Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile Recent Posts
Tuolumne Meadows and Lembert Dome during a summer storm, Yosemite National Park

The Moon is Waning Crescent (12% of Full)


Advanced

Re: Climategate

All posts are those of the individual authors and the owner of this site does not endorse them. Content should be considered opinion and not fact until verified independently.

avatar Climategate
December 13, 2009 09:29PM
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rutten12-2009dec12,0,2096153.column


Note: Especially insightful is the observation “… that we Americans are, by and large, technologically advanced but scientifically illiterate.” Hence the credence given by many to the mad, nonsensical ravings of people like Limbaugh and the like.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2009 09:40PM by szalkowski.
avatar Re: Climategate
December 14, 2009 06:02AM
The article makes many good points including reminding us of the "controversy" over tobacco health issues (that issue raged for more than 40 years). On the positive side, perhaps the skepticism and questioning by the climate change deniers reflects a desire to challenge dogma and test hypotheses. I would be more encouraged about the capacity to learn if some of these folks demonstrated a capacity to consider data impartially and modify their entrenched positions. Reminds me of the controversy about whether a person can see Half Dome from Turlock..



The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Climategate
December 14, 2009 08:41PM
When one publishes a paper or scientific findings, one must expect others to be able to come to the same conclusion by repeating and confirming your finding or having them come to that same conclusion independently. The publication of the hockey stick graph by MBH certainly became the poster child for politicians- but the later unethical and wrong behavior on the part of Mann by refusing to open his Matlab and Fortran code (and data) to all for corroboration is a crime and an embarrassment for all humanity. This deplorable selfishness has fueled idiot savants like those quoted in this thread and article to distract all from corroborating and determining fact.

Since then I think the US Senate appointed a group of scientists from different fields who came back and affirmed the hockey stick shape but not the magnitude. I also understand that McIntyre and McKintrick pointed out the discrepencies in the data but also came to the conclusion as to the shape but not the magnitude. And the controversy goes on from there- even if I misrepresented it here.

I continue to see academic publications of different sorts denoting changes, observations, etc. that are evidence of climate change (so not just bristlecone trees anymore)- the fact that it is then asked if it is anthropogenic seems kinda dumb to me- cuz I don't think the deer, birds, and chick-ons of the world have been doing much on the scale we have- but that remains open for someone to prove. I am disgusted that we spend more energy in listening to this media noise rather than openly and transparently determining the factors and how the Earth can respond this time around to this.

While this circus continues, some like Prof. Muller have some interesting thoughts on how the political side of this mess here His comments and observations on China are alarming. He states China now but one can easy transfer this to other potential global superpowers. Both outcomes suggested here will do no good to the potential problem at hand.

My original intent in the post was to cite the Muller article but I had to preface it with my frustrations- however misguided or not they may be. Sorry for the sermon.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/14/2009 08:45PM by Catalonian Burro.
avatar Re: Climategate
December 15, 2009 06:20AM
Quote
Catalonian Burro
the fact that it is then asked if it is anthropogenic seems kinda dumb to me- cuz I don't think the deer, birds, and chick-ons of the world have been doing much on the scale we have- but that remains open for someone to prove. I am disgusted that we spend more energy in listening to this media noise rather than openly and transparently determining the factors and how the Earth can respond this time around to this.

Even if climate change is not due to human activity, alternatives to fossil based fuels will inevitably be needed. We should only be using oil for quality and durable plastic products and for a source of critical organic chemicals. The long term view is rather poor-- even if we manage to begin "global cooling", aren't folks going to turn up the thermostat and burn more fuel in response?



The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 06:35PM
Quote
Frank Furter
Reminds me of the controversy about whether a person can see Half Dome from Turlock..

What is the controversy?? I am not from the area so fill me in!! It did peak my interest a bit and I found these pretty amazing photos taken of Half Dome from the Central Valley (if they are real..they almost look too good to be true lol)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/trimmoos/3294080995/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/trimmoos/3294080995/sizes/o/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2010 06:36PM by LeeVining.
avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 08:10PM
The photo of Half Dome from Turlock is real. Been to the exact spot and have seen it through my own camera.



Old Dude
avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 08:49PM
Quote
mrcondron
The photo of Half Dome from Turlock is real. Been to the exact spot and have seen it through my own camera.

Are you saying it's in this shot somewhere?

avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 08:52PM
No. That shot was the day before when the clouds obscured the view of Half Dome. The next day Half Dome could be seen. Are you going to make me post a picture?





Old Dude



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2010 09:01PM by mrcondron.
avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 08:59PM
Quote
mrcondron
Are you going to make me post a picture?

