Friday, February 19, 2016

Further dialogues with the disconnected

I left a simple comment at the following YouTube video, basically sharing notes I'd put together.  Next thing I know I wind up in another textbook exchange with a climate science contrarian type, I swear Heartland must have brigades of faithful combing the internet.  Since it turned into another vehicle for explaining my position and exposing the tactics of climate science contrarian pros, I'm going to share it, first the short build up, then I have a closer look at his most recent challenge.  His words are unaltered and in Comic Sans font.  
{sorry about the typos - touch up editing 2/20, 10:30 AM}

CO2 & the Atmosphere
Earth: The Operators' Manual

0:00  -  What CO2 does was confirmed by Air Force atmospheric research.
0:10  -  Studying the physics of the upper atmosphere for communications and heat seeking missiles.
1:00  -  "The air force hadn't set out to study global warming, they just wanted their missiles to work.  But physics is physics.  The atmosphere doesn't care if you are studying it for warring or warming.  Adding CO2 turns up the planet's thermostat."
1:20  -  Works in the other direction also, remove CO2 and planet cools.
1:30  -  Glacier studies
3:00  -  Glacier cross-section, deposition, accumulation, record of the past.
4:30  -  Orbital and rotational variations and their impact on sun's insolation.
5:10  -  Ice ages
6:00  -  Glaciers as earth mover
6:35  -  Time-lapse animation of glacial advance retreat
7:15  -  Orbital/rotational driven insolation variations interaction with Earth's many CO2 reservoirs and cycles.
8:00  -  {eye witness to a disintegrating glacier}
8:50  -  Place thermometers any where on this planet and they show warming.
The evidence is clear, the Earth's climate is warming.

Dude writes:
Co2 was not the driver of climate over the last several thousand years.  The AGW debate today,  centres  around  the  notion  that  carbon  dioxide  drives today's  climate due  to  its  volume.  But  according  to  the  ice  core record,  rising  levels  of  Co2 followed warming by  several  hundreds of  years. 

I responded:
{To begin with CO2 is exactly what's been regulating climate fluctuations over the past few thousand years.  The lag during temperature fluctuations you're talking about, goes back tens of thousands to millions of years, not a few thousand.}

OK besides that, have you every tried to understand why those lags happened?  
I know climatologist did and continue to.  Further data and refinement of resolution, besides helping better understand some of the drivers and mechanisms, it has also revealed that the said "lag" wasn't near as big as originally assumed. An example of science always moving forward.

