Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here, I'll do it for you, since you obviously lack access to Google. All i did was cut and paste what wapasha said into Google, (it's not rocket science dude)
2 November 2011 — The genetic history of six large herbivores -- the woolly rhinoceros, woolly mammoth, wild horse, reindeer, bison, and musk ox -- has shown that both climate change and humans were responsible for the extinction or near extinction of large mammal populations within the last 10,000 years.
Sometimes people do not respond to whiny "gimmie linky" demands, because they don't feel like bothering with a lazy person who won't do simplest of tasks for themselves.
Exactly right, which is why i will continue to ignore nattering nitwits posts.
It depends on whether your errors are for accuracy limited by computer power or by limited information on the inputs / assumptions. A model is just a bunch of equations (for climate, most physics, particularly thermodynamic). In many scientific situations, it's not obvious how the system will behave until the equations are run.
Weather forecasting using models, for instance, have improved enormously by more computing power. Getting observations and then not bothering with a model is often not very informative, one would have a bunch of data without much of an understanding of what's going on.
All are constrained to our own interpretations and understanding of the environment we are evaluating (ie. garbage in, garbage out). That is the point. We can statistically evaluate the likelihood of many things we "know", but attempting to calculate that which we do not know and do not understand is simply a process of exploration, not a method of validation. Those who look to models for answers simply find the answers they were looking for.
That isn't true. I'm not sure why you think models work by "guessing what a large number of unknowns might be and how they may function." That is just plain wrong.
Any fool can claim someone wrong, why don't you show why I am wrong. Go ahead, explain to me why what I said is invalid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
LOL. We don't do anything about climate change. So we keep doing what we are doing eh?
We keep testing and evaluating until we understand. You are the one suggesting we make conclusions on unfounded assumptions and then act on them. Have you ever taken a true scientific course or is your education in the science that of "summation" course that talk about the subject, but never require the student to actually validate a given position?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
Whatever Nomander. We've been back and forth on models and the validity. You take your side and I'll take my side with all the new technologies and understanding of things that were previously impossible.
You believe in deep thought, I don't. You see, I know how computers work and I understand mathematics (I mean, you kind of have to in order to get degrees in both), so you aren't fooling me when you take the stance of "You just don't understand". You can sell your garbage to a liberal arts major, not I.
I simply used google images and put forth 3 graphs to illustrate how this nonsense of AGW as some sort of wealth distributions scheme was foolish. Furthermore, I explicitly said ," And of course I could spend more than a minute and half getting charts."
If you had simply properly read my post instead of getting a chubby that you found something off about one of the graphs, you'd realize I had intentionally not put forth any work in assembling them. Why? Because I don't want to take this thread completely off topic with wealth redistribution or put lot of effort into it. I had merely assumed the adjustments were inflationary because I didn't really care about the graphs just the notion of wealth is continually being distributed to the top earners. If it's that big of a deal to you, I could spend a whole 5 minutes and get you some official charts and graphs from more credible institutes. Would that make you happy?
THIS IS AN INTERNET FORUM AND SOME PEOPLE'S TIME IS MORE VALUABLE THAN POSTING A MASTERPIECE OF A REBUTTAL. You are thinking way too much into this. If it makes you feel better as a person then you can chalk this up as a win for you that I posted a chart that I didn't look at.
As to your point. Both sides do what you are speaking about. Both sides have agendas. Both sides lie.
I wasn't responding to make an argument about wealth redistribution, or even global warming. I simply pointed out a bad graph. Dozens of graphs like yours are posted everyday, and many times they are accepted at faith value without scrutiny. Often times they are assembled by authors with no science background or even a clear understanding of the data. Microsoft Office makes it easy to create pretty charts. I'd bet 80% of the charts related to AGW or the economy are wrong. And yes, both sides are equally guilty.
So we are clear, it is wealth redistribution. When Hillary says it's not fair that a poor country in Africa suffers because of the actions of the major industrial nations and should be compensated, the intent is clear.
I wasn't responding to make an argument about wealth redistribution, or even global warming. I simply pointed out a bad graph. Dozens of graphs like yours are posted everyday, and many times they are accepted at faith value without scrutiny. Often times they are assembled by authors with no science background or even a clear understanding of the data. Microsoft Office makes it easy to create pretty charts.
I made a graph, too and no one's commenting on it. It was even about the Arctic!
So the sea ice is not going to nearly disappear, then? I mean, in 4 days the sea ice is supposed to be almost all but gone. But you say the melting season is over
No one said that for this year. Well maybe someone, dunno.
The melting season was leveling off several weeks earlier.
Aw gotta make cute little jokes and smilies because you're out of your league.....
But to answer your question, not in our lifetimes.
Whoa!! We already have Obama worrying about the future yet unborn life times with that 16 trillion in debt they have already! My 3 year old grandson, grandson will still be paying that debt and he isn't even born yet, no one knows if my grandson will be gay even and have no child of his own, or if he will have a SO in some form, only God knows what....
And we have to worry about weather then, for them now when they are years away from being born yet?
Hell No! I want my palm trees on that icy ledge next week!
Why I just got done wiring a control cabinet for Dignity, that will run hammer and burr mills to smash and bash coconuts, which will make green fiberglass, more essential oils for the resins in glass and plastics, which i know you don't know anything about, but still it would be handy if i had some wild coconuts here to smash and bash, instead of having these heavy objects shipped all the way from the Philippines.
Did you try that glass of ice water experiment yet?
Oh yeah I don't think it is a wise idea to let the Democrats worry about things like Earth, the Weather, or much of anything. They always seem to have a problem with the sky falling on their heads.
Yes, yes, I know it has that scary word 'scientists' in the title, but watch it anyway.
You can still drive your gas-guzzling truck/suv to work, come home to a beer and your dinner and watch some football or HBO which has all those nekkid women.
Meanwhile, stuff is happening that will affect your kids, most definitely your grandchildren. They'll remember your disinterest, I'm sure.
Interesting that those of us who have no kids, and very limited relatives should be the lest concerned. Seems it is the other way around, both young and old. Personally I could care little about what happens after my ashes have been scattered to the wind.... Its the Young dynamic progressive kids out there that have a lot invested in the future. They should be Mad as Hell considering what is going on.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well maybe someone, dunno.
