Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 77
Thanks Tree26Thanks

Thread: Climate change is ‘not as bad as we thought’ say scientists

  1. #21
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    68,911
    Thanks
    4498

    Quote Originally Posted by Arkady View Post
    Remember: there are studies criticizing those models in both directions. You could as easily cherry-pick the opposite kind of study, and say that it shows that the models are badly underestimating the warming that is going to happen. That's what I was talking about in my post.

    There are thousands of studies going on, and propagandists can sift through those and cherry-pick whichever ones happen to say what they want to believe. Then they can deliver those, through the usual propaganda outlets, to the partisan masses. In this case, for example, you're citing to an infamous British tabloid. My guess is that you're not a daily reader of British newspapers, much less of a disreputable tabloid like the Daily Express, right? So, you didn't come across this study simply as part of reading through the whole paper. Instead, my guess is that you are a regular reader of a right-wing propaganda clearing house, like Daily Wire, a right-wing reddit, or ClimateDepot. Those clearing houses do the work of reading through hundreds of papers around the world, looking for anything that can be used to bolster the prejudices of American conservatives. Then they cherry-pick those stories, and serve them up, relying on their readers to then further disseminate that material through chat boards, social media, etc.

    Am I right that this is how you encountered the story? Anyway, the point I'm making is that some of us operate differently. Rather than seizing on whatever individual studies happen to be saying something that we feel bolsters our argument, we instead try to get an honest view of what the overall state of the scientific understanding is. That comes not from consuming a selection of individual studies carefully curated for us by partisan outlets, but instead by looking at the big meta-analyses published by large teams of experts who have the time to review thousands of studies, and the training and background to weigh them meaningfully against each other. That's how I operate, and I'd urge you to do the same.
    You show you want the liberal talking points and not the truth

  2. #22
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    68,911
    Thanks
    4498

    Quote Originally Posted by Arkady View Post
    Whenever I see a climate study being promoted by a right-winger, I can be practically certain it came from one of just a tiny handful of researchers -- Curry being the leading suspect. I don't want to bash her too hard, because I think there's value in having contrarian scientists like her to kick the tires on the consensus views. The real problem here isn't with such scientists, who, whatever their motivations, are ultimately doing a service by challenging the ideas most other scientists have accepted. Rather, the problem is with the conservative propagandists and right-wing masses who lose track of the big picture -- mistaking a very tiny share of studies that happen to fit their prejudices for proof that the large share of studies they don't like are wrong. That's a deeply dishonest approach.

    In other words you believe the lies and fake models that have never happened

  3. #23
    Veteran Member Dangermouse's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    25,278
    Thanks
    24506

    From
    Sunny Bournemouth, Dorset
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    You show you want the liberal talking points and not the truth
    You show you want the weather-fascist talking points and not science.

  4. #24
    Veteran Member Dangermouse's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    25,278
    Thanks
    24506

    From
    Sunny Bournemouth, Dorset
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    In other words you believe the lies and fake models that have never happened
    You select fringe "science" from the contrarian one per cent and pronounce it politically correct.

  5. #25
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    36,346
    Thanks
    32011

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Urbanek View Post
    I think scientists shot themselves in the foot when they came up with the term "climate change" to describe catastrophic developments in the most benign manner possible. They should have coined something like "climate crisis" or "climate chaos." Choosing "climate change" is like calling the attack on Pearl Harbor "naval change."
    At various times, I have proposed the term global scorching.

    It does tend to get people's attention.

  6. #26
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    36,346
    Thanks
    32011

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    In other words you believe the lies and fake models that have never happened
    The April 2018 issue of Scientific American----not quite their CURRENT issue, since their May issue just came out----had an article on the extraordinary pace of climate change in the Arctic.

    Climate change in the Arctic is taking place at a rate much FASTER than ANY of our computer models have predicted, and we don't fully understand why.

    Of course, we know that you would almost certainly never bother to read articles from that particular magazine. Why? Because you are not a 'scientific American'.

  7. #27
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    68,911
    Thanks
    4498

    Quote Originally Posted by Dangermouse View Post
    You select fringe "science" from the contrarian one per cent and pronounce it politically correct.
    Problem is there is no truth to the Global warming claim that is unnatural

  8. #28
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    68,911
    Thanks
    4498

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    The April 2018 issue of Scientific American----not quite their CURRENT issue, since their May issue just came out----had an article on the extraordinary pace of climate change in the Arctic.

    Climate change in the Arctic is taking place at a rate much FASTER than ANY of our computer models have predicted, and we don't fully understand why.

    Of course, we know that you would almost certainly never bother to read articles from that particular magazine. Why? Because you are not a 'scientific American'.
    So you are saying the scientist have no idea what is happening

  9. #29
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    36,346
    Thanks
    32011

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    So you are saying the scientist have no idea what is happening
    No. I am saying the world appears to be warming up MUCH more rapidly than we had been expecting. Which means that RAPID climate change may possibly be RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER. The planet Earth may be right on the VERGE of a quite sudden shift into an entirely different climate regime, with totally rearranged ocean currents, and with the jet stream on an altogether new path. Expect mega-droughts to begin in some areas, such as the American Southwest and Great Plains, and possibly across North Africa and into the Middle East. A prolonged drought contributed to the civil war and crisis in Syria, and manmade climate change is implicated in that. Other areas might see intense flooding and massive increases in precipitation. Areas such as New England might see snowfalls such as no modern human has ever seen. The Gulf Stream might shut down, plunging the British Isles and Scandinavia into a Deep Freeze. The Indian Monsoon, which brings life-giving rains to the Indian Sub-Continent, might divert to a different track.

    We do know this: Spaceship Earth is in trouble.

  10. #30
    Senior Member Loki's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10,388
    Thanks
    3994

    From
    East coast USA
    The truth is in pudding. Just watch and wait. This is no exersize in deductive reasoning, it will present itself.
    It's actually over, nothing can change what will happen.
    South Florida will cease to exist.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 91
    Last Post: 23rd January 2018, 10:36 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 21st June 2015, 09:21 PM
  3. Replies: 28
    Last Post: 27th February 2014, 03:27 PM
  4. Scientists: Pace of Climate Change Exceeds Estimates
    By bluesman in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 17th February 2009, 05:15 AM
  5. Scientists doubt climate change
    By Freedom for All in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 186
    Last Post: 7th January 2008, 06:14 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed