Climate Change means no more flying for you after 2050

I'm sure the Eclipse will cool the earth sufficiently to prevent warming. I have a model that predicts it. It's going to be published in the Journal of the Flat Earth Society.

Cheers
 
All you folks flying GA are ruining the environment!! Hurry we need to develop electric airplanes quicker or we will be in ruins!!!!
 
Cooter said:
So are you saying that the earth was on track for catastrophic cooling in the 70s, but then the measures taken were too effective and we are now headed in the opposite direction temperature wise?
Click to expand...

Lol...think I am as blown away by that statement as you are. That's just plane silly (pun intended).
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Apples and oranges. Climate isn't nutrition.
Click to expand...
Climate science is the one that's right, except when it's been wrong. But that can't happen now, because the models. ;)

That was said in jest, these arguments usually get heated at about this point. :) God gave us each a brain and most of us have enough sense to not be swayed by every wind that blows. Like Nate said, we're all human and subject to normal human pressures. A family friend is a professor at a top tier school and he's told us that there is enormous pressure to secure grants. Until you climb up the chain, then you get to use the money for research. It's naive to assume that science is immune. In fact, I just happen to be reading a book about how political influence and pressure resulted in the Weather Service a receiving a black eye right when it was eagerly trying to establish its credibility in the scientific and public realm.
 
denverpilot said:
You can never do #3 on a global scale. So it's never finished. I don't mind that, but jailing people over it is a bit much when you're only at step 2 and can never get to step 3.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. You can test by comparing the models against what actually happens over time. So far none of the models have proven accurate.
 
denverpilot said:
It's okay. Nobody minds. We all have our cults. We just find it entertaining that some cults get more offended by the fact that they're human too, than others.
Click to expand...

Bingo. And a big thumbs up to everything you've said in your last few posts.
reLAhov.gif
 
CC268 said:
Lol...think I am as blown away by that statement as you are. That's just plane silly (pun intended).
Click to expand...
Except that statement is so inaccurate as to be blatantly false. See post #106. To recap: the world was NOT on track for a new ice age (or glacial phase, to be more accurate) in the '60s, and the notion that it was was only speculation by a tiny minority. Even then, most scientists believed that greenhouse warming would dominate over aerosol cooling. I doubt seriously that we've reduced our emissions of particulates enough since then to make THAT much of a difference in the balance.
 
Anybody wanna trip up a climate scientist?

Ask them what they would consider the ideal CO2 ppm, and what the temperature of the earth should be.

I guarantee you will never get a straight answer. :yesnod:
 
Salty said:
That's not entirely true. You can test by comparing the models against what actually happens over time. So far none of the models have proven accurate.
Click to expand...

My theory is that when it comes to future predictions of something as complex as climate and weather, the likelihood the predictions will be accurate won't be good in my lifetime. They're good enough that I can probably avoid flying into a thunderstorm and dying and maybe ice. Better than Orville and Wilbur had, so I'm cool with it. (No pun intended.)

There's always the possibility of a major breakthrough, another interesting area of history. Scientists love to think they're Einstein, but we tend to only get one of those people where all the circumstances and genetics align to make the person who can nail down something big, every generation. Otherwise we wouldn't know their names.

Just like pilots love to think they're Hoover. Only going to be one Hoover a generation, too.

X3 Skier said:
I'm sure the Eclipse will cool the earth sufficiently to prevent warming. I have a model that predicts it. It's going to be published in the Journal of the Flat Earth Society.

Cheers
Click to expand...

All the fossil fuels burnt to go see it, will kill that. LOL LOL LOL. ;) I'm amazed the group of climate AGs hasn't announced that they're going to arrest people driving cars to see it. Hahahaha. Asses.

We humans do a pretty good job of making fun of any particular group that thinks they've got it all figured out. Sometimes they do, more often they don't. It's just normal.

The whole planet thought the flat-earth scientists were right for an awfully long time. It was the "settled science" of the day. Now we know better.

How we will know better on climate will be the day we wake up and realize the models work so well the meteorologists and climate researchers lost all their jobs. Probably by then it'll just be a quick check of the brain implant for the day's weather. Haha.

(Even funnier -- even by then there will be some idiot who drives into a thunderstorm and dies because they didn't check. The entropy of being human is never ending.)

I particularly like reading about those who thought the arctic would be warm and have palm trees, so they sent a boat and a crew who were locked in the ice for years and most of them died. Of course the crew knew what they might be in for and took the risks willingly, while the scientist who convinced a newspaper owner to pay for it all, sat home in relative comfort.

Well, technically the scientist died and the newspaper guy didn't make any money on the story until the survivors got back. ;)

(Book recommendation: In The Kingdom of Ice, if you like the above summary.)
 
Cooter said:
How many ice ages have there been?

It's kind of like the nutrition guideline's seesaw that we've had to listen to. Going to the Dr and having to listen to the nutritional recommendations is insulting. If I strictly followed all the conventional wisdom, my diet would be somewhat like the latest fashions, on a 15-20yr cylcle where it all comes back in style. Eggs good, eggs bad, eggs good again. Whole milk good, bad, and good again. Coffee will kill you, coffee is good again.

I'm reminded of Malcolm Muggeridge's quote, "We have educated ourselves into imbecility". It certainly rings true in the headline grabbing popular science that the media rushes to publish.
Click to expand...
You deserve a good answer to the question about ice ages. I'm probably not the person to give that "good" answer as I'm not a climatologist. But, the ice ages have been associated with "Milankovitch cycles", changes with the earth's orbit and precession, and changes in the atmospheric composition. Volcanoes have also been involved. The latest change is being associated with increases in CO2 and the source of that is people. The climatologists do know about these interglacial periods, including the "little ice age".
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Please look through the threads...I have quoted enough. Consider starting with this one, where your words suggest dishonesty. Go from there through the thread.
Click to expand...

I, in no way, impugned all scientists nor has any one else as far as I recall, I'm not going back through all the posts chasing unicorns, you are way too sensitive about this subject and you seem to have lost your ability to look at this objectively.

And you know, when I hear scientists using words like 'incontrovertible" or "settled", I seriously question their knowledge of the subject or their impartiality to the truth.
 
Cooter said:
Climate science is the one that's right, except when it's been wrong. But that can't happen now, because the models. ;)

That was said in jest, these arguments usually get heated at about this point. :) God gave us each a brain and most of us have enough sense to not be swayed by every wind that blows. Like Nate said, we're all human and subject to normal human pressures. A family friend is a professor at a top tier school and he's told us that there is enormous pressure to secure grants. Until you climb up the chain, then you get to use the money for research. It's naive to assume that science is immune. In fact, I just happen to be reading a book about how political influence and pressure resulted in the Weather Service a receiving a black eye right when it was eagerly trying to establish its credibility in the scientific and public realm.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is pressure to get grants, and to secure a reputation to get tenure, and so forth. However, falsifying data is found out. We rely on data from others to move forward. If someone has a new synthetic technique applicable to my compound, I'll use it. If I can't get it to work, I'll start with the synthesis of the original compound and see if my technique is correct. If I can't get the original experiment to work, I'll reach out to the paper author to see what I'm doing wrong, or what is different.
 
PaulS said:
I, in no way, impugned all scientists nor has any one else as far as I recall, I'm not going back through all the posts chasing unicorns, you are way too sensitive about this subject and you seem to have lost your ability to look at this objectively.
Click to expand...
No need to chase unicorns or look very far, it is only 2 pages :)
However, you were the one who started this conversation on this track.

Edit: How can you say I'm too sensitive when you haven't even bothered to look at the posts leading to what you find objectionable?
 
Last edited:
Cap'n Jack said:
So what do you think is going on?
Click to expand...
Mother nature doing what she normally does. Warm, cold, warm, cold, etc. Mankind is nothing but a gnat on an elephant's a** in the overall scheme of things. Not to say that we shouldn't take care of where we live by keeping the air and water clean, but for the most part we're just guests on this planet.
 
It seems strange to me that the scientific community would believe that the world has been here for billions of years but yet is so fragile and easily manipulated. Life developed at some point and has not only withstood a harsh and hostile environment, but actually thrived and flourished. There have been meteor strikes, volcanos, and large temperature swings from global jungles to ice ages but somehow life has survived and continued up the evolutionary ladder. Extinction has been has been the engine that purifies the genetic pool and gives us the highly adapted life forms we see today. But with nothing more than a snapshot of data, we can declare with confidence that the whole system is falling apart and is headed towards catastrophe. How many times in history could it be said that the climate was changing? At how many points along the billions of years timeline could the creatures have set their hair on fire and declared the end times? The earth has obviously seen warmer, and thrived. Instead we see Al Gore's tidal waves and blizzards, with eventual barrenness. Why not vacations in Iceland and sunbathing in Alaska? At least until it swings back the other way, then maybe I won't have to travel all the way to Colorado to ski!

Everyone needs to take step back and maybe they'll see just how ridiculous the whole thing is. Panic is the new norm.
 
azblackbird said:
Mother nature doing what she normally does. Warm, cold, warm, cold, etc. Mankind is nothing but a gnat on an elephant's a** in the overall scheme of things. Not to say that we shouldn't take care of where we live by keeping the air and water clean, but for the most part we're just guests on this planet.
Click to expand...

