1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Michael Mann: climate data unnecessary

Discussion in 'Science & Technology' started by dogtowner, Jun 28, 2016.

  1. dogtowner

    dogtowner Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    17,228
    Likes Received:
    1,382
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sec 9 Row J Seat 1 @ VCU home games
  2. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,552
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    63
    He is just tired of fabricating data...if he can convince people that data isn't necessary then he doesn't have to go to all the trouble of making up a bunch of data to support his claims.
     
  3. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    277
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Oh well, sometimes the blind cannot see what is in front of their fingers:

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/losing-ground-southeast-louisiana-is-disappearing-quickly/

    "In just 80 years, some 2,000 square miles of its coastal landscape have turned to open water, wiping places off maps, bringing the Gulf of Mexico to the back door of New Orleans and posing a lethal threat to an energy and shipping corridor vital to the nation’s economy.

    And it’s going to get worse, even quicker.

    Scientists now say one of the greatest environmental and economic disasters in the nation’s history is rushing toward a catastrophic conclusion over the next 50 years, so far unabated and largely unnoticed.

    At the current rates that the sea is rising and land is sinking, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration scientists say by 2100 the Gulf of Mexico could rise as much as 4.3 feet across this landscape, which has an average elevation of about 3 feet. If that happens, everything outside the protective levees — most of Southeast Louisiana — would be underwater.

    The effects would be felt far beyond bayou country. The region best known for its self-proclaimed motto “laissez les bons temps rouler” — let the good times roll — is one of the nation’s economic linchpins.

    This land being swallowed by the Gulf is home to half of the country’s oil refineries, a matrix of pipelines that serve 90 percent of the nation’s offshore energy production and 30 percent of its total oil and gas supply, a port vital to 31 states, and 2 million people who would need to find other places to live.

    The landscape on which all that is built is washing away at a rate of a football field every hour, 16 square miles per year."
     
  4. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,552
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Most times it is that the blind and ignorant are just left to accept what they are told because they lack the capacity to really think for themselves. First, you are conflating land sinking with sea level rise and assuming that man is somehow to blame beyond building cities in places where they are going to sink...we have a long history of such poorly chosen building sites.

    For example...Nile delta and such cities as Canopus and Heraklion are analogous to the Mississippi Delta and cities built there like New Orleans. Cities in both places are built upon delta sediments laid over an actively subsiding rift. Blame oil companies if you like, but it simply isn't true. New orleans was sinking back when we were still burning whale oil in lamps. The cities named above and many more are unfortunately at the intersection of actively subsiding rifts and the coastal edges of continental crust. Geologically, all these cities are nearly identical and as such, the cities of Canopus and Heraklion can be reasonably put forward as a model analog for the Mississippi Delta and everything there....

    As such, cities in the Mississippi delta can be expected to continue to subside at a rate of a little over 3mm per year in addition to the normal sea level rise of a couple of mm per year. that would put New Orleans about 8 meters under water in about 2500 years....just like Canopus and Heraklion.

    The fact is that man is not responsible for this...and the rate of actual sea level rise across the gulf according to tide gages is what it has been since measurement began.

    Based on what unsupportable assumptions?

    Scientists who are trying to get first class tickets on the 7 trillion dollar climate change train? Those scientists?

    Were you aware that NOAA has effectively doubled the rate of sea level change with the stroke of a pen? How dishonest....and how much fraud can an agency perpetrate before people like you wake up and say what the hell is going on? Or will you continue to believe forever just because that is how you are wired?
     
  5. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    277
    Trophy Points:
    83

    Again no sources, just more of your opinion, and lack of ability to see the truth. Did you even read the article, or did you just decide you are smarter than everyone else, and need not do so?

    Here is yet another one you can claim to be smarter then, more educated about, and people should just accept that you are the end all, and know all:

    http://sandrp.in/Shrinking_and_sinking_delta_major_role_of_Dams_May_2014.pdf
     
  6. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,552
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Yeah...I read your article...lots of doom and gloom and warnings of the disaster to come with plenty of implication that man is to blame....not one mention of geologically analogous places across the face of the earth that are behaving the same way and have been behaving the same way throughout the geological record...just baseless warnings that if we don't change our ways we are doomed...and you lap that crap up as if it were manna from Heaven.

    And the article from this post...begins right off shoveling bullshit...first sentence....second paragraph in the executive summary..."But today, studies and ground reports are warning us that most of the deltas around the world are shrinking due to catastrophic sea level rise. '

    Which "catastrophic" sea level rise would that be? The tide gages show that the rate of sea level rise has remained basically unchanged since we started recording it...a couple of mm per year....before you sit down at the table and gobble the bullshit these people are feeding you, why don't you do just a bit of research......actual research into the topic...it is just sea level rise, not rocket surgery.

