Bismarck.Ihina said: »
Do mainstream conservatives still think the scientific community is split on man-made global warming or have they moved on to accusing the scientific community of fabricating it just so they can get grant money?
Random Politics & Religion #00
Random Politics & Religion #00
Why not both? Also, polar bears.
Odin.Jassik said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
If a group of pilots were discussing the best way to land a broken plane, do you know what I'd do? I sit down and shut up and let the people that know what they're doing actually fix the problem.
1970s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1980s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1990s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2000s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2010s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
Looks like they're doing a great job of fixing the problem.
Sadly, scientists aren't able to make the changes that would need to be made and research is expensive. Are you saying that green technologies have not made any significant progress in the last 50 years?
Relative to the money that's been shoveled towards them? No. Then again, I think the money has gone to the wrong places. Instead of giving it to a bunch of researchers who study it but can't do anything about it, it should've gone to engineers and inventors who might have been able to.
[+]
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program.
[+]
Take all the money away from the scientists researching global warming and put it towards something that could benefit the world.
Screw that lets just fear monger and executive order money into more research, regulations and taxes! Yeah! Screw solving problem logically!!
Screw that lets just fear monger and executive order money into more research, regulations and taxes! Yeah! Screw solving problem logically!!
You know what could benefit the whole world? Clean cheap energy...
[+]
Altimaomega said: »
Jetackuu said: »
Altimaomega said: »
Lets see you use some of that awesome scientific literacy in place of what I said.
inb4 "no u" again...
inb4 "no u" again...
No really actually put some substance into what you preach. What should I have said while saying the exact same thing using your awesome scientific literacy.
I'm gonna bet you'll start pulling my hair before you back up your statement.
Altimaomega said: »
I'm wondering the same thing about you.. You make a horrible analogy about a group of pilots, Rav owns you on it. Then you jump to boohoo scientists can on do so much because research is expensive and blah blah green tech. Meanwhile that plane you let fly into the ground because of your blinding trust has rusted away into nothingness.
I'd sooner take my chances with the pilots who are aware and admit there is a problem and are trying to solve it, than the moron on the plane who doesn't think there's a problem, and is too busy bitching to everyone else that they're just making it up to actually listen to the people who know what they're talking about.
Odin.Jassik said: »
You know what could benefit the whole world? Clean cheap energy...
That will happen right after world peace.
Jetackuu said: »
Altimaomega said: »
Jetackuu said: »
Altimaomega said: »
Lets see you use some of that awesome scientific literacy in place of what I said.
inb4 "no u" again...
inb4 "no u" again...
No really actually put some substance into what you preach. What should I have said while saying the exact same thing using your awesome scientific literacy.
I'm gonna bet you'll start pulling my hair before you back up your statement.
No I mean exactly what I say, just not in the context you would like it to be in.
Jetackuu said: »
Altimaomega said: »
I'm wondering the same thing about you.. You make a horrible analogy about a group of pilots, Rav owns you on it. Then you jump to boohoo scientists can on do so much because research is expensive and blah blah green tech. Meanwhile that plane you let fly into the ground because of your blinding trust has rusted away into nothingness.
I'd sooner take my chances with the pilots who are aware and admit there is a problem and are trying to solve it, than the moron on the plane who doesn't think there's a problem, and is too busy bitching to everyone else that they're just making it up to actually listen to the people who know what they're talking about.
That's the problem with you idiots and this whole global warming debacle. You think only two options exist. I'd sooner grab a parachute and take my chance's.
Like I said: if you understood science, you wouldn't say what you say.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
Jetackuu said: »
Excuse me while I hope in my cold fusion powered car and drive home to check on my cold fusion powered furnace because its cold outside.
/sigh
Like I said: no scientific literacy.
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program.
It's seriously confusing to me.
I guess people forget or don't know that MIT, CalTech, and GeorgiaTech (top three in US) are engineering schools that do vast amounts of research?
[+]
Then there's Virginia Tech, where people get shot.
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program.
Well then I don't know what to say. Clearly I don't understand the complexities of the process, but you'll forgive me for thinking that something is off. In my work, I have seen research groups pull off some incredible things with very limited budgets. And here I look at all the cash that has been thrown at climate science in along with the decades of research, and what? I see pretty graphs, dead-end projects, and some whizz-bang innovations that apparently haven't done much to stem our carbon footprint. Should I be impressed? If so, by what?
Jetackuu said: »
Like I said: if you understood science, you wouldn't say what you say.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
Whats with your obsession with my avatar? Its like the 3rd time you've made fun of it and I really don't understand why...
Also, If you understood life you'd know that
Altimaomega said: »
Bismarck.Ihina said: »
How's business lately, AO?
Not to bad considering the Historic low temperatures and early snow.
has absolutely nothing to do with scientific literacy. Since you obviously have the aptitude of a stone I will spell it out for you.
It's kinda hard to chisel plow when the ground is frozen and covered in snow. Considering that I am ALWAYS chisel plowing this time of year I could really use some global warming about now.
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program.
It's seriously confusing to me.
I guess people forget or don't know that MIT, CalTech, and GeorgiaTech (top three in US) are engineering schools that do vast amounts of research?
Yes, but there are researchers who research for the sake of research. I have a little more faith in engineering schools to actually get something done with the research they do.
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Cerberus.Pleebo said: »
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program.
Well then I don't know what to say. Clearly I don't understand the complexities of the process, but you'll forgive me for thinking that something is off. In my work, I have seen research groups pull off some incredible things with very limited budgets. And here I look at all the cash that has been thrown at climate science in along with the decades of research, and what? I see pretty graphs, dead-end projects, and some whizz-bang innovations that apparently haven't done much to stem our carbon footprint. Should I be impressed? If so, by what?
The government agency's have to approve the grants and only so much money is available for research grants every year. You are totally correct when you think something is off.
Altimaomega said: »
Jetackuu said: »
Like I said: if you understood science, you wouldn't say what you say.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
Whats with your obsession with my avatar? Its like the 3rd time you've made fun of it and I really don't understand why...
Also, If you understood life you'd know that
Altimaomega said: »
Bismarck.Ihina said: »
How's business lately, AO?
Not to bad considering the Historic low temperatures and early snow.
has absolutely nothing to do with scientific literacy. Since you obviously have the aptitude of a stone I will spell it out for you.
It's kinda hard to chisel plow when the ground is frozen and covered in snow. Considering that I am ALWAYS chisel plowing this time of year I could really use some global warming about now.
It does since snow at this time of the year isn't "early" and these aren't even record low temps...
Altimaomega said: »
Since the USA is one of the main CO2 producers, why are the temps not rising here? "You're not saying its the base cause but definitely contributing." Contributing to what? The extremely mild temperatures the USA has had and is continuing to have for the past 2 years. You cannot have it both ways.
Odin.Jassik said: »
We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses
[+]
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Altimaomega said: »
Since the USA is one of the main CO2 producers, why are the temps not rising here? "You're not saying its the base cause but definitely contributing." Contributing to what? The extremely mild temperatures the USA has had and is continuing to have for the past 2 years. You cannot have it both ways.
Odin.Jassik said: »
We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses
It's my understanding that it's considered a more powerful gas because of it's relative volume and how much longer it stays in the atmosphere than other gasses (~100 years vs methane's ~10 years). But, I am no expert on chemistry, that's just what I've read.
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
If a group of pilots were discussing the best way to land a broken plane, do you know what I'd do? I sit down and shut up and let the people that know what they're doing actually fix the problem.
1970s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1980s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1990s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2000s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2010s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
Looks like they're doing a great job of fixing the problem.
Sadly, scientists aren't able to make the changes that would need to be made and research is expensive. Are you saying that green technologies have not made any significant progress in the last 50 years?
Relative to the money that's been shoveled towards them? No. Then again, I think the money has gone to the wrong places. Instead of giving it to a bunch of researchers who study it but can't do anything about it, it should've gone to engineers and inventors who might have been able to.
Attempting to develop a solution without thouroughly understanding the base problem and parameters affecting it is a great way to end up in trouble quickly. A lot of the direct engineering methods discussed for controlling atmospheric CO2 are short term, and borderline insane.
Now, if you want to tackle the problem indirectly, by funding innovative products which reduce the use of fossil fuels, we are talking about a different story. But that route is frequently contested polirically and is a minefield of conflicting interests.
[+]
Water vapor is actually the greatest contributor to the greenhouse effect under those criteria. =~=~=☆
[+]
Jetackuu said: »
Altimaomega said: »
Jetackuu said: »
Like I said: if you understood science, you wouldn't say what you say.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
Whats with your obsession with my avatar? Its like the 3rd time you've made fun of it and I really don't understand why...
Also, If you understood life you'd know that
Altimaomega said: »
Bismarck.Ihina said: »
How's business lately, AO?
Not to bad considering the Historic low temperatures and early snow.
has absolutely nothing to do with scientific literacy. Since you obviously have the aptitude of a stone I will spell it out for you.
It's kinda hard to chisel plow when the ground is frozen and covered in snow. Considering that I am ALWAYS chisel plowing this time of year I could really use some global warming about now.
It does since snow at this time of the year isn't "early" and these aren't even record low temps...
How many times do you need to be proven wrong before you shut up?
http://www.wnem.com/story/27410176/trust-steve-how-abnormal-are-these-temperatures
Quote:
I am predicting a low of 9° tonight and a high of 23° for tomorrow. The coldest low ever recorded on Nov. 18 for Cincinnati is 12° way
back in 1880. The coldest the high temperature for the date is 26° set back in 1951 and that's before I was born so I guess it qualifies as a
long time ago too.
But wait there's more!!!
If we dip into the single digits tomorrow morning it will be the earliest it has ever been that cold in ALL CINCINNATI WEATHER HISTORY.
In addition if the high stays colder than 25° it will be the earliest in the season that we have gotten that cold.
As it now stands the earliest Cincinnati has dropped to single digits is Nov. 19. That was in 1880. The earliest the high temperature
did not make it to 25° was November 20 in 1937.
back in 1880. The coldest the high temperature for the date is 26° set back in 1951 and that's before I was born so I guess it qualifies as a
long time ago too.
But wait there's more!!!
If we dip into the single digits tomorrow morning it will be the earliest it has ever been that cold in ALL CINCINNATI WEATHER HISTORY.
In addition if the high stays colder than 25° it will be the earliest in the season that we have gotten that cold.
As it now stands the earliest Cincinnati has dropped to single digits is Nov. 19. That was in 1880. The earliest the high temperature
did not make it to 25° was November 20 in 1937.
I'm in lower Michigan and it got down to 3*f and had a windchill of -15*f
And for those interested in a visual representation of how CO2 is dispersed atmospherically, head here.
AO, what would you say if I were to tell you that there's a difference between weather and climate?
[+]
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
Bahamut.Ravael said: »
Odin.Jassik said: »
If a group of pilots were discussing the best way to land a broken plane, do you know what I'd do? I sit down and shut up and let the people that know what they're doing actually fix the problem.
1970s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1980s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1990s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2000s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2010s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
Looks like they're doing a great job of fixing the problem.
Sadly, scientists aren't able to make the changes that would need to be made and research is expensive. Are you saying that green technologies have not made any significant progress in the last 50 years?
Relative to the money that's been shoveled towards them? No. Then again, I think the money has gone to the wrong places. Instead of giving it to a bunch of researchers who study it but can't do anything about it, it should've gone to engineers and inventors who might have been able to.
Attempting to develop a solution without thouroughly understanding the base problem and parameters affecting it is a great way to end up in trouble quickly. A lot of the direct engineering methods discussed for controlling atmospheric CO2 are short term, and borderline insane.
Now, if you want to tackle the problem indirectly, by funding innovative products which reduce the use of fossil fuels, we are talking about a different story. But that route is frequently contested polirically and is a minefield of conflicting interests.
The bolded part is mostly what I'm referring to. Everything before that is, in my opinion, a money hole at this point.
Bismarck.Ihina said: »
AO, what would you say if I were to tell you that there's a difference between weather and climate?
Do you actually ever contribute anything to these arguments, or do you just get a kick out of making passive-aggressive comments that often get ignored?
[+]
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Altimaomega said: »
Since the USA is one of the main CO2 producers, why are the temps not rising here? "You're not saying its the base cause but definitely contributing." Contributing to what? The extremely mild temperatures the USA has had and is continuing to have for the past 2 years. You cannot have it both ways.
Odin.Jassik said: »
We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses
Please enlighten my fundamental lack of understanding and describe temporarily to me. Is it 1yr? 2-3yrs?
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.