Very well said.
 
azblackbird said:
Mother nature doing what she normally does. Warm, cold, warm, cold, etc. Mankind is nothing but a gnat on an elephant's a** in the overall scheme of things. Not to say that we shouldn't take care of where we live by keeping the air and water clean, but for the most part we're just guests on this planet.
Click to expand...
Yeah? What's causing the current warm up? We've been able to associate previous glacial and interglacial periods with other events.
 
Cooter said:
It seems strange to me that the scientific community would believe that the world has been here for billions of years but yet is so fragile and easily manipulated. Life developed at some point and has not only withstood a harsh and hostile environment, but actually thrived and flourished. There have been meteor strikes, volcanos, and large temperature swings from global jungles to ice ages but somehow life has survived and continued up the evolutionary ladder. Extinction has been has been the engine that purifies the genetic pool and gives us the highly adapted life forms we see today. But with nothing more than a snapshot of data, we can declare with confidence that the whole system is falling apart and is headed towards catastrophe. How many times in history could it be said that the climate was changing? At how many points along the billions of years timeline could the creatures have set their hair on fire and declared the end times? The earth has obviously seen warmer, and thrived. Instead we see Al Gore's tidal waves and blizzards, with eventual barrenness. Why not vacations in Iceland and sunbathing in Alaska? At least until it swings back the other way, then maybe I won't have to travel all the way to Colorado to ski!

Everyone needs to take step back and maybe they'll see just how ridiculous the whole thing is. Panic is the new norm.
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with this great scholar!
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Yeah? What's causing the current warm up? We've been able to associate previous glacial and interglacial periods with other events.
Click to expand...

You've been drinking too much rum captain jack sparrow! Get back to black pearl before she sails away!
 
Cooter said:
It seems strange to me that the scientific community would believe that the world has been here for billions of years but yet is so fragile and easily manipulated. Life developed at some point and has not only withstood a harsh and hostile environment, but actually thrived and flourished. There have been meteor strikes, volcanos, and large temperature swings from global jungles to ice ages but somehow life has survived and continued up the evolutionary ladder. Extinction has been has been the engine that purifies the genetic pool and gives us the highly adapted life forms we see today. But with nothing more than a snapshot of data, we can declare with confidence that the whole system is falling apart and is headed towards catastrophe. How many times in history could it be said that the climate was changing? At how many points along the billions of years timeline could the creatures have set their hair on fire and declared the end times? The earth has obviously seen warmer, and thrived. Instead we see Al Gore's tidal waves and blizzards, with eventual barrenness. Why not vacations in Iceland and sunbathing in Alaska? At least until it swings back the other way, then maybe I won't have to travel all the way to Colorado to ski!

Everyone needs to take step back and maybe they'll see just how ridiculous the whole thing is. Panic is the new norm.
Click to expand...

Al Gore is a politician. How about we keep them out of the discussion since they have their own agenda, either getting elected of getting $$$ as mentioned earlier. Using Al Gore as a spokes person would be like someone using Donald Trump as a spokes person.

We've had highly adapted life forms in the past, one asteroid seems to have changed all that. We do have a fossil record, so we have more than a "snapshot" based on today's animals.
 
Cooter said:
It seems strange to me that the scientific community would believe that the world has been here for billions of years but yet is so fragile and easily manipulated. Life developed at some point and has not only withstood a harsh and hostile environment, but actually thrived and flourished. There have been meteor strikes, volcanos, and large temperature swings from global jungles to ice ages but somehow life has survived and continued up the evolutionary ladder. Extinction has been has been the engine that purifies the genetic pool and gives us the highly adapted life forms we see today. But with nothing more than a snapshot of data, we can declare with confidence that the whole system is falling apart and is headed towards catastrophe. How many times in history could it be said that the climate was changing? At how many points along the billions of years timeline could the creatures have set their hair on fire and declared the end times? The earth has obviously seen warmer, and thrived. Instead we see Al Gore's tidal waves and blizzards, with eventual barrenness. Why not vacations in Iceland and sunbathing in Alaska? At least until it swings back the other way, then maybe I won't have to travel all the way to Colorado to ski!

Everyone needs to take step back and maybe they'll see just how ridiculous the whole thing is. Panic is the new norm.
Click to expand...

Another great post.
 
xkcd tries to put things into perspective.

I have questions, though. What happened prior to 22000BC, and how do we know what the temps were prior to the invention of the thermometer (to within 0.1 C)? There msy be historical records about first frost, crop production, when a particular body of water froze over or thawed, but an actual temperature?