    Here...peer reviewed...published in the Journal of the American Meterological Society...

    http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00319.1

    They examined the world wide sea level change over the period of the 20th century and found that seal level rise was consistent over the 20th century with little if any acceleration in the rate of rise and that glacier mass lost was not less during the first half of the 20th century than during the second half. If you aren't able to understand what that means....just ask.

    Here is an example of the sort of data manipulation that is going on within the scientific community...

    Luckily, old data is still hanging around to be found to bring the fraud of the climate science modern climate science community into high relief. This is the sea level increase between 1880 and 1980 shown by NASA. The graph shows an increase of just over 3 inches of sea level increase between 1880 and 1980....NOTE the sharp decrease in the rate of increase after 1950.

    [​IMG]

    You can't really scare people with a 3 inch sea level increase over a 100 year period so the frauds in climate science increased the figure to 6 inches per century with nothing more than adjustments.... NOTE the completely FAKE acceleration after 1950.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    Then in 2004, the University of Colorado showed 2.8 mm per year rate of sea level increase.

    [​IMG]

    2.8 mm per year? Not very scary...even to alarmists so again, the data is heavily massaged using inappropriate, and completely fraudulent methods to achieve a 3.3mm per year rate of increase. A global isostatic adjustment was applied which is blatantly fraudulent in the context of sea level increase. Such adjustments are correct in the context of calculating ocean depth as the sea floor sinks and have absolutely no relationship to measuring sea level by satellites. Here is what the adjustments look like...I see you warmers posting this graph as "evidence" of sea level increase all the time...what a laugh....

    [​IMG]

    Here is an overlay of the two graphs at the same time scale....one using valid methodology and one using calculations that are not appropriate for determining sea level increase for no other reason than to support the AGW narrative.


    [​IMG]

    So some numbers got a massage and a picture was painted to give the appearance of imminent disaster. Shit happens...right? But when the "spokes agency" for modern climate science repeats the fraud as truth....we have real evidence of deliberate data corruption with the intent to deceive regarding climate change. In 1990 the IPCC said:

    [​IMG]

    Then in 2013 using blatantly massaged data and obviously fraudulent graphs, the IPCC said exactly the opposite of what they said in 1990. climate science is populated with liars trapper...guilty of malfeasance, and deliberate fraud for no other reason than to gain political power. They have damaged the reputation of science so deeply that it will take many many decades after this circus is over to restore the trust in science that you climate wackos have destroyed for political reasons...and people like you simply gobble it up without question and then repeat it every chance you get like good little useful idiots.


    If the science is too difficult for you, perhaps you could just look at pictures...photography has existed for some time now and strangely enough, coastal areas have been very popular subjects....for example, photos taken of the fort in Saint Augustine during the Civil war show the same tide lines as are present today....it is hard to make a rational, scientifically valid case for catastrophic sea level rise when such coastal structures across the earth are showing the claim to be nothing but the lies of hand waving hysterics.

    Here...the old fort in Saint Augustine florida...note the original sea walls are still there...sea walls that were put in place in between 1692 and 1695...

    [​IMG]

    Here is a photo circa 1950...

    [​IMG]

    Circa 1933

    [​IMG]

    Circa 1902

    [​IMG]

    Such photos exist showing coastal landmarks all over the earth with the same minuscule change over time....so again...where is this catastrophic sea level rise that you and yours claim is happening right now?
     
  7. Old_Trapper70

    Old_Trapper70 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2014
    Messages:
    2,045
    Likes Received:
    277
    Trophy Points:
    83

    No, you didn't read the article, or at least with any intelligent thought. It was not solely about the rising sea level. It was about the dams built that prevent the silt from collecting thus shrinking the deltas. It was about the dredging that helped to reduce the size of the deltas. It was about areas where no dams were built that were not shrinking.

    There were many factors involved, not just the one you concentrated on:

    http://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...nd-americas-first-climate-refugees-180959585/
     
  8. palerider

    palerider Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2007
    Messages:
    4,552
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Any discussion of the area that fails to mention geologically analogous regions across the face of the earth that are, and have been behaving the same way throughout the geological record is nothing more than propaganda designed to support a particular narrative and we both know what sort of narrative wacko greens are spewing.

    With or without the dams, the same areas would be sinking...the areas that are dammed are not on actively subsiding rifts...and whether or not the sediments were still moving downstream...anything built on the Mississippi delta would still be sinking as a result of the underlying geology... Your article is a narrative designed to support a particular agenda...not research aimed at understanding what is happening and understanding that man can do nothing about it...short of take the approach that the architects of Venice took and get used to traveling along canals where there once were paved streets.

    And the article in you last post was just more propagandizing....climate refugees? Can the activism be more plain? Geological refugees perhaps....but calling them climate refugees is, quite simply....a bald faced lie....which, unfortunately, seems to be the sort of information you are most influenced by. No comment on the observable evidence that the catastrophic sea level rise claimed by climate pseudoscientists is fraud....just more bullshit opinion pieces by people with an agenda that has nothing to do with learning the truth.
     
Loading...

Share This Page