Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #2081  
Old 04.05.2016, 15:23
Uncle GroOve's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mendrisio
Posts: 1,081
Groaned at 7 Times in 5 Posts
Thanked 727 Times in 380 Posts
Uncle GroOve has a reputation beyond reputeUncle GroOve has a reputation beyond reputeUncle GroOve has a reputation beyond reputeUncle GroOve has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Look - I've got all rights to pineapple plantations in Aberdeenshire - so do you mind shutting up - and letting people carry on driving V8s and generating electricity in coal fired power stations.


Yeah like... I know "smart money" moves early... but hehe... I don't think you'll ever see yer pineapples in the Northern lands during your lifetime.
You could go and grow some tropical crops (i.e. ginger?) in Canada tho'...!


P.
Reply With Quote
  #2082  
Old 04.05.2016, 15:37
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,616
Groaned at 349 Times in 300 Posts
Thanked 13,677 Times in 7,517 Posts
marton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post


Yeah like... I know "smart money" moves early... but hehe... I don't think you'll ever see yer pineapples in the Northern lands during your lifetime.
You could go and grow some tropical crops (i.e. ginger?) in Canada tho'...!


P.
I recommend obtaining the boating concession and licence for the California desert
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank marton for this useful post:
  #2083  
Old 04.05.2016, 15:52
dodgyken's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Democratic Republic Kenistan
Posts: 10,779
Groaned at 283 Times in 233 Posts
Thanked 19,403 Times in 7,402 Posts
dodgyken has a reputation beyond reputedodgyken has a reputation beyond reputedodgyken has a reputation beyond reputedodgyken has a reputation beyond reputedodgyken has a reputation beyond reputedodgyken has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
I recommend obtaining the boating concession and licence for the California desert
I've got that too

I've also trademarked "Seaside city of Cambridge" and the "Brussels Riviera"
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank dodgyken for this useful post:
  #2084  
Old 21.10.2016, 00:39
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,616
Groaned at 349 Times in 300 Posts
Thanked 13,677 Times in 7,517 Posts
marton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

US Govt scientists discover "Nano-spike catalysts convert carbon dioxide directly into ethanol (the drinkable sort of alcohol)" now if they can just add Rioja flavour then we are all saved

Source
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank marton for this useful post:
  #2085  
Old 21.10.2016, 08:38
st2lemans's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lugano
Posts: 26,401
Groaned at 1,637 Times in 1,257 Posts
Thanked 30,601 Times in 14,610 Posts
st2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
US Govt scientists discover "Nano-spike catalysts convert carbon dioxide directly into ethanol (the drinkable sort of alcohol)" now if they can just add Rioja flavour then we are all saved

Source
Yes, but you only get back 63% as much energy as you put in.

Tom
Reply With Quote
  #2086  
Old 21.10.2016, 10:07
Chemmie's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 4,031
Groaned at 31 Times in 27 Posts
Thanked 4,817 Times in 2,181 Posts
Chemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Yes, but you only get back 63% as much energy as you put in.

Tom


I believe that that is a 63% yield, it actually requires much more energy (electrolysis, separation) to produce the viable ethanol fuel than you will be getting out of the actual fuel.


But nano-catalysis is indeed an amazing field (essentially the main reason I ended up in CH), and more funding and research is needed---just be wary of these sensational claims.


On terms of helping the environment, I feel this is really viable breakthrough.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-1...30?pfmredir=sm


Methane is far worse than CO2, too much methane comes from cows, a simple testing of different food additives for cows (winner: red seaweed) drastically reduces the methane output!
__________________
"You have reached the end of you free trial membership at BenjaminFranklinQuotes.com" -Benjamin Franklin
Reply With Quote
The following 4 users would like to thank Chemmie for this useful post:
  #2087  
Old 05.01.2017, 13:31
baboon's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rheintal
Posts: 3,801
Groaned at 124 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 5,026 Times in 2,445 Posts
baboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Now we have the interesting situation that annual CO2 emissions rose steadily from year 2000 to 2013 (in fact more steeply than in the last half of the last century) but global temperatures did not increase.

