|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 07/14/2007 : 00:05:50 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Based on these facts one can not claim a certainly that man is the cause of warming. |
Nice try, but you claimed that the one graph you posted shows that the behaviour of the Sun since 1985 has been consistent with global warming. Rather than demolish a strawman of your own devising, why not provide support for the claim that you did, in fact, make? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 07/14/2007 : 02:04:42 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Kil
Phil Plait from his blog:
First off, I want to make a very big point here: the changes in the Earth due to global warming, while real, are somewhat subtle. Yet the Earth gets most of its heat from the Sun,1. so if the Sun were the cause, we'd expect the effects of warming to be much stronger on Earth than any outer planets. So any really strong signal of global warming on outer planets like Jupiter or especially Pluto, if real, are very unlikely to be due to the Sun.
Second, what I am seeing in these arguments is a very dangerous practice called "cherry picking"; selectively picking out data that support your argument and ignoring contrary evidence. It certainly looks interesting that Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Triton, and Pluto are warming, and if that's all you heard then it seems logical to think maybe the Sun is the cause. But they aren't the only objects in the solar system.2. What about Mercury, Venus, Saturn, Uranus… and if you include Triton to support your case, you'd better also take a good look at the nearly 100 other sizable moons in the solar system. Are they warming too?
I have heard nothing about them in these arguments, and I suspect it's because there's not much to say. If they are not warming, then deniers won't mention them, and scientists won't report it because there is nothing to report ("News flash: Phobos still the same temperature!" is unlikely to get into Planetary Science journals). However, I can't say that with conviction, because the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Any planetary scientists reading this blog entry, please contact me. I'm interested in hearing more.
Third, if you actually read the articles about the specific cases of planetary warming to which I linked above,3. you see that they all have separate explanations: |
|
1. Yes; if all other factors are equal, which they are not , as such this argument is disseminated for the non thinking believers.
2. Yes; what about them. I can not seem to find current information about their temperature and none was provided in this attempt to obscure the information that is available.
3. They have separate hypothesis, not explanations.
This guy is short on fact and long on faith.
|
The Bad Astronomer's point on cherry-picking is made....
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 07:59:42 [Permalink]
|
I know I said I wasn't going to do this, but after a look at Jeromes supporting evidence (?), I have to comment.
Speaking of cherry picking, I looked at Jeromes list of links to support his case.
Only the last one hypothesized that solar heating was possibly the main reason for global warming on our planet.
Most of the links supported what Plait had to say about heating on other planets and moons and did not mention the sun as the culprit except for the one on Pluto which suggested the planet (or asteroid) has an highly elliptical orbit that brings it closer to the sun during its 248 Earth year trip around the sun.
The stuff about Triton, Saturn and Jupiter didn't mention solar as a reason for the warming, and in fact, no claim was made that Saturn is is warming. So all of those were simply cherry picked and irrelevant.
Back to Jeromes link to “The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame
http://tinyurl.com/3vqhj, what is left out about Dr. Solanki's thoughts about MMGW is this:
Not that Dr. Solanki discredits the role of man-made greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide. These have probably played a large role in Earth's climate, he believes, but only since 1980 or so, when the sun's almost perfect correlation with Earth temperatures ended. He also believes that evidence that greenhouse gases have played a larger role in climate change may some day turn up, because his near-perfect correlation does not constitute proof. To date, however, he hasn't seen anything compelling that undermines his own findings. |
So even he makes no claim that greenhouse gasses are not responsible for our current warming. He just wants to see more research in that area.
Hey Jerome, If you insist in cherry picking, you might consider the possibility that we will check out your links to see of they are even relevant…
Jerome:
Man must be so powerful that he can effect this entire solar system with his pollution!
 |
Most sarcasm has some bearing on what has been said. This bit of sarcasm is meaningless...
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 10:59:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Dave, your link presented no data.
Sunspot Activity at 8,000-Year High
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sunspot_record_041027.html
| Solanki's team calculates that, based on history, the chances of sunspot activity remaining at the currently high levels for another 50 years is 8 percent. Odds are just 1 percent the solar exuberance will last through the end of this century. |
| Previous studies have suggested cooler periods on Earth were related to long stretches with low sunspot counts. From the 1400s to the 1700s, for example, Europe and North America experienced a "Little Ice Age." For a period of about 50 years during that time, there were almost no sunspots. |
We have evidence that lack of sunspots corresponds with cooling.
We have evidence that currently the suns activity is high.
We know its warmer.
Based on these facts one can not claim a certainly that man is the cause of warming.
|
Looks like everyone cherry picked this data and tossed it.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 07/14/2007 : 11:03:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by filthy
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Kil
Phil Plait from his blog:
First off, I want to make a very big point here: the changes in the Earth due to global warming, while real, are somewhat subtle. Yet the Earth gets most of its heat from the Sun,1. so if the Sun were the cause, we'd expect the effects of warming to be much stronger on Earth than any outer planets. So any really strong signal of global warming on outer planets like Jupiter or especially Pluto, if real, are very unlikely to be due to the Sun.
Second, what I am seeing in these arguments is a very dangerous practice called "cherry picking"; selectively picking out data that support your argument and ignoring contrary evidence. It certainly looks interesting that Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Triton, and Pluto are warming, and if that's all you heard then it seems logical to think maybe the Sun is the cause. But they aren't the only objects in the solar system.2. What about Mercury, Venus, Saturn, Uranus… and if you include Triton to support your case, you'd better also take a good look at the nearly 100 other sizable moons in the solar system. Are they warming too?
I have heard nothing about them in these arguments, and I suspect it's because there's not much to say. If they are not warming, then deniers won't mention them, and scientists won't report it because there is nothing to report ("News flash: Phobos still the same temperature!" is unlikely to get into Planetary Science journals). However, I can't say that with conviction, because the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Any planetary scientists reading this blog entry, please contact me. I'm interested in hearing more.
Third, if you actually read the articles about the specific cases of planetary warming to which I linked above,3. you see that they all have separate explanations: |
|
1. Yes; if all other factors are equal, which they are not , as such this argument is disseminated for the non thinking believers.
2. Yes; what about them. I can not seem to find current information about their temperature and none was provided in this attempt to obscure the information that is available.
3. They have separate hypothesis, not explanations.
This guy is short on fact and long on faith.
|
The Bad Astronomer's point on cherry-picking is made....
|
No, I highlighted the relevant point and left it in context. The surrounding words show no evidence that the points are based on anything other than a preconceived idea.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 11:14:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Looks like everyone cherry picked this data and tossed it. |
What, your strawman? Sure! When is it not okay to toss out a strawman? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 07/14/2007 : 11:28:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Looks like everyone cherry picked this data and tossed it. |
What, your strawman? Sure! When is it not okay to toss out a strawman?
|
What false or exaggerated claim did I present that you made that I knocked down?
 |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 11:35:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
What false or exaggerated claim did I present that you made that I knocked down? |
Ahem:Based on these facts one can not claim a certainly that man is the cause of warming. The claim in the OP is that the Sun is not the primary cause of global warming. Nobody in this thread has made the claim that you criticized, especially because it's a stupid claim to make, and easy to knock down. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 12:00:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
What false or exaggerated claim did I present that you made that I knocked down? |
Ahem:Based on these facts one can not claim a certainly that man is the cause of warming. The claim in the OP is that the Sun is not the primary cause of global warming. Nobody in this thread has made the claim that you criticized, especially because it's a stupid claim to make, and easy to knock down.
|
What?
We spent something like 50 pages talking about the claim that man is causing global warming on the earth. Now you admit this is a stupid claim?
So; no this is not a straw man, and your OP was presented for the purpose of showing that a reason claimed by deniers for warming outside of man is wrong.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 12:15:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
What?
We spent something like 50 pages talking about the claim that man is causing global warming on the earth. Now you admit this is a stupid claim? |
No, we spent 50 pages defending the idea that human emissions of CO2 are most likely to be the primary cause of global climate change, while you still insist that the claim is, instead, that there is "a certainly [sic] that man is the cause of warming."| So; no this is not a straw man... |
How could it not be a strawman? You've built a caricature of the real claim, and you gleefully knock it over as if you're debunking the real claim. That's a classic strawman, and brazenly transparent, too.| ...and your OP was presented for the purpose of showing that a reason claimed by deniers for warming outside of man is wrong. |
And it is wrong, but that doesn't mean that the polar opposite claim is necessarily true. It seems that along with being an idealist, you also only see things in black or white. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 13:00:28 [Permalink]
|
Jerome:
No, I highlighted the relevant point and left it in context. The surrounding words show no evidence that the points are based on anything other than a preconceived idea. |
This is idiotic. As Plait pointed out, scientists are not given to report on events that did not happen. There are several more planets and hundreds of moons in the solar system, only a few of which have shown signs of warming, and that has been reported. He even included a rundown of most of the planets that you linked to Jerome and the likely causes of warming on those, plus, he included a call out to planetary scientists to correct him if he is wrong. Plait, being an astronomer of note, would not have been ignored by other astronomers if he were wrong, and they would have responded by now. That article is from back in early April.
Of course, you probably didn't click on to the provided link and read the whole article.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 13:16:05 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Jerome:
No, I highlighted the relevant point and left it in context. The surrounding words show no evidence that the points are based on anything other than a preconceived idea. |
This is idiotic. As Plait pointed out, scientists are not given to report on events that did not happen. There are several more planets and hundreds of moons in the solar system, only a few of which have shown signs of warming, and that has been reported. He even included a rundown of most of the planets that you linked to Jerome and the likely causes of warming on those, plus, he included a call out to planetary scientists to correct him if he is wrong. Plait, being an astronomer of note, would not have been ignored by other astronomers if he were wrong, and they would have responded by now. That article is from back in early April.
Of course, you probably didn't click on to the provided link and read the whole article.
|
Scientist do not "peer review" blogs.
I did read the article.
 |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 07/14/2007 : 14:38:47 [Permalink]
|
Jerome:
Scientist do not "peer review" blogs. |
Right. And this was a blog, as noted. Scientists do talk to each other however. And they do comment. And I assure you that many scientists, including astronomers and climatologists read Phil Plait's blog.
But hey, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it float…
And since most of the crap that you linked to did not support the hypothesis you seem to favor, and in fact, in most cases did not even mention solar warming, or included it as only part of the problem, I will assume that you really don't have anything beyond your silly cherry picking and accept that your argument lacks substance.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Global warming news
