I really did laf out loud. You’ll have to get about a 3rd-way through to laf too.
Nobody cares what you think of climate change Richard.
Richard Nikoley says:
By the way, fucktard: the post is about AGW, not “climate change,” demonstrating further your fucktarded bias. […]
Newsflash: I’m not a climate scientist. Also, I’m not so busy as to just take science-whores’ word for stuff.
You’re not a climate scientist; neither am I. I’m master’s student in engineering, studying something totally unrelated climatology.
In science, you can’t be an expert in every field. There are times when it’s best to just resign to the scientific consensus. There’s an _overwhelming_ scientific consensus, and it’s laughable when I see dumbass layman like you try to point fingers at the scientists saying, “there all wrong! I’m so smart!”
Btw, read just the first sentence of that Wiki article.
He really, really wants me/us to read this FIRST SENTENCE:
The scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth’s climate system is unequivocally warming, and it is extremely likely (at least 95% probability [scientific opinion still]) that humans are causing most of it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels.
I guess the master’s student in engineering isn’t quite getting that the article’s title is: Scientific opinion on climate change, a contradiction in essential terms: what exactly is a “scientific opinion?“ I suppose that’s when you simply can’t be bothered with contravening data: “[t]here are times when it’s best to just resign to the scientific consensus.” I dunno. Perhaps he has finals. Maybe he’s simply unaware that there are lots of laudable climatologists who’ve taken off their miniskirts and high heels, and come indoors from seedy corners.
“there all wrong! I’m so smart!”
“There” ALL wrong? I suppose it comes down to Googling Bias: List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming.
This is a list of scientists who have made statements that conflict with the mainstream scientific understanding of global warming as summarized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and endorsed by other scientific bodies.
Establishing the mainstream scientific assessment, climate scientists agree that the global average surface temperature has risen over the last century. The scientific consensus and scientific opinion on climate change were summarized in the 2001 Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Wow, 2001. Way to keep ahead of the CURVE!
…For sure people look at a post like this and think various things. Got Under My Skin. Richard’s Just An Asshole. Make Sure to Get Affiliate Links Out Every Day. Whatever.
The truth is, more and more, I’m just a guy who blogs and for whatever reason, I get to have a reasonably substantial audience. I suspect that the most of it is that I’m willing to put out anything, anytime, that’s within my personal sphere of propriety. I have zero fear of repercussions. I simply don’t care what anyone thinks about what I do, the choices I take. I just don’t. I often wonder how caring about what people think affects your own behavior. I mean: it’s not exactly like a gun to your head.
Is it just social conditioning?
…Incidentally, I did write this in a comment in the same thread on the topic at hand:
Richard Nikoley says:
Ha, I was just about to shoot him the same link, Gallier.
It’s confusing because it’s quite complex, mixed with a lot of “scientific” hubris. Just look at obesity and disease. As if human metabolism wasn’t complex enough, now we have the included metabolism of hundreds of species of gut bugs and everyone is a snowflake. I just read an article about how by transplanting microbes in mice, these transplanted mice can eat poison that would normally kill them otherwise…
Moreover, you have the added complexity of antarctica, with both land and sea ice. Normally, all the sea ice melts by the end of summer every year, this year no.
To be clear:
1. I’m neither a catch-all “climate change denier,” nor am I necessarily opposed to the idea that the earth may be warming.
2. If it is actually warming, it’s:
a. trend prediction I’m skeptical of, especially way out into the future (hockey stick).
b. the man-made factor (original sin) I’m skeptical of. There is zero doubt that the earth has been both very hot and very cold way back, and it wasn’t caused my human activity.
3. More than anything, I’m deeply skeptical of the CO2 positive feedback PREMISE hockey-stick predictions rely upon. Nature is totally dominated by negative feedbacks.
But, you know, it’s so tough to take on a graduate student in engineering. I’m just hoping that 1) he’s not going to be designing buildings, or 2) sewage treatment plants. I’ll consent to my electronic devises being lowest-common-denominator-lazy-I-Have-A-Big-Fucking-Paycheck consensus.