Yeah, Biden is causing all of this. It COULDN'T possibly be due to a major energy exporter deciding that war crimes was going to be on the menu for March and April.

How much of the increase occurred before the invasion?
Any of that increase Biden's fault?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

A pipeline that was solely for the use of Canadian companies

Wrong.

to transport tar sands oil down to ports on the US Gulfcoast and other US ports for export out of North America.

To refineries on the Gulfcoast. To be refined.

Yeah, Biden is causing all of this. It COULDN'T possibly be due to a major energy exporter deciding that war crimes was going to be on the menu for March and April.

How much of the increase occurred before the invasion?
Any of that increase Biden's fault?

Get back to me when you actually learn about this topic. Thanks!

 

[BackAgain]

Just as possible? Are you rejecting the greenhouse effect?

I agree that the greenhouse theory might have some plausibility. But I do doubt that it necessarily holds a lot of explanatory power . The analogy between a closed system greenhouse and the fairly open system of our atmosphere and it’s interactions with the earth and the oceans has been questioned before.

So, while I would not agree that I’m rejecting it — I would agree that I’m not convinced by it.

 

[alang1216]

Is that when you prevent opponents from publishing?

I've never prevented anyone from publishing. Who are you talking about?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Get back to me when you actually learn about this topic. Thanks!

The Keystone XL pipeline segments were intended to allow American crude oil to enter the XL pipelines at Baker, Montana, on their way to the storage and distribution facilities at Cushing, Oklahoma. Cushing is a major crude oil marketing/refining and pipeline hub.[25][26]

Keystone Pipeline - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

DURR

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I've never prevented anyone from publishing. Who are you talking about?

In the Climategate emails, the greens were talking about preventing skeptics from publishing.

 

[alang1216]

In the Climategate emails, the greens were talking about preventing skeptics from publishing.

Got a link? All I could find was this. It doesn't mention your charge.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Got a link? All I could find was this. It doesn't mention your charge.

In a unique experiment, The Guardian published online the full manuscript of its major investigation into the climate science emails stolen from the University of East Anglia, which revealed apparent attempts to cover up flawed data; moves to prevent access to climate data; and to keep research from climate sceptics out of the scientific literature.

Part 11: 'Climategate' was PR disaster that could bring healthy reform of peer review

Fred Pearce: Peer-review was meant to be a safeguard against the publication of bad science but the balance is shifting towards open access

www.theguardian.com

 

[Crick]

In the Climategate emails, the greens were talking about preventing skeptics from publishing.

I don't know who "the greens" might be but I believe the comment came from a climate scientist of some standing (Phil Jones?). However, you need to take into account some realities you might not like. From the point of view of those who believe AGW is real and a threat, people holding up action to reduce GHG emissions are a real danger to the well being of the human race. The worst charge folks on your side can bring are that we might waste a lot of money making the world a much cleaner place. But If the world's scientists are are right about global warming but yet you have your way and nothing is done, hundreds of millions of people will become forced emigres, millions will starve or die of thirst or from extreme weather. The cost to address it will be in the trillions and trillions of dollars and will beggar the HUMAN economy for decades if not centuries. I find it entirely understandable that someone might be enticed to bend their objectivity, particularly when their opponents have certainly shown no such principles.

Additionally, though such things were talked about in the stolen emails, there is NO evidence that such efforts were ever actually undertaken.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

I agree that the greenhouse theory might have some plausibility. But I do doubt that it necessarily holds a lot of explanatory power .

It explains why the surface temperature of the earth is not the same as its blackbody radiation temperature.

The analogy between a closed system greenhouse and the fairly open system of our atmosphere and it’s interactions with the earth and the oceans has been questioned before.

Calling it a "greenhouse" has long been known to be a flawed comparison. But the details of how the IR is initially captured by the greenhouse gas molecules (eg CO2, CH4, etc.) and re-emitted and then re-absorbed until it reaches the level in the atmosphere where it re-radiates back out into space are reasonably well known. Agreed that it is a ridiculously complex system, but not beyond understanding, certainly at a first order approximation which probably explains sufficient of the data to provide significant insight.

So, while I would not agree that I’m rejecting it — I would agree that I’m not convinced by it.

The existence of questions in any given field is not sufficient to claim it unconvincing. If that were the case nothing in science would be accepted.

The goal of any science is to explain the variability in the data by use of independent variables. Even if we don't know all the independent variables we can estimate how much of our understanding explains the variability in the data. This is basically how science operates. We never know what we don't know. That sounds silly when you say it but it's critical.

When I create a statistical fit (or model if you will) to the data I collect I accept that there is unexplained variance in the data. That comes from a variety of things like error in the instruments used to measure a given feature, random natural fluctuations and unknown explanatory variables.

We can actually understand a system REALLY WELL if we don't have all the explanatory variables. We can get an idea of how much variance is unexplained by the fit. So long as it's not the vast majority of the variance we have a pretty good insight into the system.

Right now the science behind AGW is pretty solid. Yes it has deficits, but so does everything. Many of us take prescription medications that science still struggles to understand the exact mechanism of action. Yet they work.

AGW is a pretty solid scientific concept. Which is why the vast majority of the experts in the field currently accept it as real.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

The Keystone XL pipeline segments were intended to allow American crude oil to enter the XL pipelines at Baker, Montana, on their way to the storage and distribution facilities at Cushing, Oklahoma. Cushing is a major crude oil marketing/refining and pipeline hub.[25][26]

Keystone Pipeline - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

DURR

And about 2/3 of the refined product will be exported.

In the meantime relatively corrosive heavy oil will be pumped through a pipeline running through various native americans' land and threatening their aquifers (some studies find that this particular crude oil is more corrosive to pipelines but other studies question that). Meanwhile the negative impacts from the extraction of this crude oil in Alberta is much, much worse than normal oil exploration (which ain't great to begin with).

This is a perfect example of what we learn in economic geology classes: when a resources gets more depleted we go after ever lower quality forms of the resource (eg lower grades of ore). In this case it's far heavier and requires a significant amount of processing to extract it and the attendant environmental damage is higher.

This is about the worst fuel you could imagine tapping into and the economic benefit to the US is minimal.

 

[BackAgain]

Just as possible? Are you rejecting the greenhouse effect?

One example (not the entirety of it) of expressed scientific skepticism:

Earth's Atmosphere has no "walls" or "lid" - Greenhouse Gas Theory is both Mathematically and Physically Wrong - Electroverse

“The CO2 greenhouse effect of the Earth's atmosphere is a pure fiction of people who like to use large computers, without physical bases.”

electroverse.net

Here is another piece:

Global Warming and CO2 - Econlib

Mathematician David Evans writes, After further research, new high-resolution ice core results (data points only a few hundred years apart) in 2000–2003 allowed us to distinguish which came first, the temperature rises or the CO2 rises. We found that temperature changes preceded CO2 changes by...

www.econlib.org

 

[BackAgain]

I notice that PV is still responding to me. He doesn’t seem to grasp that his dishonesty has resulted in his uselessness to me in this discussion. If he wants to withdraw his lie, someone might do me a favor and let me know.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

I notice that PV is still responding to me. He doesn’t seem to grasp that his dishonesty has resulted in his uselessness to me in this discussion. If he wants to withdraw his lie, someone might do me a favor and let me know.

I have no idea what "lie" you are talking about.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

A pipeline that was solely for the use of Canadian companies to transport tar sands oil down to ports on the US Gulfcoast and other US ports for export out of North America.

That oil wasn't going to help us. And in fact that oil is EXCEPTIONALLY polluting. The damage possible to the aquifers from the Alberta tar sands is off the charts.



Biden outpaced Trump in terms of drilling permits on public lands



I love how some people have zero clue how complex oil markets are. It's so sweetly naive. Yeah, Biden is causing all of this. It COULDN'T possibly be due to a major energy exporter deciding that war crimes was going to be on the menu for March and April.

It's Biden. All Biden.

Why don't conservatives ever act like they actually understand anything related to economics?

Supply is supply. If it’s inhibited, the price goes up. I’m so tired of my financial condition being held hostage by retarded baboon democrats.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Supply is supply. If it’s inhibited, the price goes up. I’m so tired of my financial condition being held hostage by retarded baboon democrats.

I bet you'd have a different view if where you got your water from was crossed by the pipeline.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I bet you'd have a different view if where you got your water from was crossed by the pipeline.

Why?