for the skeptical

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by TomB, Feb 2, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. speyfisher

    speyfisher Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,346
    Likes Received:
    366
    Location:
    State of Jefferson U.S.A.
    iagree All famous big time scientists have an agenda to push. Remember the nuclear winter predictions?ptyd Where is that guy now? Politicians are even worse. :beathead: Rest assured nothing you or I do with have even the minutest effect on the matter. So just enjoy the day and go fishing.:beer1:
     
  2. salt dog

    salt dog card shark

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    2,316
    Likes Received:
    11
    Location:
    Edmonds WA / Mazama
    If I correctly recall my statistics class from long ago, any statistic with a margin of error greater than plus+ or minus- .02 is, at best, purely anecdotal evidence, and is without scientific reliability.
     
  3. jhemphill

    jhemphill New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    renton, wa
    ice ages have come and gone so have very warm periods and that was way before there were cars and smoke stacks
     
  4. Will Atlas

    Will Atlas Guest

    Philster,
    A 90% confidence would mean the following. 90% of the time, the trend in the data (ie. warming) cannot be explained by "random sampling variation". In science (at least ecology), a 95% certainty is considered "statistically significant". However, because of the difficulty of collecting climate data, and the kind of time scale we're talking about, certainty is a bit hard to come by. I would say a 90% certainty is about as good as it gets, and by the time our "certainty" gets any better we'll be covered in sea water and sweating our asses off.

    As for your comment about loudmouth liberals, I have to agree with you...in some cases. Anyone talking in polarized stark terms, convinced they are correct without viewing the otherside is an idiot. I would say however, conservatives are at least as guilty of these political crimes as liberals. furthermore, I think that climate change really doesnt need to be about party politics. Its too big a problem to be solved by half the country, it has and will have a huge impact on all of our lives, and therefore I think its time something started happening in DC to deal with it.

    KEH and all others skeptical of human impacts,
    Consider the facts...Gases such as Co2 and Methane (CH4) contribute to a preexisting phenomenon known as the Green House Effect. Basically they absorb the energy the earth is giving off and turn it into heat. Without ANY greenhouse gases our planetary temp would be somewhere in the realm of -40 degrees, so its a good thing we have them. However, since the industrial revolution the concentration of CO2 in our atmophere has increased from 260 parts per million to 380parts per million. This is the highest concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere since say....the dinosaurs, or maybe even before that. There is no denying human industrial activities are playing a DOMINANT role in increasing CO2 in the atmosphere and I think ChadK hit it on the nose. We're not going to stop using energy, so we have to use it more efficiently and find ways of getting it that dont completely F%ck our world over.

    As for your statement that you "am informed that the United States is doing far more than most nations about decreasing global warming." that is pure falacy. Right now the average US citizen puts 7 tons!!!! of CO2 into the atmosphere annually. Compare that with 0.26 tons per citizen in India or 0.78 tons per citizen in China. And the Bush administration backed out of Kyoto because it needed to be more "even handed with regulating China and India". Right now the US (with the exception of local governments and private citizens ) is doing almost nothing. Europe is so far ahead of us, we look like we're in the stone age. The USA needs to be at the forefront of the issue on the global stage, and While I think that George W. is pretty much full of crap as far as his energy policy goes, I think perhaps the house and senate (via bipartisan efforts) are going to start putting some real legislation to work.

    Will
     
  5. swc7916

    swc7916 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Kirkland, WA
    That's baloney. There's no way that I, personally, produce 7 tons of CO2 anually. Besides, who wants to live like the average person in India or China? Even they don't like it, considering how hard they are trying to improve their living standards.
     
  6. Be Jofus G

    Be Jofus G Banned or Parked

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Washington
    I'm a bit more concerned about the fact that if I wanted to, I couldn't eat the fish I catch because they are basically mercury filled thermometers with fins anymore. Industries on this planet need to stop releasing krap into the air and water anyway.
     
  7. doublespey

    doublespey Steelhead-a-holic

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    688
    Likes Received:
    107
    Location:
    Bothell, WA
    Damn, i love those "Nothing we do will make any difference" posts.

    Means we can keep doing whatever we want and God, GWB, or ~somebody~ is watching over us and will make sure nothing bad happens. Or the fatalistic idea that nothing we do really matters and that these are just big cosmic cycles beyond our understanding (sounds vaguely Stoneheng-ian :) )
     
  8. Philster

    Philster Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,939
    Likes Received:
    346
    Location:
    .
    A 90% confidence would mean the following. 90% of the time, the trend in the data (ie. warming) cannot be explained by "random sampling variation". In science (at least ecology), a 95% certainty is considered "statistically significant". However, because of the difficulty of collecting climate data, and the kind of time scale we're talking about, certainty is a bit hard to come by. I would say a 90% certainty is about as good as it gets

    Thanks Cascade. I know coming from me it wouldn't have been believed. Lay folks don't understand stats and misinterpret them, much like the reporters who repeat the numbers. The only thing I would argue with you here is that it isn't as good as it gets. It's as good as they can do with flawed data. Remember the accuracy of the data they are working with...

    As for your statement that you "am informed that the United States is doing far more than most nations about decreasing global warming." that is pure falacy. Right now the average US citizen puts 7 tons!!!! of CO2 into the atmosphere annually. Compare that with 0.26 tons per citizen in India or 0.78 tons per citizen in China.

    China population: 1,313,973,713. India population: 1,027,015,247. US population: around 300,000,000. This is the reason all this stuff falls apart. How are those countries supposed to elevate their shitty-ass standard of living without increasing emissions? Sorry China, you'll have to lose 2,000,000 folks every winter to freezing? Sorry India, your rural infant mortality rate is going to stay at 60%? China will pass us in emissions in 2 years with no end in their escalation in sight. India? I would have to dig to get those numbers, but someone else pointed it out correctly. Do you want to live like the "average" Indian or Chinese? Do you want them to live as well as you? Oh, and what about all those scientific predictions about population? 4 billion was going to starve us all and kill the planet in under 5 years or some such stuff. We're at over 6.5... Hmmm... right again Scientific Community! Science is pretty darned good at explaining small scale, chemical and physical phenomena. Predicting multi-variable phenomena in an uncontrolled setting... Not so hot...

    And the Bush administration backed out of Kyoto because it needed to be more "even handed with regulating China and India".

    No Bushy backed out because it sucked. No one talks about who else doesn't like it. Lets see... That would be the countries with more than one television set per city block... Oh, and look! Countries with one television set every 100 miles too!
    http://www.sardc.net/editorial/sanf/2001/Iss1/Nf1.html
    After reading that I am still paranoid when I say it is political? To them we cause the climate change and they die. Oh yeah, it's all in my mind...

    Right now the US (with the exception of local governments and private citizens ) is doing almost nothing. Europe is so far ahead of us, we look like we're in the stone age. The USA needs to be at the forefront of the issue on the global stage, and While I think that George W. is pretty much full of crap as far as his energy policy goes, I think perhaps the house and senate (via bipartisan efforts) are going to start putting some real legislation to work.

    Not really true. Slowly american industry is making changes as the necessary technology to make those changes without sacrificing production or raising costs prohibitively becomes affordable. Market forces again. Filters and after burners on smokestacks, Heat sinks on discharge recycled into the producing facility for energy. It's slow but it's happening.

    Anyway Cascade I want to thank you for doing what I've asked folks to do all along. Enter into a fact based debate. Not call names and insult... You rock. Do you fish Saltwater with size 2 and above hooks? I think I have some flies I won't be using anymore. And they're pretty good...
     
  9. Will Atlas

    Will Atlas Guest

    philster, I dont really fish saltwater much. thanks tho. I agree that China and India will be increasingly problematic for the environment as they industrialize. But, again I dont think thats a good reason for us to not do anything.

    You doubt the power of Science, I doubt the power of the market. Scientists think science answers everything, economists think the market is the answer to everything. They're probably both wrong. Additionally, if we pioneer clean energy technology, we'll have a MASSIVE market with China and India as fossil fuels get more expensive.

