Talk-Polywell.org

I have chosen a thread title I hope is acceptable to all participants.

That is, however, the limit of accommodation.

Here's a prediction everywhere on Earth will have different climate by 2047. The most extreme changes will be tropical.

I predict 140°F in the tropics by 2100. This means humans cannot live there without air conditioning; the air will burn them alive.

This isn't science fiction. It's real. It's coming. The longer we wait the worse it's going to get. And it's already starting now.

The closer you live to the equator the worse you're screwed.

Now, I've been following atmospheric and oceanic geophysics since I was a kid; my parents showed me a lot of science shows on TV, and gave me science books, and telescopes, and electronics kits, and Radio Shack kits, and so forth. And I remember hearing first about catastrophic global warming on a show about atmospheric geophysics, when I was a young teenager. That was thirty-five years ago. They had finally found out what conditions were really like on the surface, and down through the atmosphere, of Venus, and it was clear it was hell. And their theories of climate assigned the cause to runaway global warming, started by the presence of CO2.

I can remember that the Milanković cycles were questioned when they were first proposed as causes of ice ages, and of glacials and interglacials within those ice ages, were derided as superstition.

I can remember the same derision for global warming runaway on Venus. Now, like the Milanković cycles, we know it's true.

The ancients saw the progression of the stars, and planets, and Sun and Moon, as fixed events dictated as exactly as music. In fact it's chaotic, on the longest scales; it isn't just our calculation technology, but the nature of calculation, that limits our ability to exactly solve the n=2+x problem. When x is about eight, and n is about ten, we can use calculus to approximate it but there is no exact calculable answer.

So planetary movements aren't exact; in fact, ephemerides are not troof etched in teh eturnal equasions, but weather forecasts.

I say again, ephemerides that give the orbital arguments of planets are forecasts, not facts.

Orbital mechanics is an inexact model just like climate science.

Have I made my point yet?

Now, according to orbital mechanics, we are in fact due to go back into a glaciation, what most people would call an "Ice Age," almost tomorrow.

Only 30,000 years from now. Like I said almost tomorrow.

The deniers think the cooling in THIRTY THOUSAND YEARS will fix global warming.

Meshbacks. You tell them as many times as you can, "look, thirty thousand years is eight times as long as human civilization," and they start in with their 6,000 years jebus claus mythology. We're talking about people who think a thousand is pretty much like a trillion. Meshbacks can't count.

So now we've eliminated known orbital anomalies of the Earth, and accounted for nutation and other wobbles, we find that the Earth's orbital arguments change over time; they oscillate. This is due to the shape of space, as described by Einstein's field equations, you know,

G[μν] + g[μν]Λ = (8πG/c⁴)T[μν]

and is inevitable, and driven by the combined motions of the entire system. The Milanković cycles stem from the irregularities in Earth's orbit injected by the periodic tugs of the other planets as they approach and retreat. Their effects are magnified when they are close and attenuated when they are far, because of the geometry of space, not including their own contributions.

The advance and retreat of the glaciers in the current ice age, and in fact the ice age itself, is determined by the Milanković orbital element variations. This has now been known for more than two decades. Climate deniers regularly ignore its findings.

Just putting this in here to piss off schnauzer. No other reason.

Tens of thousands of cattle killed in Friday's blizzard, ranchers say

Tens of thousands of cattle lie dead across South Dakota on Monday following a blizzard that could become one of the most costly in the history of the state’s agriculture industry.

http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/tens-o ... 10886.html



Yeah, somebody better go up there and clean up all of that "global warming."

Diogenes wrote:Tens of thousands of cattle killed in Friday's blizzard, ranchers say

Tens of thousands of cattle lie dead across South Dakota on Monday following a blizzard that could become one of the most costly in the history of the state’s agriculture industry.

http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/tens-o ... 10886.html



Yeah, somebody better go up there and clean up all of that "global warming."

Typical meshback.

a)Weather is not climate.
b)Cattle mutilations are due to wolves.
c)Warmer climate doesn't necessarily mean warmer weather everywhere, or even anywhere all the time. See a.

Honestly, after cattle mutilations, what's next, Bat Boy? The Greys did climate change? It's an Obama plot to bring global warming and screw the Old South? After all you blame him for everything else.

What amazes me most about deniers is that they deny that a slow increment ever adds up to anything.

They seem totally innumerate; incapable of projecting a graph. Totally incapable of visualization; they always seem to hide energy somewhere and pretend they can ignore it. Can't count.

Currently the fifth Action Report (AR5) has been completed, and shows that climate change is occurring and is being driven by an average heat increase, with a confidence of 95%, and that this change is due to the emissions created by human fossil fuel consumption, with a confidence of 95%.

These levels of certainty are sufficient, in criminal court, to convict a criminal of murder and order hir put to death, in jurisdictions where that's legal. If this were a legal case the judge would be obliged to advise the jury that if they find, as the scientists have, that the probability is more than 95%, then they must find the defendant guilty. That's the legal meaning of 95% certainty, which is the certainty the IPCC has in AR5.

There isn't any lying about it any more, unless one wishes to pretend one's case isn't beyond a reasonable doubt. The "your reality" gambit.

Sorry, science wins again.

It always does.

ETA: You fought the science and the science won. Get over it.

Science 15 Meshbacks -3.

Looks like troll yammering of some sort. Can't make it out because troll is in the IGNORE bucket.
Let's see what happens if I throw another rock at the troll.


Harvard physicist, running for Congress, criticizes global warming ‘hysteria’

“Thomas Kuhn described changes in scientific paradigms that are sudden and surprising with the term ‘scientific revolutions,’” Stopa told The Daily Caller. “We may be witnessing such a scientific revolution in the theory of global warming right now. But alas, there are reactionary forces outside of the scientific community that are fighting vigorously to hold the line and keep up public concern if not outright panic.”

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/08/harva ... -hysteria/

Diogenes wrote:Looks like troll yammering of some sort. Can't make it out because troll is in the IGNORE bucket.
Let's see what happens if I throw another rock at the troll.


Harvard physicist, running for Congress, criticizes global warming ‘hysteria’

“Thomas Kuhn described changes in scientific paradigms that are sudden and surprising with the term ‘scientific revolutions,’” Stopa told The Daily Caller. “We may be witnessing such a scientific revolution in the theory of global warming right now. But alas, there are reactionary forces outside of the scientific community that are fighting vigorously to hold the line and keep up public concern if not outright panic.”

http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/08/harva ... -hysteria/

14000 to 26.

Hey Shyster, whats your opinion of the Heidelberg Appeal?

http://www.bloggernews.net/14589

“Thomas Kuhn described changes in scientific paradigms that are sudden and surprising with the term ‘scientific revolutions,’” Stopa told The Daily Caller. “We may be witnessing such a scientific revolution in the theory of global warming right now.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/08/harva ... z2hOiQQtgy

The real problem is that well before any science was done in support of the whole AGW thesis, the meme was already being spread. In the early 90's when i was teaching it at Portland State, there was no significant evidence yet the entire radical environmentalist agenda had been laid out, and adolescents had moved from chaining themselves to old-growth trees to spray-painting Hummers. Then the real change took place--it a was not the product of science or evidence that made the meme popular--it was the political agenda forwarded in particular by Al Gore. And I kid you not, he has a LOT of money caught up in this stuff so right or wrong, he is going to press that agenda.

Science, like religion, is not a good mix with politics; as politics can pervert just about anything.

This AL Gore thing, he is a typical GW idiot. He spouts anthropological climate change and the need to change but he lives in a MCmansion that at the time was using multiple times the energy the average residential unit in the area because he wanted to keep it historically accurate. (Note: After this news became mainstream he underwent intensive renovations to bring his energy usage in line.) Where as who has one of the most energy efficient house in Texas? George Bush.
The interesting thing I find about this is one did it political expediency, the latter did it because it saves him money. Neither did it to save the environment.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

paperburn1 wrote:This AL Gore thing, he is a typical GW idiot.

Al Gore is not a climate geophysicist.

You're lying again.

Yes, it is a bit hypocritical for Gore to live in a McMansion, especially when the meme spread about housing is that we all ought to be satisfied with less. Much worse is his traveling very often in a private jet rather than taking mass air transport. However, I would not call Gore an idiot. He truly believes what he says. It's just that like most beliefs adopted apart from reason, where one believes either what one wants to be true or is afraid is true (hence the division of delusions: grandiose and paranoid), he adopted the belief in AGW and acted on it with no concern for the repercussions if the thing he is afraid of were NOT true.

The repercussions are enormous and just saying, the pressure to respond to the AGW thesis predates all the data by decades--since before when our new troll was born.

Despite all that I will say Gore's book is worth reading and I thought the fact he jumped on X-33 was terrific. I wish we had more VP's who gave a darn about NASA.