OT: 2019 Weather Thread

[Frank the Tank]

Good Lord.

1. Knowing more than ‘we’ do is not the standard I’m willing to accept. I mean you can see the self labelled scientist in the thread basically admitting that he knows very little beyond greenhouse gases -> climate change. Lots of less than helpful ‘theory’ beyond that. I work with a company that produces plastic replacement products. They have many dedicated scientists working every day on improving their products and creating new ones. They are making a real change in our lives and an immediate and tangible improvement for the environment. Those are the scientists I respect. Not the ones who write airy thesis built on miles of extrapolated data and then get frustrated when anyone other than a ‘peer’ dares to question what they wrote.

2. I guess you can’t understand the difference between ‘talk down to’ and ‘look down on’. That’s too bad for you, but I never used the latter phrase.

3. I never called anyone an ******* or a prick, so I’ll thank you to stop characterizing my comments in that way.

Oh, the irony of this post. If I wasn't well aware of doxxing, I would reveal my publication and patent record in the field you cite. I probably meet with your respected peers annually at conferences. NAM 25 is coming up here in Chicago in a few weeks.

Don't believe me? You can confirm with BBOil that I have a PhD and work in the industry to which you refer.

Edit: I'm curious... what company do you work for? No need to reveal anything else about yourself.

 

[I am the Liquor]

 

[Fixed to Ruin]

Couldn't we just blame climate change on the OBC and move on with our lives?

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Couldn't we just blame climate change on the OBC and move on with our lives?

Dammit - Kevin Lowe again!?!

 

[rboomercat90]

There’s another wasted hour, thanks Liquor.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Oh, the irony of this post. If I wasn't well aware of doxxing, I would reveal my publication and patent record in the field you cite. I probably meet with your respected peers annually at conferences. NAM 25 is coming up here in Chicago in a few weeks.

Don't believe me? You can confirm with BBOil that I have a PhD and work in the industry to which you refer.

Edit: I'm curious... what company do you work for? No need to reveal anything else about yourself.

What a response. Post your Resume as well next time.

lol at the bolded proof of credentials

I'm, yes I was a former mod here. No, there is no proof of credentials required or obtained on this board other than word of mouth except in the case of alleged media sources or insiders as they specifically pertain to hockey. "Confirm" haha


Duly noted.

 

[Beerfish]

Climate change/global warming is real.
The causes can be debated.
If we do nothing about it we are stupid.

 

[Mr Tadakichi]

What a response. Post your Resume as well next time.

lol at the bolded proof of credentials

I'm, yes I was a former mod here. No, there is no proof of credentials required or obtained on this board other than word of mouth except in the case of alleged media sources or insiders as they specifically pertain to hockey. "Confirm" haha


Duly noted.

Can you make me a mod?

You trust me, don't you replacement?

 

[Mr Tadakichi]

What a response. Post your Resume as well next time.

lol at the bolded proof of credentials

I'm, yes I was a former mod here. No, there is no proof of credentials required or obtained on this board other than word of mouth except in the case of alleged media sources or insiders as they specifically pertain to hockey. "Confirm" haha


Duly noted.

 

[Bryanbryoil]

What a response. Post your Resume as well next time.

lol at the bolded proof of credentials

I'm, yes I was a former mod here. No, there is no proof of credentials required or obtained on this board other than word of mouth except in the case of alleged media sources or insiders as they specifically pertain to hockey. "Confirm" haha


Duly noted.

I've known "Frank" since I was around 12 years old, so yeah it's a little different than "he told me so, so it must be true". He is most definitely a scientist and has been in the private sector for many years.

 

[Bryanbryoil]

He wasn't always Replacement!?!?!?!?!

 

[Frank the Tank]

What a response. Post your Resume as well next time.

lol at the bolded proof of credentials

I'm, yes I was a former mod here. No, there is no proof of credentials required or obtained on this board other than word of mouth except in the case of alleged media sources or insiders as they specifically pertain to hockey. "Confirm" haha


Duly noted.

Look, I don't take your contrarian approach personal. It's what you've done for a decade on this board, and remains expected when one chooses to respond directly to any of your posts on HFOil.

I do find harpoon's personal take on what qualifies as a "respected" scientist amusing. I mean what are the odds he cites my field of research as an example of scientists making a positive difference, while at the same time mocking me? Overall, his or her this thread about consumables and plastics demonstrate that he cares about environment. I just wonder why he or she accepts the numbers in these areas and doesn't accept the numbers behind AGW.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Look, I don't take your contrarian approach personal. It's what you've done for a decade on this board, and remains expected when one chooses to respond directly to any of your posts on HFOil.

I do find harpoon's personal take on what qualifies as a "respected" scientist amusing. I mean what are the odds he cites my field of research as an example of scientists making a positive difference, while at the same time mocking me? Overall, his or her this thread about consumables and plastics demonstrate that he cares about environment. I just wonder why he or she accepts the numbers in these areas and doesn't accept the numbers behind AGW.

Actually what you've shown in this thread is being condescending to anybody who dares ask any questions in response to your posts in the thread. Which is too bad. The discussion was occurring until you started ad hominin attacks on posters in the thread starting with comparing them to Simpsons characters. Which you apparently decided was fine top shelf posting for somebody with a PHD...

Somebody else might consider that infantile sophomoric regression but ymmv

 

[Frank the Tank]

Actually what you've shown in this thread is being condescending to anybody who dares ask any questions in response to your posts in the thread. Which is too bad. The discussion was occurring until you started ad hominin attacks on posters in the thread starting with comparing them to Simpsons characters. Which you apparently decided was fine top shelf posting for somebody with a PHD...

Somebody else might consider that infantile sophomoric regression but ymmv

I guess I thought that level of discourse was acceptable after someone in the thread referred to Climate Barbie, which McKenna herself considers a sexist insult.

 

[harpoon]

Oh, the irony of this post. If I wasn't well aware of doxxing, I would reveal my publication and patent record in the field you cite. I probably meet with 1 your respected peers annually at conferences. NAM 25 is coming up here in Chicago in a few weeks.

Don't believe me? You can confirm with BBOil that I have a PhD and work in the industry to which you refer.

Edit: I'm curious... what company do you 2 work for? No need to reveal anything else about yourself.

Sigh. I'm always amazed when smart people can't read.

1. I never claimed 'peer' status with the scientists I mentioned earlier. In fact, if you'd been less hasty to flaunt your credentials and minimize the contributions of others to this thread, you would have realized that I went out of my way to indicate the opposite. I simply stated that they have my respect. I'd add that in my experience they tend to treat others in a far less disdainful manner than you have demonstrated in this thread. That may be because they come from a different, more respectful, culture. Or perhaps they are just more secure in themselves as people.

2. I assume folks with PhDs know the difference between 'work with' and 'work for'. Guess not. I'm in finance, and I will most certainly not breach confidentiality to list the names of client companies for your satisfaction. I think it is extremely bad form for you to ask such a question on the open board. If you were really serious about the question, as opposed to just attempting to score cheap internet cred, you would have sent me a PM. Further proof to my mind that you are arguing this topic from a position of dogmatic immaturity. @Drivesaitl seems to have you figured out perfectly. No surprise to me.

 

[doulos]

Looks like you've completely dismantled the actual arguments so now they have turned to your character Frank. At least you tried.

 

[Todd from Leduc]

It was so cold yesterday evening, how can people say the climate is changing when we have 6C in a June evening???

 

[ThePhoenixx]

You have to ignore the radicals on both sides.

The one's who claim global warming isn't real and the one's who claim that global warming is caused by man.

Neither of these types of people are interested in honest discourse.

 

[ZJuice]

Global warming is both natural and accelerated by mankind.1

1Appeared to me in a dream

 

[McDraekke]

You have to ignore the radicals on both sides.

The one's who claim global warming isn't real and the one's who claim that global warming is caused by man.

Neither of these types of people are interested in honest discourse.

Are you playing the semantics game now too (global warming is cyclical, so technically humans didn’t cause that, but in fact we are accelerating it beyond the natural cycle), or are you actually saying you don’t believe that humans have an impact on global warming? I ask this honestly, as I’m not sure based on your post.

Because if you believe that it is radical to say that humans are pushing global warming to - and passed - the brink, then you yourself are a radical.

 

[soothsayer]

You have to ignore the radicals on both sides.

The one's who claim global warming isn't real and the one's who claim that global warming is caused by man.

Neither of these types of people are interested in honest discourse.

