Why Climate Change is a Religion and not Science https://www.topbuzz.com/@malcolmshaw/why-climate-change-is-a-religion-and-not-science-CgJAbZ6OOVo
« prev   random   next »

5
9

Why Climate Change is a Religion and not Science https://www.topbuzz.com/@malcolmshaw/why-climate-change-is-a-religion-and-not-science-CgJAbZ6OOVo

By Malcolm following x   2018 Jan 10, 2:26pm 1,325 views   94 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


An article that I wrote on TopBuzz exploring some of my own observations.

https://www.topbuzz.com/@malcolmshaw/why-climate-change-is-a-religion-and-not-science-CgJAbZ6OOVo

I have put out an internet challenge that no one seems to want to take me up on. It is simple. I am agnostic. While I technically fall into the "skeptic" or "denier" category, it is simply because I question the methodology and the politics of man-made climate-change science. I am open to being convinced, but no one seems to be able to provide anything other than future predictions. So, for the Patrick.net crowd, the same challenge I have made before, to please show me one prior doom and gloom climate change prediction that actually came true, or to show me a past and present picture demonstrating rising sea level.

I know the trolls and vicious defenders of man caused climate change will just assume that I haven't looked up the readily available evidence for climate change. Before you attack me, be forewarned that I have probably got considerable evidence to support being skeptical.

Here is a GIF I made of a famous landmark in San Diego. The Coronado Bridge was built in the late 60s. You will notice that the high waterline is pretty much in the same place. I live on the Pacific Coast. It has been alleged that sea level rise is magnified on this coast, yet I can also show pictures much older that again have no noticeable difference on the high water line.



Here is a 130 year span showing no rise at La Jolla Cove.


Source: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/05/01/if-sea-level-was-rising-wouldnt-someone-have-noticed/

Comments 1 - 40 of 94     Next »     Last »

1   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 3:18pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Brother Malcolm I have decided to play.

A trivial search of the Googlenet has revealed to me a guestimated sea level change for the 1960s through today of maybe five inches. About the size of a small crab.

Is it your claim that you could spot the difference of a small crab in the two photographs you are presenting here? If so, I humbly suggest that you are guilty of exactly the same misdirection and deception you are accusing the other side of. Surely you must admit that even a slight difference in tide would have completely wiped out that 5 in, even if it were visible at this resolution which it would not be.

If anyone doubts the veracity of what I am saying, please consider the teeny tiny black dots in the second photograph represent people with a typical height of around five and a half feet. Now imagine 5 in on that scale.
2   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 3:28pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

Brothers and sisters, these two photographs prove Beyond any doubt that the sea level rise is much more extreme than even the most radical Global warmists had predicted. In a paltry 6 hours, the water from global warming is threatening to cover us all. Please heed this warning and take cover immediately.



3   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 3:42pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

I really want people to take this seriously. In your top picture you can see the high tide line. I have been to Alaska and other places with real tides like that.
4   anon_13e7f   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 10, 3:44pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
I question the methodology and the politics of man-made climate-change science.


Politics have nothing to do with climate change. You are confusing politics with science.
5   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 3:51pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
I really want people to take this seriously. In your top picture you can see the high tide line.


Greatest apologies if I did not appear serious. I do admit a slight bit of Mirth in my second post however it was making a point that I consider important. Without knowing the tides, there is no way to compare your four photographs.

Focusing more on your main point, is it your claim that a person viewing both scenes from that distance should be able to discern 5 in? If so again I must protest that this is simply not possible to do. You can no more tell me that 5 inch is missing from the bridge photograph than you could conclusively state how many crabs were clinging to the waterline. As anyone can see above, there is no indication how many crabs are clung to the waterline because a measurement of 5 in is outside the resolution you are using.
6   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:16pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

I took the liberty of blowing up your picture to see the resolution. 5 in appears to be smaller than a single Pixel. Possibly less than 10% of a single Pixel. Am I clear to why you can't use these photographs as evidence against sea level rise? If scientists had said the rise was several feet, you might have a superior case.

7   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:22pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

In my opinion you would be able to see 5" difference in the high tide water line. That is the width of your hand. My methodology takes your concerns into account. I simply ask someone to show me an old picture of a fixed point in the ocean and then show me that the water or water line is higher.
9   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:30pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Brother Malcolm I will take this at face value and we can agree together that a hand is the size of a single Pixel on your photograph. This would be the bare minimum in order for it to appear.

This means the lower base of the bridge Tower is 4 feet tall because you can visibly count 10 pixels. Unfortunately I cannot reconcile this story with what I already know to be true. Playing a little bit with cut and paste, I have determined that this would result in the bridge being no more than 60 ft tall. The Coronado Bridge is 200 ft tall.
10   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

At this juncture I am afraid we will have to agree to disagree. There is absolutely no way that 5 in of difference could be determined in your photograph. I don't think it's a close thing. I also know from my seafaring experience that tides follow daily, monthly, and even yearly fluctuations. That depend on many things including how close the Moon is to the Earth. Even if I were to accept all of your other assumptions, you still cannot guarantee that the fuzzy border showing the tide extent is an actual marking point on a bridge under construction. I do not wish to belabor the point but this is not evidence of what you are proposing.
11   WookieMan   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 10, 4:41pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Why is there another climate change thread? These should be banned. If the science is right all of us die and so do our kids. If it's wrong, we all die at some point anyway. I don't get what we're arguing.

If those of us in the USA are not cleaning up pollution, then argue that. Or the 3rd world countries. Climate change is a dead horse, and you're beating it. Both sides.
12   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:46pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Like I said, I have the challenge out there to anyone who can provide pictures to your standards that show sea level rise. I can only give my and other real world observations because I happen to travel and also live on the coast. I have lived in Florida as well. I visited recently and guess what, I am looking for old pictures to compare with. I visited my birthplace in the Caribbean, my home movie of a cove looks just like my dad's film from 1971 when I was born. I am still working on more of these historic pictures. Here is another pair from that same source I cited earlier:

New Zealand 1918

Present day


Tell me what you think.

Another good one from the site:

Nice, France 1840


Present day
13   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:46pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

WookieMan says
Why is there another climate change thread?


Brother wookie just between you and I, I will secretly confess that this is not in all probable fact a climate change thread. It is a rather poorly constructed but still curious psychology experiment.
14   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:51pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

It will be a dead horse soon. Enough people are speaking up. The reason we can't let it be is because this country is making costly policy decisions on the assumption that this religion is science.
15   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:53pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

DoofusRicky says
WookieMan says
Why is there another climate change thread?


Brother wookie just between you and I, I will secretly confess that this is not in all probable fact a climate change thread. It is a rather poorly constructed but still curious psychology experiment.


Ah yes, the insults start when someone is challenged. That is why I call it a religion. You are not the first to balk at a real debate on the issue.

16   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 4:55pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Fyi, sea levels vary at different places. They vary as a function of seasons and tides. And so far there has been very limited sea level rises.
Showing pictures like this is silly.
17   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
Ah yes, the insults start when someone is challenged.


I am sincerely sorry you feel this way but I spent an inordinate amount of time breaking down your claim, even to the smallest pixel. Your proof does not hold up even with a basic academic analysis. The base of the Coronado Bridge that you posted is 10 pixels tall. To see a feature in a 10 pixel photograph, that feature must be equal to or greater than 1 pixel. Assuming 5in is one pixel, the base of the Coronado Bridge is apparently four feet high.

This absolutely cannot be true since the tidal range greatly exceeds this but more importantly it would mean the bridge itself is around 60 feet high in the photograph. I simply don't know where else to take this once you ignore the case I made and just say yeah I think I can see 5 in.

For your purposes would it help if I told a fib and said there were 20 pixels in the base? Please tell me what else I need to look at.
18   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
It will be a dead horse soon. Enough people are speaking up.


Funny, I've heard denialists make that claim for 20 yrs. But the opposite is happening:
- the science is ever more certain.
- direct measures are showing ever clearer warming, ever thinner ice-sheets , melting glaciers, increased ocean heat-content, etc...
- Russians, China and other countries are investing massively in the arctic.
- Prices of oceanfront properties in Florida are affected.
Effects are more tangible by the year, but some people just don't want to be bothered with reality.
19   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:11pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Like I said, the challenge is out there. If you think there really is a consensus and the science is even more certain you should look up Climategate. Here is a little more education for you.

21   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
Like I said, the challenge is out there


Brother Malcolm are you making a challenge when you are not willing to take a challenge yourself?

I humbly and sincerely challenge your claim that 5in can be resolved on any of your photographs. I believe 5 in is less than a single wave in the water. I challenge you to give us some good reasons why these photographs are evidence of a water level in stasis.

Would this be fair?
22   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:24pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

It would be, except that you are making the claim, and some claim as much as a foot rise. I put the challenge out there for you to prove sea level rise. My evidence, which is unscripted, unaltered, certainly does not show sea level rise. Yes, I believe you would see the width of a hand in the photographs. For the Cove you can find a spot and put the cursor on it.

No, your logic is strange, why would I take a challenge as a condition to you accepting a challenge. Go find the smoking gun, I told you I am open to the proof. Show me the proof.

So far you've done two things, you said you were up to show me visual proof of sea level rise over time and then said that the sea level rise isn't noticeable because of photo resolution, understand, people are claiming entire islands have already been covered by rising sea level, and you are worried about a pixel?
23   FNWGMOBDVZXDNW   ignore (2)   2018 Jan 10, 5:26pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

This is pretty funny. The premise here is that if (1) someone ignores the fact that you cannot resolve 5 inches in the picture and (2) ignores the fact that tides vary as pointed out already and (3) assume that a few point visual measurements are more accurate than the average of many measurements around the world over decades, then we can prove that climate change is a fraud.
Who is following the evidence and who is following blinded by cognitive bias again? Will this thread make it to 100 comments? Will Malcom claim at that point that nobody has answered his question? I'm titillated.
24   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:28pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

BTW, if you are so sure about sea level rise maybe you can tell me how it is calculated. Actually, let me tell you, it is called the budgeting method. Basically they look at satellite images and estimate where all the known water is then estimate what it is doing. Observations proved no sea level rise and the precise method of using a satellite to lock onto a beacon on a buoy didn't get the desired results so those results are inconclusive and not used.
25   mell   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:29pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Malcolm says
DoofusRicky says
WookieMan says
Why is there another climate change thread?


Brother wookie just between you and I, I will secretly confess that this is not in all probable fact a climate change thread. It is a rather poorly constructed but still curious psychology experiment.


Ah yes, the insults start when someone is challenged. That is why I call it a religion. You are not the first to balk at a real debate on the issue.



Thx interesting debate there.
26   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:30pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

FNWGMOBDVZXDNW says
This is pretty funny. The premise here is that if (1) someone ignores the fact that you cannot resolve 5 inches in the picture and (2) ignores the fact that tides vary as pointed out already and (3) assume that a few point visual measurements are more accurate than the average of many measurements around the world over decades, then we can prove that climate change is a fraud.
Who is following the evidence and who is following blinded by cognitive bias again? Will this thread make it to 100 comments? Will Malcom claim at that point that nobody has answered his question? I'm titillated.


It is so easy to prove me wrong. It just takes real evidence. You stepped up and can't produce it.
27   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:38pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
It would be, except that you are making the claim,


Sir you are obviously mistaken. I made no claim. Scientists say the ocean rise is 5 in. They may be right and they may be wrong but accepting for argument I am a neutral party, your pictures do not stand alone as the default position. You posted them with a positive claim that the sea level could not have changed based on your photographic evidence.

All I am doing with any and all respect due is rejecting your positive claim of 0 sea level rise. The photographs are not evidence of this. It does seem to be your quest to collect these, but 5 inches is a rather small measurement and proving it with a photograph of pixels measured in feet can never work. The second reason to reject these is the obvious difference in tides and how not getting the timing exactly right would disqualify the photos without even considering any other demerits..
28   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:42pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

I didn't say my pictures were proof of 0 sea level rise, I said they were evidence contradicting sea level rise. The whole premise of this is to allow anyone to provide me visual proof at any resolution that sea level has risen. No one has done so, yet they argue the point with me, in essence stepping up to a challenge to please show me where sea level has risen, with a visual.

I'm not disrespecting anyone's opinions, just show me the real proof.
29   DoofusRicky   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
I didn't say my pictures were proof of 0 sea level rise, I said they were evidence contradicting sea level rise.


I stand corrected. They are proof of the absence of sea level rise exceeding the pixel size of your photograph which as far as I can determine is well over a foot.

Fortunately for the warmist community, that isn't what scientists have measured.
30   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 5:51pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

WookieMan says
I don't get what we're arguing.

Still a lot of ignorance out there.
31   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 6:05pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

DoofusRicky says
Malcolm says
I didn't say my pictures were proof of 0 sea level rise, I said they were evidence contradicting sea level rise.


I stand corrected. They are proof of the absence of sea level rise exceeding the pixel size of your photograph which as far as I can determine is well over a foot.

Fortunately for the warmist community, that isn't what scientists have measured.


LOL, the diplomatic side of me was going to at least propose that we concede it is not more than a foot. Yes, my evidence is merely putting it out there that I am consistently not seeing noticeable sea level change over decades. But that's cool, I had a similar discussion with an old friend, he asserted 2 1/2 inches over 150 years. These pictures are just for a baseline, and I really am open to looking at pictures showing the opposite. Like I also said, I am compiling images wherever I can as to not just have a few data points.
32   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 6:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Malcolm says
The whole premise of this is to allow anyone to provide me visual proof at any resolution that sea level has risen.

For example the "mar├ęgraphe" in Marseilles, is a tide gauge that kept records of sea level since 1883. It has a sophisticated mechanism to integrate the levels.
http://www.sonel.org/spip.php?page=maregraphe&idStation=1802 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00190-014-0728-6
You still won't see 20 cm difference on a picture.
33   Malcolm   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 6:26pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Well, I'll start caring about sea level rise when you can.
34   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (1)   2018 Jan 10, 6:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Malcolm says
Well, I'll start caring about sea level rise when you can.


Sure, and in the meantime, put your money where your mouth is and go buy a nice oceanfront property in Miami, since you are so sure it won't be affected.
I hear they sell at a discount.
35   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 10, 6:53pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

WookieMan says
I don't get what we're arguing.


You giving 15% of your paycheck to Al Gore.
36   WookieMan   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 10, 7:13pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Satoshi_Nakamoto says
WookieMan says
I don't get what we're arguing.


You giving 15% of your paycheck to Al Gore.

I don't follow. What 15% of my paycheck?

I don't care if the scientist are wrong or right. I live by the fact we're all going 6 feet under anyway. Enjoy life. Don't change your oil and dump it on the front lawn. Don't start a tire fire. Be energy efficient if it works for you. Those types of things.

A speeding rock can hit our planet and there's nothing we can do about it. We'd all be dead tomorrow. A super volcano. Whatever. If climate change is real, there's nothing we can do about it anyway. Grab a drink or joint and have fun... but don't be a dead beat.
37   Satoshi_Nakamoto   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 10, 7:16pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

WookieMan says
Satoshi_Nakamoto says
WookieMan says
I don't get what we're arguing.


You giving 15% of your paycheck to Al Gore.

I don't follow. What 15% of my paycheck?


Because Al needs the money.
38   FortWayne   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 10, 7:19pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Global warming hoax was sales bullshit to sell more solar panels and electric vehicles. Coincidence that billionaire democrats are selling those!!!
39   WookieMan   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 10, 7:23pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Satoshi_Nakamoto says
WookieMan says
Satoshi_Nakamoto says
WookieMan says
I don't get what we're arguing.


You giving 15% of your paycheck to Al Gore.

I don't follow. What 15% of my paycheck?


Because Al needs the money.

Al is a fat fuck. Ignore him. If he cared about the environment he'd stop eating 3 burgers a day which in effect eliminates his neck. You can't take a no-necker seriously, you know that, right?
40   anon_08dee   ignore (2)   2018 Jan 10, 8:22pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Does anyone know if the Russian troll farms are getting involved with this topic now ?

Fossil fuels are more important to certain Russian oligarchs than even the Koch brothers.

Fascinating thread. I guess I'm possibly an idiot for deferring to the experts when they tell me the earth is not nearly flat, or that sea level has gone up by however much it has. No offense, but it takes someone very disrespectful of academia and scholarship in general, not to mention critical thinking as thing that exists, to think that sea level changes (something so incredibly easy to verity) have not been verified in thousands of places, six ways from Sunday.

Maybe it's comedy ? Showing photos to show sea level hasn't gone up 5 inches, when tide is something like 24 inches. Wtf ?

Comments 1 - 40 of 94     Next »     Last »


Comment as anon_1a476 or log in at top of page: