I don’t know how long I’ll keep my virtual dialogue at WUWTW going, it get’s more depressing all the time,
but too many half finished projects and something, maybe the vacuum out there, won’t let me stop bailing.
Besides, it is a learning process… though there is that song.
<em>This is responding to someone's comment, one that's not worth bringing into this so I won't.</em>
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2015/02/considering-defensive-offense-sod.html
<blockquote>
<blockquote>Political, business leaders and the public have a right to learn about
climate science without malicious interference!
Serious science is not about "tolerance of diversity"
Science is about pinning down the facts as well as possible
and always learning.
It's not about relying on
"only what others are telling us"
It's about trusting a huge community of experts
who keep each other honest !</blockquote>
I didn't know RD from Adam, I was commenting on his words, the ideas he was sharing.
Rather than responding to my comments RD played the offended victim card. I know it all too well,
it's a rather typical defensive strategy (right up there with sarcastic dismissal) that deflects attention
away from bankrupt arguments and affords an easy escape from considering the substance of the dialogue.
What ever happened to honest curiosity, grappling over the issues themselves,
striving to understand what's being discussed on both sides?
What's wrong with being told: "you're 'wrong' and here and here is why I believe you are mistaken!"
Then slink off to examine and think about the here and here. It's nothing personal.
It's about the desire to learn and understand, even to take learning from mistakes in stride.
Our egos, mighty important though they are, shouldn't supersede our honest desire to understand the world
around us and our place in it.
But time after time it's the grand indignation, the huffy defensiveness as said 'victim' slinks away.
Unfortunately youz never slink away with a little self-skepticism in your hearts.
It's never about withdrawing to consider new information and lessons or to give them a little time to digest...
including getting over the inevitable hurt feelings at having had it wrong.
It's the new understanding and the enhanced window of appreciation that living and growing is all about.
Learning for the sake of better understanding and to help prepare for our futures.
But the Republican/libertarian thing is all about absolutism and certitude in their adulation of the Ego.
Anyone no matter how honorable, professional, accomplished or well intentioned they may be -
if they want to teach folks about climate science truths they are branded as bad, amid much indignation,
after that anything goes in the PR battle to demean - learning be damned.
For instance, as I put together the many links I add to my posts, all intended to encourage further learning;
and no matter how I try to self-censor and stick to the most authoritative, clearly written sources,
it seems that everyone of them has been demonized within the blogosphere and thus made irrelevant in the eye's of the faithful,
learning be damned.
The Republican/libertarian attitude is one of, "We" don't need to read or learn anything from IPCC, or NOAA.gov,
SkepticalScience, or RealClimate, or on, and on..." Nah, Inhofe, Watts and pals hate them,
they are no good, "we" will ignore them all.
Doesn't matter that they present and discuss the science in as rational and above-board manner as I can imagine.
They stick to their topics, they present their supporting evidence. Their collective consistent quality of information
is something every intelligent person of good faith (and an interest in learning) would embrace -
if not for the phony right-wing litmus test.
You can actually learn about our global heat distribution engine from these sources.
But then, learning has become the new enemy hasn't it.
So they must be rejected.
The tragedy is unfathomable.</blockquote>
Considering the silliness of Dr. L.W. at SoD #1
Friday, February 27, 2015
http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com/2015/02/considering-silliness-drlw-sod1.html
CC:
Here is something you need to keep in mind. The great majority of people have neither the time or inclination to do research in this area on the level you do. Secondly the idea of the climate getting warmer, while true, is not supported by many of our personal and immediate direct experiences (unlike industrial pollution that we have dealt with in the past) . i.e. here in Buffalo we have just had the coldest Feb. on record and the entire NE has been dealing with large amounts of snow and much colder than average temps. this winter.
To make the majority concerned about climate change a way must be found to show how this going to affect the lives of them or their kids in the near future.
Okay back to shoveling now, :shut:
CC:
To make the majority concerned about climate change a way must be found to show how this going to affect the lives of them
or their kids in the near future.
Okay back to shoveling now, :shut:
All it would take is for people to sprout some honest curiosity (rather than egocentric tribalism)
a desire to learn about our Global Heat Distribution Engine,
...the atmosphere as insulation layer,
...we're heaping more on.
Shove more heat into the system, it will energize.
Shove more moisture into the atmosphere it will create wilder storm events.
Energizing the system means disrupting and intensifying weather pattern we are accustomed to, and dependent on.
There's no magic about it.
Oh and folks would need to pay attention to what's happening around world,
and those that can't see the signs everywhere (including your crazy snow storms out there!) have simply been conditioned to being blind.
I've been traveling around the past couple years again and see what people are into and how incredibly oblivious they are and
how much they take totally for granted.
And by this point in the game it's pretty hopeless, people minds are too locked into self-centered dogmas,
Or leaders are locked into tribalism of the most juvenile level, the economy is trapped within it's self-canibalizing ways
and our planet is locked into too much warming,
and our kids will live through one hell of an ugly downhill ride for our laziness.
Oh and this wonderful cornucopia of planet will continue to devolve back to a primal mess
that will take tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousand and millions of years to bounce back from what we've inflicted.
Do you know that every month we are injecting the equivalent of more than a super volcano (think Yellowstone) per f'n month.
And people pretend that's not going to f'k us and everything else royally. :down:
Oh as for your snow (Here in the Four Corners we've hardly experienced any winter this Dec, Jan, Feb,
oh but this last week there was wonderful life giving snow, first real snows in a couple months -
then it rained last night, now it's started snowing again this evening.)
The Link Between Global Warming and 2015's Freezing Winter
http://princetoninfo.com/index.php/component/us1more/?key=02-25-15-jennifer-francis
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/cold-snow-climate-change.html#.VPUHBDpyHww
Nationally, it's been one of the warmest winters on record
http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2015/02/16/warm-winter/23510107/
just saying . . .