I know one thing, if we're ever going to have a serious discussion about climate change, we need to exclude those radical organizations like the NOAA, IPCC and NASA. We need more balanced commentators like Brett f***ing Wilson (lol) and that random lady whose google searches are considered a legitimate study.

 

[booyakasha]

It was nice to wake up to a sunny morning.

 

[MoontoScott]

I don't mind the fact that there is criticism of the oil industry and discussion about climate change but what I do resent is the fact that many people do not understand the environmental excesses that go on in their own back yards while they constantly criticize the policies of those that they see as "outsiders."

Case in point-- BC is shipping record amounts of coal from its ports to destinations in Asia--a place where air pollution already kills many people every year. They are aggravating an already dangerous situation. Much of this coal originates in the U.S. but State governments in Washington, Oregon and California refuse to ship it because they see it as an environmental hazard so BC does the "dirty work" that U.S. coastal states won't.

However, when I point this out to friends and relatives in B.C. they all claim that they have never heard of these exports despite the fact that people in White Rock bemoan the presence of coal trains and all the ramifications that result as part of the province's export policy.

I have written several letters to Mr. Suzuki asking him for clarification on the coal train issue but curiously have received no reply. I guess he was busy on his power boat or perhaps he was jetting to Australia and had no time to answer. I get it, I mean coal is the dirtiest of all fuels but if you criticize the economic interest of your own rabid followers then it is going to cost you some serious money and influence. No one wants to admit that the emperor wears no clothes.

I have also written a few letters to the CBC asking them to do an expose on the coal trains of the Lower Mainland. In fairness, they did "auto-reply" me and stated that my topic was not under consideration since the CBC can't finance all the story suggestions they receive. I understand this but it seems strange to me that they have all kinds of financial resources to pursue endless stories about the Trans Mountain pipeline issue but couldn't spare a reporter to talk to anyone in White Rock about their environmental concerns that have very little to do with Alberta's export strategy.

What good is "climate action" if people won't accept responsibility for what happens in their own sphere of influence? It's like saying we are going to clean up the house today but the favored sons don't need to bother tidying up their rooms.

 

[McDraekke]

Good Lord.

1. Knowing more than ‘we’ do is not the standard I’m willing to accept. I mean you can see the self labelled scientist in the thread basically admitting that he knows very little beyond greenhouse gases -> climate change. Lots of less than helpful ‘theory’ beyond that. I work with a company that produces plastic replacement products. They have many dedicated scientists working every day on improving their products and creating new ones. They are making a real change in our lives and an immediate and tangible improvement for the environment. Those are the scientists I respect. Not the ones who write airy thesis built on miles of extrapolated data and then get frustrated when anyone other than a ‘peer’ dares to question what they wrote.

2. I guess you can’t understand the difference between ‘talk down to’ and ‘look down on’. That’s too bad for you, but I never used the latter phrase.

3. I never called anyone an ******* or a prick, so I’ll thank you to stop characterizing my comments in that way.

I’ll start with number 3. I didn’t say that you used those words, but anyone reading your posts can easily infer that’s how you feel. But if you’d like, I won’t type that way next time.

Number 3. I don’t care about either phrase being subtly different from each other. When there are literal tons of research papers, studies, etc etc on a scientific topic, and then you have people with opinions but no real, tangible knowledge on a topic chiming in and arguing with that scientific data because those uneducated people can’t begin to fathom anything outside of their little circle of life they’ve made for themselves, full power to those scientists to look down on, talk down to those ignorant people for getting involved in something they know nothing about.

Number 1. You, and other people in this thread, seem to be arguing that since we don’t know EVERYTHING about global warming, that all of our data is useless, or that the claims being made that we are causing a potentially irreversible situation in the span of human life are baseless. Since when do we ever know EVERYTHING about any topic? Never have we done so, or at the very least very few times. So I guess we shouldn’t use the collective knowledge that we have gathered and learned to better our society and world? I’ll never understand this type of argument because it’s nonsensical. If humans never explored uncharted territory, we never would have made it past the trees that our ancestors used to live in.

 

[Daryls Friend]

Looks like you've completely dismantled the actual arguments so now they have turned to your character Frank. At least you tried.

Yes. Ill take the guy who actually has a clue for $100, Alex