No matter, I found one. Not one about climategate yet, but there has to be a discussion hidden somewhere here.
The Chinese are working on Thorium reactors, which actually are safe. Not cheaper, but safer. Also there is a shit ton of thorium everywhere.
If the fuckholes who built all the uranium reactors hadn’t been wanting Plutonium for bombs, the world might actually already have safe clean thorium reactors everywhere.
Instead we got a fuck load of problems associated with reactors.
sigh Maybe it’s because you aren’t a member. Ok, here are the first 5 results:
Marcel Leroux: Global Warming Denier
So who can answer Jerry Pournelle’s questions about Global Warming?
Thousands of Scientists are Skeptical of Global Warming
Is Anthropogenic Global Warming Falsifiable?
Global Warming Redux: Have they lost their credibility?
And that’s just the first 5 on the page. There are tons more threads on this topic in GD alone. Expand to GQ and you’ll get even more.
-XT
You must be an amazing Running Back with all that dodging, man.
Let’s go to straight-up questions.
What is in your opinion the total climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 concentration from pre-industrial-age levels?
Don’t give me your cites, I want to know the number you personally accept.
Thanks. I did mention I thought the search was munged.
FXM doesn’t seem like the idiot you all are painting him out to be. I don’t think he’s really saying that AGW is a myth overall, just that the proper response isn’t to immediately stop buring fossile fuels and revert to subsistence farming.
Correct me if I’m wrong FXM, but I believe you are really just saying that AGW may or may not be a matter of fact, but the response people are arguing for is irresponsible and irrational, and it hurts progress towards a more balanced, scientific approach.
You are very close actually. I’m actually quite concerned over humanities pollution of our world, as well as many other wide spread practices which are causing possibly serious fucking harm for future generations.
The soot problem is probably responsible for at least half of the current warming in the arctic. Stratosphere pollution from aircraft over the poles is another serious fucking issue. The water vapor, nitrates and CO2 injected into the cold dry air there is possibly causing a lot of warming, as well as ozone destruction.
It’s problematic because the stratosphere is much lower over the poles, yet aircraft still fly at the same altitude, this is putting a lot of moisture into the upper atmosphere, which is really really unnatural. There are good experiments showing aircraft are responsible for a host of fucking problems, from temperatures to precipitation to cancer rates.
The focus on just CO2 is madness, as it is the most benign and easy to solve problem, should it become a threat to mankind.
Many other issues are much more pressing, and easier to change.
Well, easier from a technological standpoint. Like the Asian brown cloud. This is linked to some serious glacier melting problems, as well as changes in precipitation.
What’s surprising is the recent findings that warming oceans may be causing more snow to fall, which is causing some glaciers to grow. High glaciers of course.
The Greenland Law dome is certainly not showing any signs of shrinking. If anything, there is a shit ton of more snow recently.
You want to start this one up again?
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=552280&highlight=global+warming&page=5
No, no, you’re doing it wrong. Do more like before! You know, “shit happens when you party naked.” That kind of thing!
What? You been talking to my girlfriend or something?
I usually ignore idiots, there is no percentage in arguing with them.
If you are asking me I’d say the same thing I told you in your nuclear power pit thread…if you REALLY want to discuss the subject start a new thread in GD (not in the Pit). Lay out your arguments, whatever they are, and be prepared to defend your position. Restarting an old thread is rarely going to do much to further a specific debate. Starting a thread in the Pit isn’t going to get you a debate, it’s going to earn you derision.
-XT
(bolding added)
So GIGObuster must personally run a model rather than relying on those from climate scientists? :dubious:
Ají de Gallina, don’t give me your cites, but what is your personal number for the drag coefficient of a 737 at cruising speed and altitude?
Yep. like **wevets **said, what Aji is doing is running away from science, it seems that the Aji does think that it is always better to deal with an anonymous guy on the web to deal with the “secrets” of the universe. 
The only bad he was referring to was the denialists efforts that are funded by oil producers, it is a wonder how you got all that from his post.
Sure, I would not put it how he said it, but it is clear that you are making just a caricature of what he was referring to, in essence you just turned him into a boy who cried wolf, but the point of the tale is missed when one ignores that there was a wolf in the end. Point being that nowhere on your tirade there was any resemblance of evidence that discredited the paleoclimate work of Mann (the so called hockey stick) The wolf remains, regardless of the attempt o making all the ones on your OP as the ones who cried wolf, in reality they just misunderstood what the Hockey Stick was all about, it is just one line of evidence that supports AGW.
And no one that is proposing solutions has said that, finding a doper that is confused about an item but not the overall picture will not do, do you have a cite?
So says the expert of strawmans, while I can not answer for Ogre, it is clear that many others in the thread did not follow those extremes, besides the subject was the vindication of Mann… Once again.
For the record, I’d be happy to hear your falsification criterion regardless of whether you include a cite.
After 12 years, I’ve finally been pitted!
Yessss!
So only you will continue spewing nonsense? That would be.. very convenient.. Not.
The reality is that the internet is part of the problem, but it is also a big part of the solution:
But it is also the less reliance on the traditional way of sending mail elsewhere that is driving that reduction.
Already done, but you do not like the answer. It is very straightforward, falsify the 10 basic fingerprints and you are there, as even the basic ones were already mentioned, the exercise now goes to the researchers that **do **see those falsifications already and already did try to falsify those basic ones.
Point being that wile you are continuing to huff and puff assuming that the falsifications are not there, skeptical researchers already know them, and do not care one bit about your nowhere man efforts.
They failed so far, and that was one of the items where I base the further point of how unlikely you will get your efforts to amount to even a hill of beans. Of course you would had noticed that bit already if you had read the cite as I linked to that before.