|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:34 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| gang ah jee wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| I'm quite sure all will be ok. Go buy your coastal property. |
Thanks for the advice, but having seen your attitude towards information you don't like, I'm not sure you're the kind of person I'd trust to be telling me what to do with my money.  |
My "attitude"? Maybe you are mistaking me with the True Believers. I like all information, even if it is shit. I don't play the "source" game. Take all the information you can get, and make your decision. In this case, you have to take the stuff you read in the papers along with the demonstrated pattern of downright dishonest behaviour of self-described "environmentalists" with the things that they say. Take it all together, and look at it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| Yes, efl, lies, yes. Atta boy. |
They were your words, son. You want to revise them, I'll no longer call you a liar. You paint something other than it is, you are lying. That too much for you to process? |
Well, yeah, it must be. Dad? I dunno. But I do know that it is Friday night, and you've likely hit the soju, right? Gonna drink and angrycrazy drunk-post till Monday afternoon, 3pm sharp'ish, when it is time to march back to Harburd Englishy Institute in Nowon. Have a nice weekend eh?
But, just to point out the sheer nonsensical hypocrisy of those who want to limit Carbon and yet live 18 hours away from home by plane. One last post..
http://www.news24.com/News24/Technology/News/0,9294,2-13-1443_2086930,00.html
| Quote: |
Tourists cause global warming
22/03/2007 10:53 - (SA)
Click Here & get R100 FREE to try African Palace Casino!
Madrid - Holidaymakers may be ruining their favourite destinations through pollution and greenhouse gases, making the tourism industry one of the world's worst polluters, experts say.
A flight to that pristine beach and a few nights in an air-conditioned hotel room, when repeated on the mass scale of modern tourism, is all it takes to put the holiday business on a polluting par with heavy industries.
"Tourism is unfortunately one of the vectors of (climate) change at the moment and contributes, through its excesses, to the process of global warming," World Tourism Organisation (WTO) director general Francesco Frangialli told an international conference on meteorology in Madrid this week.
In 2006, 842 million people took a holiday in a foreign country and 40% of them flew to their destinations. That's 336 million people, or more than the population of the United States, taking trips which spew greenhouse gases that fuel global warming.
Total air transport still only accounts for two percent of carbon dioxide (CO2), the principal greenhouse gas, in the atmosphere, but its contribution is growing and tourism is one of the driving forces behind rising passenger numbers, Frangialli said.
He said 1.1 billion tourists were expected to take trips abroad in 2010, and 1.6 billion by 2020.
Tourism faces 'tragedy'
At the same time, tourism itself was facing "tragedy" if climate change continued unabated, Frangialli said.
As tourists pollute their way around the world, popular destinations such as the pristine but low-lying Maldive islands in the Indian Ocean may disappear as sea levels rise.
Tanzania's famous lakes, a staple of the African tourism industry, will dry up. In Europe's alps the ski season will become shorter, the pistes fewer and harder to find.
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned in February that by 2100, global average surface temperatures could rise by between 1.1 C and 6.4 C compared to 1980-99 levels.
The most likely surface temperature rise will be between 1.8 and 4.0 C, it said.
According to a French weather expert, a temperature rise of 1.8 degrees C would translate to 40 fewer days of snowfall at mid-level altitudes of 1 500m.
The WTO has backed an EU proposal to include air travel by 2011 or 2012 in limitations on emissions and creating transferable carbon accounts in a bid to limit the greenhouse effect.
Such measures would encourage airlines to put pressure on manufacturers to produce aircraft which are more fuel-efficient, Frangialli said.
That could mean higher air fares, but some in the travel industry believe tourists would be ready to pay a little more to protect the places they love. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gang ah jee
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: city of paper
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| I don't play the "source" game. |
Yes, I know. Which is why you find a CH4 documentary made by a known crank to be more credible than mainstream science. Sounds pretty foolish if you ask me - but you'll learn that for yourself eventually, I'm sure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
GAJ, you are aware that there is a fairly well organized campaign to push out or shut up dissenters? The same thing happens all over the university. You must conform. You must have 'correct' set of ideas. The university is not the free-thinking institution you think it is.
Peer-reviewed journals are how profs get tenure. Publish or perish and all that. But, if you publish (if they would even consider it) an article that criticized any of the GW religion, you will find quickly that your employment prospects dry up. I have an econ professor who published that men and women might not be 100% exactly equal in terms of intellectual ability, without a value judgment, and he is fully unable to find work in the West. And he is from a top 15 program. Another professor of mine lost his tenure application because he used "his" instead of "her/his" in a published article. They said it was sexist. Science is not immune to this, and with all these hyper-political reports being cheer-led by journalists, we had better be damn sure that those who would know, agree. And. They. Don't.
This is just another panic. All the pieces are in place, and the dissenters are on the side. Nobody dares speak out for fear of being labeled 'of exxon' and destroying their career.
I'm afraid you are going to have to look beyond the facade on this one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gang ah jee
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: city of paper
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
GAJ, you are aware that there is a fairly well organized campaign to push out or shut up dissenters? The same thing happens all over the university. You must conform. You must have 'correct' set of ideas. The university is not the free-thinking institution you think it is.
Peer-reviewed journals are how profs get tenure. Publish or perish and all that. But, if you publish (if they would even consider it) an article that criticized any of the GW religion, you will find quickly that your employment prospects dry up. I have an econ professor who published that men and women might not be 100% exactly equal in terms of intellectual ability, without a value judgment, and he is fully unable to find work in the West. And he is from a top 15 program. Another professor of mine lost his tenure application because he used "his" instead of "her/his" in a published article. They said it was sexist. Science is not immune to this, and with all these hyper-political reports being cheer-led by journalists, we had better be damn sure that those who would know, agree. And. They. Don't.
This is just another panic. All the pieces are in place, and the dissenters are on the side. Nobody dares speak out for fear of being labeled 'of exxon' and destroying their career.
I'm afraid you are going to have to look beyond the facade on this one. |
Dude, is that what they told you? "I'm teaching here in Asia because I wrote 'his' instead of 'his/her'?" Too funny. And WTF was an econ prof doing speculating about gender intelligence differentials? No, something stinks here.
So, got anything else about this 'fairly well organised' campaign other than anecdotes from your school? Because there's a great deal of evidence from the other side of a concerted campaign to discredit global warming through pseudoscience and misinformation which you conveniently seem to be ignoring. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| Yes, efl, lies, yes. Atta boy. |
They were your words, son. You want to revise them, I'll no longer call you a liar. You paint something other than it is, you are lying. That too much for you to process? |
Well, yeah, it must be. Dad? I dunno. But I do know that it is Friday night, and you've likely hit the soju, right? Gonna drink and angrycrazy drunk-post till Monday afternoon, 3pm sharp'ish, when it is time to march back to Harburd Englishy Institute in Nowon. Have a nice weekend eh? |
Was that supposed to be a joke? Harburd? Nowon? Drinking? Sorry, even if I wanted to, can't drink until at least Monday. Seriously, can't win your argument so you claim someone you don't know, never will is a drunk? Way to go, scumsucker. You and gopher, one of a kind. Pigs. Fucking pigs.
| Quote: |
| But, just to point out the sheer nonsensical hypocrisy of those who want to limit Carbon and yet live 18 hours away from home by plane. One last post.. |
Yeah, that's relevant to this thead.
Why don't you try posting some credible facts instead of bullshit hit pieces that have already been proven full of falsities? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
No, the his/her was in Canada. My undergraduate advisor. It is actually true. The other one, about gender, was an econometric study of employment of some kind. Remember, at the PhD level, economics is essentially math math math.
You can look around yourself. I posted here about a dude who got death threats for speaking out against it. He also said that people form his own school, Manitoba, we telling him he "couldn't" say that. What happens is people who dissent go into industry. This is the same for all academia. If you don't pull the line, you will not have success, unless you are some extra special genius. That is the way academia works. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| BJWD wrote: |
| Yes, efl, lies, yes. Atta boy. |
They were your words, son. You want to revise them, I'll no longer call you a liar. You paint something other than it is, you are lying. That too much for you to process? |
Well, yeah, it must be. Dad? I dunno. But I do know that it is Friday night, and you've likely hit the soju, right? Gonna drink and angrycrazy drunk-post till Monday afternoon, 3pm sharp'ish, when it is time to march back to Harburd Englishy Institute in Nowon. Have a nice weekend eh? |
Was that supposed to be a joke? Harburd? Nowon? Drinking? Sorry, even if I wanted to, can't drink until at least Monday. Seriously, can't win your argument so you claim someone you don't know, never will is a drunk? Way to go, scumsucker. You and gopher, one of a kind. Pigs. *beep* pigs.
| Quote: |
| But, just to point out the sheer nonsensical hypocrisy of those who want to limit Carbon and yet live 18 hours away from home by plane. One last post.. |
Yeah, that's relevant to this thead.
Why don't you try posting some credible facts instead of *beep* hit pieces that have already been proven full of falsities? |
Sure. "Win" an argument that is about a topic so complex you simply do not have the computing power to understand. To "win" we would have to present opposing climate models, data and evidence. You are pulling a True Believer line, and I'm calling you out for it. You throw insults virtually ever post, and I'm throwing them back.
Do you notice how you buy every single story out there? Like, if there is something that you should believe, you believe it. Notice that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gang ah jee
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: city of paper
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
No, the his/her was in Canada. My undergraduate advisor. It is actually true. The other one, about gender, was an econometric study of employment of some kind. Remember, at the PhD level, economics is essentially math math math.
You can look around yourself. I posted here about a dude who got death threats for speaking out against it. He also said that people form his own school, Manitoba, we telling him he "couldn't" say that. What happens is people who dissent go into industry. This is the same for all academia. If you don't pull the line, you will not have success, unless you are some extra special genius. That is the way academia works. |
So nothing but anecdotes. I see. Does this organised campaign work in the same way as the ones that suppress the evidence that shows that God created us 6,000 years ago? Or is it more like the organised campaign that keeps all the structural engineers silent on the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
A simple google search..
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=%22peer+review%22+global+warming+refuse+to+publish&spell=1
First hit:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/05/01/wglob01.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/05/01/ixworld.html
| Quote: |
Two of the world's leading scientific journals have come under fire from researchers for refusing to publish papers which challenge fashionable wisdom over global warming.
A British authority on natural catastrophes who disputed whether climatologists really agree that the Earth is getting warmer because of human activity, says his work was rejected by the American publication, Science, on the flimsiest of grounds.
Radcliffe on Sour power station with Dr Benny Peiser (inset)
Radcliffe on Sour power station with Dr Benny Peiser (inset). He disagrees with the pro-global warming line
A separate team of climate scientists, which was regularly used by Science and the journal Nature to review papers on the progress of global warming, said it was dropped after attempting to publish its own research which raised doubts over the issue.
The controversy follows the publication by Science in December of a paper which claimed to have demonstrated complete agreement among climate experts, not only that global warming is a genuine phenomenon, but also that mankind is to blame.
The author of the research, Dr Naomi Oreskes, of the University of California, analysed almost 1,000 papers on the subject published since the early 1990s, and concluded that 75 per cent of them either explicitly or implicitly backed the consensus view, while none directly dissented from it.
Dr Oreskes's study is now routinely cited by those demanding action on climate change, including the Royal Society and Prof Sir David King, the Government's chief scientific adviser.
advertisement
However, her unequivocal conclusions immediately raised suspicions among other academics, who knew of many papers that dissented from the pro-global warming line.
They included Dr Benny Peiser, a senior lecturer in the science faculty at Liverpool John Moores University, who decided to conduct his own analysis of the same set of 1,000 documents - and concluded that only one third backed the consensus view, while only one per cent did so explicitly. |
Really dude. That academia crowds out dissenting views is hardly new news. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gang ah jee
Joined: 14 Jan 2003
Location: city of paper
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alright! So we've got a 2005 Daily Telegraph article featuring a review team for Science, Landsea and Peiser. You probably remember those last two from Larry Soloman's National Post series. You probably also remember that Peiser is an anthropologist and not a scientist, but no matter. You may not be aware that Peiser made some major cock-ups in his attempted replication of Oreske's study and in the two years since has recanted from several of his claims. Oh no. So really all we have are some more anecdotes from a handful of malcontents. Now, this agrees with your faith that everything will be peachy as long as we leave the corporations to work their market magic, so I imagine you'll have no problem taking this as convincing. You'll understand if I require something more substantial, however.
So what about your search terms? Funny! The second link on the page is to a Creationist site (see? Right-wing libertarians aren't the only group to deny global warming on the grounds that it causes problems for their dearest beliefs), and the sixth link is to an HIV/AIDS denial group's website. Apparently they have a beef with global warming as well. It looks like the rest of the links on the first page just repeat information that's in the Telegraph piece or are related to the some of the other five usual suspects (Lindzen, for example). I know you don't care about the quality of the sources you use, but this is the best evidence of a massive, organised left-wing conspiracy you've got? One article and an EFLtraineresque command to 'google it'? Heh. Chicken-littling about the Muslims, head firmly inserted in the sand about global warming. You are indeed an enigma, BJWD.
Oh, and for those Gore fans out there - the man testified to congress that:
* Carbon tax: better than cap-and-trade. Cap-and-trade: better than nothing. Cap-and-trade with auctioned permits: better than cap-and-trade without.
http://gristmill.grist.org/main/2
Go go Carbon Tax! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| Sure. "Win" an argument that is about a topic so complex you simply do not have the computing power to understand. To "win" we would have to present opposing climate models, data and evidence. You are pulling a True Believer line, and I'm calling you out for it. |
Semantics, boy, semantics. Can't win the argument so now you argue the meaning of "win." Clinton would be proud.
| Quote: |
| You throw insults virtually ever post, and I'm throwing them back. |
Well, I throw simple little "dumbass", "idiot", etc., around. You? You completely lose it and attack my character, my living habits and even, with gopher, my emotional state regarding my wife who passed away.
Scum. <---- I never used that till you ACTED like it.
| Quote: |
| Do you notice how you buy every single story out there? Like, if there is something that you should believe, you believe it. Notice that? |
Now, boy, you've read my list of what I believe on the topics, so why LIE AGAIN?
9/11: Have not come to a conclusion.
Iraq: was against it from before the time it started as it was clearly nothing but bullshit, lies, power and money.
GW: what is there to buy? It's here, it's happening. Your stance it isn't human-caused is LESS valid than mine that it is human-exacerbated. Get a grip. I can support my conclusion, you cannot.
PO: This is simple. Do the math. Under current consumption of oil and current assumptions of the MAXIMUM oil reserves we have, there are between 80 and 100 years left of oil.
Anything else, boy? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As discussed here and there, chaos is a essentially mathematical modeling of seemingly unstable systems. It, in combination with understanding how exponents work, can help inform us about many things. Tipping points = bifurcation. They are points where systems transition from stasis/linear functions/equilibrium to turbulence/disequilibrium. (You math folk may have a clearer way to state this.)
What we are seeing in climate models and in historical records is that these tipping points occur very quickly. Again, spin a coin. Notice how long it spins smoothly. Notice how long it takes to go from the first wobbles to chaotic motion. Then, from pretty wobbly to completely out of control. Notice the relationships in time. And this is as simple a system as we can realistically get in the real world. Now try spinning several coins in the same area. How long till one or more are down? Or, just add, say, a puff of breath to the coin. What happens? Well, that's ice and global warming.
As stated in the IPCC's recent report, the most recent data for ice melt wasn't even included. Some here have argued the numbers in the IPCC are THE numbers, so quit screaming the sky is falling. Well, sometimes you pay attention to the little things, or even those not said. I guarantee you global warming is coming faster than any skeptic, and perhaps most adherents, understand. It's simple logic.
To wit:
Antarctic Melting May Be Speeding Up, Scientists Say
| Quote: |
March 23, 2007 � By Michael Byrnes, Reuters
HOBART -- Rising sea levels and melting polar ice-sheets are at upper limits of projections, leaving some human population centres already unable to cope, top world scientists say as they analyse latest satellite data.
A United Nations report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in February projected sea level gains of 18-59 centimetres (7-23 inches) this century from temperature rises of 1.8-4.0 Celsius (3.2-7.8 Farenheit).
"Observations are in the very upper edge of the projections," leading Australian marine scientist John Church told Reuters.
"I feel that we're getting uncomfortably close to threshhold," said Church, of Australia's CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research said.
Past this level, parts of the Antarctic and Greenland would approach a virtually irreversible melting that would produce sea level rises of metres, he said.
...But the Antarctic Peninsula is warming faster than anywhere else on Earth, and glaciers are in massive retreat.
...But even in east Antarctica, which is insulated from global warming by extreme cold temperatures and high-altitudes, new information shows the height of the Tottenham Glacier near Australia's Casey Base has fallen by 10 metres over 15-16 years.
MELTING POLES
Scientists say massive glacier retreat at Heard Island, 1,000 km (620 miles) north of Antarctica, is an example of how fringe areas of the polar region are melting.
...Church pointed out that sea levels were 4-6 metres higher more than 100,000 years ago when temperatures were at levels expected to be reached at the end of this century.
Dynamic ice-flows could add 25 percent to IPCC forecasts of sea level rise, van Ommen said.
...This was already happening in the south of England, where local councils and governments could not afford to protect all areas from sea water erosion as land continued to sink.
About 100 million people around the world live within a metre of the present-day sea level, CSIRO Marine Research senior principal research scientist Steve Rintoul said. "Those 100 million people will need to go somewhere," he said.
Worse, every metre of sea level rise causes an inland recession of around 100 metres (300 feet) and more erosion occurs with every storm.
"You can't just say we'll just put sea walls," Hunter said. |
New efforts to predict when polar ice will melt
| Quote: |
The loss of sea ice in the Arctic may have reached a "tipping point" that could "trigger a cascade of climate change" reaching much farther south. As Arctic warming accelerates, polar waters could become ice-free by the turn of the century, or, under one scenario, as early as 2040.
These are among the conclusions of a new study published March 16 in the journal Science. The area of the Arctic covered by sea ice has been shrinking at least since 1979, when regular satellite observations began.
| Quote: |
"When the ice thins to a vulnerable state, the bottom will drop out, and we may quickly move into a new, seasonally ice-free state of the Arctic. I think there is some evidence that we may have reached that tipping point, and the impacts will not be confined to the Arctic region."
|
The effects could be felt widely around the world and could include drought in the American West and increased winter rains over Western and Southern Europe...
...Pine Island and Thwaites on the western Antarctic and Totten and Cook glaciers in the eastern Antarctic � were retreating in unison, faster than in previous decades. |
Last edited by EFLtrainer on Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:31 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
Anything else, boy? |
Bad day? How do you wake up angry and anti-social every day? The weather forecast for Seoul is 11 degrees. A lovely day to get out of the house and away from the computer. Go explore. Connect with people. Enjoy life. Stop obsessing about every little problem and person.
Get a life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
Anything else, boy? |
Bad day? How do you wake up angry and anti-social every day? The weather forecast for Seoul is 11 degrees. A lovely day to get out of the house and away from the computer. Go explore. Connect with people. Enjoy life. Stop obsessing about every little problem and person.
Get a life. |
Excellent response to good science.
Last edited by EFLtrainer on Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:32 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
