Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (930980)	4/18/2016 8:07:46 PM
From: J_F_Shepard	Read Replies (7) \| Respond to of 1572507

Still think there are no significant changes....?? Apr 18 2016, 7:47 pm ET 'Unprecedented': 5 Dead as Record Rainfall Floods Houston by Elisha Fieldstadt, Tim Stelloh and Shamar Walters nbcnews.com

To: Brumar89 who wrote (930980)

4/18/2016 8:22:18 PM

From: Wharf Rat

Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572507

There's only one way to believe we aren't...

=
Beyond loopy: Latest Judith Curry-ism: the Earth could be flat after all

Sou | 11:00 PM

Judith Curry has tipped into "beyond denier weirdness". She's picked up an article that looks as if it first appeared at WUWT three years ago (archived here) - and who knows where Anthony Watts dug it up from. Anyway, according to Judith Curry (see here), if scientists generally agree about something then it's evidence of a lack of evidence of that something. Yes. You read that right.

Credit: Plognark

Here is what Judith Curry thought so nice she quoted it thrice ( here and here and here):

In our view, the fact that so many scientists agree so closely about the [causes of the] earth’s warming is, itself, evidence of a lack of evidence for [human caused] global warming – D. Ryan Brumberg and Matthew BrumbergSo let's put that to the test. Using Judith's test, which she adopted from a couple of science deniers, there must be a lack of evidence of:

evolution
the big bang
inheritance via DNA
substances being comprised of atoms
the periodic table
plate tectonics
photosynthesis
bacterial infection
viruses
oh heck - the list is going to be way too long, it comprises everything that is accepted in science.

Wait, there's more. Here's what Judith doesn't understand about climate. She says there is "considerable debate" - I guess she's been reading too many denier blogs and not any scientific papers. Judith doesn't know:

that the warming since 1950 has been dominated by human causes (it has).
how much the planet will warm in the 21st century (probably at least three degrees above pre-industrial)
whether warming is ‘dangerous’ (yes, it is posing many dangers)
whether radically reducing CO2 emissions will improve the climate and human well being (no, it won't improve the climate but it will prevent more harm).

The only one that I'd say most people don't know with any real confidence, is how much the planet will warm in the 21st century. That will depend to a large degree on how much more CO2 we add to the air. It could be "only" two or maybe three degrees if we're lucky and manage to curb emissions enough quickly enough. Since we're already past one degree of warming, I think we'll be lucky if we can keep it below another two degrees by the end of this century.

If anyone thought that Judith Curry was loopy, you were wrong. She's beyond loopy.

blog.hotwhopper.com