Author Topic: The Scott Pruitt "If the models are all wrong" thread  (Read 429741 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Stupid Fitz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4660
  • Go Cats
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #400 on: September 25, 2013, 03:22:00 PM »
sys is correct.  A global carbon tax would be the best solution, but it would be incredibly hard to enforce. 

Another viable solution I've recently read about is the "stratoshield."  It's a geo-engineering concept that basically lowers the Earth's surface temperature by emitting sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, essentially mimicking the function of a super volcano.  It would be relatively cheap to install two of these at each pole (probably a few billion dollars or so).  This idea played out naturally in 1991 with eruption of Mount Pinatubo, which sent sulfur dioxide pouring into the stratosphere, and measurably cooled the Earth for around two years (by about 0.5 degrees F).

Yes this seems perfect.  A bunch of dudes building a tube that will put sulfur dioxide in the air at each pole.  What could possibly go wrong with this.  I really don't want to live forever (maybe I do :dunno: , but I would love to be able to look back from the future and see what a bunch of dumbasses we all were.

Pretty chilly today for this time of year btw.

All you need to do is go back to the 70's and the coolers fear mongering. They were planning on covering the polar ice caps with coal dust to heat things up. The same morons are still at work.


There are extremists on both sides of the debate.  The Earth was cooling back in the 70's and a lot of it had to do with CFCs and aerosols that were polluting the atmosphere.  The Montreal Protocol eliminated the use of CFCs for the most part and here we are today with a warmer climate. 

The extremists on the denial side of the debate don't believe that humans have any sort of affect on our environment, and a significant portion of those people believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old.  That's why this debate is going nowhere and the special interest groups on the denier side have so much more leverage than they really should.

sounds like we need to put CFCs back in aerosols.


They are mainly HCFCs now, and they're found mostly in refrigerants.  The biggest problem is that they do a ton of damage to the ozone layer, not that they cool the Earth necessarily.

Oooh, the ozone layer. Remember back in the 80's when we were creating a giant hole in it and were all going to fry if we didn't hurry up and do something about it?  I stopped using hairspray to help, pretty sure that fixed the problem. Your welcome.

Pretty normal temps today, looks like we are good.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #401 on: September 25, 2013, 03:45:17 PM »
I thought it was mostly just the Australians who were going to fry.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #402 on: September 25, 2013, 09:12:45 PM »
Speaking of phony environmental catastrophes, I wonder how many people have died of malaria because of the DDT ban? But the science was settled....
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40475
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #403 on: September 25, 2013, 10:55:01 PM »
Speaking of phony environmental catastrophes, I wonder how many people have died of malaria because of the DDT ban? But the science was settled....

speaking of Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) talking points with no basis in reality...
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline bubbles4ksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5488
  • Son of Pete
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #404 on: September 25, 2013, 11:01:27 PM »
are humans responsible for ocean acidification? i'm not sure if humans are able to affect the enviro on that scale or not. anyone?

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #405 on: September 26, 2013, 09:05:04 AM »
I like how the guy who thinks we should be building a smoke stack on the north and south pole to stop global climate warming change is calling people crazy and delusional.
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline Stupid Fitz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4660
  • Go Cats
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #406 on: September 26, 2013, 08:39:08 PM »
I like how the guy who thinks we should be building a smoke stack on the north and south pole to stop global climate warming change is calling people crazy and delusional.

I think we should build the giant stacks AND black stuff all over the glaciers.  That should make everyone happy. 

Offline OregonSmock

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 8512
  • Mashing 'taters like an Old Country Buffet
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #407 on: September 27, 2013, 12:07:03 PM »
Gotta love how the whackos attack me for simply mentioning an alternative solution to climate change.  A cost effective solution that wouldn't totally crush the economy.  The idea comes from a think tank in Seattle that includes some of the smartest humans on the planet, many of whom helped develop Microsoft.

Offline kim carnes

  • chingon!
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 13551
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #408 on: September 27, 2013, 02:47:38 PM »
Microsoft is a hot pile of garbage

Offline Stupid Fitz

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 4660
  • Go Cats
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #409 on: September 27, 2013, 03:50:15 PM »
Gotta love how the whackos attack me for simply mentioning an alternative solution to climate change.  A cost effective solution that wouldn't totally crush the economy.  The idea comes from a think tank in Seattle that includes some of the smartest humans on the planet, many of whom helped develop Microsoft.

I am 100% behind your Lego towers Beems.  Let's cool this bitch down.

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #410 on: September 28, 2013, 08:48:43 AM »
 :lol:

Oh, beams.
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #411 on: September 30, 2013, 08:36:40 AM »
HEADLINE: Top MIT Climate Scientist Concurs With Post On goEMAW.com

Quote
Not all scientists are panicking about global warming — one of them finds the alarmism “hilarious.”

