Give Me a Urinal or Give Me Death!

[Sulman]

Perhaps they'll hold a peaceful protest outside his home.

[Sulman]

Perhaps they'll hold a peaceful protest outside his home.

[Easy J]

Perhaps they'll hold a peaceful protest outside his home.

[jugheadnaut]

[pedant] Climate (science) is pure physics (interacting of course with chemistry and ecology). It's the interpretation of data, conflicting agendas, and policy response options that provide the space for ideology. [/pedant]

Actually, climate science is a hugely multidisciplinary field and relatively little is based on pure physics. Statistics and mathematical modelling (either not based on physics or based on huge simplifications), as well as chemistry play large roles. The models that are based on physics are generally highly non-linear dynamical systems that are extremely sensitive to certain assumptions about their parameters. Not only that, simplifications are almost always included for areas that are not well understood or very difficult to model at the moment (e.g. ocean currents, clouds). All of this introduces potential sources of investigator bias. I'm not saying that climate scientists are explicitly fiddling with their models to achieve desired outcomes. But let's say you're a climate scientist who is already convinced that man-made activities are causing catastrophic climate change and regard it as one of your duties to provide policymakers with scientific ammunition in favor of greatly restricting said man-made activity. You've put together a model that makes certain assumptions and simplifications, and it spits out results consistent with your presuppositions. Excellent, time to publish. But if it spits out contrary results, you're going to be very skeptical. You'll assume the model is wrong and try alternate assumptions and play with your simplifications and use the desired outcome as the test of whether the model is right. Or, maybe you'll just figure it's a dead end and not publish at all. My academic background is in biophysical modelling and simulation, and I've seen this dynamic occur even in contexts that aren't politically charged in the least. Richard Feynman mentioned this dynamic with regards to the Millikan oil drop experiment in his famous cargo cult essay. Damn, I wish Feynman were alive today...would be fascinated to hear his thoughts on the current state of climate science.

From my perspective, the focus on climate sensitivity for policy development is misleading, and leads to a lot of fiddling while Rome burns.

I've seen a fair bit of pooh-pooping of climate sensitivity as a useful metric from alarmist sources over the last year, but have yet to see a cogent reason why. It seems to me the actual reason why is that the research into it hasn't been useful to alarmist arguments. So, ignore the man behind the curtain, and back to the motte!

We have already passed thresholds where the rate of emissions grossly exceed the rate of sequestration, consequently increasing the concentration of GHG in the atmosphere. (Releasing millions of years worth of sequestered atmospheric carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere over 200 years will do that to a planet.)

Yes, yes, atmospheric CO2 concentrations have been increasing, and this is almost certainly largely anthropogenic. How is that prescriptive for policy? What percentage of global GDP growth per year would you be willing to sacrifice per year for reducing CO2 emissions a certain amount? You need to know the expected consequences of the atmospheric CO2 increases, even if it's only in a probability range, to make such decisions, not make decisions solely on the basis of "Releasing millions of years worth of sequestered atmospheric carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere" just sounds scary.

By the time we have narrowed the uncertainty it is/will be too late to stop that particular runaway train.

Ah, another common alarmist claim that has little basis in science. There have been hypotheses regarding positive feedback cycles that could lead to runaway warming, such as methane release from thawing permafrost, or thermohaline circulation disruption, but none stood up to closer scrutiny as significant dangers, at least in the 100-200 year time frame. While there's no question global temperatures have risen over the last 100 years, there's also no question from ice core data that we're still in a relatively cool spot with respect to the entire holocene. If we're closing in on a temperature that will kick off a positive feedback loop between rising temperature and rising CO2, why didn't it occur 7000 years ago when temperatures were 2 deg C warmer than now? It's certainly possible, as non-linear systems are notoriously difficult to predict and perhaps the high rate of warming will somehow push the system into a positive feedback loop, there's just no affirmative evidence for it at this point.

I'm not ok with doing nothing and waiting. I see the impact of the warming climate already hitting agriculture in Australia, community livelihoods/water security in south east Asia, and posing increased operational risk for critical infrastructure in south east Asia (all areas that I have worked on).