You my friend are relying on ignoring new evidence and clinging to whatever notion fits your dogma, with no curiosity about the WHY.  Why aren't you curious about understanding those mysteries you take so much stock in?  Get up to date:  "Ice Core Data Help Solve a Global Warming Mystery" - Why do some ice core samples seem to indicate CO2 spikes trailed increases in global temperature? It’s all about the way bubbles move in ice -
~~~ It's the atmospheric insulation silly! ~~~  Grow up face the facts.  We really are doing this to ourselves.

Why does CO2 get most of the attention when there are so many other heat-trapping gases (greenhouse gases)?

How CO2 warming is driving climate

Richard Alley - 4.6 Billion Years of Earth’s Climate History: The Role of CO2

Dude was not impressed, responding:
We are doing what to ourselves? What catastrophe is imminent? The blob off the West coast is disappearing, and it is evident El Nino is waning. Both of these systems which were not understood south of the satellite record {1}, both existed prior to the sat record, are powerful climatic drivers. The latter drives global temps up by a degree over the course of a year. So what has caused the temp spikes of the last couple of years? We are we doing what to ourselves? {2}
As for the lag, new theories are welcome. And the very existence of the lag, of which there is considerable evidence, is problematic for CAGW theory. 
{Why would that be?}
Also, what is the dogma I subscribe to?  You seem very sure that I have dogmatic beliefs; so what are they? {3}  As well, you claim that I'm not curious... How can you know that for certain. {4} Isn't it more likely that you're making statements of which you have little evidence to support? {then link to and consider this} 
I tried clarifying:
I was referring to the North Atlantic, not the Pacific ocean. ~ Ocean currents and oscillations do not warm the global system, they merely move heat around!  ~  It's the Global Atmospheric Insulation increasing because of greenhouse gases that are causing the entire system to warm (remember the oceans hold 90% of our climate systems heat). 

"problematic"? - You know scientists have been looking at those "problematics" for a long time and they have learned an amazing amount of things about the system - keeping yourself trapped in decades old limitations is your fraud. ~  You need to look at the full spectrum of available evidence!  As for the various oddities, Antarctic seasonal ice growth, etc. - you just have to look a little deeper and you will learn why such things are happening.  It's not that complicated, you just need to be honest with the evidence.
fyi -
* Did global warming stop in 1998199520022007, 2010?
{1}   Not true!  
New results from high-resolution coral records document with high confidence that the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) system has remained highly variable throughout the past 7000 years, showing no discernible evidence for an orbital modula- tion of ENSO. This is consistent with the weak reduction in mid-Hol- ocene ENSO amplitude of only 10% simulated by the majority of cli- mate models, but contrasts with reconstructions reported in AR4 that showed a reduction in ENSO variance during the first half of the Hol- ocene. {5.4.1}
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 
{2}   Stanford Report, September 17, 2015
Global warming 'hiatus' never happened, Stanford scientists say
A new study reveals that the evidence for a recent pause in the rate of global warming lacks a sound statistical basis. The finding highlights the importance of using appropriate statistical techniques and should improve confidence in climate model projections. ...
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
{3}    I imagine your dogma is that you believe it's okay to ignore the global community of scientists, that would be the experts, if you don't like the implications of their science.  I say this because you are doing it!  Also I imagine, that you believe it's okay to do science by lawyerly debate (backed up by the 'he who screams the loudest wins' principle of public debate), rather than constructive level playing field debate of the honest students science.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
{4}    Well first off, you are unfamiliar with information I know is out there.  You also haven't been curious enough to look at my presentation and offer your considered opinion.  No, please don't use the, "You're an idiot so it's not worth my time" cop out - it's not "my" science, it's merely me sharing what the community of experts has established.
As an afterthought I tossed in:
Oh as for the CAGW - denying that reality seems another crescendo of human disconnect from reality.  Do you have any conception of workings of our complex society?  Where do you get off imagining it's invulnerable??  Ever hear of compounding interest?  You should know the principle holds true for physical systems too.  And how huge do you want the disaster to be?... before you take it seriously?... and we get to call it a catastrophe… have you been paying any attention to global news???  Google "climate hot map" sometime.  Get to know the world you're living in.
The came the response that's inspired sharing this particular exchange.  
I have neither changed nor deleted any of his words, only adding paragraph breaks to make room for my response to this classic bit of obfuscation:

Dude:  You're fallaciously correlating global events to CAGW theory, which is a NULL hypothesis; where much better, supported theories exist. 
Your's are empty words.  I don't know about your null hypothesis, but for me obeying the laws of physics seems a good place to park my null hypothesis.  

Greenhouse gases really, honestly, act as physical insulation for our global heat and moisture distribution engine.  No way around that, no matter how much fancy talk you toss at it.

CAGW - Our society developed within a narrow range of climate conditions, whose rhythms are millennia old.  Every facet of our society is tuned to the range of past climate conditions - we have shifted to increasingly hot and increasingly extreme events and we are not prepared for it and you pretend it's not going to be viciously disruptive??   

As for "fallacious," my god, what can be more fallacious than pretending recent local catastrophe's aren't directly tied to our warming climate engine!?

Is Global Warming Linked to Severe Weather?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 
Climate Change Impacts
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Climate Change Has Intensified the Global Water Cycle

Dude:  You're all over the map, in fact. 
Actually all over the globe and under the oceans too!  

What's the problem?  It is a coherent global heat and moisture distribution engine, we're talking about.  

I've made an effort to describe it in a rational manner.  Ignoring it won't make it's truth any less true.
It is based on and supported by a trove of scientific work done by a community of serious professional honorable people, spanning generations and all the nations of the world.  Against that, you folks never come up with anything but this sort of evasive circus talk.

Dude:  Anybody who claims the global climatic system is easy to understand, when the lions share of relevant data has not seen conception is an idiot. 
What does "data has not seen conception" mean?

The fundamentals aren't that difficult, it's the fine details that are devilishly difficult.

What contrarians refuse to admit is that the fine details make absolutely no difference to the over all reality of the situation, or humanity's need to act or yes, the ultimate CAGW threat (from the human perspective that is,  Earth would probably heave a sigh of relief) will happen.

The concept is simple we are increasing our planet's atmospheric insulation, that in turn is being translated into a warming global heat and moisture distribution engine with all its cascading consequence (and no we don't need to know every threat, to know we are very threatened.).  In turn, that climate engine drives weather patterns and dictates the state of our biosphere, upon which we depend for everything.

Dude:  Thats akin to claiming to know precisely how much milk my neighbours have consumed this year, based on my my consumption. Both coverage and resolution have to be immaculate, and in areas we have yet to survey. 
Why drag in such nonsense, it's a meaningless distraction and time waster.  Why do you think every square meter of water has to have a number on it?
Why does coverage have to be "immaculate"?  Why do you think we need to know every fact out to three digits past the decimal point?  

It should be about understanding the basic geophysics of our planet and getting real about what is being observed throughout this planet and what that tells us about our future prospects.

Dude:  New theories  come to light every few months which upset the theories of the past. This ecological scientific cycle is absolutely like no other in  history, because of the toolset we now employ(a toolset which will grows like a newborn). 
Please list a few of these "new theories," please. __________
Because I think you are speaking nonsense you can't back up.

Climate science contrarian haven't been doing anything but rerunning old "theories" - There is no cloud iris effect, it's not cosmic rays, yes the observations are plenty accurate!  

New details are constantly being discovered and old understanding gets refined but the over understanding hasn't changed in a half century.  Has something to do with the fact that it accurately represents what's been observed upon our physical planet. 

Dude:  Expect that all theoretical sacred cows are doomed. Those left standing in the next hundred years or so will have survived a maelstrom of brutalality from scientists seeking to make their mark. 
Consider the ARGO fleet; very accurate, extremely sparse. 
It's the Republican/libertarian PR machine that's crammed full of sacred cows - such as the delusion that endless economic growth is possible.

What's "extremely sparse" - Setting impossible expectations is not how to learn any thing about our planet!

Incidentally, Isaac Asimov wrote a very enlightening essay specifically on this misleading point you're trying to make:

Dude:  Consider the market of research today compared to 20 - 30 years ago. Today CAGW is a trillion dollar industry, employing an army of modelers, researchers etc. 
I don't give a fart for market research, that's PR lalaland.  
This is supposed to be about understanding how our global heat and moisture distribution engine operates!

Dude:  Are we to expect all of our precious theories will be left alone? But maybe you're right...maybe ita all very simple to understand our global systems as soon as we have amassed your level of deep comprehension. 
Sort of depends, we can certainly expect that gravity will always happen, our planet will always rotate and molecule's radiative properties will always be what they are.  Those "precious theories" are sure to endure.

Yes!  Learning about Earth's life supporting climate engine is relatively easy, all it takes is the attitude of a sincere curiosity student - as opposed to a lawyer trying his case, someone who couldn't care less about acknowledging let alone trying to understand the "opposition's" evidence - since that would mean he'd have to drop his case.

Dude:  As for the full spectrum of available evidence; I have absolutely obsessed over, its now impossible to keep up. Like music, its creation outpaces our ability to consume it. But maybe you can keep up. I imagine, on the subject of global climate, I am fluent in areas where you are not and vice versa. 
Yes, I imagine you have obsessed over it, but it certainly has not been the full spectrum of evidence.  Your one-sided delivery gives that away.  I get the impression you have tunnel vision.  Too obsessed with irrelevant fine details to fit your line of attack while totally missed the big picture.

Like trying to construct a house with a micrometer.

Dude:  Why not keep the chat to a simple exchange and leave out the negative assumptions. Otherwise it gets combative, and we stop listening to each other.
How about you?  One thing I've found is that your side never lives by the fair-play standards they expect from others?  Sort of pathetic, but in the PR wars, oh so successful.  

Also, how about lightening up on the conspiracy ideation and focusing on the real issues, rather than this obsessive obfuscation?  Or pretending that the world's experts and genuinely serious scientists are all to be rejected on this one topic - in favor of a handful of old crackpots?

Oh and how about not lying about what's settled physics, that would be much appreciated! (Such as the role of greenhouse gases in regulating our planet's temperature.)

A Hyperlinked History of Climate Change Science 

Some further thoughts to ponder.

Sunday, February 14, 2016

Sadly all too many.  

I often hear people, not just the religious with their paper thin understanding, but educated rational people who superficially accept the notion of evolution, but who have never spent anytime really absorbing what Earth's pageant of evolution has been all about, dismissing the need to learn anything about it.  

Its all led to a general apathy that I can't for the life of me comprehend.  Especially considering what an amazingly beautiful, complex, mysterious and absolutely relevant story it is.

This general apathy terrifies me, and compels me to share some of the building blocks that have shaped my own developing basic understanding.  I have a head-start since I've been fascinated by this Creation I was born into since my earliest days.  The wonder of it, and the things I've learned makes me want to share some of my experience and perspectives during what time remains for my own, oh so splendid, journey on this wonderful planet.

Tragically, people who never pondered the reality, (that all we have today is the direct product of four and a half billion years of evolution, unfolding one magnificent day after another), lack the foundation to understand what we are doing to our planet and life support system these days.  It explains why we have so many profoundly ignorant, self-deluded and disconnected politicians and 'masters of the universe' these days.

When I toss out a concept such as, our "Global Heat and Moisture Distribution Engine," it's blank faces all around.  

Why?   I'm fearing listeners have no fundamental conception for the intricate interconnections between our evolving Earth, oceans and land masses.  Without that awareness, of course they'll never get it. 

After all, our atmosphere is the direct product of a fantastic evolutionary process that married geology and biology and took billions of years to unfold.  Without understanding how it got here, there's no way one can comprehend what we have,... and what we are doing to "it",... that is, the only life, and economy, support system we have.

January 6, 2016
{1} Our Global Heat and Moisture Distribution Engine

January 9, 2016
{2} Co-evolution of Minerals and Life | Dr Robert Hazen

January 14, 2016
{3} Evolution of Carbon and our biosphere - Professor Hazen focuses on the element Carbon

January 23, 2016
{4} Evolution-Considering Deep Time and a Couple Big Breaks

February 6, 2016
{5a} The Most Beautiful Graph on Earth - A. Hessler

February 7, 2016
{5b} Earth's Earliest Climate - By Angela Hessler

February 14, 2016
{6} Evolution of Earth's Atmosphere - easy version

February 18, 2016
{7} Our Global Heat and Moisture Distribution Engine, visualized

providence willing, more to follow.

No comments: