Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

New climate change studies


Daffodil

Recommended Posts

Wow! I just finished the whole three hour long interview and man was it an eye opening video. It even goes I to explain reason behind the formation of early ancient times pagan religions etc, as being related to these cataclysmic events that have happened on the earth. A lot of what he said made since. He did touch on a few outlandish ideas later on in the interview which could be heavily criticized at this point. But his work as it relates to global climate change in relation to extinction events, human growth and recession, interrelated mythology produced from the events, etc is astounding.

     And since I am also a Mason in GA I hope to one day sit with him and be able to discuss his theories in person. Their are some newer podcasts that I will most definitely have to watch when the opportunity presents itself. ?

 

DB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderator
3 hours ago, Burnedout said:

I come out of a hard-assed business background.  If those scientists had made a prediction as they have and been off by that much, then if they were executives or even analysts, they would be fired.  Instead, those researchers keep their job and keep getting their funding and still keep being published.  Perhaps it is better for their credibility with the public if they under promise and over deliver.  Maybe there should be more accountability for predictions in that manner.  

 

That's a double edged sword: In Italy scientists were prosecuted for not giving sufficient warning of an earthquake that killed a lot of people. At which point have you heard a scientist say we can predict earthquakes, and yet they got prosecuted. So now there is the influence that may cause scientists to over predict just in case in order to avoid prosecution. (Not saying this is necessarily the case with climate change, but pointing out how irrational the public can be when something goes wrong.)

 

Its probably part of the primal flight or fight response embedded in us where its safer to say 9 gusts of wind were lions, rather than 1 lion was a gust of wind.

 

Upon further examination of your Greenpeace video posted I have to ask where this guy got his sources. Look at the graph - there are no temperature ranges, no time scale etc and yet he's using that to show CO2 and temperature do not correspond. Compare that graph to this one:

 

400000yearslarge1.gif

 

Note this graph does not tell us the causation of the correlation, only that there is a correlation.

 

In regards to the power of observation, as this seems a salient factor as to your position, and you confirm whether you believe the earth is a sphere, have you observed it with your own eyes? If not how do you know its a sphere? I know BAA has gone over this with you, but I think its important to show that direct observation is 1) not the only meaning of scientific observation, and 2) relying only on direct observation can give you the wrong answer. ("Can" Not always - my basic point is all information available should be taken into account)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

That's a double edged sword: In Italy scientists were prosecuted for not giving sufficient warning of an earthquake that killed a lot of people. At which point have you heard a scientist say we can predict earthquakes, and yet they got prosecuted. So now there is the influence that may cause scientists to over predict just in case in order to avoid prosecution. (Not saying this is necessarily the case with climate change, but pointing out how irrational the public can be when something goes wrong.)

 

I know when death occurs that people want to blame someone or some thing but when it comes to natural disasters I think it is idiotic to hold scientists legally liable for not predicting something as complicated as the exact time an earth quake will occur. I mean shit meteorologist can't even get an accurate prediction of the weather most the time outside of 12 to 24hrs.

 

DB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

We can all observe air being blown into a balloon. The balloon slowly fills with air and that is a verifiable fact. As to exactly when the balloon will burst and how loud the 'pop' will be is guesswork. That most of the guesses will be off doesn't mean the the balloon will not eventually explode if air continues to be forced into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
31 minutes ago, Burnedout said:

 

Not arguing against your logic, but it begs the question.  How long is a reasonble time to give?  Everything that matters on earth is a risk.  We cannot escape that.  

My point doesn't address what you might define as a reasonable progression. I'm saying that assuming you don't want the balloon to pop you might want to slow down its inflation any way you possibly can. If I claim the balloon will pop after six more pumps and it's still intact after ten more pumps it does not follow that it will therefore never pop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To go along with BOS train of thought. In the video Randall mentions a few times when going over the Ice cores how at (x) period of time the earth was (y) degrees warmer than it currently is now. Would that not suggest that the earth is just naturally warming to a formerly higher temperature in its own history? And if the earth has been warmer could it not also be argued that at this point we do not have any proof that our activity on earth is causing it to be unnaturally warm? But just that it is just unnaturally warm to us in modern history so we are freaking out thinking  (with our own observations) that it must be our fault and we are destroying our world through GW? It could be that we are nearing a peak and we will be gradually cooling in just a matter of 10 or 20 years. If we haven't passed the earth's own past temperatures then why push all the dooms day propaganda that current scientists and politicians are using to advance their agendas?

 

DB

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
47 minutes ago, Burnedout said:

 

Is that not a fallacy?  Appeal to tradition?  Or perhaps the researchers who are sure there will be a calamity are not overlooking some variable? 

I conclude, then, that in the balloon analogy you would contend that since you've not personally witnessed the balloon popping, and some guy down the street said that he didn't think it would pop, it may therefore have an infinite capacity for expansion that was overlooked when I worried about too much inflation pressure accumulating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.