36 replies to this topic

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Jeez its quiet in here.

What does a man have to do to get a response?

Oh yeah:


Ban guns!

Religion is a warped, man made construct!

Legalise abortion!

Free marijuana for medical purposes!

Global warming is all made up!

[HandyNZL]

Shhhh...we're Christmas shopping...

[Insider]

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 19 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Jeez its quiet in here.

What does a man have to do to get a response?

Oh yeah:


Ban guns!

Religion is a warped, man made construct!

Legalise abortion!

Free marijuana for medical purposes!

Global warming is all made up!

I agree, guns are for pussies.  Machetes are far cooler. Religion is a crutch for people who don't do drugs.  Legalise abortion? Whoa! Fine line. Try discussing that point with rape victims. Free marijuana for any purpose! Global warming is made up - by us!

Edited by Insider, 30 December 2011 - 10:43 AM.

[Schumikonen]

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 19 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Jeez its quiet in here.

What does a man have to do to get a response?

Oh yeah:


Ban guns!

Religion is a warped, man made construct!

Legalise abortion!

Free marijuana for medical purposes!

Global warming is all made up!

  the rest of them are ok.

You can ban guns but those who use them illegally will still use them and now the will have the absolute upper hand, I just don't see a way to control guns and other weapons.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

OK, so not the best paper but the story is interesting:

http://www.dailymail...zing-again.html

[AleHop]

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 30 January 2012 - 07:37 AM, said:

OK, so not the best paper but the story is interesting:

http://www.dailymail...zing-again.html

I agree, I prefer two-sheet toilet paper but it isn't as good for reading the news. I'm getting used to reading the news on my phone...

BTW, I love global warming and my heating bill too. It's like going downhill most of the time with the car. That's what I'd call an energy efficient world.

[Massa]

A few years ago I had a science teacher who said something about how we were already in an ice age because the poles were frozen or something like that.

If true, someone should thaw Kubica out.

[AleHop]

Massa, on 31 January 2012 - 05:00 PM, said:

A few years ago I had a science teacher who said something about how we were already in an ice age because the poles were frozen or something like that.

Those who are always complaining about global warming could just ask what it takes to be poles.

[Kopite Girl]

Massa, on 31 January 2012 - 05:00 PM, said:

A few years ago I had a science teacher who said something about how we were already in an ice age because the poles were frozen or something like that.

If true, someone should thaw Kubica out.

But I thought Kimi was the Iceman. No? I thought that was rather good!

[Autumnpuma]

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 19 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Ban guns!

No.

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 19 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Religion is a warped, man made construct!

No and maybe.

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 19 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Legalise abortion!

Already is, more's the pity.

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 19 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Free marijuana for medical purposes!

Yes.

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 19 December 2011 - 10:20 PM, said:

Global warming is all made up!

Only the man-made variety.

[Kopite Girl]

Ah. Religion. The one topic that makes me utterly lose my rag.

Yet, I'm off to Vatican City and obviously the Vatican as part of my study but mostly for the work I'm doing on the Documentary. I haven't got an audience with popey, but if I did, I'd let him know my thoughts on christianity. I may even bring a copy of the Malleus Maleficarum for him to sign.

I mean no disrespect to christians, nor followers of any religion. It's definitely not for me, nor will it ever be and it's not about God. I cannot prove or disprove God exists. Nobody truly can do either. I can only try to be aware and willing to learn and accept that others have opinions even though I may not agree with them.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Breaking news, we've already had global warming, why aren't we all dead?

http://www.theregist...ice_age_global/

[HandyNZL]

So the world is warming up by 1 or 2 degrees....this is such a shock to the human body that we will all drop dead instantly.  Take for instance, if you want to die, you jump on a plane in winter from somewhere in Europe, and you get off in the summery isles of Fiji....and instantly drop dead by the 15 deg plus temperature difference.



Er....not.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Oh dear - no global warming for last 15 years, official data shows....