I don’t follow the horse race of global warming politics, but I got into it with someone regarding some of the record low temps recently. I didn’t argue the science since I don’t know it, I just accept the consensus, but he had a deluge of studies. I checked a few of them and they were crap, but I had some general problems I couldn’t respond to.
Like:
The “hiatus”. I came across a WUWTW that talked about the failed models and the scrambling for new explanations.
Non-sinking nations. Sea level is rising, but no one is losing land yet. The weirdest thing I saw was that the UN had a warning about 50 million climate change refugees a few years ago on their website, but they have now taken that down with no comment.
It was enough for this guy to be suspicious and he obviously read a lot. For someone less informed, it’s the kind of thing that just makes you doubt science generally.
I don't follow the horse race of global warming politics, but I got into it with someone regarding some of the record low temps recently. I didn't argue the science since I don't know it, I just accept the consensus, but he had a deluge of studies. I checked a few of them and they were crap, but I had some general problems I couldn't respond to.
Like:
The "hiatus". I came across a WUWTW that talked about the failed models and the scrambling for new explanations.
Non-sinking nations. Sea level is rising, but no one is losing land yet. The weirdest thing I saw was that the UN had a warning about 50 million climate change refugees a few years ago on their website, but they have now taken that down with no comment.
It was enough for this guy to be suspicious and he obviously read a lot. For someone less informed, it's the kind of thing that just makes you doubt science generally.
I think you meant WUWT.
not ;-) http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot.com
But, more to the point: Have I got a video for you! This is one of the smart guys
The Human Influence of Climate
A.E. Dessler, Dept. of Atmospheric Sciences
Texas A and M University The science behind climate change
Published on Sep 19, 2014
Jan. 2011 seminar given to the TAMU Petroleum Engineering Department.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/7ImRv58XJO8
_____________________________________
notes:
Dr. Dessler shares his intention early on: "What I'm going to try to convince you of is that it's really a much simpler problem than you may have been led to believe. You can use freshman physics to convince yourself that if we keep emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere we're really going to see very large warming over the next century, and that's my goal…"
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
2:55 key thing here about this is that there's multiple lines and evidence...
the data fit together and so you can call this - consilience - this idea you have lots of different data like puzzle pieces that fit together perfectly. If you put a puzzle together you're pretty sure you put it together right, if every piece fits. …
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
4:00 ...warning unequivocal essentially nobody really argues about warming and so I'm not gonna talk anymore about "if," is the climate warming is going to assume that we all know it's warming and move on from their...
I'll return to this idea of "consilience" - that we have multiple evidence that fits together ...
... the skeptics have that, there's no consistent skeptical argument…
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
22:40 If Richard Lindzen at MIT was here he would essentially agree with everything i said up till now. Where we disagree is in this one term (cl=cloud feedback) We disagree a lot on that term but still if you take the world's most credible climate skeptic he would not disagree with anything I've said up until right at this point…
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
27:00 so again the key thing here is consilience, everywhere you look we have a consistent view of carbon dioxide driving the climate …
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
36:25 Anti-Consilience... classic lawyer strategy (read Republican/libertarian PR machine.)
"Anti-Consilience... classic lawyer strategy " is the approach your pal is taking.
Has nothing to do with trying to absorb as much information as possible. It a political strategy, not learning.
Trying to find every little flaw while ignoring all the solid indisputable observations.
It supposed to be about curiosity and good faith learning.
Listening to 'opponents', digesting information even if shocking and unwanted, demanding rearranging previous conviction.
being self-skeptical as well - and allowing the evidence to direct your beliefs,
It's the fraud who depends on a nonstop flow of defensive contrarian one-liners, that ignore indisputable evidence
while closing off one's ear to all disputing evidence, I think your pal is guilty of that.
Also notice how much of the Republican/libertarian approach depends on degrading if not demonizing
every ever-lasting scientist or messenger that takes global warming seriously.
_________________________________________
As for the cold temps, we are an egocentric lot aren't we.
It's been mighty warm up where it supposed to be freezing.
Weird Winter Weather Plot Thickens as Arctic Swiftly Warms
Scientists are working out potential linkages between rapid Arctic warming caused by climate change
and a more wavy jet stream causing weird winter weather
February 19, 2015 |By Jennifer Francis and The Conversation US
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weird-winter-weather-plot-thickens-as-arctic-swiftly-warms/
http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-02-23/how-warming-arctic-might-be-behind-bostons-deep-freeze
If you want to see something interesting check out what I just stumbled onto, click on the site it has an observation data generated animation looking down on the northern hemisphere.
Arctic Oscillation Analysis and Forecasts
AER scientists provide researchers and enthusiasts real-time insights on one of North America’s and Europe’s leading drivers for extreme and persistent temperature patterns. Authors Judah Cohen, Ph.D., and Jason Furtado, Ph.D., work at Atmospheric and Environmental Research (AER), a division of Verisk Climate
https://www.aer.com/science-research/climate-weather/arctic-oscillationand go to the bottom of the page
Temperature Anomaly Animation (of the Northern Hemisphere)
Below we show the daily temperature difference between those with observed high October Eurasian snow cover minus low October Eurasian snow cover from September 1 through February 28 in degrees Celsius. Temperature differences are shown in shading and those differences that are found to be statistically significant are outlined by a black contour. This is not meant to be a forecast but instead shows the general progression of the temperature anomalies across the Northern Hemisphere based on October Eurasian snow cover variability alone.
Thanks cc, I hope to get to watching these soon. Consilience is a great concept. Sounds better than “scientific consensus” which sounds more like voting or an opinion. (I mean the words sound like voting, not the concept itself)