It seems you've already made a lot of hasty assumptions as to the nature of the problems and the cause. There is also a grave risk in "just doing something". Suppose a global regulatory policy was enacted that reduced global carbon emissions 50% but reduced average global GDP annual growth from 2% to 1%. This doesn't sound so terrible, but it means in 50 years the global GDP would be almost 70% less than it would have been had the policy not been instituted. If the major risks humanity faces from climate change turn out to be over a time span of centuries, humanity would now be much poorer and probably considerably less advanced technologically than it would have been otherwise and have substantially less ability to deal with these risks.

[Shatterface]

Cop shot dead in Paris.

[John D]

I am honestly starting to think we should do nothing regarding CO2. Yeah... I know it's Prager.... but that doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong.

[youtube][/youtube]

[Oglebart]

Has Beccy gained employment with Uber security? Ironically she sees in others what the rest of us see in her.

http://i.imgur.com/HFz4nF6.png

Did she just use the b-epithet? Doesn't that merit instant stoning, or was it peine forte et dure?

She uses the word all the time. Remember the 'bitch' who served her tacos in that taco place a few weeks back?

And of course, any statistics concerning the use of the word 'bitch' on Twitter will include Watson's use of the word and she'll see that as evidence of misogyny.

Hey! toilet slaves, do as I say, not as I do. Come on, you should know this shit by now!!

[Shatterface]

Second cop has died.

[Lsuoma]

Second cop has died.

Up go Le Pen's poll numbers.

[shoutinghorse]

Second cop has died.

Up go Le Pen's poll numbers.

http://i.imgur.com/WAoGOW5.jpg

[pro-boxing-fan]

[pedant] Climate (science) is pure physics (interacting of course with chemistry and ecology). It's the interpretation of data, conflicting agendas, and policy response options that provide the space for ideology. [/pedant]

Actually, climate science is a hugely multidisciplinary field and relatively little is based on pure physics. Statistics and mathematical modelling (either not based on physics or based on huge simplifications), as well as chemistry play large roles. The models that are based on physics are generally highly non-linear dynamical systems that are extremely sensitive to certain assumptions about their parameters. Not only that, simplifications are almost always included for areas that are not well understood or very difficult to model at the moment (e.g. ocean currents, clouds). All of this introduces potential sources of investigator bias. I'm not saying that climate scientists are explicitly fiddling with their models to achieve desired outcomes. But let's say you're a climate scientist who is already convinced that man-made activities are causing catastrophic climate change and regard it as one of your duties to provide policymakers with scientific ammunition in favor of greatly restricting said man-made activity. You've put together a model that makes certain assumptions and simplifications, and it spits out results consistent with your presuppositions. Excellent, time to publish. But if it spits out contrary results, you're going to be very skeptical. You'll assume the model is wrong and try alternate assumptions and play with your simplifications and use the desired outcome as the test of whether the model is right. Or, maybe you'll just figure it's a dead end and not publish at all. My academic background is in biophysical modelling and simulation, and I've seen this dynamic occur even in contexts that aren't politically charged in the least. Richard Feynman mentioned this dynamic with regards to the Millikan oil drop experiment in his famous cargo cult essay. Damn, I wish Feynman were alive today...would be fascinated to hear his thoughts on the current state of climate science.

You're goddamn right (bold), although im sure everyone here knows it. I studied in environmental sciences (undergrad, did not finished it). My classes were all over the place, and sometimes the schedule make it hard to go from one department to others in time since my Uni departments are disseminated all over downtown Montreal. On the top of my head those were the classes i had first year: chemistry, biochemistry, zoology, plants biology (fucking fern), climatology, oceanography, physics, geology, biostatistics, epistemology.

[Shatterface]

No feminist glaciology? And you claim to be an expert?

[Brive1987]

Second cop has died.

Time for FtB to adopt the kneeling semi-prone position.

Almost like a reflex.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/imag ... QolGEN2OFA

[shoutinghorse]

Well bugger me, who'd have guessed :o

http://i.imgur.com/pBlNtUJ.png

http://i.imgur.com/WAO0IbP.png

[pro-boxing-fan]

No feminist glaciology? And you claim to be an expert?

To my defence, it was way before the world discover the power of wokedness. Basically the dark ages.

