Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Posts by The Yell
Fact is that if present concentrations of CO2 caused higher temperatures through a greenhouse effect, there wouldn't be dip for 14 years. Fact is that IF CO2 caused higher temperatures but SOMETHING cancelled that out for a 14-year dip, there's no explanation of what that SOMETHING is, or, why it shut off after 14 and somehow pollution is driving climate again.
The anomalies are explained by saying pollution doesn't drive climate.
**An elephant, in contrast, would largely be stuck with the temperature of the environment and their internal temperature regulations.**
Not unless they grew 3x as big and had hair and jumped into tar pits to stay warm
>>i also meant to point out Yell that the whole the earth is cooler than 15 years ago is false
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2014/04
Warmest it has been in April world wide, and 6th warmest jan - April since records began. 0.77 degC above 20th century april average and trend is going up.<<
I didn't say "cooler than 15 years ago". The past 15 years have been cooler not warmer.
If you want to say there's been a spike this year that only leaves 14 years of increasing global pollution without a corresponding increase in global temperatures.
If you want to argue "Pollution creates greenhouse effect lookit this spring" you have the problem of explaining why the trapped heat is heat this year and not for 14 years.
There were mammals about at the same time.
>>The Yell: Those mysterious mechanism that transmits the trapped heat is called Fluid Mechanics, Heat Transfer and Thermodynamics - I suggest you look those up.<<
Yeah and they have basic rules that exist from the laboratory on up. Unless you're pretending that the laws of thermodynamics are altered by scale? Go ahead and build a model to prove it.
Nothing you're doing is "science". You haven't got a hypothesis to be tested by experiment. You're just deflecting criticism of your failed assumptions by insisting we have to build a model that includes those assumptions as a starting point.
--Current levels of CO2 have an insulating effect-- that is false. It's shown by the failure of global temperatures to relate to increasing pollution. It's shown by the record of this planet which has known higher CO2 levels in the past.
"Global warming gases have an insulation effect - so increasing the concentration will increase the global temperature "
False. Already disproved by the past 15 years.
" arguments can be made as to how much,"
Not really, since the past 15 years have shown global warming emissions on the rise, while global mean temperatures have gone DOWN.
>>and I will make the assumption that you have years of study into the evidence and read peer reviewed articles on both the con and pro side and come to a reasoned and intelligent conclusion<<
The peers are whores. We have exactly the position the USSR had with biologists who disputed genetics. Every damn thing published on breeding livestock in the Soviet Union was "peer-reviewed" up the ying-yang, and anybody who believed genetics controlled physionomy was not published.
>.We also know that we exist because of a specific set of parameters, which includes both the composition of the atmosphere and the temperature of our environment. Now pumping GHG change both these things,<,
This ignores the fact that the dinosaurs enjoyed an atmosphere much richer in GHG than we could ever manage through pollution.
Remember when 97% of psychologist said homosexuality was a mental disorder?
And I read about when 97% of biologist said blacks were mentally inferior to whites, and 97% of physicists said quantum mechanics was hooey
good times
2. NCA assertion: “It has been known for almost two centuries that carbon dioxide traps heat.”
Facts: That’s not the question—it’s not if CO2 is a greenhouse gas, it’s how much is there in the atmosphere (Fig. 3) and how much can it affect climate? CO2 makes up only 3.6% of the greenhouse gases (Fig. 4) and coupled with the fact that the atmospheric concentration has changed only 0.0065% since recent warming began in 1978 (Fig. 3), there is no way that this miniscule amount can have any significant effect on climate. Water vapor accounts for ~95% of the greenhouse effect and computer modelers put a large arbitrary water vapor factor in their computer programs, claiming that if CO2 increases, so will water vapor. But that isn’t true—atmospheric water vapor has been declining since 1948 (Fig. 5), not increasing, so modelers who put a water vapor driver in their programs will not have a valid output.
>>because that is the only important issue really. How that relates to specific weather patterns is not so important, <<
That's a total reversal of the IPCC statements.
In fact, supposedly, this is a global political crisis because specific weather patterns are going to be altered directly, all over, at the same time, and everybody has to pitch in.
>>If you are saying that CO2 doesn't have insulation properties (which seems to be Flin't argument), then science wants a word with you about reality.<<
In the concentrations put out by industry? No discernable effect.
The lack of global warming, AS PREDICTED, since 1991, is consistent with the notion that pollution doesn't affect climate.
As I said, if you want to assume pollution traps heat energy, you also have to assume that some mysterious global mechanism intermittently transmits heat into some other form of energy. But only in the cold years!
WHATEVER. Your crew pretended to understand the weather effects of the combined industrial output of the whole human race for fifty years. After 20 years it's obvious to anybody who can read that you blew it. NOW, we're hearing its too complicated? It's COMPLICATED because you're making shit up. Heat is trapped by pollution and then magically sometimes becomes other energy, on a global scale, by an unobserved, unexplained and undefined mechanism? Bullshit.
I don't have to have a solution to the three-body problem to know the kid who wrote "42" with a crayon got it wrong.
You don't have to have the right answer to prove other people have the wrong answer. That's SCIENCE. Try it. Try some science. Try a defined controlled experiment demonstrating the basic principles of this mystery energy transfer from trapped heat into whatever.
Cause I have a contrary hypothesis: Pollution doesn't affect climate. As demonstrated by global climate remaining within observed historical norms, despite constantly increasing pollution.
>>i propose you try repeating the experiment with a ball of molten rock that has a very thin cooled down crust, a small band of gaseous atmosphere, totally close that system and then apply the heat from the outside.<<
If the laws of thermodynamics cannot be deduced from containers of water then someboy got some splaining to do
you're not gay enough for eurovision apparently
She should be acquitted, that wasn't even assault. He asked her to shoot him.
Presented here for the totally serious and necessary medical update
I can prove global warming is true
the math is proprietary
but i will read you what is the result of my proprietary math
I will read it to you in person if you pay me $30,000 speaking fee
plus airfare
its worth it you will feel very good about fighting global warming if you fly me to your city and pay me $30,000 you will be a better person than Einstein who doesn't even care
what a jerk
for another $3,000 I will add an Einstein joke to my presentation
$33,000 is a bargain
I am practically giving away the salvation of humanity for that
whatever! I posted the link where you Spanish dudes genocided all the Arabs in prehistoric Europe after the last ice age
hmmm looks like we're setting up for a rematch
all I know is, when a Jap named Fukuda says microbes threaten humanity, we gotta summon Mothra
Pshaw don't teach your grandma to suck eggs
it will be titled WHY I DID IT
and I'll put a picture of Deci on the cover in greyscale cause he looks more sinister
Well they don't come right out and say it, but
LONDON, April 30 (Reuters) - The spread of deadly superbugs that evade even the most powerful antibiotics is no longer a prediction but is happening right now across the world, United Nations officials said on Wednesday.
Antibiotic resistance has the potential to affect anyone, of any age, in any country, the U.N.'s World Health Organisation (WHO) said in a report. It is now a major threat to public health, of which "the implications will be devastating".
"The world is headed for a post-antibiotic era, in which common infections and minor injuries which have been treatable for decades can once again kill," said Keiji Fukuda, the WHO's assistant director-general for health security.
In its first global report on antibiotic resistance, with data from 114 countries, the WHO said superbugs able to evade event the hardest-hitting antibiotics - a class of drugs called carbapenems - has now been found in all regions of the world.
Drug resistance is driven by the misuse and overuse of antibiotics, which encourages bacteria to develop new ways of overcoming them.
Only a handful of new antibiotics have been developed and brought to market in the past few decades, and it is a race against time to find more as bacterial infections increasingly evolve into "superbugs" resistant to even the most powerful last-resort medicines reserved for extreme cases.
One of the best known superbugs, MRSA, is alone estimated to kill around 19,000 people every year in the United States - far more than HIV and AIDS - and a similar number in Europe.
THE DRUGS DON'T WORK
The WHO said in some countries, because of resistance, carbapenems now do not work in more than half of people with common hospital-acquired infections caused by a bacteria called K. pneumoniae, such as pneumonia, blood infections, and infections in newborn babies and intensive-care patients.
Resistance to one of the most widely used antibiotics for treating urinary tract infections caused by E. coli -medicines called fluoroquinolones - is also very widespread, it said.
In the 1980s, when these drugs were first introduced, resistance was virtually zero, according to the WHO report. But now there are countries in many parts of the world where the drugs are ineffective in more than half of patients.
"Unless we take significant actions to improve efforts to prevent infections and also change how we produce, prescribe and use antibiotics, the world will lose more and more of these global public health goods and the implications will be devastating, "Fukuda said in a statement.
Laura Piddock, director of Antibiotic Action campaign group and a professor of microbiology at Britain's Birmingham University, said the world needed to respond as it did to the AIDS crisis of the 1980s.
"Defeating drug resistance will require political will, commitment from all stakeholders and considerable investment in research, surveillance and stewardship programmes," she said.
Jennifer Cohn of the international medical charity Médecins Sans Frontières agreed with the WHO's assessment and confirmed the problem had spread to many corners of the world.
"We see horrendous rates of antibiotic resistance wherever we look in our field operations, including children admitted to nutritional centres in Niger, and people in our surgical and trauma units in Syria," she said.
What do you call it when two organisms compete and one adapts faster than the other one and the one that doesn't adapt starts to die out?
I for one welcome our microbe overlords!
paralegal, I'm making about $29k / year
haha you may have something there
oh I've had Delirium at a local microbrew pizza restaurant, really good but I must admit I'd numbed my tastebuds by then
or if the taxi will take me 
at my income level I will have to sneak into the wheelwell of a jet or get shipped into Belgium in a crate and work off my passage like Primo
Stella Artois is considered a high-end Imported Beer out here
actually Anheiser-Busch was bought out by InBev so it's Belgians infringing on the Czech copyright while claiming the US is outside the jurisdiction of the EU
clever bastards
best wishes counterstrike
Imperial Forum → Posts by The Yell
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.