Climate change?

[Big J]

First wildmttrout, read this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

Phil Jones is full of crap and you cannot use his shifty data.  Nor can you tell me what the temperatures were a 1,000+ years ago.

http://landandwaterusa.com/GlobalWarming/2010GlobalWarming/5-29SameJunkScience.htm

Then like I said before, read up on tom segalstad and ernst georg beck CO2 studies.  You'll find that man made CO2 cannot be the cause of global warming.

[Michael Toris]

First wildmttrout, read this

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html

Phil Jones is full of crap and you cannot use his shifty data.  Nor can you tell me what the temperatures were a 1,000+ years ago.

http://landandwaterusa.com/GlobalWarming/2010GlobalWarming/5-29SameJunkScience.htm

Then like I said before, read up on tom segalstad and ernst georg beck CO2 studies.  You'll find that man made CO2 cannot be the cause global warming.

Did not bring up Phil Jones, nor did I use his data. I used NOAA data and graphs.

I am not going to beat this dead horse anymore. The facts are conclusive.

[Big J]

I post scientific journals and other peer reviewed items and you show me an obscure news blog and a homemade website?

Obviously, there exists nothing which will change your mind, so I am done.

No, you post charts that have no evidence that it is correct.  The news website was an interview with Phil Jones showing you that he even agrees his data is unreliable and the blog was just a refrence to a couple scientific papers you should look up.  It's benificial at least to know both sides of the coin instead of just taking everything someone with a PHD feeds you.  You take those charts as if they are gold because you want to accept the point they prove, not because you actually want to learn.  Here is a link to a couple of the papers since you cannot look it up yourself.

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/08_Beck-2.pdf

http://www.biomind.de/nogreenhouse/daten/EE%2018-2_Beck.pdf

Also quoting works wonders for when people edit.  Kind of like all the posts you edited over on SELF.

[Michael Toris]

I post scientific journals and other peer reviewed items and you show me an obscure news blog and a homemade website?

Obviously, there exists nothing which will change your mind, so I am done.

No, you post charts that have no evidence that it is correct.  The news website was an interview with Phil Jones showing you that he even agrees his data is unreliable and the blog was just a refrence to a couple scientific papers you should look up.  It's benificial at least to know both sides of the coin instead of just taking everything someone with a PHD feeds you.  You take those charts as if they are gold because you want to accept the point they prove, not because you actually want to learn.  Here is a link to a couple of the papers since you cannot look it up yourself.

http://icecap.us/images/uploads/08_Beck-2.pdf

http://www.biomind.de/nogreenhouse/daten/EE%2018-2_Beck.pdf

Also quoting works wonders for when people edit.  Kind of like all the posts you edited over on SELF.

I said I was done, but I lied.

Journal of Energy and Environment? Really? The editor has publicly said she is in it for her own political reasons. The peer review process is trash (not just me saying this either, many many others).

Here is the mission statement of E&E:

"E&E has consistently striven to publish many 'voices' and to challenge conventional wisdoms. Perhaps more so than other European energy journal, the editor has made E&E a forum for more skeptical analyses of 'climate change' and the advocated solutions"

Do not take everything someone with a PhD says. Of all people, it is my job to research the topic. I have looked on both sides. On one side, everybody has the same consensus and continue to do so with new research everyday. On the other, there are a few who will not believe no matter what. I take those charts as gold because they are the best that we have. They have been reviewed and are considered to be quite accurate. They are found not only in peer-reviewed journals (real ones) but in many textbooks.

[Big J]

I take those charts as gold because they are the best that we have. They have been reviewed and are considered to be quite accurate. They are found not only in peer-reviewed journals (real ones) but in many textbooks.

Haha.  Just because something is the best that we have, does not mean it is correct or the fact that it is in textbook or "real" peer reviewed journals. 

I personally don't care what you believe as far as global warming or politically.  Only reason why I get involved in these things is because I enjoy making Mudwall have a conniption about some of the differing views I have.  It'll give us something to shoot the breeze with when we eventually fish together.  Heck, I don't even talk politics whenever I fish unless someone brings it up and wants to talk about it.  Dougfish can atest to that.  I fish with him and I have no idea if he is a bleeding heart liberal or a birther, nor would I care if he was either. 

How did I get on that rabbit trail.... anyways, go on believing your gold standard and keep questioning me why I don't believe everything I hear. Fact is people are getting rich from the going green movement because of people with PHD doing their "research" to prove a "fact".

[Michael Toris]

I take those charts as gold because they are the best that we have. They have been reviewed and are considered to be quite accurate. They are found not only in peer-reviewed journals (real ones) but in many textbooks.

Haha.  Just because something is the best that we have, does not mean it is correct or the fact that it is in textbook or "real" peer reviewed journals. 

True, but it is all I have to go on.

I personally don't care what you believe as far as global warming or politically.  Only reason why I get involved in these things is because I enjoy making Mudwall have a conniption about some of the differing views I have.  It'll give us something to shoot the breeze with when we eventually fish together.  Heck, I don't even talk politics whenever I fish unless someone brings it up and wants to talk about it.  Dougfish can atest to that.  I fish with him and I have no idea if he is a bleeding heart liberal or a birther, nor would I care if he was either. 

I enjoy seeing other's opinions on this topic. I like to see the "other side's" view so I can understand the full picture. I hate (read loathe) talking politics when I fish. I have to talk it too much from day to day, but I was bored this morning. I would much rather bullshit, drink beer, dip snuff, and call others I fish with ghay.

How did I get on that rabbit trail.... anyways, go on believing your gold standard and keep questioning me why I don't believe everything I hear. Fact is people are getting rich from the going green movement because of people with PHD doing their "research" to prove a "fact".

I continue to research and follow what science tells me. I hope you continue to not believe everything that you hear. No doubt people are getting richer, but this is true on many levels.

Seriously, done now.

Good talk.

[Dougfish]

Heck, I don't even talk politics whenever I fish unless someone brings it up and wants to talk about it.  Dougfish can atest to that.  I fish with him and I have no idea if he is a bleeding heart liberal or a birther, nor would I care if he was either. 

Don't open that can. I'm very complicated and simple at the same time.
But feshin' soothes the savage beast.

Carry on you arguetarians!

[benben reincarnated]

Hockey stick graph trends are cool.

[Woolly Bugger]

I'm buying up land on the current 200' contour, it's the new ocean front property!

[Big J]

Don't open that can. I'm very complicated and simple at the same time.
But feshin' soothes the savage beast.

Carry on you arguetarians!

I'm not opening any can 

[Woolly Bugger]

[Mudwall Gatewood 3.0]

Big Muddy always poking the beehive with a stick.  Always...

I see the beehive was satisfactorily poked.  Great job guys!

Just returned from the hills – my favorite beaver dam remains structurally sound and the beavers seem to be doing fine.  I will post a picture or two when I get time.

Fished for a few hours with little luck – snow melt, water levels, etc. made it rough. 

I did find several fossils, which are fun to hunt when things are slow.  Sunday evening I walked down the creek from my place to the Methodist Church, where I spent so many Sundays of my youth.  Fossils in hand, I asked God the significance of the ancient geological beauties.  She said they were confirmation that the earth was much older than 8,000 years, and that I should inform Big J.  I agreed to convey the update.  I wanted to make a few more inquiries but she seemed a bit testy – our exchange ended as the voice floated from faint to silent.  I swear I heard her grumbling something about mountain top removal.   

It was a good long weekend.

[The Dude]

Stephen, I'm sure you already know, but just in case, Craig creek is also loaded with fossils. I remember collecting them one time when I woke up in the crick after a rager party at Caldwell fields. We used to call them ATF parties because there was gratuitous use of all three vices at those parties.

[Dougfish]

Checking on the welfare of beavers. That's what I'll call it from now on.

Dude,
You know a lot about VA. Just curious, what's your connection?

The easiest fossil collecting I ever did was on the trail at Gaudineer on Cheat Mountain, WV. The crushed stone they put on the path was loaded with plant and mollusk fossils.

[Mudwall Gatewood 3.0]

Dude,
You know a lot about VA. Just curious, what's your connection?

The Dude is a Hokie!  Now Dude, tell us some more war stories.