[pro-boxing-fan]

Second cop has died.

Up go Le Pen's poll numbers.

And down goes Philippe Poutou poll numbers. He's the guy who want to disarm the french police.

To be honest, he probably did not have a lot of support to begin with.

[Service Dog]

Bike Lock Boy wrote a feminist master's thesis, then proceeded to specialize in complaining about prisons.

I'm sure he fails to confront the "lock 'em up & throw away the key" feminist view on incarceration & feminism's role in locking up countless men.

Rather than devote himself to the serious work of bringing his two conflicting specializations to a better union, he's out braining third parties with a bike lock.

[Oglebart]

First, Houses of Parliament in London, then the Champs-Elysees in Paris. Prominent, high profile locations, just coincidence I hope.

[pro-boxing-fan]

Catching up on the Paris attack. I have a feeling terrorism in France will only get worst in the years to come and this make me sad as fuck.

English version because you guys are a bunch of blokes.

[youtube][/youtube]

[MarcusAu]

That's funny - I was just listening to the French version earlier:

[youtube][/youtube]

[Service Dog]

PS I'm not so sure that old media is conspiring against the new.

The formula appears to be outrage = clicks = $.

Also, if the market is not growing then there is a limit to the number of advertiser dollars - so if they can decrease someone else's share - there is more for them.

They can either be true believers (ie think that the youtube community is really full of anti-semites, racists and sexists) or cynical to be motivated in this way.

No conspiring necessary.

Hmm... in that case... I feel like Sargon&Co. have pretty-much described the same dynamic as you-did, but they were called conspiracy kooks for it.

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Oh Boy - The second largest city in Michigan is Grand Rapids. It is a 2.5 hour drive from Detroit and is much more right leaning than many cities. Crime is low. Unemployment is low. Religiosity is high.

It is changing and becoming more liberal. They have a really cool public art fair called Art Prize... very hip and cool.

So... anyway. The cops what to be seen as "progressive" and this is the word the police chief used in an interview. They studied police stops by race. And, of course, blacks are stopped at twice the rate as whites as a proportion of the population. As a devout racist, my first reaction was... "Well, that's just about right because blacks do about twice the crime." But no..... the cops in Grand Rapids are racist and now they are getting special training. Haha. It's like the whole country has some kind of brain virus. No one thinks it is possible that blacks do crime at twice the rate of whites.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/m ... 100674808/

Black people are terrible, erratic drivers. It is known.

[Brive1987]

First, Houses of Parliament in London, then the Champs-Elysees in Paris. Prominent, high profile locations, just coincidence I hope.

We should applaud the gunman in this case for showing remarkable restraint.

:clap: :clap:

[Matt Cavanaugh]

Well bugger me, who'd have guessed :o

http://i.imgur.com/pBlNtUJ.png

http://i.imgur.com/WAO0IbP.png

Suspect last seen sodomizing goats in Molenbeek.

[KiwiInOz]

snip

This goes even deeper for me as I have suffered quite a lot of the same problems this person is talking about. I am a chronic asthmatic with many hospitalisations, as well a having had pneumonia and bronchitis, and as well as having had a nervous breakdown of sorts coming out of a mood disorder.

I know how you feel. I get hay fever (including from drinking beer) and it make my eyes water and I sneeze a lot. It makes me grumpy.

[pro-boxing-fan]

Apparently, the presumed terrorist was a French citizen and he tried to kill 2 policemen in 2001.

Also, ISIS claimed the attack.

[KiwiInOz]

[internal voice] Should I engage jugheadnaut in a long fruitless discussion about climate science and climate change, or should I stick to one liners? [/internal voice]

[MarcusAu]

I know how you feel. I get hay fever (including from drinking beer) and it make my eyes water and I sneeze a lot. It makes me grumpy.

And Dopey, but definitely not Happy.

If you are still Sneezy, you should see Doc (If you are not Bashful).

[d4m10n]

Hey, Pit Crew.

Remember that bonkers Huffpo piece about stopping white people from voting in South Africa? Well, it appears they were hoaxed, and "Shelley Garland" does not exist. And it doesn't appear to be a prank from the HuffPo gone wrong - they were pwned hook, line, and sinker!

