AlpineK Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 [img:center]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_95-BRDJHPgc/SMs4I8JfzHI/AAAAAAAAAao/SogLxfN3NWo/s400/Cartoon20080907.jpg[/img] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 IMO, the IPCC's conclusions were arrived at, largely, by affirming the consequent. CO2 scattering of IR radiation may yet prove correct as the primary cause of warming, but their "conclusions" fail to address other possible causes for Q. In any event, my main point was the whole concept of winter in Peru as an argument of semantics and the BBC's uncanny ability to weave "climate change" into every story however far removed from the observable it may be. Yeah, I've done 2 climbing trips to Bolivia in their winter (also their dry season). It was Hawaiian shirts and golf umbrellas all the way up to 20,000 ft, baby! Love that equator! Can you see the equator from your house, FW? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 Joe can see the moon from his house, ipso facto he's an ASTRONAUT!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted July 14, 2009 Share Posted July 14, 2009 May to September: The only time of year for high-altitude mountain climbing. The dry season coincides with winter in the Southern Hemisphere, which due to Peru's proximity to the Equator, means 30-50 minutes of daylight less per day. Temperatures drop below freezing at altitudes over 4,500 meters. Peru Climbing Season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted July 15, 2009 Author Share Posted July 15, 2009 IMO, the IPCC's conclusions were arrived at, largely, by affirming the consequent. CO2 scattering of IR radiation may yet prove correct as the primary cause of warming, but their "conclusions" fail to address other possible causes for Q. In any event, my main point was the whole concept of winter in Peru as an argument of semantics and the BBC's uncanny ability to weave "climate change" into every story however far removed from the observable it may be. Yeah, I've done 2 climbing trips to Bolivia in their winter (also their dry season). It was Hawaiian shirts and golf umbrellas all the way up to 20,000 ft, baby! Love that equator! Can you see the equator from your house, FW? Personal anecdote trumps scientific method? Well done little robot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 (edited) No, but a few months in the region is light years further than a couchside point of view. I saw first hand what 20 years of drought, definitely a significant change in climate, had done to the high Andes. The only info we could get our hands on at the time was a Spanish guidebook that was 2 decades old. When we showed up, we quickly realized that the fine neve lines we'd picked out had become either bare vertical rock or really fucked up icefalls. Our base camp in the Illampu area was threatened by a new, 1 million cubic meter ice bulge (it had been surveyed) perched about 2000 meters over the valley. So we picked some new lines and tried them out. They all worked. But hey, this is just eye witness experience, so it doesn't mean shit compared to spray-pinion. Edited July 15, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted July 15, 2009 Author Share Posted July 15, 2009 The glaciers are shrinking. No shit. You don't even have to go to Sajama or Anchohuma to see it. But ambient air temperature isn't the only reason this would be occurring, now is it? !Vivi en Bolivia para dos anos estupida chingada madre! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 OMG ARE U SAYIN COMMUNISM SHRINKS GLACIERS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted July 15, 2009 Share Posted July 15, 2009 Drought, dude. That means dry, whatever the air temperature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akhalteke Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Drought, dude. That means dry, whatever the air temperature. Thanks doctor chestbeat. Got any more amazing mind shattering revelations for everyone? Or would you just rather watch choadaboy, the resident tourettes' poster child run around humping anything that moves and constantly hitting refresh to see if anything else was posted by fairweather? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 Drought, dude. That means dry, whatever the air temperature. Thanks doctor chestbeat. Got any more amazing mind shattering revelations for everyone? Or would you just rather watch choadaboy, the resident tourettes' poster child run around humping anything that moves and constantly hitting refresh to see if anything else was posted by fairweather? LOL!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 I care not what Joe Six Pack has to say. Palin will get those glaciers growing again in 2012. You betcha!