The ldsfaqs / Climate Change MEGATHREAD

[_EAllusion]

If you believe that capitalism, broadly construed, is mankind's best economic option to maximize happiness through encouraging peace and prosperity, I think you should be worried about a future in which the ravages of global warming are widely believed to discredit it. If global warming is what capitalism produces, then it is irredeemably flawed.

I happen to think that global warming isn't the inevitable result of the consumerist societies capitalism encourages, but rather is a function of more narrow societal flaws, especially in the United States, that developed in the late 20th century. But what I think isn't going to matter in 50 years.

[_DarkHelmet]

More evidence that clearly supports climate change.

https://youtu.be/iXuc7SAyk2s

Global warming is hitting some cities much harder than others.

[Reflexzero]

Science Deniers (a la LDSFaqs): “Human activity cannot influence climate.”

Also Science Deniers (a la LDSFaqs): “Those temperature averages are skewed by measurements that were taken in urban areas where human activity influences climate.”

[_Ceeboo]

More evidence that clearly supports climate change.

https://youtu.be/iXuc7SAyk2s

Global warming is hitting some cities much harder than others.

Indeed! :)

[_DarkHelmet]

Science Deniers (a la LDSFaqs): “Human activity cannot influence climate.”

Also Science Deniers (a la LDSFaqs): “Those temperature averages are skewed by measurements that were taken in urban areas where human activity influences climate.”

Apparently Tony Heller is not interested in defending the concrete industry. However, if he starts creating videos that show concrete has no effect on local temperature, ldsfaqs will immediately change his opinion. When the prophet speaks, the debate is over.

[_Themis]

Hi Themis and Res,

No Themis your wrong, I am sure Res took an inordinate amount of time on his research and posting, it indeed becomes as gish gallup.

I'm calling BS. RI did take the time YOU asked and you disrespect him and others by now trying to avoid discussing it. I suspect you never intended to. Like gunnar and others, I have noticed you like to silently slip away when people start to engage you with actual content. I noticed you doing this again after days of silence. I left it just in case you were busy with life, but I also knew you would come back if I posted about it. I suspected from your past behavior you would probably not engage and use some excuse, but gish gallup? That is one of the dumber claims I have read. RI posted about 4-5 paragraphs worth of text hitting on a few points. Not 40-50 paragraphs hitting on dozens of points. You don't even need to address all of them. How about one like the first point which discusses the paper objective and how one can easily answer it by just looking at satellite data on the sun.

You asked people if they would want to know the truth. The problem is everyone thinks they want to know the truth, but most don't when it comes to their religious or political beliefs. Almost all will say they do, but it is behavior that reveals their real intent on learning truth. Truth seekers don't try to leave a discussion when people start bringing up content. They continue to ask questions and research to see if they have the more accurate position or if the other person does. RI is one of the better posters at doing this and even admitting to being wrong from time to time. I would suggest following that example.

[_EAllusion]

A Gish Gallop involves overwhelming someone with a large volume of bad arguments that strains their ability to respond to manipulate independent observers.

The paper Mikwut posted is more of a Gish Gallop than Res Ipsa's abbreviated response. If Mikwut feels Res Ipsa was gish galloping, he could highlight one or two points and respond accordingly. From here, it looks like a bad faith attempt to having to get out of accounting for why he acted like a fringe group's hackneyed work was promising for upending the field of climatology.

[_subgenius]

“The general-circulation models of climate on which international policy is at present founded are unfit for their purpose,” the letter, sent to Secretary-General António Guterres, states. “Therefore, it is cruel as well as imprudent to advocate the squandering of trillions of dollars on the basis of results from such immature models.”

The letter is signed by a number of prominent scientists and professionals from related fields, including atmospheric physicist Richard Lindzen and applied geology professor Alberto Prestininzi. The effort is led by professor Guus Berkhout, a Dutch engineer who served as professor of acoustics, geophysics, and innovation management at Delft University of Technology.

[_Black Moclips]

An interesting data point:

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/doomed-planet/2019/09/a-climate-modeller-spills-the-beans/

[_DoubtingThomas]

Potholer-Heller debate -- rebuttal #4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq2Wv2KHGBc