(at what point do people go: "er......hang on a minute...."
http://thegwpf.org/t...r-15-years.html

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

More global warming round ups:

Oh dear not so many people believe:
http://www.theregist..._usa_uk_canada/

You mean the big ball of burning gas might have an effect ???!!!
http://www.theregist...ted_by_the_sun/

IPCC goes up against New Scientists on quotas - balanced opinion?
http://thegwpf.org/s...-scientist.html

Antarctic not shrinking after all
http://thegwpf.org/t...-data-show.html

[HandyNZL]

Great Scott, Batman!

Does this mean we can race cars again?

[LabradoRacer]

Religion = Bad. Sorry, worst thing in the world.

Guns = Bad. Because a##holes outnumber sensible people.

Evolution = True. Unless you're comfortable accepting that you're an inbred.

Global warming = Feels true at times.

Gay marriage = Allow it. Though I must add that marriage itself is a Sh#te institution.

Abortion = Allow it. Earth's too overpopulated. Also because poor people should be given the chance to undo the mistake of not using protection.

[HandyNZL]

Here's one for you:

http://www.stuff.co....an-t-be-stopped

It appears, now, that when water warms up it expands.  So why is it that when I freeze water in a bottle with the cap on, I can make the bottle explode as the water turns to ice and increases in size (ie expands)....then when it melts, it returns to it's original size.

If I turn water into a gas, it expands, but never seen 100ml of hot water take up more space than 100ml of cold water.....

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Technically correct but there is little evidence to suggest that the sea levels are actually rising.... or, for that matter that the globe is warming. In fact it has been colling over the last decade or so.

[Quiet One]

HandyNZL, on 02 July 2012 - 06:55 AM, said:

Here's one for you:

http://www.stuff.co....an-t-be-stopped

It appears, now, that when water warms up it expands.  So why is it that when I freeze water in a bottle with the cap on, I can make the bottle explode as the water turns to ice and increases in size (ie expands)....then when it melts, it returns to it's original size.

If I turn water into a gas, it expands, but never seen 100ml of hot water take up more space than 100ml of cold water.....

Sorry, I  never bother to reply in this thread and I do not read the links posted both because I don't want to be dragged into these discussions and because I lack the knowledge, but in this case I must make an exception because the mistake is blatant.

Water DOES expand under heat like any other substance. It's reverse behavior (i.e. expanding as it freezes) only occurs when its temp goes below 4°C. Otherwise in your swimming pool water warmed by sunlight would "sink" and you would feel warmer at higher depths than on the surface, which you obviously don't.

That much I still remember from my second year of high school physics.

So, even if I have no idea what the article is about and I do know you guys love to think that there's a global warming conspiracy, you should at least be sure you have your second-year physics right.

Don't thank me

[AleHop]

When politicians get their hands on science it turns into political slogans and campaigns. Having said that, I'd love to see more people aware of environmental problems.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

OK

So ice takes up more volume than water as it has a crystalline structure (which liquid water does not) - same amount of mass in a larger space (therefore, less dense, which is why ice floats in water).

Water expands when warmer too, as do most substances due to higher molecular activity, again, becomes less dense and therefore will sit on the top of a body of colder water, hence the swimming pool scenario you outlined, oh hairless one

And as for conspiracy theories, no would not categorise it as that, as this implies some evil geniuses co-ordinating a plot. Whereas the reality is that is a combination of radical greens, scientists chasing grants, politicians wanting to get onto the bandwagon, corporations seeing ways of making megabucks and governments using it as an excuse to both raise taxes and defer making difficult decisions on energy policy.

Some good has come out of it in that more people are aware of their energy consumption and impact on the planet, however the whole global warming thing has been based on a lot of lies, deceit and dodgy science.

[Quiet One]

Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, on 02 July 2012 - 05:22 PM, said:

OK

So ice takes up more volume than water as it has a crystalline structure (which liquid water does not) - same amount of mass in a larger space (therefore, less dense, which is why ice floats in water).

Water expands when warmer too, as do most substances due to higher molecular activity, again, becomes less dense and therefore will sit on the top of a body of colder water, hence the swimming pool scenario you outlined, oh hairless one

And as for conspiracy theories, no would not categorise it as that, as this implies some evil geniuses co-ordinating a plot. Whereas the reality is that is a combination of radical greens, scientists chasing grants, politicians wanting to get onto the bandwagon, corporations seeing ways of making megabucks and governments using it as an excuse to both raise taxes and defer making difficult decisions on energy policy.

Some good has come out of it in that more people are aware of their energy consumption and impact on the planet, however the whole global warming thing has been based on a lot of lies, deceit and dodgy science.

As long as we all agree on your last paragraph, and Alex's I have no problems about discussing global warming until hell freezes over (as long as it does not expand! )
I just lack the comprehension beyond  my elementary physics to discuss the global warming theories past a point. So it comes to a battle of "links to" and I hate looking for links, sources and such. I only enjoy theories and "facts" when I can pull them out of my Argie arse

And yes, you are correct (and Craig too) about the ice expanding, of course. Hence my mention of "reverse behavior" under 4°C.
That's what makes water such a fascinating substance, along with semen. Wait, are we discussing semen here?

And no, Mr.Chris, oceans of custard would not solve the world's issues!

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Quiet One, on 02 July 2012 - 05:45 PM, said:

And no, Mr.Chris, oceans of custard would not solve the world's issues!

Hmmm, I think you are onto something here.... all I need is a gazillion tons of cornflour and sugar, 50 quintillion eggs and quite a lot of vanilla pods.... the Argentinian navy would just need to stick all their battleships in the Atlantic and put their propellors on full blast and Hola! Natillas!

The non-Newtonian nature of custard would prevent tsunamis from happening; tidal surges could be a thing of the past (no flooding) and global hunger could be eradicated!!!

We now just have to find a way of creating a giant mountain range of apple tarts.....

Edited by Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, 03 July 2012 - 12:18 PM.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

News article on BBC about cornflour - the main constituent of custard - see my idea *does* have merit

http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-18800017

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

Interesting article - turns out NOAA (the American weather people) have been taking figures from their newer, more accurate (and colder) weather stations and tweaking the figures up to match the warmer, less accurate stations. This has an impact on the global temperature records and surprise, surprise, when the adjustment is made the world appears to have warmed a lot less.....

Lead bit of article follows:

"If new techniques endorsed by the World Meteorological Organisation are applied to official figures, over half of the global warming reported by US land-based thermometers between 1979 and 2008 simply disappears, researchers have found.

The new study used the same raw temperature measurements as US government federal scientific agencies, but the team deployed a revised metric that was better at taking into account the quality of the weather stations that housed the thermometers.

Previous studies have used a cruder metric to gauge station quality, which has to be taken into account so as to allow for the effect of asphalt, urban development and other local factors on the readings at any given thermometer. The new station-quality metric improves on older methods, not merely relying on distance but also the density of heat sinks and sources near the thermometers.

When the more sophisticated classification system is used, some dramatic results are seen. The new study reveals that the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) discarded the temperature trend from the higher quality weather stations in favour of a warming temperature trend from low quality weather stations.

But the most extraordinary aspect is that this improved metric for categorising weather station quality has been endorsed by the World Meteorological Organization since 2010. It was proposed by Michel Leroy of Météo-France, the French state weather service, who devised its cruder predecessor in 1999.

Yet it has been left to a group largely outside the climate establishment to first do the field work and then the maths, and apply the new metric to the data. The official agencies and climate academics have been able (some would say, required) to use the latest WMO-endorsed categorisation method for 18 months, but have failed to do so."

Read more here:

http://www.theregist...ture_bombshell/

[The Shadow]

I suppose a lot of people feel the increase of temperatures over time(which they attribute to global warming) due mainly to the increased urbanisation and population density. Buildings built nowadays tend to reflect heat so as to lower costs for air conditioning (which is also a major heat source). With increased development areas wind speeds drop (due to buildings creating air resistance) and the heat at ground level is unable to dissipate as quickly as it would in an open, unhindered space.

I think its being a bit cheeky to dismiss global warming as a fact. But though it may not be as bad as some quarters may have you believe, the actions taken to mitigate its increase do have other benefits as well. Living in a third world city, you do notice a significant increase in air quality compared to the 1990's due to tougher emission laws. Cars today weigh heavier than blue whales yet consume less fuel than before (and as a result, produce less greenhouse gasses).

That's assuming the report above is an accurate reflection though....

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

The Shadow, on 01 August 2012 - 02:04 AM, said:

I suppose a lot of people feel the increase of temperatures over time(which they attribute to global warming) due mainly to the increased urbanisation and population density.

Well there are WMO guidelines for what is acceptable for weather stations. It is interesting if you look at the following link, you will find that (completely independently of the "tweaking" described in the report, there are also anomalies with the siting of a number of weather stations - e.g. some weather stations which feed into the official "global" temperature calculation which, for example have air conditioning vents blowing straight onto them (!)

http://www.surfacest...g/odd_sites.htm is a site that is analysing the quality of the sites in US against WMO guidelines.

The thing with the report is outlining how NOAA have tweaked the figures to give an overall warming outlook - why? Worse, rather than taking the older, less accurate stations (which are less affected by urban heat island effects) and adjusted them to meet the newer, more accurate, stations (which are less affected), they have done it the other way around. i.e. degraded the more accurate stations' results. This just does not make sense.

The Shadow, on 01 August 2012 - 02:04 AM, said:

I think its being a bit cheeky to dismiss global warming as a fact.

Not cheeky at all. There has been no global warming since 1998. This is an established scientific fact.

Furthermore every day more and more information comes out that 1) demonstrates our climate is very complex (and the models don't work) and 2) that there is not consensus.

Why do I care? Well, I hate bad science and there has been plenty of this going around - cherry picking results to give a particular outcome, peer review processes which are biased, temperature figures which have been tweaked.

The Shadow, on 01 August 2012 - 02:04 AM, said:

the actions taken to mitigate its increase do have other benefits as well. Living in a third world city, you do notice a significant increase in air quality compared to the 1990's due to tougher emission laws. Cars today weigh heavier than blue whales yet consume less fuel than before (and as a result, produce less greenhouse gasses).

On this we agree - its no bad thing that we are being more efficient and polluting less, but I'd rather it was approached directly around those issues directly than creating a myth which is used by politicians for various purposes...... like raising taxes or making spectacularly bad decisions about energy policy, etc.

The Shadow, on 01 August 2012 - 02:04 AM, said:

That's assuming the report above is an accurate reflection though....

The authors are credible.

Edited by Grabthaw the Hammerslayer, 01 August 2012 - 03:19 AM.

[The Shadow]

Wow.

Its just that I find it hard to grasp that so many weather stations go out of their way to produce bad data. Are those stations built by organisations that have a vested interest in cooking up false data?

I suppose, like many, I never really gave a thought about the factors and conditions of the data collection centers. I just assumed that they were set up according to established criteria for temperature collection. Wouldn't be the first time people were hoodwinked by bad science.

Its good that you and the authors point out one glaring fact. When it comes to science, opinions should always be formed with the benefit of peer review and looking at data from sources following criterion that is unbiased (the removal of factors and variables that can affect data directly or indirectly), as well as to draw the conclusions based on that and to not let other people or groups do that for you.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer]

The Shadow, on 02 August 2012 - 01:53 AM, said:

Its just that I find it hard to grasp that so many weather stations go out of their way to produce bad data. Are those stations built by organisations that have a vested interest in cooking up false data?

Yep it is a bit shocking. I think in part its not deliberate, many of these stations use old equipment bought with limited budgets and probably when they were first started they were compliant with the less rigorous standards then. But over time, building and modern life has encroached on them and many have not been updated. Its really a legacy of neglect. The danger is that science now works to higher degrees of accuracy and without looking at the quality of where the data has come from, it is easy to interpret some of the inherent inaccuracies as trends.

However there are some less scupulous people who still know this and use the data to suit their own personal agendas/beliefs.

The tweaking of figures though is more deliberate and I can't see any justification for making the best, most accurate data worse.