What Makes Inevitable Environmental Collapse, Or, "Why I Hate Earth Day"

[athanasios]

Thread has deviated ... >:(

... sorry warmed up, and this warming is man made, I won't argue for that! ;D :P

[EDIT]

How did I miss that:

http://www.latimes.com/features/home/la-hm-hotprop-gore-20100428,0,4103538.story

Now he can have a luxury view of the effects of man induced global warming on the sea level. And enough bathrooms for his pets to pee.

Oh, sister Hwi, isn't it true that 'wicked men and impostors have advanced from bad to worse, misleading and being misled'?

[chatfsh]

Oh how true, Athanasios.  But we must rise above the insults and remain focused on the task.  Besides, these boys are as harmless as kittens. ;)

Now back to the discussion

[Wolf]

Oh, sweet! I'm gonna let Dante respond to this because he's smarter, but in the meantime--since you've finally demonstrated the capacity to respond once having been called out--could you do me a huge favor and respond to the origins of life thread? You see, I kind of was able to silence you completely with two objections that you refused to/could not answer (based purely in Cartesian logic, mind!), and you know, since, like, the burden of proof is now on you, the statute of limitations is running out on that one. Been three months, just about. Just a friendly reminder!

[Dante]

You flatter me, Wolf. :)

Ok this, this is going to be the sweetest reply I've ever made. I haven't even written it yet and I'm already anticipating the sweet, christmasy feeling of glee that I'm going to derive from it at the end. It's one thing to have to respond to baseless rejections, but this actually bares a passing resemblance to a real argument. It's going to be so much sweeter to trounce it.

On a related note, I guess "tedious data" isn't so bad now, hm? Perhaps the mockery finally sunk in.

So, best get down to business. Part 1, "the current temperatures/conditions are unprecedented."

Well, since we (read: I) already said that temperatures have been warmer in the past (they would have had to have been, given previous sea levels and the animals and plants that used to flourish in formerly hot areas) we are left with the rather more vague descrptior "conditions." One can only assume that this is intended to mean speed of temperature change without wishing to be too specific about it, as a specific point is far easier to refute than a nebulous one.

It's a shame that, unlike a real scientist, Hwi shows no ability to link her sources. I for one would be interested to know how those results in the first graph (and wouldn't 'Figure 1' have been more appropriate?) were obtained.

Anyway, lets have a look at this Medieval Warming Period. We've heard so much about it before, it's only fair to give it its due now.

Firstly, the argument goes something along the lines of "The Medieval Warm Period was warmer than current conditions. This means recent warming is not unusual and hence must be natural, not man-made." I suppose before I sink my teeth into the science of the matter I should point out that this is a logical fallacy. One could equally say "World War One killed approximately 16 million people. The Spanish flu of 1918 killed at least twice that number of people. Since it isn't unnatural for that many people to die, it stands to reason that World War One also had natural causes."

Secondly, without a source to go on I can't measure the validity of Hwi's first image, but the oceans are a big place with substantial temperature variability. There are all sorts of streams and gyres and the like that play off each other, not to mention the effects of El Ni

[Dante]

Mm, where was I? Oh yes.

Secondly, I question the fit of those graphs. Irradience does not fit as well to temperature as you seem to believe, and there are several studies that show a rather different correlation:

Figure 15

[athanasios]

Four thousand years ago. The Greeks and Romans are still distant possibilities, the Egyptians are building pyramids.

Bullshit!

http://www.european-pyramids.eu/wb/pages/european-pyramids/greece.php

Note that Herodotus states: "ἐν τῇ αὐτὸν λέγουσι(=they say) κεῖσθαι Χέοπα

[chatfsh]

The MWP was a global phenomenon not a local one as you claim.  Extensive studies have been conducted to determine what the air temperatures were around the world during the MWP.  For the results of the studies see the following interactive map.   

Using the interactive map you can go to each region to review the studies and the individual findings.  But for your convenience, I

[Wolf]

This is better than television. Dante's doing all the hard work, but I'm going to try to make a little contribution to the validity of the arguments being put forth.

1. Athanasios: saying that it's wrong to "quote the lies of Wikipedia" is exactly the kind of raving, off-the-wall lunacy that pretty much guarantees that you've discredited yourself. Of course you'll disagree, but exactly what kind of frame of reference do you have? Or not have, as the case may be?

2. Hwi: I really want to point this out to all of you, because she did it in the naturalistic origins of life debate pretty consistently, and it's great to see that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Two things:

1. She outright rejects that the MWP was a "localized" phenomenon, and posts some "interactive map" that she found with no explanation. Hwi isn't interested in learning (I've posited that it's because she's driven by a primitive win-loss/us-them dialectic, but there could be other reasons), of course, and so she's waived the opportunity even to defend the propositions she's pointed us to herself. She just posts the map (or what she hopes is the map), gives us no explanation or synthesis, and runs off. I am beginning to suspect that her definition of debate is confined merely to finding authorities that agree with you, and nothing more than that. Well, the "interactive map" from "science-skeptical.de" would curry a lot less favor with the general public than even Wikipedia. Oh, hey, you know what's funny, also--obviously, scientists are all "biased" in the sense that they have a hypothesis that they suspect is right and wish to prove, but there's something to be said for that, and something to be said for a website whose sole aim is the simple, generalized, wholesale rejection of the scientific method and the equally-simple, generalized and wholesale promotion of scientific skepticism. There's a distinction there. It's like if we were having a debate about national security and I started quoting from al-Qaeda-in-Iraq.

2.

I will deal with point 3 tomorrow.  At the moment my attention is being demanded elsewhere.

Hahahahahaha, oh man, you pulled this all the time when you were getting your face handed to you in "origins of life" and had no good answer! I mean, evidently, you had enough time to devote your attention to posting a moderately-lengthy post with at least 5 distinct points of research. Where do you draw the line, I wonder? Man, Hwi, I'm looking forward to what your sleepless, feverish all-nighter of climate change "research" produces. They should write a law: anything you come up with after saying that "your attention is being demanded elsewhere" ought to count as probable cause for a search.

[Dante]

You know I was going to post another long, detailed reply to the above, but then I read through it again and I realised that it's just the same points from last time, rehashed and with a slightly less user-friendly graph. Which means that I already dealt with it all in my last reply so... yeah, try again and better luck next time. Disappointed? Well you should have made a proper argument, shouldn't you?

Athanasios, whether or not the Greeks built pyramids is not really important. The famous ones were Egyptian, and the Greeks didn't achieve their particularly famous brand of civilisation (on which the Romans modelled theirs) until somewhere around the 7th century BCE, more than a thousand years after the Great Pyramid was constructed. I fail to see how this is relevent to the discussion at hand, however.

[athanasios]

I wasn't the first to mention about the Greeks and the Pyramids. It is off topic I agree, but I had to reply. You are referring to Classic Greece. IMO the Greeks may have helped the Egyptians to built the pyramids. Our history goes back for millenniums:

Quote from http://www.pelion.org/history/index-GR.asp

"Λίγα χιλιόμετρα δυτικά από τον Βόλο είναι το Σέσκλο, όπου η αρχαιολογική σκαπάνη έφερε στο φως τα ερείπια του αρχαιότερου στην Ευρώπη οργανωμένου οικισμού. Τείχη, σπίτια, τάφοι, και πολλά ευρήματα που ανάγονται στην έβδομη χιλιετία π.Χ. Στο απόγειό του, στη Μέση Νεολιθική, στα 5.300 - 4.300 περίπου, οι κάτοικοι του οικισμού ήταν μερικές χιλιάδες και η κατοικημένη περιοχή είχε εμβαδόν περίπου 100 στρέμματα. Λίγο πιο κοντά στον Βόλο βρίσκεται το Διμήνι, που σήμερα αποτελεί δυτικό προάστιο της πόλης. Εκεί βρίσκονται τα ερείπια ενός άλλου μικρότερου αλλά με ανάλογα ευρήματα νεολιθικού οικισμού ο οποίος ανάγεται στην Νεότερη Νεολιθική, στο τέλος της 5ης χιλιετίας."

Now on topic: I am very cautious and skeptic with what I read and hear, be it Wikipedia, the media or politicians. Also data and results are cooked to continue receiving funds or even get secret 'gifts' (=black money) from businessmen (from both sides?). IMO currently man induced global warming is negligent. Of course if population increases a lot or developing countries imitate western consumerism, soon we will have a serious problem to face.

