Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Change?"

Communicate with fellow Zoners

Moderators: SkiDork, spanky, Bubba

Bubba
Site Admin
Posts: 26313
Joined: Nov 5th, '04, 08:42
Location: Where the climate suits my clothes

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by Bubba »

Meanwhile, Vail is investing in energy savings projects to reach zero CO2 emissions by 2030.
Vail’s CEO, Rob Katz, points out that committing to renewable energy is a good business decision. “We talk about an environmental goal of needing to use less, but that’s an important business goal too. It means we are being smart about not only the resources we use inside the company, but also how we use any resources outside the company … particularly when the environment is both our product and our passion,” he says (via the Denver Post).
Vail Vows to Invest $25M in Energy Saving Projects

July 26, 2017 by Jennifer Hermes

https://www.energymanagertoday.com/vail ... 0-0171219/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And...

More Big-Name Companies Moving Toward Renewables
July 26, 2017 by Emily Holbrook

https://www.energymanagertoday.com/big- ... y-0171216/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
As more and more companies move towards renewables — and as more customers favor those that do — there are certain aspects to keep in mind. Companies must discern how political and regulatory interpretation of public sentiment and public good are likely to impact clean energy policy direction on a regional basis.
"Abandon hope all ye who enter here"

Killington Zone
You can checkout any time you like,
but you can never leave

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function" =
F. Scott Fitzgerald

"There's nothing more frightening than ignorance in action" - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
hillbangin
Wanted Poster
Posts: 3033
Joined: Feb 7th, '12, 20:37

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by hillbangin »

Bubba wrote:Meanwhile, Vail is investing in energy savings projects to reach zero CO2 emissions by 2030.
Vail’s CEO, Rob Katz, points out that committing to renewable energy is a good business decision. “We talk about an environmental goal of needing to use less, but that’s an important business goal too. It means we are being smart about not only the resources we use inside the company, but also how we use any resources outside the company … particularly when the environment is both our product and our passion,” he says (via the Denver Post).
Vail Vows to Invest $25M in Energy Saving Projects

July 26, 2017 by Jennifer Hermes

https://www.energymanagertoday.com/vail ... 0-0171219/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And...

More Big-Name Companies Moving Toward Renewables
July 26, 2017 by Emily Holbrook

https://www.energymanagertoday.com/big- ... y-0171216/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
As more and more companies move towards renewables — and as more customers favor those that do — there are certain aspects to keep in mind. Companies must discern how political and regulatory interpretation of public sentiment and public good are likely to impact clean energy policy direction on a regional basis.
I just got a survey call from SSI basically trying to figure out if Charlie Baker should support closing Seabrook down and if he should support new NG pipelines in MA - Funny you pulled that quote out of the article.
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by madhatter »

Mister Moose wrote:
f.a.s.t. wrote:
deadheadskier wrote:Yes, you're right. All skiers who don't make first chair are lame.
A skier that choses to stay out late drinking instead of getting up to go skiing may have a drinking problem, that sure is lame. Never said they have to make first chair. I only get to ski about 25 to 30 days a year, I try to make the most of it. You won't see me late night in a bar the night before I go skiing.
On the days I'm out at opening bell, (about a third of the time) I'm glad there are folks that don't. The quiet of 8am is a wonderful thing. And of course there are those days when you party on, knowing the next morning is going to be crap.
of historical note I got to the hill BEFORE GIS yesterday....granted it's summer and all that BUT...
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
Sgt Eddy Brewers
Slalom Racer
Posts: 1145
Joined: Aug 24th, '11, 14:57

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by Sgt Eddy Brewers »

On the topic of "the experts predict" (which seems to convince some of you to turn off your brains) ...and to continue our debate on the fate of "fossil fuels" here is an interesting analysis (with some important DATA) on the fate of fuels supplies.

Peak Oil: What Ever Happened to Hubbert's Peak?
Next year U.S. oil production will exceed its 1970 peak.


http://reason.com/blog/2017/07/27/peak- ... berts-peak" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Contrasts the predictions of EXPERTS with reality.

