Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Pilot's Lounge

Pilot's Lounge Members meetup

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 06-01-2012, 05:53 PM
5./JG27.Farber 5./JG27.Farber is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,958
Default

Because carbon emissions do not corolate with global tempreture...
  #52  
Old 06-01-2012, 05:55 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber View Post
No definative model? We were talking about taking into consideration as many factors as possible. They have ignore relevant factors, thats the whole point!
No, the point is that there Dyson is demanding a definitive model when he knows full well that it is not possible to make such a model.
  #53  
Old 06-01-2012, 05:56 PM
AndyJWest AndyJWest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,049
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walshy View Post
Yes Andy off course I know that but he has an expertise in phyics and mathematics, and if he says the models aren't right well I'll listen to him, and if I was studying the climate I'd listen to his advice to get the computer model right ...................
You'll listen to him because you agree with him? And you won't listen to the other scientists and mathematicians who say he is wrong? So much for objectivity. And what advice has he ever given on 'getting the computer model right' anyway? You are grasping at straws.
__________________
MoBo: Asus Sabertooth X58. CPU: Intel i7 950 Quad Core 3.06Ghz overclocked to 3.80Ghz. RAM: 12 GB Corsair DDR3 (1600).
GPU: XFX 6970 2GB. PSU: 1000W Corsair. SSD: 128 GB. HDD:1 TB SATA 2.
OS: Win 7 Home Premium 64bit. Case: Antec Three Hundred. Monitor: 24" Samsung.
Head tracking: TrackIR 5. Sore neck: See previous.
  #54  
Old 06-01-2012, 05:58 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walshy View Post
Yes Andy off course I know that but he has an expertise in phyics and mathematics, and if he says the models aren't right well I'll listen to him, and if I was studying the climate I'd listen to his advice to get the computer model right ...................
He knows next to nothing about climatology. We might as well be listening to what chimps have to say on the subject.
  #55  
Old 06-01-2012, 05:59 PM
Walshy Walshy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland
Posts: 114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
So what? Why should I give a crap what a physicist has to say about climatology?
To quote him from the Article Andy put up .............

"e360: So it’s a sense you get from the way the argument is conducted that it’s not being done in an honest way.

Dyson: I think the difference between me and most of the experts is that I think I have a much wider view of the whole subject. I was involved in climate studies seriously about 30 years ago. That’s how I got interested. There was an outfit called the Institute for Energy Analysis at Oak Ridge. I visited Oak Ridge many times, and worked with those people, and I thought they were excellent. And the beauty of it was that it was multi-disciplinary. There were experts not just on hydrodynamics of the atmosphere, which of course is important, but also experts on vegetation, on soil, on trees, and so it was sort of half biological and half physics. And I felt that was a very good balance.

And there you got a very strong feeling for how uncertain the whole business is, that the five reservoirs of carbon all are in close contact — the atmosphere, the upper level of the ocean, the land vegetation, the topsoil, and the fossil fuels. They are all about equal in size. They all interact with each other strongly. So you can’t understand any of them unless you understand all of them. Essentially that was the conclusion. It’s a problem of very complicated ecology, and to isolate the atmosphere and the ocean just as a hydrodynamics problem makes no sense.

Thirty years ago, there was a sort of a political split between the Oak Ridge community, which included biology, and people who were doing these fluid dynamics models, which don’t include biology. They got the lion’s share of money and attention. And since then, this group of pure modeling experts has become dominant.

I got out of the field then. I didn’t like the way it was going. It left me with a bad taste."
  #56  
Old 06-01-2012, 06:01 PM
Walshy Walshy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland
Posts: 114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
He knows next to nothing about climatology. We might as well be listening to what chimps have to say on the subject.
Sorry mate but the only chimp in the room, pardon the change on a common parlance, is yourself ......................
  #57  
Old 06-01-2012, 06:01 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walshy View Post
To quote him from the Article Andy put up .............
You would learn as much by talking to a chimp.
  #58  
Old 06-01-2012, 06:02 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walshy View Post
Sorry mate but the only chimp in the room, pardon the change on a common parlance, is yourself ......................
No offense, but chimps probably understand more about science than the likes of you.
  #59  
Old 06-01-2012, 06:08 PM
AndyJWest AndyJWest is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,049
Default

Dyson is irrelevant. He says he isn't an expert. He isn't. The overwhelming consensus amongst the relevant section of the scientific community is that anthropomorphic climate change is real, and will have widespread harmful effects. This is the simple fact here. The denialists are largely driven by greed, ignorance or just plain loopiness, and their opinions on the matter are thus also irrelevant. Scientific questions cannot be answered by propaganda, end of story.
__________________
MoBo: Asus Sabertooth X58. CPU: Intel i7 950 Quad Core 3.06Ghz overclocked to 3.80Ghz. RAM: 12 GB Corsair DDR3 (1600).
GPU: XFX 6970 2GB. PSU: 1000W Corsair. SSD: 128 GB. HDD:1 TB SATA 2.
OS: Win 7 Home Premium 64bit. Case: Antec Three Hundred. Monitor: 24" Samsung.
Head tracking: TrackIR 5. Sore neck: See previous.
  #60  
Old 06-01-2012, 06:09 PM
Walshy Walshy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Belfast, Northern Ireland
Posts: 114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
No offense, but chimps probably understand more about science than the likes of you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
You would learn as much by talking to a chimp.
Well I'd probably have a better all round conversation with said chimp, and not have to listen to someone trying to insult me or my intelligence or another human beings for that matter. You're a very small souled individual mate ................
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.