[Dragoon Knight]

"Λίγα χιλιόμετρα δυτικά από τον Βόλο είναι το Σέσκλο, όπου η αρχαιολογική σκαπάνη έφερε στο φως τα ερείπια του αρχαιότερου στην Ευρώπη οργανωμένου οικισμού. Τείχη, σπίτια, τάφοι, και πολλά ευρήματα που ανάγονται στην έβδομη χιλιετία π.Χ. Στο απόγειό του, στη Μέση Νεολιθική, στα 5.300 - 4.300 περίπου, οι κάτοικοι του οικισμού ήταν μερικές χιλιάδες και η κατοικημένη περιοχή είχε εμβαδόν περίπου 100 στρέμματα. Λίγο πιο κοντά στον Βόλο βρίσκεται το Διμήνι, που σήμερα αποτελεί δυτικό προάστιο της πόλης. Εκεί βρίσκονται τα ερείπια ενός άλλου μικρότερου αλλά με ανάλογα ευρήματα νεολιθικού οικισμού ο οποίος ανάγεται στην Νεότερη Νεολιθική, στο τέλος της 5ης χιλιετίας."

Look here.  Pay specific attention to the last rule.

Google Translate, however, tells me that you're still spouting nonsense.  Regardless of the language you're doing it in, please stop.  You've already agreed that it's off-topic, so if you want to start a thread about how the Greeks actually built The Pyramids, you go right ahead.  But you shut up about it in here, understand?

[athanasios]

I am aware of the rule. But I was quoting from a web page, not writing myself, so that anyone could jump to the link provided and use his preferred translator to translate the relevant part and not all of the article. Is this also against the rules? ::)

NOTE: I suspect Dante's style of writing is proper English? ...

Please you may have open accounts with sister Hwi, but the rest of us do not need to suffer when reading your posts. It doesn't fit your 'name'. ;)

[Dante]

When someone acts like a joke for long enough, they get treated as a joke.

[Wolf]

I suspect Dante's style of writing is proper English? ...

Well now, I reckon it is. But I guess it depends on where y'all is from.

[chatfsh]

Sorry for the delay, but it could not be helped.  Life

[Dante]

Oh look, she's pretending to be a scientist again. It's like watching a four year old dress up in a white coat and go toddling about the place in search of small animals to harrass. That post was much like the last one in that, while better sourced, it's mostly just a rehash of the first one. I don't much care for repeating myself, so this reply is going to be somewhat truncated.

The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) occurred from about AD 950

[athanasios]

Yeah, last two images are to create impressions. They are irrelevant and prove nothing.

"Ουκ εν τω πολλώ το ευ..."

To be more clear: It doesn't matter what does the majority believe, it matters what those who posses the knowledge believe. Education level doesn't suffice. Specialty matters. And 'Climatologists' isn't enough specialty. You must have done personal research on the matter-with their own funds!

[Wolf]

Hwi, did you make a sockpuppet?

[Dante]

Yeah, last two images are to create impressions. They are irrelevant and prove nothing.

To be more clear: It doesn't matter what does the majority believe, it matters what those who posses the knowledge believe. Education level doesn't suffice. Specialty matters. And 'Climatologists' isn't enough specialty. You must have done personal research on the matter-with their own funds!

You are stupid and have no idea how the scientific community works.

Nobody funds their own research these days. Research grants and funding comes from governments, companies and charities. The days of eccentric nobles dabbling in home-situated labs are, sadly, over.

If you care to examine the image's source (linked the first time it was mentioned) you will find that the definition of "Climatologist" is actually quite rigorous. They have done the research, they have published said research, they have submitted their research to their peers for analysis and review, they have in many cases worked in their field of speciality for decades. And they are the majority. These are the people who know what they are talking about.

You are not.

Edit: Actually, I'm going to link it for you. Because I'm nice like that.

1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?

2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

...

In general, as the level of active research and specialization in climate science increases, so does agreement with the two primary questions (Figure 1). In our survey, the most specialized and knowledgeable respondents (with regard to climate change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change (79 individuals in total). Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered

[athanasios]

The days of eccentric nobles dabbling in home-situated labs are, sadly, over.

And the days to believe everything because an authority said so are sadly over too.

[Dante]

That's why I provided figures, references, papers, sources, and arguments rather than just saying "Because I said so." That's how science works, you know. Scientists don't just go around saying things, they do research and get numbers to back up their ideas. How else would you have it done, exactly?