|
Post by jeppeb on Oct 21, 2015 19:19:26 GMT
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Oct 21, 2015 19:39:14 GMT
Hi jeppeb!! Have a look at the North Atlantic Drift...Drifted? Thread...looong discussion there and some really good contributions!!
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Oct 26, 2015 20:02:57 GMT
I went to the above forum, after one post i was 'offered' to view the following....
Let me open this thread by stating how great this website is, as it's one of the few places on the internet where anyone can talk about M2C2 (man-made climate change) for free. As such, it offers us all the opportunity to exchange ideas about, and consider the many possibilities surrounding, this new situation. Unfortunately, this kind of website, being an open forum, also invites certain obstacles, and I will use myself as a case in point.
Now let me begin by clarifying that by using myself as an example, I am not suggesting that I am the only person representative of this example. In fact, I think if you look at the half-dozen or so regular contributors here, of which I am one, you will find that we all, at times, are representative of this example. That said, I am currently the number one contributor to this website, and I know so because every time I click enter and post a new comment, the website informs me that "you are no. 1 on the list of most active users." Unfortunately, if you were to look at all of the over-500 posts I've made here, you'd quickly realize that only about 100-200 of them are actually on topic and constructive contributions to their respective threads. The remainder are either off topic or, worse yet, me criticizing the messenger when I should be commenting on the message.
There are many reasons for this type of non-constructive behavior. Originally, when I first discovered this website a few weeks ago and made my first post Bursting the Atmosphere: what happens when rain falls up, I did so with the full intent of contributing only on topic, constructive content. Unfortunately, it quickly became apparent that not everyone here was participating on those same terms. I responded to this by creating threads which were aimed at turning the conversations here into a more positive direction, such as:
A better way to post on Climate-debate.com
...and...
The reality of an open online debate forum
Sadly, these did not have the desired impact, and Climate-debate.com continued on in a predominantly non-constructive direction. So, I decided to join in the mayhem and fight fire with fire. While this proved somewhat entertaining for awhile, and it did provide me the opportunity to sharpen my sarcastic whit, it only resulted in my making a vast volume of irrelevant posts which further clogged up threads and drove non-participant guests to this website away. While I was able to silence one or two of the other non-contributory individuals who were actively posting here, ultimately, I also just further empowered the ones who remained. This was not my goal.
The real goal of this site, in my opinion, is not to get everyone to agree. The real goal is to have a free, open exchange of ideas which is conducted in a constructive and respectful manner. This means that it's okay to disagree, even about things almost everyone else agrees upon, as long as it's done in a constructive and respectful way. When it comes to M2C2, there are currently two main camps of opinions: the 97% who are believers (97%B's), and the 3% who are doubters (3%D's). I am in no way suggesting that the 3% should be excluded from this website. In fact, they more than anyone else belong here, for they are the vanguards of one of the foundation corner-stones of science: skepticism. Should we exclude them, we run the risk of becoming nothing more than a bunch of self-serving yes-people who lack the ability to see beyond our own noses.
On the other hand, in the face of overwhelming evidence which is contrary to one's position, it can be very difficult to be a constructive 3%D'er (3%cD), as it is ultimately frustrating to champion a banner behind which there are so few supporters. This make 3%D'ers prone to the hazard of shifting from doubters to denialist, or what I call destructive 3%D's (3%dD's).
Now there are dozens of websites that already address the denialist problem in M2C2, like Denial101x, so I won't rehash all the details here. Just realize that, currently on this website, the 3%dD's have taken hold of the conversations to the point that not only are they making destructive posts (i.e. - posts that are off topic and non-contributory), but they've also drawn the 95%B's into similar behavior which is the ultimate goal of denialist: preventing constructive conversation from occurring in the first place.
Well, what's the matter with all of this? So what if there's a website where both the 3%D's and the 97%B's get down and dirty in the mud for a bit of the old roust-about? Nothing, if this website did not have the potential to be the premier home for constructive, open and free discourse about M2C2. But to do that, there need to be many voices - both of the 97% as well as the 3% - who are participating. Yet, now, at best, there are only a paltry half-dozen individuals who post here at any given time. Why? Because though there's a regular flow of "guests" who regularly land here and have a look around, it obviously becomes quickly apparent to them that this site is nothing more than a few people involved in mud wrestling, something the overwhelming majority of our guests have no apparent interest in, and so they decline to join in our conversations. And that's why I've created this thread: to propose a way to change that; to propose a way to have over-whelmingly constructive discourse; to propose a way to re-energize Climat-date.com and make it into something valuable to the internet at large.
So here goes. Right now there are three people who, in my opinion, have contributed mostly constructive content to this website: climate scientist, Ceist, and Totototo. Right or wrong (you can decide), I'm also including myself in this group. Rather than making general comments or ones addressed at a single individual, for now, I'm predicating all of my posts with this:
"@climate scientist, Ceist, Totototo, and trafn only - ..."
My goal here is to make everyone, regardless of whether they are of the 97% or the 3%, aware that this post is aimed at those who support constructive, respectful dialogue. This does not mean that a 3%dD'er can't post a comment in response to one of mine, but it does mean that I won't be responding to them publicly in a thread. Whenever someone from a 97%B perspetive publicly responds to a 3%dD based post, it only empowers that 3%dD'er to continue down the 3%dD pathway. So from now on, when I make one of my "@-only" posts:
1. If a 3%dD response is posted, I will not respond, thereby not further empowering the 3%dD behavior.
2. If a 3%dD person should make an on topic, constructive response, I will reply by PM only, until such time as I am convinced that they have stopped posting as a 3%dD contributor and are now willing to post as a 3%cD contributor (i.e. - have shifted back from being a denialist to a doubter). This will keep me from empowering their 3%dD behavior, while leaving the door open for their return to a more constructive means of participating here.
3. If a 3%dD person should make an off topic, constructive response (i.e. - off topic but of interest in the M2C2 arena), then I will suggest via PM that they begin a new thread which I will gladly consider participating in if it comes from a 3%cD, doubter rather than denialist, perspective.
Well, that's a lot to take in all at once, and I hope everyone will see the value in this approach. Ultimately, we want as many people to participate here in as constructive and respectful manner as is possible. Of course, that means that we must also realize that anyone, including myself, can at times charge off in the wrong direction. If and when that does happen, this does not have to drag down the entire website. Hopefully, with the above suggestion, we will now have a way to re-welcome the distracting individual back into our constructive, respectful conversations.
Thoughts?
yeah...i have some thoughts you ridiculous, patronizing, narcissistic, egotistical maniac.....
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Oct 26, 2015 21:55:24 GMT
Don't sugar coat it Acid my man. Tell em what you really think.
|
|
|
Post by acidohm on Oct 26, 2015 22:19:17 GMT
Don't sugar coat it Acid my man. Tell em what you really think. Yeah..well, that's not what I said on the forum....but I did make them aware I wasn't going back, very strange place!!
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Oct 27, 2015 0:24:49 GMT
Don't sugar coat it Acid my man. Tell em what you really think. Yeah..well, that's not what I said on the forum....but I did make them aware I wasn't going back, very strange place!! Yeah ... i looked through the site, and it did look a little strange. Not much interest in the pursuit of knowledge. Counting coup gets a little tiring after awhile.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 20, 2017 2:10:55 GMT
www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/The North Atlantic between Newfoundland and Ireland is practically the only region of the world that has defied global warming and even cooled. Last winter there even was the coldest on record – while globally it was the hottest on record. Our recent study (Rahmstorf et al. 2015) attributes this to a weakening of the Gulf Stream System, which is apparently unique in the last thousand years.