Money quotes:

"In 1956, geologist M. King Hubbert famously predicted, in a presentation to the American Petroleum Institute, that oil production in the U.S. would peak no later than 1970."

"In his 2004 book Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil, the Caltech physicist David Goodstein asserted not just that peak production was imminent but that "we can, all too easily, envision a dying civilization, the landscape littered with the rusting hulks of SUVs." In 2007, the German Energy Watch Group declared that the world had reached peak oil, and that this could soon trigger the "meltdown of society.""

So much for BLINDLY relying on the claims of experts.

Peak oilers greatly underestimated the power of markets and human ingenuity to solve problems.

...and if I might add...what can change when your government favors rather than discourages pragmatic energy production.
Ski the edges!
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by madhatter »

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:On the topic of "the experts predict" (which seems to convince some of you to turn off your brains) ...and to continue our debate on the fate of "fossil fuels" here is an interesting analysis (with some important DATA) on the fate of fuels supplies.

Peak Oil: What Ever Happened to Hubbert's Peak?
Next year U.S. oil production will exceed its 1970 peak.


http://reason.com/blog/2017/07/27/peak- ... berts-peak" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Contrasts the predictions of EXPERTS with reality.

Money quotes:

"In 1956, geologist M. King Hubbert famously predicted, in a presentation to the American Petroleum Institute, that oil production in the U.S. would peak no later than 1970."

"In his 2004 book Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil, the Caltech physicist David Goodstein asserted not just that peak production was imminent but that "we can, all too easily, envision a dying civilization, the landscape littered with the rusting hulks of SUVs." In 2007, the German Energy Watch Group declared that the world had reached peak oil, and that this could soon trigger the "meltdown of society.""

So much for BLINDLY relying on the claims of experts.

Peak oilers greatly underestimated the power of markets and human ingenuity to solve problems.

...and if I might add...what can change when your government favors rather than discourages pragmatic energy production.
sad, so sad...
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
f.a.s.t.
Wanted Poster
Posts: 3063
Joined: Nov 14th, '11, 09:43

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by f.a.s.t. »

At this point, you really have to wonder if all these indoctrinated and brainwashed leaders of the hoax also have brain damage from smoking too much pot and taking too many drugs?
!!!!!!!!!! MAKE AMERICA LOVE AGAIN !!!!!!!!!!
rogman
Postinator
Posts: 7029
Joined: Mar 27th, '06, 13:33
Location: In a maze of twisty little passages, all alike

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by rogman »

madhatter wrote:
Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:On the topic of "the experts predict" (which seems to convince some of you to turn off your brains) ...and to continue our debate on the fate of "fossil fuels" here is an interesting analysis (with some important DATA) on the fate of fuels supplies.

Peak Oil: What Ever Happened to Hubbert's Peak?
Next year U.S. oil production will exceed its 1970 peak.


http://reason.com/blog/2017/07/27/peak- ... berts-peak" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Contrasts the predictions of EXPERTS with reality.

Money quotes:

"In 1956, geologist M. King Hubbert famously predicted, in a presentation to the American Petroleum Institute, that oil production in the U.S. would peak no later than 1970."

"In his 2004 book Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil, the Caltech physicist David Goodstein asserted not just that peak production was imminent but that "we can, all too easily, envision a dying civilization, the landscape littered with the rusting hulks of SUVs." In 2007, the German Energy Watch Group declared that the world had reached peak oil, and that this could soon trigger the "meltdown of society.""

So much for BLINDLY relying on the claims of experts.

Peak oilers greatly underestimated the power of markets and human ingenuity to solve problems.

...and if I might add...what can change when your government favors rather than discourages pragmatic energy production.
sad, so sad...
Do you put on a clown nose before writing your posts, just to get in the proper frame of mind? Now it's peak oil and M. King Hubbert? First of all lets dispense forthwith any argument along the lines of "they were wrong about X so they could be wrong about Y. It has a number of names, but Galileo Gambit is a common term. As Carl Sagan pointed out, they laughed at Columbus, they laughed at the Wright Brothers, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. Suit up dude.

Regardless, M. King Hubert's basic point wasn't wrong. Oil is a finite resource, it will run out. Peak Oil has already passed for some countries.

