Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Every week there's a new explanation of the hia (Score 1) 333

by budgenator (#47732465) Attached to: Cause of Global Warming 'Hiatus' Found Deep In the Atlantic

The science drove the unbeleivers out.
That's how science works.

You don't get to question Einstein just because.
The more evidence for the prevailing theory piles up, the greater the burden of proof you must overcome in order to overturn the consensus.
You don't have the automatic right to considered just as valid just because you have the ability to say "well, i think it's....". You need a damn good pile of data to back you up.

and right now, the cranks have diddly squat.

I thought Einstein was the guy who said "You don't need a consensus to disprove a theory, you just need one person" or something close to it.

Comment: Re:Every week there's a new explanation of the hia (Score 1) 333

by budgenator (#47732239) Attached to: Cause of Global Warming 'Hiatus' Found Deep In the Atlantic

2. CO2 traps heat (experiments showing that are all over the internet.)

Any "experiment" about CO2 "trapping" heat, you see on the internet will vary from amusing naiveté, to blatant fraud like the Al Gore/Bill Nye demonstration; they will all be wrong.

Comment: Re:Every week there's a new explanation of the hia (Score 1) 333

by budgenator (#47731181) Attached to: Cause of Global Warming 'Hiatus' Found Deep In the Atlantic

Do enlighten us - please link to an example of "sketchy science" that has been proved wrong by more solid, peer-reviewed science.

Strangely, all the examples I can find just support the consensus view.

How does 95 different climate models, returning 95 different results, all of which fail to approximate real-world data support a consensus view, and what does a consensus have to do with science in the first place? Here's a clue, if you want me to make an effort to reduce my "carbon footprint" and spend more of my hard earned money to achieve the same, don't hide your supporting original research behind a paywall. I'm not convinced by the interpretations of a Journalism Major that graduated from a liberal arts college in matters of real science, most of those dwebes couldn't pass a real laboratory science class if their lives depended on it; let's see what Journalists have to say after they've passed Calc I &II, DifEq, Stats and a Physics class!

I did read the Press Release and found an interesting reference to the fear of an impending ice-age back in the '70s

The authors dug up historical data to show that the cooling in the three decades between 1945 to 1975 – which caused people to worry about the start of an Ice Age – was during a cooling phase. (It was thought to have been caused by air pollution.) Earlier records in Central England show the 40- to 70-year cycle goes back centuries, and other records show it has existed for millennia.

Changes in Atlantic Ocean circulation historically meant roughly 30 warmer years followed by 30 cooler years.

seems like that means that all of the Warmists who claimed that fear of an ice age during the 1970's was denialist propaganda, are either incompetent researchers or bald-faced liars. Oh by the way if you want to know more about the 30/60 year quasi-periodic warming and cooling cycles due to the ADO and PDO, ther is tons of info over at WattsUpWithThat to get you started.

Comment: Re: While you're at it (Score 1) 92

The flaw is your visualizing a universe and imagining something inside exploding, rather than nothing exploding into something. For the most part, the human mind can't understand that shit, it's all jabberwocky

Twas bryllyg, and ye slythy toves
Did gyre and gymble in ye wabe:
All mimsy were ye borogoves;
And ye mome raths outgrabe.

just the maths is understandable.

Comment: Re:Easy, India or China (Score 1) 292

by budgenator (#47719703) Attached to: Scientists Baffled By Unknown Source of Ozone-Depleting Chemical

Maybe the radical fringe in the Democratic party doesn't count anything as "environmental initiative" unless it is narsisitic grandious exhibitionism and the moderates in both party find themselves putting more effort into keeping the fringes from scuttling any posible consensus than they do solve real demonstrable problems.

For example FTA,

"It is now apparent there are either unidentified industrial leakages, large emissions from contaminated sites, or unknown CCl4 sources."

how many Eco-activists are going to automatically assume that it's "unidentified industrial leakages" from evil one-percenter corporations, vs. those wondering if salt in seawater, natural organic chemicals and high energy photons may be cause a previously unrecognised chemical reaction? Even odder, we have no evidence that there ever was no hole in the ozone, so how do we decide how much is anthropgenic and how much is natural variation and how much is always was?

Comment: Re:California At It Again (Score 1) 97

by budgenator (#47684433) Attached to: How California's Carbon Market Actually Works

Australian is a net CO2 sink, and the globe hasn't warmed for almost 18 years anyway; so I don't understant your point. Another thing is that conspiracy theorists amongst those you call denialist has been very throughly debunked, in fact 100% of "denialist" agree that man has caused some warming due to CO2 vs. 97% of Warmist agree with that statement! And before you go all conspiracy theorist about "Big Oil/Coal Shills" the CRU gets considerable funding from evil "Big Oil/Coal".

Comment: Re:False Savings (Score 1) 97

by budgenator (#47682921) Attached to: How California's Carbon Market Actually Works

Hawaii is pretty unique situation, there even if you forget to turn on the "solar water" the temp of you shower is tollerable. When I was there last, it seemed there was no weather reports on TV, I assumed it was because any time the weather was different enough to report it was a news item. Residential heating is unnecessary from what I could see the winter I was there and I doubt A/C would be used even in the summer. I know it snows on Mona Loa on "big Island" but at lower elevation it's always nice.

Comment: Re:Quit COMPLAINING about Comcast and buy them out (Score 1) 364

by budgenator (#47657179) Attached to: Comcast Drops Spurious Fees When Customer Reveals Recording

Natural monopolies should never be for profit. This is what happens when you pay lip service to free market capitalism and fail to regulate.

We'd be so much better off if Comcast took all of the money paid out as dividends and put it into bonus checks for management instead.

The best way to avoid responsibility is to say, "I've got responsibilities."