A top climate scientist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology lambasted a new report by the UN’s climate bureaucracy that blamed mankind as the main cause of global warming and whitewashed the fact that there has been a hiatus in warming for the last 15 years.

“I think that the latest IPCC report has truly sunk to level of hilarious incoherence,” Dr. Richard Lindzen told Climate Depot, a global warming skeptic news site. “They are proclaiming increased confidence in their models as the discrepancies between their models and observations increase.”

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change claimed it was 95 percent sure that global warming was mainly driven by human burning of fossil fuels that produce greenhouse gases. The I.P.C.C. also glossed over the fact that the Earth has not warmed in the past 15 years, arguing that the heat was absorbed by the ocean.

“Their excuse for the absence of warming over the past 17 years is that the heat is hiding in the deep ocean,” Lindzen added. “However, this is simply an admission that the models fail to simulate the exchanges of heat between the surface layers and the deeper oceans.”

“However, it is this heat transport that plays a major role in natural internal variability of climate, and the IPCC assertions that observed warming can be attributed to man depend crucially on their assertion that these models accurately simulate natural internal variability,” Lindzen continued. “Thus, they now, somewhat obscurely, admit that their crucial assumption was totally unjustified.”
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #412 on: September 30, 2013, 08:44:49 AM »
http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/23/u-s-and-europe-tried-to-cover-up-data-showing-lack-of-global-warming/

Quote
Leaked documents obtained by the Associated Press show that the U.S. government and several European governments tried to get climate scientists to downplay the lack of global warming over the past 15 years.

The highly anticipated United Nations report on global warming is expected to affirm the link between human activity and global warming, but scientists are still having trouble explaining away the lull in rising global temperatures over the past 15 years despite rapidly rising greenhouse gas levels.

The lull in global warming has been noted by skeptics to show the flaws behind the science and the theory that human activities, primarily through burning fossil fuels, causes global temperatures to rise.

This has some governments worried, reports the AP, as documents show that the U.S. government along with some European nations tried to convince the report’s authors to downplay the lack of warming over the past 15 years.

The AP reports that “Germany called for the reference to the slowdown to be deleted, saying a time span of 10-15 years was misleading in the context of climate change, which is measured over decades and centuries.”

“The U.S. also urged the authors to include the ‘leading hypothesis’ that the reduction in warming is linked to more heat being transferred to the deep ocean,” the AP noted. “Belgium objected to using 1998 as a starting year for any statistics. …Using 1999 or 2000 as a starting year would yield a more upward-pointing curve. Hungary worried the report would provide ammunition for skeptics.”

Concern by governments over the lull in warming comes ahead of the deadline the world has set for reaching a global climate agreement in 2015. This report would serve as the scientific underpinning of such an agreement.

“This is the culmination of four years’ work by hundreds of scientists, where governments get a chance to ensure the summary for policymakers is clear and concise in a dialogue with the scientists who wrote it, and have the opportunity to raise any topics they think should be highlighted,” Jonathan Lynn, a spokesman for the UN’s climate authority, told the AP.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #413 on: November 01, 2013, 01:38:06 PM »
:facepalm: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/obama-orders-government-prep-global-warming/

Quote
President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming.

The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

I wonder if this means we should stop rebuilding cities below sea level? Or wait, I think Obama promised he would lower the sea levels. Never mind.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #414 on: November 01, 2013, 01:57:01 PM »
:facepalm: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/obama-orders-government-prep-global-warming/

Quote
President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming.

The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

I wonder if this means we should stop rebuilding cities below sea level? Or wait, I think Obama promised he would lower the sea levels. Never mind.

Yeah, we probably just should have abandoned the port that handles the greatest volume of cargo in the United States.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #415 on: November 01, 2013, 02:55:19 PM »
:facepalm: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/obama-orders-government-prep-global-warming/

Quote
President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming.

The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

I wonder if this means we should stop rebuilding cities below sea level? Or wait, I think Obama promised he would lower the sea levels. Never mind.

Yeah, we probably just should have abandoned the port that handles the greatest volume of cargo in the United States.

by definition, wouldn't the port be at or above sea level? I'm talking about re-building all the shacks that were below sea level.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #416 on: November 01, 2013, 02:57:14 PM »
:facepalm: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/obama-orders-government-prep-global-warming/

Quote
President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming.

The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

I wonder if this means we should stop rebuilding cities below sea level? Or wait, I think Obama promised he would lower the sea levels. Never mind.

Yeah, we probably just should have abandoned the port that handles the greatest volume of cargo in the United States.

by definition, wouldn't the port be at or above sea level? I'm talking about re-building all the shacks that were below sea level.

It's hard to have a large port without a large city.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #417 on: November 01, 2013, 03:03:31 PM »
:facepalm: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/obama-orders-government-prep-global-warming/

Quote
President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming.

The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

I wonder if this means we should stop rebuilding cities below sea level? Or wait, I think Obama promised he would lower the sea levels. Never mind.

Yeah, we probably just should have abandoned the port that handles the greatest volume of cargo in the United States.

by definition, wouldn't the port be at or above sea level? I'm talking about re-building all the shacks that were below sea level.

It's hard to have a large port without a large city.

That port only accounts for 8.3% of the country's tonnage.  It'll find another place to land bro.

SOURCE:  http://web.archive.org/web/20070104212555/http://www.aapa-ports.org/files/Statistics/2004_US_PORT_CARGO_TONNAGE_RANKINGS.xls

ETA:  My math was wrong.  8.4%.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #418 on: November 01, 2013, 03:07:13 PM »
:facepalm: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/obama-orders-government-prep-global-warming/

Quote
President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming.

The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

I wonder if this means we should stop rebuilding cities below sea level? Or wait, I think Obama promised he would lower the sea levels. Never mind.

Yeah, we probably just should have abandoned the port that handles the greatest volume of cargo in the United States.

by definition, wouldn't the port be at or above sea level? I'm talking about re-building all the shacks that were below sea level.

It's hard to have a large port without a large city.

That port only accounts for 8.3% of the country's tonnage.  It'll find another place to land bro.

What did the US spend on rebuilding New Orleans? What would it cost to increase capacity at some other port by more than 240,000,000 tons and then build infrastructure to transport that cargo? I think it most likely is more cost effective to just send aid to New Orleans every 50 years or so, but I would honestly like to see some kind of cost comparison if there is one that actually exists.

What is the solution to all of the exports that are floated down the Mississippi to the Port of New Orleans? Railroad to Houston?
« Last Edit: November 01, 2013, 03:24:32 PM by Nuts Kicked »

Offline WillieWatanabe

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 19275
  • We'll always have Salt Lake
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #419 on: November 01, 2013, 03:11:03 PM »
ahh yes..."The weather is SO MUCH MORE EXTREME" argument.  ugh.
Sometimes I think of the Book of Job and how God likes to really eff with people.
- chunkles

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #420 on: November 01, 2013, 03:18:42 PM »
ahh yes..."The weather is SO MUCH MORE EXTREME" argument.  ugh.

I know, it's so idiotic, and yet the President of the United States is leading the charge! (Though he's certainly not reducing his own carbon emissions from Air Force One - he'll be the most traveled (and vacationed) president in history by the time his 8 years are up).
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #421 on: November 01, 2013, 03:26:25 PM »
:facepalm: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/1/obama-orders-government-prep-global-warming/

Quote
President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming.

The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

I wonder if this means we should stop rebuilding cities below sea level? Or wait, I think Obama promised he would lower the sea levels. Never mind.

Yeah, we probably just should have abandoned the port that handles the greatest volume of cargo in the United States.

by definition, wouldn't the port be at or above sea level? I'm talking about re-building all the shacks that were below sea level.

It's hard to have a large port without a large city.

That port only accounts for 8.3% of the country's tonnage.  It'll find another place to land bro.

What did the US spend on rebuilding New Orleans? What would it cost to increase capacity at some other port by more than 240,000,000 tons and then build infrastructure to transport that cargo? I think it most likely is more cost effective to just send aid to New Orleans every 50 years or so, but I would honestly like to see some kind of cost comparison if there is one that actually exists.

Fair questions.  My perspective is that the government shouldn't be much involved in insuring, building/re-building, owning, and operating these ports.  Free market, man.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #422 on: November 01, 2013, 03:39:37 PM »
Fair questions.  My perspective is that the government shouldn't be much involved in insuring, building/re-building, owning, and operating these ports.  Free market, man.

Didn't the free market decide to locate New Orleans at the mouth of the Mississippi River? I think it makes a lot of sense for the government to speed the process of rebuilding important cities by providing disaster relief. Not spending that money comes at a big cost to the US government as well, in the form of lost revenues.

Offline Emo EMAW

  • PCKK7DC Survivor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *******
  • Posts: 17891
  • Unrepentant traditional emobro
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #423 on: November 01, 2013, 03:41:58 PM »
Saving money by spending it.  :excited:

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37049
    • View Profile
Re: If the models are all wrong
« Reply #424 on: November 01, 2013, 03:45:03 PM »
Saving money by spending it.  :excited:

Isn't that how investments work?