However annual CO2 emissions in 2014 and 2015 did not increase over 2013 but in 2015 global temperatures shot up again.

Since the proof of Global warming is by correlation not causation then one has to wonder?
Actually seems there hasn't been a pause in warming. Ocean temperatures were underestimated, now analysed and corrected and all the data makes pretty sums again


http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-38513740
Reply With Quote
  #2088  
Old 05.01.2017, 13:54
st2lemans's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lugano
Posts: 26,401
Groaned at 1,637 Times in 1,257 Posts
Thanked 30,601 Times in 14,610 Posts
st2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Actually seems there hasn't been a pause in warming. Ocean temperatures were underestimated, now analysed and corrected and all the data makes pretty sums again.
Wonderful, massage the data to make it fit the theory.

Tom
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank st2lemans for this useful post:
This user groans at st2lemans for this post:
  #2089  
Old 05.01.2017, 14:54
Chemmie's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 4,031
Groaned at 31 Times in 27 Posts
Thanked 4,817 Times in 2,181 Posts
Chemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

hmmm buoy measurements colder than bucket measurements.
25x more measurements now with buoys, more weight put on the buoy values.


Now it correlates with buoy-only trends and satellite trends.


Still working on that perfect model huh!
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Chemmie for this useful post:
  #2090  
Old 05.01.2017, 15:37
FrankZappa's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: France, near Geneva
Posts: 827
Groaned at 8 Times in 7 Posts
Thanked 2,558 Times in 642 Posts
FrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
hmmm buoy measurements colder than bucket measurements.
25x more measurements now with buoys, more weight put on the buoy values.


Now it correlates with buoy-only trends and satellite trends.


Still working on that perfect model huh!
No model is perfect. In fact, they are all wrong...

Essential reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank FrankZappa for this useful post:
  #2091  
Old 05.01.2017, 15:44
Chemmie's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 4,031
Groaned at 31 Times in 27 Posts
Thanked 4,817 Times in 2,181 Posts
Chemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
No model is perfect. In fact, they are all wrong...

Essential reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_models_are_wrong


All aphorisms are terse :P
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Chemmie for this useful post:
  #2092  
Old 05.01.2017, 17:12
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,616
Groaned at 349 Times in 300 Posts
Thanked 13,677 Times in 7,517 Posts
marton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Actually seems there hasn't been a pause in warming. Ocean temperatures were underestimated, now analysed and corrected and all the data makes pretty sums again


http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-38513740
Buoys have been used to measure ocean temperatures for over 50 years.
Over the years there have been very many studies comparing their results with ships and satellites.
Now suddenly we see a new study that magically changes the numbers for only the last 15 years!

Last edited by marton; 05.01.2017 at 17:42.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank marton for this useful post:
  #2093  
Old 08.01.2017, 09:18
baboon's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rheintal
Posts: 3,801
Groaned at 124 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 5,026 Times in 2,445 Posts
baboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote from Prof Sam Dupont, University of Gothenburg (a Biologist btw, not a climate scientist)

“I am a sucker for conspiracy theories but you have to ask yourself what is the most plausible: hundreds of scientists from more than 50 countries working secretly together to promote a false idea, or merchants of doubt with financial and political interests at stake working very hard to undermine the scientific evidence.”
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank baboon for this useful post:
  #2094  
Old 08.01.2017, 10:19
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,616
Groaned at 349 Times in 300 Posts
Thanked 13,677 Times in 7,517 Posts
marton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Quote from Prof Sam Dupont, University of Gothenburg (a Biologist btw, not a climate scientist)

“I am a sucker for conspiracy theories but you have to ask yourself what is the most plausible: hundreds of scientists from more than 50 countries working secretly together to promote a false idea, or merchants of doubt with financial and political interests at stake working very hard to undermine the scientific evidence.”
Originally I am a physicist and the history of physics is littered with theories that were endorsed by everyone and then found to fail to forecast the real world correctly and needed to be changed or replaced.

