Nails in the Coffin

[garyb]

ok. Nestor i do appreciate the kind words, let's not take this any further.
whatever we may think each other are, we only see the part shown anonymously on the internet.

look, i've slung mud and had mud slung at me. that's not the point. this is the way that political discourse gets shut down when one side or the other doesn't like what's said, so let's just not go there any further.

we won't solve this issue here, and it's up to everyone to make up his or her mind about things.

i don't mind speaking about facts as facts or opinions as opinions.

i don't believe a certain number of opinions equals fact. for example, temperature data. however, there ARE accepted sources of data, but even these lie at times. a perfect example of an organization that is responsible for accurate data is NASA, an organization that has been plagued with allegations and admissions of hiding the truth, as in the Challenger incident. this has nothing to do with political ideology or whether it's good to use a cleaner form of energy. the truth of one does not counteract the truth of the other. please, it really is fine to tslk about these things and tease each other, but we can't make this personal.

and i'm not as cool as Nestor says.

i'm going to assume that hubird is a good person. i think there have been legitimate disagreements between us, but i think there have been more misunderstandings.

[Nestor]

Ok, cool, that’s fine. My reaction towards Hubird came to be in this way because he was ridiculing you out of nothing, and this is not fare. I have seen this use of people’s minds many times before in his writings, I’m tired of it. I’m sure he is NOT a bad guy, but it is a good guy doing bad things…

[hubird]

he was ridiculing you out of nothing, and this is not fare.

On the contrary, my post makes clear that I take his role als moderator and the belonging expectations and responsibilities very serious.
If you'd say too serious I could comprehend it

[garyb]

it's not that serious.
i'm doing my job.

where do you work hubird?

all joking aside, back to the subject or let's stop participating. all you're doing hubird, is bumping the thread that you hate.

[dante]

What is the subject ? Oh yeah, climate change If you want a taste of Climate Change come to Victoria Australia ! We have had heat wave with record bush fires down the Great Ocean Road and then biggest rain for 13 months yesterday, in the space of 3 days

[garyb]

yes, we all agree that there is something called climate change. the climate does change. the life of a human or even 10 humans is a brief moment to the planet.

[guppy]

here in France , they just annunced a 1500€ fine if ppl business are not in conformity with new co2 laws....
maybe the crise here in France is not enough rude, that the government wants to terminated us all... damn them all, i hate them !
i'm crying for my land... I think everything is lost now for at least one another generation...
they can fool ppl thousand times...

look at this one :
http://www.keshefoundation.org/
more than 3kw (but only 2.2a) for your house / 700€

[valis]

It's been ages since I spoke up here, and yet not much has changed...

Funny thing about insoluble problems and politics, the seem to make great bedfellows. Well at least until you can create another problem to display with much fanfare (or wearing white shoes, black outfits and driving black Toyota SUV's). Oh and once that problem is gone, we always have those lovely insoluble issues to return to when needed...

[Nestor]

It's been ages since I spoke up here, and yet not much has changed...

Funny thing about insoluble problems and politics, the seem to make great bedfellows. Well at least until you can create another problem to display with much fanfare (or wearing white shoes, black outfits and driving black Toyota SUV's). Oh and once that problem is gone, we always have those lovely insoluble issues to return to when needed...

Disagreement does not necessarily shows as “insoluble problems”. There is the need of analysis to get to concrete conclusions that really relate to reality. If a persons does not know himself, he will always tend to tint everything with his own hidden color, a color he is not aware of. If there is knowledge to be grasped somewhere, it must start within ourselves, whatever it might be, because we are the kaleidoscope of perceptions, and without the proper apparatus to grasp what is going on, that is to say, your own self, your convictions will natural tend to be a far cry of what reality, without the observer, actually is. If perception and so knowledge, does not start within yourself, as an exercise in the search of objectivity, it will be breakable, incoherent or simply, a projection of your own psychological fears, doubts, frustrations, traumas, be it over people, over the weather, over hell, over heaven, etc.

You have been away for a long time, as you say, you came now, and immediately expressed a definitive impression, it does not coincides with the truth of what is going on. But your psychological impregnation, has given you an immediate answer, which is an automatization of your own self. This words, will probably create yet another reaction. If you understood them well, you would feel a very human feeling and will vibrate with me like friends and brothers, if you get angry or anything like that, you are very far away from this thoughtful exercise.

[valis]

My words were not a reflection of the discussion local, but the evolution of it (or lack thereof) as an overall subject that's being utilized as a political tool in the collective media and across national borders, and propelled by the fact that insoluble problems make great political tools in general.

Also, I never stated I wasn't paying attention to this thread. Simply hadn't spoken up because I've said all I can that's relevant to the main thrust of this discussion so far. I did interject now for a good reason however

PS. The point of the Yamahas may be lost in translation, I was referring to ISIS/ISIL as a current 'problem' to be solved globally. Here in the US it was alleged that some of the ISIS footage and vehicles were financed directly from our own pockets...

[Nestor]

Sorry Valis, I have totally misunderstood your point so, now that you explain it clearly I can see. Sometimes it is difficult to get something so subtle for me, as what you wanted to say with so little words. Thank you for explaining me what you were saying exactly. It is shame that it was not, because my explanation came out to be pretty cool

[garyb]

for those who think that Geoengineering is a conspiracy nut fantasy, an Airforce(US) official recently mentioned it in an interview about the shutdown of the Alaska HAARP facility.

Responding to questions from Sen. Lisa Murkowski during a Senate hearing Wednesday, David Walker, deputy assistant secretary of the Air Force for science, technology and engineering, said this is "not an area that we have any need for in the future" and it would not be a good use of Air Force research funds to keep HAARP going. "We're moving on to other ways of managing the ionosphere, which the HAARP was really designed to do," he said. "To inject energy into the ionosphere to be able to actually control it. But that work has been completed."

this sure sounds a lot more like something that will make a physical and immediate change to weather systems compared to CO2....

by the way, the Alaska facility isn't the only facility of it's kind, it's just the biggest and the original.
http://www.adn.com/article/20140514/air ... 100/&ihp=1

[garyb]

one more quote:

On April 28, 1997 U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen made the following statement:

"Others [terrorists] are engaging even in an eco-type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves… So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations…It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our [counterterrorism] efforts."

Secretary of Defense William Cohen at an April 1997 counterterrorism conference sponsored by former Senator Sam Nunn. Quoted from DoD News Briefing, Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen, Q&A at the Conference on Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and U.S. Strategy, University of Georgia, Athens, Apr. 28, 1997.

[Eanna]

The ionosphere is higher up than the bulk of the atmosphere. It's generally regarded as the edge of space. The space station and some satellites orbit in the ionosphere...

[garyb]

right, and adding large amounts of energy to it affects the lower atmosphere. otherwise, why are there treaties about this and why do these guys say what they say? it's no more preposterous than the idea that mankind's 0.3% of greenhouse gases are causing catastrophic changes.

[Eanna]

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not a scientist in this area, so I can't comment...

[garyb]

that's true, except that the info is out there for people who really wish to know.
of course, this assumes that the info is accurate. an example in real life about data is in the "hockeystick" graph that proves the alarming rate of temperature rise. you know that this is "adjusted" data, right? so the quality of the data that "everyone" is using really depends on the honesty and integrity of the people and the PROCESS used to adjust the data. it's very troubling that all the hoopla is based around one or two computer models based on this adjusted data that just assumes that all factors will remain static. even though there's been quite a bit of work since the original data was published, the news sources all still refer to this adjusted data...

[Eanna]

That assumes that no good science is acting as arbiter of the results...

Like, I know what you're saying Gary, and you're dead right to be sceptical.. You won't have any argument from me about the pervasiveness of bad science in popular culture... Coupled with the media, and politicians, both of whom absolutely suck at statistics and probability, bad science is unfortunately allowed to thrive...

I just feel there is sufficient weight behind the observations and the refining of models, the science of it all, to say that their predictions, which can vary widely, all point to some climate change process to which we may have contributed by our actions. And only action will modify our behaviour, to elicit a change in our current activity. If that's the point of carbon taxes and international treaties, then great, politics may actually be for the greater good here... Yeah, the jury is out on that one too! But you gotta work with something....

[garyb]

you're putting a lot of faith in acknowledged liars. the purposes that those making these rules have probably aren't the same as yours. as i said, i'm with you on the need for improved energy sources. the biggest changes could be made by improving yourself, even if you're already a good guy, imho...

[Eanna]

Yeah again you're assuming there is some greater malice or selfish intent at the root of those rule makers..

I trust in the ability for good science to arrive at useful results. Prediction is always terribly difficult - chaos theory rules over nature - but science can produce solid results too. If models are at first inaccurate, and a better model or theory fits the observations better, then that theory will out rule the precedent.

And adjusted data is absolutely fine if the adjustment is a scientifically valid factoring out of some measurement generalisation or whatever. But yes data can be massaged too, in order to fit the intentions or biases of the scientist or group presenting the data. In that case, 'adjusted' is the wrong word to use. But, again, science will, in time, always converge on what it considers as truth, ie. observations and predictability. Like Einstein predicted re the bending of starlight by the gravitational force exerted by the sun, proven in that solar eclipse in the south Atlantic later that year, producing a good-science 'proof' of his theory of relativity, if the current models fail, then fail they will, and we move on and refine.