The drawing seems to show the latest rise corresponds to the invention if the internet. Didn't Al Gore invent the internet?

https://xkcd.com/1732/
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Yeah? What's causing the current warm up?
Click to expand...
Combination of orbital shift and the multitude of fissures/fractures from plate tectonics allowing the inner molten core to shift around. Same ole same ole as it always has been since the dawn of time. The earth is constantly evolving, and will continue to evolve for many more billions of years after we're long gone.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Al Gore is a politician. How about we keep them out of the discussion since they have their own agenda, either getting elected of getting $$$ as mentioned earlier. Using Al Gore as a spokes person would be like someone using Donald Trump as a spokes person.

We've had highly adapted life forms in the past, one asteroid seems to have changed all that. We do have a fossil record, so we have more than a "snapshot" based on today's animals.
Click to expand...
Politicians control the flow of money. He's getting his data from somewhere. I'm not denying the existence of good scientist or good science but that doesn't exclude the possibility of corrupted science.

The snapshot was in reference to accurate temperature readings.
 
Cooter said:
Politicians control the flow of money. He's getting his data from somewhere. I'm not denying the existence of good scientist or good science but that doesn't exclude the possibility of corrupted science.

The snapshot was in reference to accurate temperature readings.
Click to expand...
How about we keep the discussion to science? Both sides have people who promote a certain viewpoint because of monetary gain.
 
CC268 said:
Rollin' coal baby!!! :stirpot:
Click to expand...

I prefer forest fires myself. Far more effective. :)

Everskyward said:
How about we keep the discussion to science? Both sides have people who promote a certain viewpoint because of monetary gain.
Click to expand...

Because the two are inextricably linked.

But as the OP, I'm fine if y'all kill the thread. Very few people apparently find the utter corruption avoidable to discuss, which shows how real it is.

Even when shown an article based off of a Columbia University study that is so ridiculous it was only posted as a joke, people must switch to discussing the sick ridiculousness of it all.

Top lawyers who got appointed to be the "leadership" of law enforcement in their respective geographies, threatening to imprison those who disagree with their worldview, is... after all... a pretty big deal.

Sorry I brought it up. The airplane spin on the article was entertaining is all. I'll make sure students plan on checking density altitude performance charts when it's 120F out in 2050 because we all ignored Al Gore and his AG friends. ;)
 
Everskyward said:
They're only linked because people can't resist linking them when they start discussing the subject. Science can and should be apolitical.
Click to expand...

Frankly no. You can't separate them unless you've found a way to feed scientists with free food. Science never EVER has been apolitical. The freaking Nobel Prize is based upon the money saved in finding a cheaper way to blow people up.
 
Denverpilot for prez 2020
 
CC268 said:
Denverpilot for prez 2020
Click to expand...

Definitely not interested. I don't have the "compelled to tell other people what to do" gene unless they're paying me to teach them how to survive flying airplanes. And in that case, they made their wishes quite clear that they want to be told.
 
Everskyward said:
How about we keep the discussion to science? Both sides have people who promote a certain viewpoint because of monetary gain.
Click to expand...

Climate deniers are getting rich like Algore? I'm not seeing that trail of money.
 
Cooter said:
It seems strange to me that the scientific community would believe that the world has been here for billions of years but yet is so fragile
Click to expand...

Typical uninformed climate denier tripe. Let's try this on for size. For much of its existence Earth has been inimical to human life. Way, way too hot. It's happened before, so if it happens again does that make it OK?

I've heard the word civilization being described as "that which happens during ice ages". Does that means Ice Ages are O.K.? After all, they've happened before?

What really brings this home to me is the planet Venus. Very, very different climate from Earth despite being about the same size. Closer to the Sun, but well within the "goldilocks" zone of astronomical inhabitanility. If we spotted a planet like Venus in another solar system we'd give it high marks for potential inhabitability.

So why is Venus so inimical to life? Lots of reasons, one of which is runaway greenhouse warming. Now, really really melt the poles and you release enough methane hydrates to start runaway greenhouse warming on Earth.

The one thing I can say with utter confidence about the current spate of warming is it is unprecedented to our understanding. And in case anyone is interested, we've already bolluxed the oceans. CO2 has to reach chemical equilibrium with water by making carbonic acid. That's what it does. The CO2 we've dumped in the atmosphere will lower oceanic pH levels to the point of killing anything that sequesters calcium, and that includes anything with a shell, i.e. most of the world's zooplankton. That's only the basis of the pelagic food chain.
And please don't tell me that the latter is just wild speculation because I ran the numbers myself. The only saving grace to any of this is I never had any children. I feel sorry for yours that have to live in this broken world we've left them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top