The improved Curry Corner

Discussion in 'Science' started by Robert, Mar 9, 2018.

  1. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One the difficulties I'm having discussing this topic with you Robert is that most of us are here at home plate focused on the salient points and you're off in left field talking about how CO2 is a biological toxin only in high concentrations, burning death due to the air temperature, the diurnal temperature changes in your backyard or across the bay, and other irrelevant topics or strawman arguments that no reputable climate scientist is making. If we could reel this in I think the discussion would move along more smoothly.

    So to review...

    - Nobody is concerned that we are going to get CO2 gas poisoning.
    - Nobody is concerned that the Earth is going to turn into a literal oven that bakes people to death.
    - The temperature variations in your backyard are not an adequate proxy for the climate.
    - There are no doomsday predictions in the IPCC AR5 report.
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  2. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Well thank god you do not place much faith in the IPCC report. Me either.

    I tend to think deeper than my opponents.
     
  3. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I happen to think the IPCC AR5 is one of the better high level overviews of the science concerning climate change. I'm just saying you won't find any doomsday predictions in there. I don't know where you're getting them, but it's definitely not from the official IPCC AR5 publications which happen to be an accurate representation of the scientific consensus as well.
     
  4. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well hotdog. Everything is fine.

    Look, I created this thread topic. I wish the believers hustled to the Curry site and made their argument there. They could argue with peers. What an idea. I told Curry Corner two heavyweights are here. And you are one of them. Wonder if others see your importance as you see it?
     
  5. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Forget what i think. Watch one of the professionals in the field take this issue on.

     
  6. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Keep away from accusing me.

    For your special pleasure

    My offer is scientists on a panel

    Enjoy it.

     
  7. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mullis also denies AIDS (where he has done zero scientific work) and attacks sociology for not accepting ASTROLOGY!!

    From his entry in WIKI:
    "In a Q&A interview published in the September 1994 issue of California Monthly, Mullis said, "Back in the 1960s and early '70s I took plenty of LSD. A lot of people were doing that in Berkeley back then. And I found it to be a mind-opening experience. It was certainly much more important than any courses I ever took."

    His field is chemistry with his plaudits focused on his breakthrough in polymerase chain reactions (related to progress on dna), decidedly NOT climatology.
     
    iamanonman likes this.
  8. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let's just forget for a moment that this guy denies the link between HIV and AIDS and the link between CFCs and ozone depletion for a minute. What scientific principal did he invoke that convinced you that global warming is nothing but a a big "joke"?

    Also, he's not a professional in the field. He even admits as much in the video.
     
  9. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Frankly it does not matter if I believe him or not. I simply am open to varying views. Are you open to other views?
     
  10. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    For sake of my addition to this discussion. I am not a stickler that one is a gifted climatologist than they can, by virtue of scientific expertise, evaluate things such as climate.

    I am more interested in questions, than in answers by true believers.

    Why is that?
    Believers are fatalistic devoted to this issue. They have become fanatics.

    I included Iamanoman to the Curry people as a heavyweight due to his scientific system of discussion. And i included his other schooled opponent as well.

    Climate is no place for attack politics. Those types do not belong in the debate on the Curry site. They are not all Curry followers. They engage this scientifically too.

    Science in physics can be more clear than climate science can be. Climate has to span a globe and make predictions that then can be subject to verification.

    All the fanatics have doomed this planet in their words. Do they truly believe if this small amount of a gas is that terrible, we are not already doomed to a severe existence?

    When I suggest a massive tree planting campaign and am rebuffed and told it is out of line, I judge those speakers as not truly interested in solutions, just trying to scare the hell out of people.

    I don't scare that easily.

    For example this is by true climate heavy weights.

    https://judithcurry.com/
     
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am most definitely NOT open to the climatology related views of some LSD soaked guy who believes in astrology and has ZERO credits in climatology.

    Why the HELL would I be interested in that when the topic is actually important?

    And, let's continue to remember that you don't agree with Dr. Curry.

    You need to be doing a better job of identifying sound sources and understanding what they are saying. Looking for quotes from single individuals is just not a valid approach to ANY topic of science.
     
  12. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Don't worry. If they are not credible, your own credibility vanished with them.

    I told Curry site we have two heavy weights posting on climate. I did not include you for obvious reasons. I won't address your diversons, just note they are just that.
     
  13. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ALL you have done here is label those who don't agree with you (the VAST majority of climatologists from around the world) as "fanatics".

    Then, you use that as a justification for ignoring the combined output of that entire branch of science in favor of some individual you found. In fact, you even choose IDIOTS over experts in the field as long as you think they agree with you.

    Yours is NOT a valid method of evaluating scientific understanding of climate change. It is ENTIRELY political - being based on you and your personal preconceived notions.
     
  14. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Wrong. Why do you make wrong claims?
     
  15. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,487
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    IN NO WAY is my credibility tied to some LSD soaked astrology buff.

    YOU are the one who posted that kind of nonsense as something you seem to think others need to know!!!
     
  16. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Moving discussion regarding the Kary Mullis video to this thread...

    For what it's worth I never said anything regarding Kary Mullis that wasn't true. He really does deny a lot of well established science and think astrology is a good tool for explaining human behaviors. He also claims to have had a conversation with a alien specifically one masquerading as a raccoon. He's also proud of being high on LSD. Anyway, desplite all of that I never poked fun at him or called him names; something no one on this forum would blame me for if I had. So you insinuating that I'm bashing him comes off with incredible irony considering that's actually what he's doing to bona-fide climate scientists in this video.

    I'm still a software engineer. Come on Robert...do you really think Kary Mullis someone to be taken seriously?

    I'm sure you did learn a lot about the weather. And no doubt you likely have a better grasp on it that most people. But, there's still a disconnect with your understanding of climate.

    We already are noticing it. The global mean surface temperature is the defining metric by which we notice.

    Well, there are thousands of scientists that disagree with you. The consensus that global warming will be net harmful to the United States.

    I'm not the one who brought up the topic of carbon dioxide in beverages. That's was all your doing in the other thread. And again, no one cares about CO2's toxicity in humans because people aren't typically exposed to the high concentrations that are required for it to be harmful. And besides CO2's toxicity isn't related to its ability to warm the planet.

    What doomsday prediction have I peddled? The answer: none. Never. You're trying to paint me as an alarmist here. The fact is that I attack alarmist rhetoric just as vehemently as denier rhetoric. Anybody who follows my posts knows that bash Al Gore every chance I get.

    I'm sorry, but this isn't true. Murray Mitchell is believed to be the first to use the phrase global warming. He did so in a 1961 paper. Going even further I can also tell you the myth that Democrats changed the name from global warming to climate change is also false. In fact, Mitchell is believed to also be the first person to coin the term climate change. And ironically, he did this in a 1953 publication that predated his use of the phrase global warming. Mitchell's political affiliation is unknown. Going back even further Arrhenius was the first person to predict global scale warming due to human behavior. He just didn't coin the term "global warming". He made his prediction back in 1896. He definitely wasn't a Democrat. He wasn't even an American. Oh, and side note, his prediction ended up being astonishingly accurate considering how little information he had to go on. He even predicted that the Arctic would warm faster than the equator. And he did all of this before the turn of the century...and I mean the turn of the 20th century; as in more than 120 years ago.
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  17. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    More information on climate change.

     
  18. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I brought up a good book by Professor Richard A Muller and the retort was to display a video where he says "Say, I now believe in man made global climate" to which I replied, just read his book.

    Well since I own his book, let me type the words out.

    "Global warming, although real and caused largely by humans, can be controlled only if we find inexpensive or profitable methods to reduce greenhouse emissions in China and the developing world." ~ Richard A Muller

    Gee, I have reported this same thing a good many times.

    I have long said, point the finger at the right people and watch me agree with you.

    Stands I have long taken yet get called a denier

    1. Climate changes
    2. Climate change can easily be proven given the Great Lakes exist
    3. Climate change is easy to prove given the glaciers that carved up Yosemite Valley in Ca plus receded and left the area occupied by New York City. Sure it changes.
    4. Climate changed in the Arctic area. Before was a tropical area.
    5. Climate changed at the Sahara Desert since fossils of long dead crocodiles are there and have been recovered in some cases.

    What puzzles me is why alarmists do not claim humans did that, but want to today use them as the scapegoat.

    Still, pick on China and you have a friend here.
     
    Last edited: Nov 6, 2018
  19. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The main reason you get the denier label is centered on your choice to use geological climate change to minimize the situation taking place in the last century. It is fine to "Blame China" but that is pretty much a cop out and actually solidifies and highlights the unfortunate reality of where the real problems lie....we humans have done this and wont stop doing it.
     
  20. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Of course you are in charge of climate.
     
  21. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    More goodies from the Curry bag.

    https://judithcurry.com/2018/11/10/week-in-review-science-edition-89/#more-24463

    Were I persuaded you read the links, I would let it go there. But just to give a hint.

    Week in review – science edition
    Posted on November 10, 2018 by curryja | Leave a comment
    by Judith Curry

    A few things that caught my eye this past week.


    “Fingerprints of internal drivers of Arctic sea ice loss in observations and model simulations” [link]

    Conflicting Measurements Reduce Uncertainty in Climate Science [link]

    California’s new earthquake warnings deliver critical seconds of notice [link]

    Why are land-use change emissions so complex? Forests have direct (eg, deforestation), indirect (eg, CO₂ fertilisation), & natural effects (eg, storms). Policy & science treat these differently! [link]

    A 900-year New England temperature reconstruction from in situ seasonally produced branched glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraethers [link]

    Reassessing the Role of the Indo‐Pacific in the Ocean’s Global Overturning Circulation [link]

    The importance of unresolved biases in 20th century sea-surface temperature observations [link]
     
  22. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I not only did not imply that, I recognize it as an attempt at distraction because you have no useful argument.
     
  23. Mamasaid

    Mamasaid Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2018
    Messages:
    3,754
    Likes Received:
    1,218
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Curry has really turned into a vapid naysayer. The more gullible among us will think she is presenting substantive arguments and evidence, but she is doing neither. She is a discredited fraud and her blogs are meant for untrained people. She produces no science, submits no actual peer reviews, and is no longer a scientist.
     
    tecoyah likes this.
  24. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You sure fooled me by detracting from my comment to blame China and you calling me out for it.
     
  25. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    As opposed to your lofty credentials you mean?
     

Share This Page