Examples range from Newton's laws of motion to the idea that the point-like particles of particle physics can also be modelled as one-dimensional objects called strings.

To quote Albert Einstein "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong".

It is not a question of conspiracy theory, the issue is that there are ever more complex ideas being put forward to explain why the real world is not behaving as the global warming theory forecasts.
__________________
It is naive to assume my posts are my own work
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank marton for this useful post:
  #2095  
Old 08.01.2017, 10:42
baboon's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rheintal
Posts: 3,801
Groaned at 124 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 5,026 Times in 2,445 Posts
baboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Originally I am a physicist and the history of physics is littered with theories that were endorsed by everyone and then found to fail to forecast the real world correctly and needed to be changed or replaced.

Examples range from Newton's laws of motion to the idea that the point-like particles of particle physics can also be modelled as one-dimensional objects called strings.

To quote Albert Einstein "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong".

It is not a question of conspiracy theory, the issue is that there are ever more complex ideas being put forward to explain why the real world is not behaving as the global warming theory forecasts.
As I know from other threads you can be open-minded, please have a good read of this
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...59378015000515
Well written and referenced (if long), summerises the reality far better than I ever could. Part 6 addresses the "pause".
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank baboon for this useful post:
  #2096  
Old 08.01.2017, 22:23
Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Lucerne
Posts: 230
Groaned at 37 Times in 19 Posts
Thanked 154 Times in 82 Posts
armed_neutrality is considered a nuisancearmed_neutrality is considered a nuisancearmed_neutrality is considered a nuisance
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Quote from Prof Sam Dupont, University of Gothenburg (a Biologist btw, not a climate scientist)

“I am a sucker for conspiracy theories but you have to ask yourself what is the most plausible: hundreds of scientists from more than 50 countries working secretly together to promote a false idea, or merchants of doubt with financial and political interests at stake working very hard to undermine the scientific evidence.”
It's not secret. There may be pockets of conspiracy, but the basic idea is out in the open: activists, get a "scientist" label for yourself, and then use your "scientist" status to make some scientismic proclamations, write some scientismic papers, do some scientismic research, take part in the scientismic consensus (the term "scientism" and friends borrowed from Taleb here -- though interestingly on this issue as a whole he does seem to want to invoke the precautionary principle). If you already have a "scientist" label and you fancy doing a bit of activism, go for it! No actual conspiracy required.

And Prof Sam Dupont is just doing the "consensus" argument here. That argument is nonsense and must be ignored by anyone willing to look directly at the issues.

Quote:
View Post
Originally I am a physicist and the history of physics is littered with theories that were endorsed by everyone and then found to fail to forecast the real world correctly and needed to be changed or replaced.

Examples range from Newton's laws of motion to the idea that the point-like particles of particle physics can also be modelled as one-dimensional objects called strings.

To quote Albert Einstein "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong".[...]
Exactly.

Apologies for the long quote, but this Feynman piece is excellent for understanding how this stuff can work:
Quote:
We’ve learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature’s phenomena will agree or they’ll disagree with your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you haven’t tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it’s this type of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science.
[...]
We have learned a lot from experience about how to handle some of the ways we fool ourselves. One example: Millikan measured the charge on an electron by an experiment with falling oil drops, and got an answer which we now know not to be quite right. It’s a little bit off, because he had the incorrect value for the viscosity of air. It’s interesting to look at the history of measurements of the charge of the electron, after Millikan. If you plot them as a function of time, you find that one is a little bigger than Millikan’s, and the next one’s a little bit bigger than that, and the next one’s a little bit bigger than that, until finally they settle down to a number which is higher.

Why didn’t they discover that the new number was higher right away? It’s a thing that scientists are ashamed of this history because it’s apparent that people did things like this: When they got a number that was too high above Millikan’s, they thought something must be wrong–and they would look for and find a reason why something might be wrong. When they got a number closer to Millikan’s value they didn’t look so hard. And so they eliminated the numbers that were too far off, and did other things like that.
This happened for a basic single measurement, very repeatable, no political consequences. For some reason, the scientists subsequent to Millikan didn't end up reporting their results straight up. We understand why because it is a human kind of behaviour. Now imagine what could happen for a huge complex system, driven in large part by chaos itself, difficult to measure and impossible to model well enough, with enormous political implications, and severe political opprobrium heaped on dissenters. Wanna rock the boat?

Quote:
We’ve learned those tricks nowadays, and now we don’t have that kind of a disease.

But this long history of learning how to not fool ourselves– of having utter scientific integrity–is, I’m sorry to say, something that we haven’t specifically included in any particular course that I know of. We just hope you’ve caught on by osmosis.

The first principle is that you must not fool yourself– and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you’ve not fooled yourself, it’s easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that.

I would like to add something that’s not essential to the science, hut something I kind of believe, which is that you should not fool the layman when you’re talking as a scientist. I am not trying to tell you what to do about cheating on your wife, or fooling your girlfriend, or something like that, when you’re not trying to be a scientist, but just trying to be an ordinary human being. We’ll leave those problems up to you and your rabbi. I’m talking about a specific, extra type of integrity that is not lying, but bending over backwards to show how you’re maybe wrong, that you ought to have when acting as a scientist. And this is our responsibility as scientists, certainly to other scientists, and I think to laymen.
Reply With Quote
The following 4 users would like to thank armed_neutrality for this useful post:
  #2097  
Old 09.01.2017, 10:21
baboon's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rheintal
Posts: 3,801
Groaned at 124 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 5,026 Times in 2,445 Posts
baboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond reputebaboon has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
It's not secret. There may be pockets of conspiracy, but the basic idea is out in the open: activists, get a "scientist" label for yourself, and then use your "scientist" status to make some scientismic proclamations, write some scientismic papers, do some scientismic research, take part in the scientismic consensus (the term "scientism" and friends borrowed from Taleb here -- though interestingly on this issue as a whole he does seem to want to invoke the precautionary principle). If you already have a "scientist" label and you fancy doing a bit of activism, go for it! No actual conspiracy required.
Care to substantiate that with actual references. A decent sized list of names for example?


Breitbard (and similar) does not count as a reference btw.
Reply With Quote
  #2098  
Old 09.01.2017, 10:32
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 10,638
Groaned at 210 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 20,320 Times in 8,665 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
US Govt scientists discover "Nano-spike catalysts convert carbon dioxide directly into ethanol (the drinkable sort of alcohol)" now if they can just add Rioja flavour then we are all saved

Source
I've heard about that catalyst. In them old days we called it the tempranillo grapevine and american oakwood barrel method.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #2099  
Old 09.01.2017, 10:35
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 10,638
Groaned at 210 Times in 178 Posts
Thanked 20,320 Times in 8,665 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Yes, but you only get back 63% as much energy as you put in.

Tom
That's better than most commercialized energy storage systems then.
Reply With Quote
  #2100  
Old 09.01.2017, 10:36
PaddyG's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pensier, Fribourg
Posts: 9,278
Groaned at 121 Times in 105 Posts
Thanked 16,856 Times in 5,911 Posts
PaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
To quote Albert Einstein "No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong".
Much as I admire Einstein, I don't agree with this statement; a single experiment doesn't prove anything either way (Andrew Wakefield anyone?), that is just cherry-picking. However, when a series of experiments and data from independent sources start to corroborate, then you might have to reconsider your hypothesis.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
climate change, climategate, co2, global warming




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 17:14.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0