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gener ... k-Oil.html
Image
Sgt Eddy Brewers
Slalom Racer
Posts: 1145
Joined: Aug 24th, '11, 14:57

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by Sgt Eddy Brewers »

rogman wrote: Do you put on a clown nose before writing your posts, just to get in the proper frame of mind? Now it's peak oil and M. King Hubbert? First of all lets dispense forthwith any argument along the lines of "they were wrong about X so they could be wrong about Y. It has a number of names, but Galileo Gambit is a common term. As Carl Sagan pointed out, they laughed at Columbus, they laughed at the Wright Brothers, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. Suit up dude.

Regardless, M. King Hubert's basic point wasn't wrong. Oil is a finite resource, it will run out. Peak Oil has already passed for some countries.

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gener ... k-Oil.html
So... you again miss the basic point. No one, except YOU and a couple clowns, on this board is arguing what you claim is being argued. YOUR claims rely on arguments from authority for which the points made in my post are an excellent response. None of us are arguing that because experts CAN make a mistake therefore climate science is a fraud. We are merely being mindful that scientists are human and CAN make mistakes.

YOUR WHOLE ARGUMENT is that "the scientists are EXPERTS so they must be right." & "who are you to question the EXPERTS!"

(to which I would reply ...an AMERICAN!)

The point of posting the types of errors in prediction by experts is to remind YOU (and a few other clowns) that the "argument from authority" you continue to use to defend "climate science" is simple not compelling.

The link you posted I have read before and it really just dances around the issue that the EXPERTS (including Hubbert) miscalculated quite dramatically in projecting the future prospects of oil production. Fracking changed the whole picture. Exactly the kind of unforeseeable factor that makes "expert predictions" so sketchy. The author pretends that the "peak oil movement" of bed-wetting doom-sayers (reread the QUOTES) does not exist when in fact it does (and is a major factor driving "renewables" ) and they simply don't understand science as well as they think they do.

"Too many people are too certain about too many things!"
Ski the edges!
Sgt Eddy Brewers
Slalom Racer
Posts: 1145
Joined: Aug 24th, '11, 14:57

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by Sgt Eddy Brewers »

And just in case any of you think that the expansion of oil production capacity is ONLY due to fracking technology...turns out we keep finding NEW oil sources (that the experts were sure would not exist) .

FOR EXAMPLE:
Massive Oil Discovery in Alaska Is Biggest Onshore Find in U.S. in 30 years
http://ktla.com/2017/03/10/massive-oil- ... -30-years/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

USGS Announces Largest Oil And Gas Deposit Ever Assessed In U.S.(west Texas)
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/ ... overy-ever" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A new oil discovery in Kenya is “very encouraging indeed” for its export ambitions
https://qz.com/640595/a-new-oil-discove ... ambitions/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oil exploration firm in 'largest undeveloped discovery' on the UK Continental Shelf
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03 ... ntinental/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Talos and Premier in ‘significant’ Mexico oil discovery. International consortium says discovery is world’s fifth biggest in past five years
https://www.ft.com/content/79969c16-66b ... 38dcaef614" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New Brazilian oil discovery may be biggest find of the year
http://business.financialpost.com/commo ... de173dc454" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

All within the last few years!!
Ski the edges!
madhatter
Signature Poster
Posts: 18340
Joined: Apr 2nd, '08, 17:26

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by madhatter »

rogman wrote:
madhatter wrote:
Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:On the topic of "the experts predict" (which seems to convince some of you to turn off your brains) ...and to continue our debate on the fate of "fossil fuels" here is an interesting analysis (with some important DATA) on the fate of fuels supplies.

Peak Oil: What Ever Happened to Hubbert's Peak?
Next year U.S. oil production will exceed its 1970 peak.


http://reason.com/blog/2017/07/27/peak- ... berts-peak" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Contrasts the predictions of EXPERTS with reality.

Money quotes:

"In 1956, geologist M. King Hubbert famously predicted, in a presentation to the American Petroleum Institute, that oil production in the U.S. would peak no later than 1970."

"In his 2004 book Out of Gas: The End of the Age of Oil, the Caltech physicist David Goodstein asserted not just that peak production was imminent but that "we can, all too easily, envision a dying civilization, the landscape littered with the rusting hulks of SUVs." In 2007, the German Energy Watch Group declared that the world had reached peak oil, and that this could soon trigger the "meltdown of society.""

So much for BLINDLY relying on the claims of experts.

Peak oilers greatly underestimated the power of markets and human ingenuity to solve problems.

...and if I might add...what can change when your government favors rather than discourages pragmatic energy production.
sad, so sad...
Do you put on a clown nose before writing your posts, just to get in the proper frame of mind? Now it's peak oil and M. King Hubbert? First of all lets dispense forthwith any argument along the lines of "they were wrong about X so they could be wrong about Y. It has a number of names, but Galileo Gambit is a common term. As Carl Sagan pointed out, they laughed at Columbus, they laughed at the Wright Brothers, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. Suit up dude.

Regardless, M. King Hubert's basic point wasn't wrong. Oil is a finite resource, it will run out. Peak Oil has already passed for some countries.

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-Gener ... k-Oil.html
what about phelps and them sharks? inquiring minds want to know...how'd ya beat em both?
mach es sehr schnell

'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
User avatar
Mister Moose
Level 10K poster
Posts: 11625
Joined: Jan 4th, '05, 18:23
Location: Waiting for the next one

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by Mister Moose »

Opinion piece in the WSJ:
The most important facts in the climate debate are subject to frequent revisions. This doesn’t mean the global warming thesis is wrong, but it argues for skepticism. The Journal’s Holman Jenkins noted in 2015:

By the count of researcher Marcia Wyatt in a widely circulated presentation, the U.S. government’s published temperature data for the years 1880 to 2010 has been tinkered with 16 times in the past three years
https://www.wsj.com/articles/our-changi ... 8?mod=e2fb" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Butter. Margerine.
Image
Sgt Eddy Brewers
Slalom Racer
Posts: 1145
Joined: Aug 24th, '11, 14:57

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by Sgt Eddy Brewers »

Mister Moose wrote:Opinion piece in the WSJ:
The most important facts in the climate debate are subject to frequent revisions. This doesn’t mean the global warming thesis is wrong, but it argues for skepticism. The Journal’s Holman Jenkins noted in 2015:

By the count of researcher Marcia Wyatt in a widely circulated presentation, the U.S. government’s published temperature data for the years 1880 to 2010 has been tinkered with 16 times in the past three years
https://www.wsj.com/articles/our-changi ... 8?mod=e2fb" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Butter. Margerine.
Yeah looks good...paywalled for me so I couldn't read the whole thing!

But here is a video covering the same NYT climate coverage of climate SHREDS that paper for presenting an entirely FALSE picture of US summer heat patterns. FAKE NEWS. Plain and simple. In the video TONY HELLER uses the best surface data for the US and shows that the NYT headlines about our new terrible over-heated summers is ENTIRELY FALSE. Whole video is great but you can get the gist of it (how HORRID the NYT actually is when reporting climate) by watching bits of it. In any case interesting and correct.

Extreme Heatwave Fraud At The New York Times

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41Cv7MJ ... ture=share" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Ski the edges!
User avatar
Mister Moose
Level 10K poster
Posts: 11625
Joined: Jan 4th, '05, 18:23
Location: Waiting for the next one

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by Mister Moose »

Sgt Eddy Brewers wrote:
Mister Moose wrote:Opinion piece in the WSJ:
paywalled for me so I couldn't read the whole thing!
Here's the whole article:

Our Changing News Climate
Why even New York Times readers may resist the faith.
By
James Freeman

July 18, 2017 5:06 p.m. ET

1004 COMMENTS

Just exactly how much has the climate changed in recent decades? Longtime New York Times readers can be forgiven if they are now thoroughly confused on the matter.

Last month this column noted that the actions of the New York Times suggest that the people who put out the newspaper don’t think burning carbon is as dangerous as one would think from reading their product. How else to explain their marketing effort to persuade well-heeled readers to increase emissions by travelling the globe aboard a barely-filled Boeing ? And now, one particularly industrious Times reader submits evidence of another reason to resist the paper’s climate faith. In this case the skepticism about global warming comes not from refusing to take the paper seriously but from taking it too seriously.

Anyone old enough to have been a Times reader in the late 1980s may recall a series of stories that helped educate the public on how cool our planet used to be. Here’s one report from March of 1988:


One of the scientists, Dr. James E. Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Institute for Space Studies in Manhattan, said he used the 30-year period 1950-1980, when the average global temperature was 59 degrees Fahrenheit, as a base to determine temperature variations.

The paper returned to the topic in June of that year, and reminded readers of the planet’s colder past:

Dr. Hansen, who records temperatures from readings at monitoring stations around the world, had previously reported that four of the hottest years on record occurred in the 1980’s. Compared with a 30-year base period from 1950 to 1980, when the global temperature averaged 59 degrees Fahrenheit, the temperature was one-third of a degree higher last year.

The following year, the paper reported a new record high in global temperatures and affirmed its climate history, which seemed to be the consensus view—at least among scientists quoted by the Times:

The British readings showed that the average global temperature in 1988 was 0.612 degrees Fahrenheit higher than the long-term average for the period 1950 through 1979, which is a base for comparing global temperatures. The average worldwide temperature for that 30-year period is roughly 59 degrees Fahrenheit, the British researchers said.


In 1991, the Times reported yet another record high, and published yet another reminder of how cool the planet used to be:

The Goddard group found that the record average surface temperature for the globe was eight-tenths of a degree Fahrenheit above the 1951-1980 average of 59 degrees. The British group found it seventh-tenths of a degree higher than the 1951-80 average.

By that point a reasonable consumer might have been ardently hoping to return to that magical era in which global temperatures averaged just 59 degrees. But in the ensuing years it must have been difficult for Times readers to stay hopeful. As the years and then the decades rolled by, The Times routinely reported record or near-record highs as global temperatures appeared to march ever higher.

In January of this year, the newspaper published a feature entitled, “How 2016 Became Earth’s Hottest Year on Record.” The Times noted the disturbing news that “2016 was the first time that the hottest year on record occurred three times in a row.” And things could be about to get much worse. “We expect records to continue to be broken as global warming proceeds,” climate enthusiast Michael Mann told the Times.

Is there any way to return to the salad days of 59 degrees? Well, it turns out to be easier than you might think. In January, as the government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was reporting the third consecutive year of record highs, it noted that the average global temperature in 2016 had surged to a sizzling... 58.69 degrees.

Over the years researchers seem to have concluded that the planet was not as hot as they thought. Oops.

The most important facts in the climate debate are subject to frequent revisions. This doesn’t mean the global warming thesis is wrong, but it argues for skepticism. The Journal’s Holman Jenkins noted in 2015:

By the count of researcher Marcia Wyatt in a widely circulated presentation, the U.S. government’s published temperature data for the years 1880 to 2010 has been tinkered with 16 times in the past three years.


While waiting for the science to settle, this column’s advice to Times readers is to go ahead and fly around the world on the newspaper’s luxurious jet—if you don’t mind the company.

***
Image
Sgt Eddy Brewers
Slalom Racer
Posts: 1145
Joined: Aug 24th, '11, 14:57

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by Sgt Eddy Brewers »

Thanks for the post!!

A bit hard to find the money quote....but for me I LOVE:


IIs there any way to return to the salad days of 59 degrees? Well, it turns out to be easier than you might think. In January, as the government’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was reporting the third consecutive year of record highs, it noted that the average global temperature iin 2016 had surged to a sizzling... 58.69 degrees.

Thanks!
Ski the edges!
rogman
Postinator
Posts: 7029
Joined: Mar 27th, '06, 13:33
Location: In a maze of twisty little passages, all alike

Re: Science Rant, Not politics: Can CO2 cause "Climate Chang

Post by rogman »

Yet another climate change scandal! Uncovered by the Wall Street Journal no less! Of course, the truth is a bit more mundane, and in fact old news...
https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-h ... re-records
Image
Post Reply