Australian Politics Forum - More facts for the deniers....

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: More facts for the deniers....
Reply #15 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 11:08am

Here let me add some general answers for Mozz first.

You are denying that climate change is extremely complicated.

Or are you projecting Beo?
I have not seen any post from muso to validate your statement.

If one follows the "religion" of climate change/global warming one is accepting that man-made emissions is the cause. Hence accepting simplification.

Quote:
You are denying that the modelling is flawed.

What modelling?
Are you stating that ALL modelling is inherently flawed?
Do you have a specific model in mind?
If you do, I am sure that you would be better served to use that specific case, and argue for it, rather than use a blanket statement without any justification.

The modelling used by the IPCC. They have changed their predictions several times now. No doubt it will continue to be changed and continue to be inaccurate or just plain wrong.

Quote:
You are denying the scientific opinion against the current propaganda.

I have seen muso question opinions proffered as scientific, and then give reasons why he has issues with them, and offer references to sholarly opinion to show why he disagrees.
I think we would be more accurate to call that "critical analysis".

I have seen several quotes from scientists dismissed as rubbish for no other reason than they work in a particular industry or merely disagree with the "faithful".

Quote:
You are denying the scientific opinion against the current propaganda.

I haven't seen muso defend unsubstantiated propaganda, perhaps you could provide an example of him doing so?
If not, do not try and lump all scientific opinion as being equivalent to tabloid sensationalism, which though it does exist, does not negate the validity of the other.

Like I said messenger shooting and off-hand dismissal eg; the last lomberg comments.

Quote:
You are denying it is more propaganda than fact.

Got any statistics to back that up?

Can supply as many as you can.

Quote:
You are denying the anecdotal evidence against warming.

Like "It is cold today, so global warming is a lie?"
Got any more gems of anecdotal wisdom to impart?

LOL... once a denier always a denier.
If one cannot believe what one's senses tell them about the weather etc, then that would make one what?

Quote:
You are denying the evidence against man made warming.

Sorry I must have missed that, what "evidence" has he denied?

As a "believer" denial of all scientists who speak out against the "religion" is denial.
Off hand dismissal and messenger shooting is denial.
Acceptance of one side and refusal to give equal credence to the other is bias and hence denial.

Quote:
You are denying that the IPCC is as much political or even more political than it is scientific.

Who has provided you with that fact?
How did they quantify the political to scientific ratio?

Sorry... you are unaware of the make up of the panel and the organisation it is part of?

Quote:
You are denying that a temperate or warmer climate is in fact good for us.

Is this the, "It's not happening, but if it is, then it will be good anyway" argument?
If so, please advise the half of you that thinks it isn't real to fight it out, with the half of you that thinks it is, but it will be good for us.
Then you can stop having to argue with strangers.
Unfortunately for you, you will not even be half right.

ah sorry... we had an ice age in the past we are now in a WARMER period.
There are cooling and warming events and always have been apparently with or without mans intervention.
Are you denyiing that this current temperate (WARMER) period is worse for us than the Ice Age was?

Quote:
You are denying that co2 levels rise after warming periods.

I have seen that argument qualified and explained, do YOU consider that denial?

If you agree withe the premise that temperature rises cause co2 emmission rises, No, if you don't, Yes, because I've seen it accepted by a great many people many of whom are scientists and climatologists.

Quote:
You are denying that we are/were in just such a period.

I thought everyone had agreed we are in a warming period, even the denialists, and just that they were still arguing against actually trying to do anything constructive to mitigate, as much as possible, exacerbating the situation?

Well you'll have to wait to see when this recent/current waming period has been seen to have officially ended. Next time there's a thunderstorm I'll give you a call so you can get someone to mitigate it.

Quote:
You are denying that in the past warming periods occurred witout man-made emmissions like those being blamed today.

I have not seen anyone deny that the earth has cycles of warming and cooling, I have seen many refer to the timeframes involved, and point out the uncharacteristic rate of change we are currently experiencing, as you well know, but do not let truth slow down your assault on sensible behaviour.

Yet they seem to accept the current theory in spite of the historical evidence.

Back to top

IP Logged

mozzaok

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: More facts for the deniers....
Reply #16 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 12:18pm

Funnily enough, the politicisation of this debate, which was very well orchestrated, has polarised the views of too many, who are like drowning men searching for anything that floats.

Unfortunately for us, it seems sh1t floats, because they keep latching onto every log that floats by, but it just leaves them more frustrated and just a little bit icky, and feeling the need to flick it around.

You see Grendel, you made lot's of claims about how you perceive muso's stance, but I could not see any justification for a single claim you made.

You don't like the denialist term for those opposed to addressing climate change, so attempted to throw it back, when the only thing that they deny, is that we should just ignore it.

Nobody thinks any of this is cut and dried, but some are doing their best, to gather the best information, to best inform us, of the best options for our futures.

Nobody objects to any scientist adding to our knowledge, and helping to expand our understanding, and if that means that predictions and plans can be improved, then that benefits everyone, but elevating every voice who may find an area of dispute, into a messianic prophet of "I told you so", by the denialists, is plain silly.

How many have had there work quoted by denialists and then had to come out to say that the denialists had twisted and misrepresented their findings?

No doubt there are agendas at play, but the credibility of the denialists is appalling, and as much as we would like them to be right, they just don't have the evidence to back it up.

Back to top

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: More facts for the deniers.... Reply #17 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 1:58pm If none of you follow the "party" line on climate change and gw that's fine by me. I obviously don't. But don't expect me to follow a line that says; maybe, kinda, sorta or it might.
Back to top	IP Logged

mozzaok Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 6741 Melbourne Gender:	Re: More facts for the deniers.... Reply #18 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 2:18pm Yeah, we know that. Your line is pretend nothing is happening and hope for the best. I think we all agree with you on the "hope for the best" bit, it is the "pretend nothing is happening" we have a problem with.
Back to top	OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma! IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: More facts for the deniers....
Reply #19 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 2:42pm

Not doing that at all Mozz...

just not one of the Emporers New Clothes gang.

There is a theory but... no proof we are the prime cause of anything... therefore there is no certainty if we do anything that things will change. It's like jumping at shadows.

My theory/belief is that it is cyclical and completely natural and that it's bigger than us. We need to learn to adapt.

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: More facts for the deniers....
Reply #20 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 2:48pm

Grendel,

I'll put some time into this if you will at least read my posts and respond.

I'll leave the emotion and character assasination bit out of it and just stick to the facts. If you're expecting some kind of go team Gore from me, don't bother. As an environmental professional, I've made a point of checking through the data in detail. This isn't about personalities and I don't have to appeal to the authority of the IPCC. This is fairly basic stuff, which I can explain if you're willing to listen.

Adopting the same line of questions that I had for PBJ, let's see how you go:

I'd like to explore at which point your understanding breaks down.

1. You understand that the CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere is currently at around 385ppm (seasonally adjusted )
2. You realise that the level of CO2 has increased around 25% since the 1950's and around 30% since the industrial revolution(I think)

3. You realise that through Isotopic measurements, the increase in CO2 can be attributed to the burning of fossil fuel (true or false?)

4. You understand that the highest atmospheric CO2 levels from 1800 back 1 million years was about 300ppm? (true of false)

5. You realise that variations in temperature in the pre industrial period has a direct effect on the equilibium concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere (I'm not sure where you stand on this one)

All I'm asking you to do is relax, forget about your preconceptions, and listen. Don't feel threatened. You're not going to lose face.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:04pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: More facts for the deniers.... Reply #21 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 2:52pm How about you just explain to me how man-made CO2 emmissions is the major contributing factor in global warming. And then explain how past warmings where man made emmissions were zero or negligible occurred. Then explain how this is any different.
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: More facts for the deniers....
Reply #22 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:02pm

Grendel wrote on Oct 16^th, 2008 at 2:52pm:

How about you just explain to me how man-made CO2 emmissions is the major contributing factor in global warming.

And then explain how past warmings where man made emmissions were zero or negligible occurred.

Then explain how this is any different.

Good. We're getting somewhere.
I'll have to explain that in steps. First of all we need to look at the CO2 in the atmosphere itself and the isotopes that makes up the Carbon in the carbon dioxide. Can I ask you how much chemistry you are familiar with? Can I assume that you know about isotopes?

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: More facts for the deniers.... Reply #23 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:06pm HSC level 2 unit Organics and all. Engineering Science 2 unit. Top of my school. Physics 2 unit
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: More facts for the deniers....
Reply #24 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:14pm

Ok. So do you understand how Carbon 14 is produced in the atmosphere? Basically Cosmic rays collide with the atmosphere producing neutrons, and the neutrons collide with atmospheric nitrogen 14 to produce carbon 14 or 14C as we usually write it. So every living breathing animal and plant absorbs the carbon 14 through respiratory processes. Ok?

That Carbon 14 decays losing a beta particle to form Nitrogen 14 again. The half life is around 5700 years or so. So after decayed biological matter has been in the ground for millions of years, it contains virtually no carbon 14. There are also differences in the 12C to 13C ratio.

So we have a way of analysing the carbon isotope composition of the Earth's atmosphere. For that we can use a device called a mass spectrometer. Do you follow me so far?

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

mozzaok Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 6741 Melbourne Gender:	Re: More facts for the deniers.... Reply #25 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:15pm HSC level 2 unit Organics and all. Engineering Science 2 unit. Top of my school. Physics 2 unit They made him sit on the roof because he gave everyone the irrits.
Back to top	OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma! IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: More facts for the deniers.... Reply #26 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:16pm Don't distract mozz or I'll throw the chalk at u
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

Grendel Gold Member Offline OzPolitic Posts: 28080 Gender:	Re: More facts for the deniers.... Reply #27 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:23pm ok... Life is based on a Carbon matrix, carbon and carbon dating etc, maybe 1 in 1 trillion carbon atoms are carbon-14. Etc, etc...
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: More facts for the deniers....
Reply #28 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:39pm

So by measuring the isotope ratio in the atmosphere , we have a way of determining how much of it is due to the burning of fossil fuels, the odd volcano(not as big an effect as you may have been led to believe), and the heating of limestone in a kiln to make cement (This drives off CO2 as I'm sure you're aware).

If I appear to be skimming over the facts at any stage, just say so. I am, but it would take a lot longer to explain why we actually use C13 and not C14.

We can also measure the isotope ratios of carbon absorbed by the oceans. That's one of the biggest sinks for carbon dioxide. The CO2 is absorbed to form bicarbonate or carbonate depending on the pH. With Ocean water, it becomes predominantly bicarbonate.

We have a pretty good handle on the concentration of bicarbonate in the oceans worldwide.

I'll take this up at a later stage. Don't you just hate it when work interrupts?

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: More facts for the deniers....
Reply #29 - Oct 16^th, 2008 at 3:56pm

Ah Mt ST Helens, MT Pinataubo, Krakatoa.... not exactly all small fry and then we have active volcanoes belching forth gases all over the world every day and many more beneath the oceans all adding to the carbon mix.

yep dissolved carbon in water is a biggy. yep diatoms etc, etc....
Storms/typhoons etc deposits more carbon in the oceans than annual rainfall does.

Back to top

IP Logged