<snip>
Now, I smelled BS right from the start, and "her" twitter account looked dodgy right from the start. I have to ask whether Godfrey Elfwick was behind this. How could these dumb fuckers fall for this shit? Well, regressive media outlets are falling over themselves to publish this shite, I suppose. Fucking hilarious. ...

Yea, bit of a hoot: Sokal hoax, part deux. But useful for showing the odious "conventional wisdom" that motivates many on the Left. And for suggesting that HuffPost is more like a yellow journal than not, although they did suggest correcting the errors of their ways. But, for posterity, an archive of the original post, courtesy of someone over on Reddit: https://archive.is/8wRig

Dude got sacked yesterday.

http://m.huffingtonpost.co.za/2017/04/1 ... _22046493/

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[John D]

Oh Boy - The second largest city in Michigan is Grand Rapids. It is a 2.5 hour drive from Detroit and is much more right leaning than many cities. Crime is low. Unemployment is low. Religiosity is high.

It is changing and becoming more liberal. They have a really cool public art fair called Art Prize... very hip and cool.

So... anyway. The cops what to be seen as "progressive" and this is the word the police chief used in an interview. They studied police stops by race. And, of course, blacks are stopped at twice the rate as whites as a proportion of the population. As a devout racist, my first reaction was... "Well, that's just about right because blacks do about twice the crime." But no..... the cops in Grand Rapids are racist and now they are getting special training. Haha. It's like the whole country has some kind of brain virus. No one thinks it is possible that blacks do crime at twice the rate of whites.

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/m ... 100674808/

Black people are terrible, erratic drivers. It is known.

They sure are in Detroit. Holy shit. It is like a driving trip thru Beirut when you drive thru some black neighborhoods in Detroit. Wow! The shit iv'e seen...haha. Running stop signs and lights. Stopping in the middle of a busy avenue to talk to you drug dealer friend. Cutting people off, not proceeding on lights, not following lanes. Fucking chaos. And you can't bitch at drivers because you are afraid you will be shot. ------ true stories from Detroit.

[Brive1987]

First, Houses of Parliament in London, then the Champs-Elysees in Paris. Prominent, high profile locations, just coincidence I hope.

In completely unrelated news I got an HD for my first Genocide assignment.

:dance:

[free thoughtpolice]

First, Houses of Parliament in London, then the Champs-Elysees in Paris. Prominent, high profile locations, just coincidence I hope.

In completely unrelated news I got an HD for my first Genocide assignment.

:dance:

Which ethnic/ religious group did you wipe out?

[free thoughtpolice]

The Isis terrorist who murdered a policeman and severely wounded two others on the Champs Elysee in Paris tonight was sentenced to 20 years in prison for trying to kill officers in 2003.

Identified as Karim C. and using the ‘nom de guerre’ (war name) ‘Abu Yousuf the Belgian’, the 39-year-old had also made dark threats to kill more police using Telegram, the instant messaging service.The France-born killer lived in Chelles, a commuter town close to Paris in the Seine-et-Marne department.

So he tried the same thing 14 years ago, was a known Islamist and somehow got early release.

[Brive1987]

First, Houses of Parliament in London, then the Champs-Elysees in Paris. Prominent, high profile locations, just coincidence I hope.

In completely unrelated news I got an HD for my first Genocide assignment.

:dance:

Which ethnic/ religious group did you wipe out?

I will condescend to talk to you when you have committed the following to memory.
http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/ad ... mework.pdf

[DrokkIt]

snip

This goes even deeper for me as I have suffered quite a lot of the same problems this person is talking about. I am a chronic asthmatic with many hospitalisations, as well a having had pneumonia and bronchitis, and as well as having had a nervous breakdown of sorts coming out of a mood disorder.

I know how you feel. I get hay fever (including from drinking beer) and it make my eyes water and I sneeze a lot. It makes me grumpy.

Please refrain from such othering language when referring to my pity narrative, thank you.

[DaveDodo007]

Can't be said enough: Why would you interrupt your opponent when they're making a mistake? In the case of WBC and other loons, their message persuades virtually no one and dissuades a whole lot more. You let them speak because they're doing your job for you. They're flaunting their ugliness far better than silencing them and assuring people they really are ugly, honest, ever could.

I've never understood trying to silence people. It never works, is usually counterproductive, spreading your opponent's message far and wide. Give people enough rope and they'll hang themselves. When has this stifling approach ever worked? But people insist that letting other people talk equates to endorsing what that person says, an argument that should only work with elementary school children.

This. When Thatcher tried to ban 'Spy Catcher' I just got an Aussie mate to buy me a copy. I read it and can't even remember what the fuss was about. ~Though so many other people wanted to read it, I just passed it on and have no clue who has my copy now.

[DaveDodo007]

Has Beccy gained employment with Uber security? Ironically she sees in others what the rest of us see in her.

http://i.imgur.com/HFz4nF6.png

http://i.imgur.com/kKlCCA2.png

I don't understand this at all, it is however clear that Becky is being a cunt.

Again.

It's just more listen and believe shit, I wouldn't trust Twatson with my pet hamster (if I had one.)

[Aneris]

PS I'm not so sure that old media is conspiring against the new.

The formula appears to be outrage = clicks = $.

Also, if the market is not growing then there is a limit to the number of advertiser dollars - so if they can decrease someone else's share - there is more for them.

They can either be true believers (ie think that the youtube community is really full of anti-semites, racists and sexists) or cynical to be motivated in this way.

No conspiring necessary.

Sargon interviews new media guy who makes some interesting claims about old media.

[youtube][/youtube]

Well, that escalated quickly. Luke Rudkowski is from the Alt Right party connection (of Southern, Pettibone and Cernovich), and himself a conspiracy believer. Google this guy, and you find his stuff quickly, e.g. interviews with such luminaries as David Icke.

Sargon deliberately doesn't mention any of this in the introduction, and again presents an Alt Right Trojan Horse, his typical method, to accustom his viewers to Alt Right views. No doubt, the PR team will again write some damage control. But what for? Why not admit what should be dead obvious by now.

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

Second cop has died.

Up go Le Pen's poll numbers.

http://i.imgur.com/WAoGOW5.jpg

You are shitting me? Is this a real quote?

"Well, it seems we now have to accept that these folks are here, they're pissed off, and they're going to be killing a few folks every so often from now on. Nothing we can do about it, so...err...good luck, I guess."

[ConcentratedH2O, OM]

If he is the right bloke, the bike lock slayer teaches ETHICS..... lol.

Oh...and The Guardian continues to sink into the swamp.....here's the latest from Laurie Penny.

"Robots are racist and sexist. Just like the people who created them"

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... i-language

Remember, this is the paper that brought "racist meerkats" a year ago, and now, racist and sexist ROBOTS.

The best bit is this comment.

Seems like our Parsehole's creation is now entering the language as a shorthand for Penny and her ilk.

https://preview.ibb.co/cb711Q/Screen_Sh ... _02_PM.png

[ffs]

I am honestly starting to think we should do nothing regarding CO2. Yeah... I know it's Prager.... but that doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong.

[youtube][/youtube]

Lindzen is covered a few times during the series

he is also one of only a handful of actual climate scientists still out as far in that direction, and I would not take anything he says as any particular consensus or reasonable analysis in the community. moreover there have been plenty of articles showing completely bizarre stances of his and completely misrepresented if not fabricated data he's pushed as supportive, knowingly or not. lots to springboard off here for instance - https://skepticalscience.com/news.php?p=2&t=56&&n=1319

I wouldn't even apply 'yes it's prager' as the questionable metric. it's also lindzen and only him.

[MacGruberKnows]

http://c8.alamy.com/comp/C61704/preside ... C61704.jpg



http://thehill.com/sites/default/files/ ... k=5_DU6d5q

[Shatterface]

Veep is back. Veep eases the pain.

[Guest_84d94f98]

I wouldn't even apply 'yes it's prager' as the questionable metric. it's also lindzen and only him.

Prager is actually pretty good sometimes. HOWEVER, if they have a wrong position, or are presenting their position on poor facts, they don't appear to have any sort of internal mechanism to reevaluate their position, admit they got it wrong and correct themselves.

When prager is right, they are just fortunate enough to have selected the correct position as their initial position.
-Soylent

[DaveDodo007]

PS I'm not so sure that old media is conspiring against the new.

The formula appears to be outrage = clicks = $.

Also, if the market is not growing then there is a limit to the number of advertiser dollars - so if they can decrease someone else's share - there is more for them.

They can either be true believers (ie think that the youtube community is really full of anti-semites, racists and sexists) or cynical to be motivated in this way.

No conspiring necessary.

There's also the issue of propagating and perpetuating negative stereotypes about the internet, which isn't a conspiracy but a common point of view among the "mainstream" public opinion. Stephen Colbert illustrated this very well when he interviewed Anita Sarkeesian. His jokes were flatly delivered cliches about gamers being unattractive, resentful virgins living in their parents' basements. Most non-gamers see gamers along those lines, a fact which people like Sarkeesian exploit very well.

To most "normal" people the Internet IS a wretched hive of scum and villainy. Most people believe feminists when they say that people harass them all the time because the common cultural perception is that the internet is a place full of hatred, profanity, perverts and porn. Politicians of all stripes and cultural figures who adhere to all philosophies and religions have contributed to these stereotypes, which are exaggerations, not complete inventions anyway. Anytime a religious leader rails against internet porn, or a conservative politician elicits paranoia about child predators on the internet they also feed into the feminist/SJW narrative. Feminists are natural allies of social conservatives and religious leaders on this issue.

This is true. I have access to 'old school conservative press media' and the listen and believe assertions is still going strong, god so much 'muh feminism.' They have little clue to the new internet savvy 'new right' though they do fear it as their occasional attempts to undermine it show.

[free thoughtpolice]

About the predictive value of climate science- they really don't know how the last ice age ended. If they can't get an accurate picture of what has already happened how can they predict future climate variation?
Correct me if I'm wrong. Is there a consensus as to what ended the last glacial period?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... t-ice-age/

[KiwiInOz]

About the predictive value of climate science- they really don't know how the last ice age ended. If they can't get an accurate picture of what has already happened how can they predict future climate variation?
Correct me if I'm wrong. Is there a consensus as to what ended the last glacial period?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... t-ice-age/

Yeah. Changes in the Earth's eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession, followed by the increasing effect of a range of reinforcing (positive) feedback processes, including the release of CO2 stored in cold oceans, changed albedo due to darkening of formerly ice covered areas of land, etc.

[free thoughtpolice]

Human-induced changes
There is considerable evidence that over the very recent period of the last 100–1000 years, the sharp increases in human activity, especially the burning of fossil fuels, has caused the parallel sharp and accelerating increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases which trap the sun's heat. The consensus theory of the scientific community is that the resulting greenhouse effect is a principal cause of the increase in global warming which has occurred over the same period, and a chief contributor to the accelerated melting of the remaining glaciers and polar ice. A 2012 investigation finds that dinosaurs released methane through digestion in a similar amount to humanity's current methane release, which "could have been a key factor" to the very warm climate 150 million years ago.[46]

William Ruddiman has proposed the early anthropocene hypothesis, according to which the anthropocene era, as some people call the most recent period in the earth's history when the activities of the human species first began to have a significant global impact on the earth's climate and ecosystems, did not begin in the 18th century with the advent of the Industrial Era, but dates back to 8,000 years ago, due to intense farming activities of our early agrarian ancestors. It was at that time that atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations stopped following the periodic pattern of the Milankovitch cycles. In his overdue-glaciation hypothesis Ruddiman states that an incipient glacial would probably have begun several thousand years ago, but the arrival of that scheduled glacial was forestalled by the activities of early farmers.[47]

At a meeting of the American Geophysical Union (December 17, 2008), scientists detailed evidence in support of the controversial idea that the introduction of large-scale rice agriculture in Asia, coupled with extensive deforestation in Europe began to alter world climate by pumping significant amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere over the last 1,000 years. In turn, a warmer atmosphere heated the oceans making them much less efficient storehouses of carbon dioxide and reinforcing global warming, possibly forestalling the onset of a new glacial age.[48]

[HoneyWagon]

Out of curiosity, is anything going on with Elyse Anders as of late?
I ask because there was a post on twitter with a similar name referring to the Science March (She was going after Jerry Coyne)
A friend asked if that was Elyse Anders, and I said I didn't think so...too many data points were off.
But I went and checked Elyse's twitter feed , and nothing since Jan 2017
https://twitter.com/dELYSEious/with_replies.