Yes!
avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 09:06PM
This was shot through a video camera with an equivalent 1100mm lens setup. The original high res picture used a 1200mm lens onto a 12Mpix or so, digital SLR. My video camera is only about 300K pixels. Standard video, thus the lower res. Half Dome and El Cap can be seen though. It was a hazy day then and I hope to revisit the site on a really clear day. I do have video of zooming from WA to Tele.

Maximum Zoom


Maximum Wide Angle


From behind the camera. The snow covered peaks of Yosemite can be seen.




Old Dude



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 01/11/2010 10:00PM by mrcondron.
avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 09:30PM
Are we going to go through this every year?



The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 09:50PM
ad infinitum



Old Dude
avatar Re: Climategate
January 14, 2010 05:35PM
OK..Well I know you all are rather dismissive..but this is rather new to me..and all I see is debate..You two act like you know..so whats the answer?
avatar Re: Climategate
January 14, 2010 05:42PM
Quote
LeeVining
OK..Well I know you all are rather dismissive..but this is rather new to me..and all I see is debate..You two act like you know..so whats the answer?

Sorry if it seemed dismissive. I assumed you would look up the original thread and understand. There was a thread last year that analyzed the issue ad nauseum. The conclusion was that, yes it is possible on a clear winter day to see Half Dome from Turlock. Probably easier with magnification, but eagle eyes report unmagnified views have occurred. Try searching "half dome turlock" to get the original thread. No one has demonstrated seeing Turlock from Half Dome, to my knowledge. But, I anticipate that "discovery".



The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Climategate
January 14, 2010 06:19PM
Awesome!! That would have been my conclusion as well...Did a lot of searching just not here!
avatar Re: Climategate
January 15, 2010 10:56AM
Lee Vining,

Any newcomer to this site will not have had any appreciation for how overworked the old thread became. It has since been followed up on many other thread's posts ending with wisecracks like, "but can you see it from Turlock?" It's sort of an inside joke that has become old but will no doubt resurface every year. Another one is, "Is there a trail from Yosemite Falls to El Capitan?" As Frank Furter said, you can search the old discussions to see how ridiculous some threads can become. We groan every time somebody makes reference to these old threads , fearing they will continue with the same unstoppable regularity as the Earth's rotation (a definite possibility). It's nothing personal. You just stepped on a small land mine. LOL grinning smiley
avatar Re: Climategate
January 12, 2010 05:27AM
Isn't it about time to also start planning for the "poor mans" Firefall event?



The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Climategate
January 13, 2010 12:20PM
avatar Re: Climategate
December 15, 2009 01:08AM
China couldn't care less about global warming. All China cares about is cashing in $2 trillion in USA bonds it knows the USA can't pay. That's China's motivation (i.e. China owns Alaska). Meanwhile, the third-world countries just want money (which will go to weapons) and India and Pakistan (not very population-oriented, are they?) won't sign on either. A global "global warming" treaty won't happen. Period.
avatar Re: Climategate
December 15, 2009 01:28PM
What bothers me most about the "hockey stick" graphs is they start at 300 and end at 400. How about a "hockey stick" graph that starts at 0 and goes to 400? Not dramatic enough, I guess.
avatar Re: Climategate
December 15, 2009 09:03PM
Quote
Vince
What bothers me most about the "hockey stick" graphs is they start at 300 and end at 400. How about a "hockey stick" graph that starts at 0 and goes to 400? Not dramatic enough, I guess.



It’s a government conspiracy.
Have you noticed that the daily temperature variation graphs never extend down to absolute zero (-460°F or -273°C)?
avatar Re: Climategate
January 11, 2010 05:26PM
Quote
Vince
What bothers me most about the "hockey stick" graphs is they start at 300 and end at 400. How about a "hockey stick" graph that starts at 0 and goes to 400? Not dramatic enough, I guess.


http://www.twolumps.net/d/20100108.html
avatar Re: Climategate
January 15, 2010 12:19PM
Quote
LeeVining
Awesome!! That would have been my conclusion as well...Did a lot of searching just not here!

A some of the posts on this forum relate to seeing Half Dome from Patterson, closer to the original photo site than Turlock but actually farther from HD than Turlock.

http://yosemitenews.info/forum/read.php?1,7686,7686


http://www.flickr.com/photos/trimmoos/3294080995/in/set-72157603775162264/


http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/permalink/can_you_see_half_dome_from_the_central_valley/



The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas.
-- Carl Sagan
avatar Re: Climategate
January 15, 2010 12:54PM
Quote
Frank Furter
... relate to seeing Half Dome from Patterson, closer to the original photo site than Turlock but actually farther from HD than Turlock.


"Patterson" does not manage to conjure up the same mental images as "Turlock."
Same goes for "Lodi" vs. "Galt."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2010 01:23PM by szalkowski.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login