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jan 20, 2017 2:42:23 GMT
www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/The North Atlantic between Newfoundland and Ireland is practically the only region of the world that has defied global warming and even cooled. Last winter there even was the coldest on record – while globally it was the hottest on record. Our recent study (Rahmstorf et al. 2015) attributes this to a weakening of the Gulf Stream System, which is apparently unique in the last thousand years. Sigurdur, It's probably not this simple but I wonder if the meltwater from Greenland is having an effect on that region? It would be interesting to see if the cooling is year round or mostly in the summer months?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 20, 2017 3:29:25 GMT
www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/The North Atlantic between Newfoundland and Ireland is practically the only region of the world that has defied global warming and even cooled. Last winter there even was the coldest on record – while globally it was the hottest on record. Our recent study (Rahmstorf et al. 2015) attributes this to a weakening of the Gulf Stream System, which is apparently unique in the last thousand years. Sigurdur, It's probably not this simple but I wonder if the meltwater from Greenland is having an effect on that region? It would be interesting to see if the cooling is year round or mostly in the summer months? Glenn; I posted this to once again create discussion. Actual observations show that the Gulf Stream has not slowed down. A paper put out later 2016 uses observations in its conclusion. The thread at RC with comments is worth examining.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 20, 2017 3:44:17 GMT
www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/03/whats-going-on-in-the-north-atlantic/The North Atlantic between Newfoundland and Ireland is practically the only region of the world that has defied global warming and even cooled. Last winter there even was the coldest on record – while globally it was the hottest on record. Our recent study (Rahmstorf et al. 2015) attributes this to a weakening of the Gulf Stream System, which is apparently unique in the last thousand years. Sigurdur, It's probably not this simple but I wonder if the meltwater from Greenland is having an effect on that region? It would be interesting to see if the cooling is year round or mostly in the summer months? I wondered that as well, but it seemed the volume wasn't enough, But if you look at the 0-800 m time series along 59N from 0 to 30 W there does appear to be a seasonal component. Low temps occur in mid-year and highs over winter. I note that these ARGO data are updated through Dec, 2016 ... but the online Argo database has not been updated. I'm going to file a discrimination complaint. This is the blog site paper referred to in your link Sig. meltfactor.org/category/ice-sheet-melt-factor/
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 20, 2017 4:12:33 GMT
So, the ARGO data is available if u have an inside source.
And these guys are worried abt the TRUMP admin?
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Jan 20, 2017 4:21:05 GMT
Begs the question, has the Labrador current increased?
There is also the Green land current. It forms a small gyre with the Labrador.
This is an area I don't have much knowledge about so let's all work together to see what we can learn.
Maybe Graywolf can help.us here?
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 20, 2017 7:29:35 GMT
Begs the question, has the Labrador current increased? There is also the Green land current. It forms a small gyre with the Labrador. This is an area I don't have much knowledge about so let's all work together to see what we can learn. Maybe Graywolf can help.us here? Any news on the new sensor arrays designed to measure the NAD itself (north of the gyre) that were supposed to come on line sometime about 2015?
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 20, 2017 9:23:55 GMT
Begs the question, has the Labrador current increased? There is also the Green land current. It forms a small gyre with the Labrador. This is an area I don't have much knowledge about so let's all work together to see what we can learn. Maybe Graywolf can help.us here? Any news on the new sensor arrays designed to measure the NAD itself (north of the gyre) that were supposed to come on line sometime about 2015? New sensor arrays? Whose?
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Jan 20, 2017 14:01:09 GMT
Sigurdur, It's probably not this simple but I wonder if the meltwater from Greenland is having an effect on that region? It would be interesting to see if the cooling is year round or mostly in the summer months? Glenn; I posted this to once again create discussion. Actual observations show that the Gulf Stream has not slowed down. A paper put out later 2016 uses observations in its conclusion. The thread at RC with comments is worth examining. Sigurdur, As with most things climate related there seems to be conflicting studies. A Google Search leads to quite a few papers and most of them seem to indicate a measurable slowing of the Gulf Stream. Like I said everybody seems to have an agenda with everything related to climate science but the University of Rhode Island study which found there to be no significant slowing was based on data from one ship and only since 1992. So I have a question is the Gulf Stream slowing or not? Is the well documented cold blob a result of the Gulf Stream slowing? I love how you can find a paper to support just what you want it to out there. Kind of like picking and choosing a news outlet to fit your political bias like FOX or MSNBC. ftp.soest.hawaii.edu/engels/Stanley/Textbook_update/Science_304/Hakkinen-04.pdfThe Met concluded the slowing was part of natural variation. Which I found refreshing for them. www.reportingclimatescience.com/2016/05/27/gulf-stream/I will say that it is counter intuitive to have a cold blob if the Gulf Stream was in deed as strong as ever. One would think the warm water from southern latitudes with mitigate any cooling.
|
|