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted July 16, 2009 Share Posted July 16, 2009 John Moore: One world government and global warming/climate change/whatever Posted: July 16, 2009, 11:40 AM by NP Editor John Moore, Full Comment I knew I was poking the bear when I sent my most recent column (Climate skeptic arguments don't hold ice, July 14) to my editor here at the National Post. The [Financial] Post publishes almost weekly columns about the fiction of climate change so understandably some readers are well persuaded that the whole global warming house of cards is already tumbling down. The torrent of e-mails and some 48 on-line comments later and I have a new appreciation of just how fiercely some hold on to their denier status. Setting aside the likes of John Rhodes who told me “You’re full of sh#t and you should shut the fu*k up” and those who called on my editors to place warnings in front of my Trotskyite columns there were some recurring themes that intrigued me. A major talking point amongst the skeptics is a certain indignation over how “global warming” became “climate change”. Some people think this was a marketing move by the international forces of socialism to protect our Coke-like franchise. Actually, the terms are irrelevant. The general theory has been roughly the same for 150 years. Unfortunately the same can’t be said for the skeptics who made a very canny transition three or four years ago from the stance that the world isn’t warming up to “no-one denies the planet is warming up, we dispute the cause.” No small number of people were very angry about the term "denier" insisting that it lumps skeptics in with holocaust deniers. No apologies here. “Denier” is a term that accurately describes people who refuse to acknowledge established facts. There’s a particular outrage amongst many skeptics about the notion that their arguments and many of the people who champion the cause are so routinely dismissed by other scientists and the media. On this and other issues I am often remonstrated for failing to give due credit to “the other side of the story”. It’s a phenomenon Thomas Homer Dixon has identified as “the unbalance of balance”; the idea that minority opinions deserve not just consideration but equivalence. Creationists frequently invoke the same argument insisting that their religious objections to the theory of evolution are of equal merit to the theory itself. Of course it is no coincidence that the anti-evolution campaign and climate change dissent, when broken down into their component elements, are virtually the same. Both insist the theories are on the verge of collapse, that scientists are involved in a massive cover-up, that alternative formulas and complicated equations easily disprove the theories and that “the other side of the story” is being suppressed. I have also been recommended to various experts in the field to clear my confusion. The two most frequently mentioned names are Professor Tim Ball and Dr. Ian Plimer. One has to be careful in writing about Ball. When someone alleged that he is somewhat of a fantabulist when it comes to his academic credentials he filed and then withdrew a lawsuit. [The statements of claim make for fun reading at http://www.desmogblog.com/tim-ball-vs-dan-johnson-lawsuit-documents ]. Ball seems to have a lot of time on his hands to fire off terse e-mails and file lawsuits so let’s just say when it comes to this retired Winnipeg geography professor, he’s not really much of a player in the current science. Dr. Plimer is vaguely more compelling. He wrote Heaven and Earth- Global Warming: The Missing Science, a book that has been widely criticized by fellow scientists as just another collection of denier hits. Plimer’s dissent comes as little surprise. He also believes that El Nino is caused by undersea volcanoes, an opinion shared by almost no-one in his field and holds an even more extraordinarily rare and unsupported view that the sun is a ball of iron. Throw in Fred Singer, a man who spent many years arguing that a link between smoking and cancer could not be established and you begin to wonder why so many of the leading lights of climate skepticism are such isolated oddballs. I know, I know. They said Galileo was wrong. As I wrote to the few polite people who wrote to me (okay aside from comedian Rick Mercer there were two) Occam’s Razor requires you to decide whether the established theory – while still not complete - is accurate or if the world’s scientists, all of the national scientific associations, almost every government and the media are involved in a massive conspiracy. And to what end? Oh right, one world government and global serfdom. How could I be so blind? National Post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Yngve Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Aid workers say prolonged exposure to the cold is causing hypothermia and deadly respiratory infections such as pneumonia. Children, who are often malnourished, are more vulnerable to the extreme cold. Thanks for your expertise, aid workers. What do doctors say? You don't need to be a doctor to know that parachute use reduces major trauma related to gravitational challenge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Gary, the mosquitoes were fucking horrible at Index this evening. I would recommend climbing in the fall when they are dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.