I searched here first, and the most recent thing I saw here was the gofundme her husband set up


No biggie. I hadnt though of her in months and this just came up

[KiwiInOz]

Human-induced changes
There is considerable evidence that over the very recent period of the last 100–1000 years, the sharp increases in human activity, especially the burning of fossil fuels, has caused the parallel sharp and accelerating increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases which trap the sun's heat. The consensus theory of the scientific community is that the resulting greenhouse effect is a principal cause of the increase in global warming which has occurred over the same period, and a chief contributor to the accelerated melting of the remaining glaciers and polar ice. A 2012 investigation finds that dinosaurs released methane through digestion in a similar amount to humanity's current methane release, which "could have been a key factor" to the very warm climate 150 million years ago.[46]

William Ruddiman has proposed the early anthropocene hypothesis, according to which the anthropocene era, as some people call the most recent period in the earth's history when the activities of the human species first began to have a significant global impact on the earth's climate and ecosystems, did not begin in the 18th century with the advent of the Industrial Era, but dates back to 8,000 years ago, due to intense farming activities of our early agrarian ancestors. It was at that time that atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations stopped following the periodic pattern of the Milankovitch cycles. In his overdue-glaciation hypothesis Ruddiman states that an incipient glacial would probably have begun several thousand years ago, but the arrival of that scheduled glacial was forestalled by the activities of early farmers.[47]

At a meeting of the American Geophysical Union (December 17, 2008), scientists detailed evidence in support of the controversial idea that the introduction of large-scale rice agriculture in Asia, coupled with extensive deforestation in Europe began to alter world climate by pumping significant amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere over the last 1,000 years. In turn, a warmer atmosphere heated the oceans making them much less efficient storehouses of carbon dioxide and reinforcing global warming, possibly forestalling the onset of a new glacial age.[48]

What is your point/question?

[Shatterface]

About the predictive value of climate science- they really don't know how the last ice age ended. If they can't get an accurate picture of what has already happened how can they predict future climate variation?
Correct me if I'm wrong. Is there a consensus as to what ended the last glacial period?
https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... t-ice-age/

Yeah. Changes in the Earth's eccentricity, axial tilt, and precession, followed by the increasing effect of a range of reinforcing (positive) feedback processes, including the release of CO2 stored in cold oceans, changed albedo due to darkening of formerly ice covered areas of land, etc.

And the black flowers. Don't forget the black flowers.

http://cinetropolis.net/wp-content/uplo ... rkness.jpg

[Shatterface]

Edge of Darkness was the first pre-recorded video I ever bought.

[free thoughtpolice]

What is your point/question?

It seems to me that it is difficult to make really accurate descriptions of what has happened much less what will happen. It is obvious humans are having a big effect on the climate, but it is not a consensus even now to what degree and when we began to do it.
IIRC the idea that methane is much worse of a greenhouse gas than CO2 only came up in the last 10 years, that there is much to be learned about the system.

[pro-boxing-fan]

What is your point/question?

It seems to me that it is difficult to make really accurate descriptions of what has happened much less what will happen. It is obvious humans are having a big effect on the climate, but it is not a consensus even now to what degree and when we began to do it.
IIRC the idea that methane is much worse of a greenhouse gas than CO2 only came up in the last 10 years, that there is much to be learned about the system.

Absolutely not. I went to uni in 2001, it was common knowledge then and has been for a long time before that. Same for NOx and H2O (as per the usual funny reminder in env sci).

[Really?]

Out of curiosity, is anything going on with Elyse Anders as of late?
I ask because there was a post on twitter with a similar name referring to the Science March (She was going after Jerry Coyne)
A friend asked if that was Elyse Anders, and I said I didn't think so...too many data points were off.
But I went and checked Elyse's twitter feed , and nothing since Jan 2017
https://twitter.com/dELYSEious/with_replies.

I searched here first, and the most recent thing I saw here was the gofundme her husband set up


No biggie. I hadnt though of her in months and this just came up

I'm worried about Elyse. Why would she want her husband to be involved at all, seeing as how he's physically abusive? How is he even out of jail? Would a gofundme violate the restraining order? The system just doesn't care about women and children when they are in crisis.

[free thoughtpolice]

Fair enough, I confess to not having expertise on the subject. It seems that the effects of methane, still don't get much coverage compared to CO2.

[KiwiInOz]

What is your point/question?

It seems to me that it is difficult to make really accurate descriptions of what has happened much less what will happen. It is obvious humans are having a big effect on the climate, but it is not a consensus even now to what degree and when we began to do it.
IIRC the idea that methane is much worse of a greenhouse gas than CO2 only came up in the last 10 years, that there is much to be learned about the system.

Thanks. I think that I see what you are after now. We actually do know quite a lot about past and current climates and the big picture processes that drove/drive them.

The transfer of heat energy from the sun to the earth, from the land/ocean to the atmosphere, from the tropics to the poles, and from the earth to space, drive our climate and weather patterns.

The Milankovitch cycles are the big picture drivers of a cold earth vs a not so cold earth, because they affect the amount of solar radiation (heat energy) received or intercepted by the earth.

The greenhouse gasses (GHG) in our atmosphere slow the rate of heat loss from the earth back to space (effectively making the planet habitable).

The concentration of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere is dynamic, and is driven by biological or geological processes that sequester or release them. The Carboniferous for example was a period where relatively high levels of atmospheric GHG were sequestered in plant form and then buried, effectively removing them from the biological-atmosphere cycle.

CO2 (one of the GHG) was stored at higher levels in the cold oceans during the last glacial, only to be released as the earth received more of the sun's energy (as we moved out of that part of the Milankovitch cycle) and warmed.

Forest grew and spread, and stored more of the atmospheric CO2 after glaciation, and humans invented agriculture and clearing those forests. We became one of the small feedback processes that affect the cycling of CO2. The significance of this particular feedback loop became more dominant as our population grew and the scale at which we could clear forests, grow cows, and extract stored carbon and release it back into the atmosphere, also grew. It has ramped up over time; and the rate at which we are adding to the stock of GHG in the atmosphere is now exceeding the rate at which it is taken out of the atmosphere.

This is affecting the rate of heat energy loss to space, meaning that there is more energy within our climate system, meaning that it is changing our weather patterns in weird and wonderful ways (just look at the recent polar jet stream).

We have known that methane is a GHG for a long time, and that it has a stronger radiative forcing factor than CO2 (about 23 x). GHGs tend to be measured/reported as CO2 equivalents (CO2e) and CO2 has become the shorthand catch all. We have changed the rate at which methane is being released to the atmosphere through agriculture and wetland draining, but the scale of this is less than the scale of CO2 release through burining fossil fuels, hence the focus. Now, as the permafrosts thaw due to the warming earth, watch the rate of methane release ramp up and really make things crazy!

Some regions of the world will do ok (as measured by human liveability), but others not so much.

[regna]

You are shitting me? Is this a real quote?

"Well, it seems we now have to accept that these folks are here, they're pissed off, and they're going to be killing a few folks every so often from now on. Nothing we can do about it, so...err...good luck, I guess."

After the (most recent) attack in New York London mayor Sadiq Khan said terror attacks were "part and parcel of living in a big city" and we just had to be "vigilant."

So there you go folks. The left position on Islamic terror is for us to just to get used to the new normal and accept it as the price of living in a big cosmopolitan city like New York, Paris or London.

Somehow I don't think Khan have said that campus rapes are "part and parcel of living around a bunch of horny young men."

[HoneyWagon]

Just saw this
http://i.imgur.com/xde86mq.png

[Really?]

Just saw this
http://i.imgur.com/xde86mq.png

THIS IS HOW IT BEGINS. Danielle will soon be touring the country with fellow female victims Jessica Valenti and what's her name that incredibly shitty to be around woman who quit twitter because she hated criti-Lindy West.

Smoking pot is totally related to racism and transphobia because IT IS.