    -The Diggler
     
  10. Davy

    Davy Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2004
    Messages:
    2,035
    Likes Received:
    27
    Location:
    SIlverton, OR
    if I use less ice in my martini tonight , will that contribute to the cause or worsen the effect of global warming?
     
  11. SteveA

    SteveA Gnu to the board

    Joined:
    May 23, 2006
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Helena, MT
    Judging from the majority of the posts following this statement I have to deduce that LT is psychic.

    Why do so many people feel personally threatened by the very idea of humans contributing to global warming?

    Steve A
     
  12. Richard Olmstead

    Richard Olmstead BigDog

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    3,031
    Likes Received:
    1,734
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    WOW! Is this hyperbole, or are you really the smartest person on earth?

    Tom, all I can do is sigh...

    Dick
     
  13. Philster

    Philster Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,939
    Likes Received:
    346
    Location:
    .
    I doubt the power of science beyond one or two variables in a controlled setting... Seems there's lots of evidence popping up that Cholesterol isn't a good predictor of Heart attacks but something known as "Little A" is. And that lowering cholesterol with statins as we have been doing can lead to parkinsons... You'd think we'd know our bodies by now... Complex systems are just that, Complex. By the way, you need to reexamine your soul. The sentence "Additionally, if we pioneer clean energy technology, we'll have a MASSIVE market with China and India as fossil fuels get more expensive." suggests a belief in market forces driving development of clean technologies. And that's actually what's gonna get it done I feel. Not government, or multi-governmental organizations. I mean cmon. Stopping clear cutting in the rain forrest is pretty easy. Put some blue helmeted folks there with guns and shoot at the sound of chainsaws. Anybody doing anything about deforrestation? Anybody mention deforrestation anymore? No money in it... Aaah, but the long line of lawsuits waiting to happen in the world court if "global warming" becomes internationally policed? WOOOOOOOOO-DOGGY!
     
  14. Philster

    Philster Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,939
    Likes Received:
    346
    Location:
    .
    Personal attack again. Good job. Nope. Interdisciplinary review is a great way to avoid tunnel vision. It's standard practice at lots research facilities and "think tanks". Not my fault I worked someplace like that. And yes, I did feel priviledged to be there and heard some of the great historical figures of Science and Technology speak on a regular basis. I met Kelly Johnson of the Lockheed Skunkworks and Edward "Father of the Hydrogen Bomb" Teller. No matter what you think about their impact on the world, they are major historical figures and I will go to my grave amazed that I had the opportunity to even be in the same room with them. Once again doesn't make me special, just a job perk. The fact you don't know how common Interdisciplinary review is doesn't make mean I'm bragging, it just means you don't know how that world works. I could easily say " Don't talk about my job, I don't come down to yours and cover the buttons with the pictures of food on it with stickers so you can't work the register..." See. Personal attacks are easy and don't accomplish anything. I don't know what you do or did for a living, and I don't make assumptions about what anyone else here does, how old they are, where they've traveled, who they've met, or even if they dare practice a love of which we do not speak... I've met writers, carpenters, photographers, real gee whiz engineering folks on this board. You never know who you're going to meet on the net. If you meet me, you've met someone who is still impressed he met someone. That's hardly bragging. Some would say it's sad :confused:
     
  15. o mykiss

    o mykiss Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2001
    Messages:
    1,507
    Likes Received:
    424
    Location:
    .
    Philster, having read everything you've written about this subject in the last several days I realize I'm probably whistling in the wind, but I have to say your apparent faith in the beneficence of "market forces" and their role in environmental progress strikes me as naïve or disengenuous. I guess you must believe that factory and coal fired utility operators put those afterburners on out of the goodness of their boards' warm little hearts? Where do you think we'd be if we didn't have state and federal clean air, clean water, and other environmental laws, emission standards for autos, etc., etc.? Air and water quality haven't improved in here the last several decades because business wanted to (or because technological advances led the way). Regulation forced the technological change that led to improvements in air and water quality. Go to China if you want to see how business takes care of the environment when there aren't strong environmental laws and regulations and/or efforts to enforce those laws/regulations.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.