Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1121  
Old 10.03.2013, 20:40
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,568
Groaned at 472 Times in 405 Posts
Thanked 19,378 Times in 10,229 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
I note that Christopher Booker, the author of the Daily Telegraph article, has an impressive history of contrarian points of view, notably doubting the dangers of asbestos and the link between passive smoking and cancer. Both of which he was completely wrong to doubt.

The graph in his article is completely stupid.



0°C is not a true zero point. It is completely arbitrary. If the graph was of, say, road deaths, he would be right. But 0°C is just the freezing point of water. It has no special significance here. So no points to either Lawrence Solomon (who sells coffee beans on the side, such is his stature as an environmentalist) or Christopher Bonkers.
Well if you started the graph at absolute zero then the line at the top would likely look completely flat

It is well known that graphs look very different depending on the axes you choose. Which is why the global warming proponents just plot around +1C -it makes the changes look bigger.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank marton for this useful post:
  #1122  
Old 10.03.2013, 21:04
st2lemans's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lugano
Posts: 31,577
Groaned at 2,353 Times in 1,711 Posts
Thanked 38,371 Times in 18,109 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
0°C is not a true zero point. It is completely arbitrary.
Total nonsense.

It is 273.15 K, hardly arbitrary.

Tom
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank st2lemans for this useful post:
  #1123  
Old 10.03.2013, 21:36
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
I note that Christopher Booker, the author of the Daily Telegraph article, has an impressive history of contrarian points of view, notably doubting the dangers of asbestos and the link between passive smoking and cancer. Both of which he was completely wrong to doubt.
This shouldn't surprise anyone. The people denying climate change are the same kinds of people who denied those things, using the same deceitful and anti-science methods. It'd be funny if it wasn't so serious.

Like all the other ones it copies, that article cherry picks the 1997 point in time because as soon as you stray either side of it, the short term plateau - and hence the whole "argument" - disappears.

It's called lying with statistics.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank drsmithy for this useful post:
The following 2 users groan at drsmithy for this post:
  #1124  
Old 10.03.2013, 21:52
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
This shouldn't surprise anyone. The people denying climate change are the same kinds of people who denied those things, using the same deceitful and anti-science methods. It'd be funny if it wasn't so serious.

Like all the other ones it copies, that article cherry picks the 1997 point in time because as soon as you stray either side of it, the short term plateau - and hence the whole "argument" - disappears.

It's called lying with statistics.
"Global Warming" is just another fiction made up by pseudo-scientists extrapolated from heavily contrived data. "Climate change" is the term adopted when it was proven there was no link between human activity and an increase in temperatures worldwide, and that the world may actually be cooling in spite of human activity.

Does this mean humanity has no responsibility to Earth and Nature? Hardly. Conservation should be a central part of the human ethos moving forward. Let's just do it without the false rationale.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
This user groans at Jobsrobertsharpii for this post:
  #1125  
Old 10.03.2013, 22:06
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,568
Groaned at 472 Times in 405 Posts
Thanked 19,378 Times in 10,229 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
This shouldn't surprise anyone. The people denying climate change are the same kinds of people who denied those things, using the same deceitful and anti-science methods. It'd be funny if it wasn't so serious.

Like all the other ones it copies, that article cherry picks the 1997 point in time because as soon as you stray either side of it, the short term plateau - and hence the whole "argument" - disappears.

It's called lying with statistics.
Interesting that this article manages to produce a completely different trend line than the Hadley centre here.

I have never heard the Met Office Hadley Centre described as climate skeptics before; but I suppose they must be as their trend line turns down in recent years......
Reply With Quote
  #1126  
Old 10.03.2013, 22:09
Sbrinz's Avatar
RIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Murten - Morat
Posts: 11,866
Groaned at 563 Times in 354 Posts
Thanked 11,548 Times in 5,941 Posts
Sbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

The fact that the world we live in is getting very slightly warmer has been reasonably proven. What I find hard to reconcile is that a few kilometers above the earth's surface it is extremely cold, so why should this very slight warming at ground level be a BIG problem?

Almost every disaster weather report ends with the words "This was the worst weather since 19xx " so the present weather was not the worst, just the second worst over the past 100 years.

I am in favour of saving energy, we obviously need to stop throwing it away, but the present results are laughable: let's build an electric car, make it nice and heavy after filling it with batteries, then let us charge the batteries with conventional power stations, and burn more energy carrying the batteries around.

Has anyone thought of creating hydrogen, deliver it, and use it as a fuel? Well of course they have, but the oil companies wouldn't like it!
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Sbrinz for this useful post:
  #1127  
Old 10.03.2013, 22:28
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
"Global Warming" is just another fiction made up by pseudo-scientists extrapolated from heavily contrived data. "Climate change" is the term adopted when it was proven there was no link between human activity and an increase in temperatures worldwide, and that the world may actually be cooling in spite of human activity.
And here i was thinking "Climate Change" was the term adopted when it become impossible to deny the upward trend in global temperature any longer.

Meanwhile, in reality, both terms have been used for decades and both are meaningful and accurate.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users groan at drsmithy for this post:
  #1128  
Old 10.03.2013, 22:31
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Interesting that this article manages to produce a completely different trend line than the Hadley centre here.
Both trends look pretty similar to me. Clearly upward.

Quote:
I have never heard the Met Office Hadley Centre described as climate skeptics before; but I suppose they must be as their trend line turns down in recent years......
It seems you're missing the point.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users groan at drsmithy for this post:
  #1129  
Old 10.03.2013, 22:34
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
The fact that the world we live in is getting very slightly warmer has been reasonably proven. What I find hard to reconcile is that a few kilometers above the earth's surface it is extremely cold, so why should this very slight warming at ground level be a BIG problem?
Because it's the bit that matters ?

Quote:
Almost every disaster weather report ends with the words "This was the worst weather since 19xx " so the present weather was not the worst, just the second worst over the past 100 years.
2013 - 1999 = 14.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users groan at drsmithy for this post:
  #1130  
Old 10.03.2013, 22:38
Fridge's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Zürich
Posts: 687
Groaned at 23 Times in 19 Posts
Thanked 757 Times in 331 Posts
Fridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
View Post
Has anyone thought of creating hydrogen, deliver it, and use it as a fuel? Well of course they have, but the oil companies wouldn't like it!
Bullshit.

The reason hydrogen as a fuel for internal combustion didn't take off, is because it's a terrible idea.

A couple of issues:
The pressure required to carry a meaningful potential energy density, and how exactly do you isolate the hydrogen?
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Fridge for this useful post:
  #1131  
Old 10.03.2013, 22:50
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,568
Groaned at 472 Times in 405 Posts
Thanked 19,378 Times in 10,229 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
Bullshit.

The reason hydrogen as a fuel for internal combustion didn't take off, is because it's a terrible idea.

A couple of issues:
The pressure required to carry a meaningful potential energy density, and how exactly do you isolate the hydrogen?
About "The pressure required to carry a meaningful potential energy...."

Nah, you just need a very long pipe.....

But I suppose the roads will get quite foggy with all that warm H2O being spread around.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank marton for this useful post:
  #1132  
Old 10.03.2013, 23:34
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
The fact that the world we live in is getting very slightly warmer has been reasonably proven..
This hasn't been proven, and it hasn't been connected to human activity. The current consensus in long-term climate science is that, regardless of human activity, we are between two ice ages.

Quote:
View Post
Almost every disaster weather report ends with the words "This was the worst weather since 19xx " so the present weather was not the worst, just the second worst over the past 100 years.
And the news media are known for their scientific accuracy? Or for getting people to watch, so they can sell ads?

Quote:
View Post
I am in favour of saving energy, we obviously need to stop throwing it away, but the present results are laughable: let's build an electric car, make it nice and heavy after filling it with batteries, then let us charge the batteries with conventional power stations, and burn more energy carrying the batteries around.
I agree completely here. Current electric-vehicle technology is still in its infancy, and so much so, that traditional internal-combustion vehicles are still the best option. Hopefully research continues, and breakthroughs are made in battery technology and electric motor efficiency.

Quote:
View Post
Has anyone thought of creating hydrogen, deliver it, and use it as a fuel? Well of course they have, but the oil companies wouldn't like it!
There was a story on EF recently about Skunk Works at Lockheed-Martin planning to deliver semi-portable fusion reactors within the next 4 or so years..
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
  #1133  
Old 10.03.2013, 23:43
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
And here i was thinking "Climate Change" was the term adopted when it become impossible to deny the upward trend in global temperature any longer.
Apparently you were misinformed.

Quote:
View Post
Meanwhile, in reality, both terms have been used for decades and both are meaningful and accurate.
Only half this statement is true- the first half that states these terms have been used for decades. The other half is rhetoric from anti-capitalists that hijacked the environmental movement from the conservationists.

When these "scientists" are asked simple questions, like "What is the temperature on Earth today?" they cannot answer. They can't tell you what it was yesterday, one week or one month ago. They won't be able to tell you what it will be tomorrow, or next year. But, somehow they can tell you that the temperature is going up!

Weren't we all supposed to have been vaporized by the hole in the ozone layer by now?

Again, I'm strongly in favor of responsible use of natural resources and conservation. What I'm against are these environmental charlatans using bad observations, skewed data, and crappy computer models (some don't even factor rainfall in!) to buy into this hysteria, so they can then sell "snake oil" carbon credits to the foolish masses.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
  #1134  
Old 10.03.2013, 23:56
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Zurich
Posts: 711
Groaned at 22 Times in 13 Posts
Thanked 456 Times in 217 Posts
sam ali has earned the respect of manysam ali has earned the respect of manysam ali has earned the respect of many
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Us
Reply With Quote
  #1135  
Old 11.03.2013, 03:33
poptart's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,785
Groaned at 33 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 3,013 Times in 1,242 Posts
poptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Bullshit.

The reason hydrogen as a fuel for internal combustion didn't take off, is because it's a terrible idea.

A couple of issues:
The pressure required to carry a meaningful potential energy density, and how exactly do you isolate the hydrogen?
Google Iceland hydrogen buses. And hydrolysis. If you're going to be a vicious critic, at least know what you're talking about first asshat
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank poptart for this useful post:
  #1136  
Old 11.03.2013, 03:40
poptart's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,785
Groaned at 33 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 3,013 Times in 1,242 Posts
poptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond reputepoptart has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post

When these "scientists" are asked simple questions, like "What is the temperature on Earth today?" they cannot answer. They can't tell you what it was yesterday, one week or one month ago. They won't be able to tell you what it will be tomorrow, or next year. But, somehow they can tell you that the temperature is going up!.
climate is not the same as the weather you watch on the tv news. You don't need a ph.d. To understand why Monsanto is engineering new GM plants to take advantage of drier climates with longer growing seasons where it used to be cold and wet. I don't understand folks more enamored of arguing against the scientific studies when merely knowing the way the climate has changed in our own lifetimes is significant enough to ask the questions.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank poptart for this useful post:
  #1137  
Old 11.03.2013, 06:05
Fridge's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Zürich
Posts: 687
Groaned at 23 Times in 19 Posts
Thanked 757 Times in 331 Posts
Fridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
View Post
Google Iceland hydrogen buses. And hydrolysis. If you're going to be a vicious critic, at least know what you're talking about first asshat
He said "as a fuel" and that the "oil companies wouldn't like it".

I know all about hydrolysis, thank you. Good to hear you took high school chemistry. He was mocking the weight and grid source of batteries, suggesting h2 as a superior, yet unfairly stifled alternative.

So tell me, where does the power to perform the hydrolysis come from? And what about the weight for the pressure tanks to store the h2?

If you want to start with an alcohol and isolate the hydrogen on site, then you have another set of issues. To be fair, it's been a few years since I worked on a fuel cell, but at the time there was a concern about excessive heat discharge in the reaction that caused some nasty side effects.

Maybe some research yourself before throwing out the oh so eloquent insults?
__________________
The red blobs are all mine, you can't have 'em back!!! Bwahahaha!!!

Last edited by Fridge; 11.03.2013 at 06:33.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Fridge for this useful post:
  #1138  
Old 11.03.2013, 07:17
AbFab's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 8,226
Groaned at 347 Times in 237 Posts
Thanked 11,995 Times in 4,115 Posts
AbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

(What's "h2"? Hydrogen was "h" when I was at school.)

Here we go again the endless climate debate! What happened to the "Greenhouse effect"?

Also what happened to the "trees dying", caused by "acid rain". In the 1980s this was a major horror story in Switzerland. Towns like Chur at the bottom of mountains would be wiped away when there were no more trees to hold the earth and rocks back. This was supposed to have happened in the 1990s.

I'm not a sceptic or deny-er - just very confused...
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank AbFab for this useful post:
  #1139  
Old 11.03.2013, 07:33
Fridge's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Zürich
Posts: 687
Groaned at 23 Times in 19 Posts
Thanked 757 Times in 331 Posts
Fridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond reputeFridge has a reputation beyond repute
Yes, H would be the atomic symbol for hydrogen But having a single of a 2 electron outer shell, the "stable state" is bonded as a 2-atom molecule, hence H2.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Fridge for this useful post:
  #1140  
Old 11.03.2013, 07:44
Sbrinz's Avatar
RIP
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Murten - Morat
Posts: 11,866
Groaned at 563 Times in 354 Posts
Thanked 11,548 Times in 5,941 Posts
Sbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond reputeSbrinz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Another thing that bothers me, in the sixties and seventies those that are supposed to know about climatology, were predicting a fresh ice age early in this century, ie today. These same people are now predicting global warming on a massive scale, and in only a few years time.

The world has become very slightly warmer, this has been measured, and you only need to visit the Alpine museums here, and look at old photographs, to learn how far the Swiss glaciers have retreated in the past 50 years.

But this is probably due to the Sun's solar cycle, and it will get a bit warmer before cooling again.

There is a study scheme to supply Scotland with electricity produced in Iceland, but this will lead to a 30% distribution loss. They have plenty of thermal energy which can also be easily used to create hydrogen, a very useful but dangerous fuel, with no distribution losses.

Isn't it strange that the oil companies can capture wasted methane gas in the Libyan desert and ship it liquified to Europe for use in cars and city buses here in Bern, but some say it is impossible to manufacture cleaner hydrogen and ship it here for transport use.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Sbrinz for this useful post:
Reply

Tags
climate change, climategate, co2, global warming




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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 16:14.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0