6 of 7
6
What’s really behind Global Climate Change denial
Posted: 27 November 2012 12:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 76 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3322
Joined  2011-11-04

Hmm… Dr. Tim Ball (no relation to TimB).  Well, he was a guest on the radio show “Coast to Coast”.  And not everything on that show is sensationalist fantasy.  Just most of it.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2012 05:37 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 77 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4400
Joined  2010-08-15
sine dues - 27 November 2012 09:49 AM

Hmmmmm….looks like the greenhouse gas lies of the IPCC are finally being outed.

Messed up models, lying researchers….proud bunch !

Let us see how Dr Tim Ball does with the junk science promoters…...

Have you heard of him yet darrons ?

You will

Speaking of junk science, it’s a topic Ball is quite familiar with

In January 2007 {...} “Over the past five years, he has published no less than 39 opinion pieces and 32 letters to the editor in 24 Canadian newspapers.
Fifty of these pieces ran in papers owned by “CanWest MediaWorks. These efforts totalled an incredible 44,500 words.”[9]

Among his unorthodox views, published as recently as last month in the Calgary Sun:

*Global temperatures have declined since 1998 in direct contradiction to computer models on which the Kyoto Accord is based.
*Ice-core records show that temperature rises before CO2 rises, not because of it.
*Evidence is mounting that pre-industrial levels of CO2 may have been much higher than the 280 parts per million assumed by environmentalists to have existed at that time.
*New research shows that changes in the energy output of the sun account for most of the recent warming and cooling of our planet.
The primary evidence of human influence on climate, the famous ‘hockey stick’ temperature-trends graph of climatologist Michael Mann, has been debunked as manipulated and wrong.”[9]http://www.sourcewatc(dot)org

Lot’s of opinions, but what science has he done lately?

Lawsuit

In September 2006, Ball filed a lawsuit against The Calgary Herald, a division of CanWest MediaWorks, specifically naming four of its staff, as well as Dr. Dan Johnson, a professor of environmental science at the Department of Geography at the University of Lethbridge and the Board of Governors of the University of Lethbridge.

Ball’s suit is over the publication of a letter to the editor published in April 2006 by Johnson responding to an opinion column by Ball. In his statement of claim, Ball objects to Johnson’s letter in which statements about his academic record were disputed. Ball’s claim seeks $250,000 in damages, special damages for loss of future income and punitive damages of $75,000.[10]

Johnson has filed an 18-page statement of defence denying “each and every allegation of fact and law” made by Ball.[10]

In the face of this and an even-more strident Statement of Defence by the Calgary Herald (“The Plantiff (Dr. Ball) is viewed as a paid promoter of the agenda of the oil and gas industry rather than as a practicing scientist.”), Ball withdrew the suit in June 2007.[10]
http://www.sourcewatc(dot)org/index.php?title=Tim_Ball

Honesty isn’t one of his strong suits:

Key Deeds

Ongoing

Ball and the organizations he is affiliated with have repeatedly made the claim that he is the “first Canadian PhD in climatology.” Ball himself claimed he was “one of the first climatology PhD’s in the world.” [3], [4]

Many have pointed out that there have been numerous PhD’s in the field prior to Ball. [5]

Ball was a former professor of geography at the University of Winnipeg from 1988 to 1996.
The University of Winnipeg never had an office of Climatology.
His degree was in historical geography and not climatology.

Desmogblog
http://www.desmogblog(dot)com/timothy-f-ball-tim-ball

http://www.exxonsecrets(dot)org/html/personfactsheet.php?id=1164

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2012 05:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 78 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4858
Joined  2007-10-05

Thanks CC. I was in class this afternoon and fought a massive traffic jam on the way home. I just finished supper and was getting ready to research Dr. Ball when you posted this.

Hey, SD, when are you going to quit digging yourself deeper into that hole?

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2012 05:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 79 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  50
Joined  2012-11-26

I’ll venture a guess and imagine that he sees no such hole.

 Signature 

His palm.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2012 05:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 80 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4858
Joined  2007-10-05
MMMasturbator - 27 November 2012 05:45 PM

I’ll venture a guess and imagine that he sees no such hole.

The pie chart Mriana linked and I posted is probably blocking the Sun so SD can’t see how deep he is.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2012 05:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 81 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  50
Joined  2012-11-26

Depth is generally something obscured. It even has a phantom.

 Signature 

His palm.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2012 06:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 82 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4400
Joined  2010-08-15

Incidentally, for folks who might be interested in why Dr. Tim Ball’s scientific opinions are wrong
here’s the search results over at SkepticalScience.com.

While denialists are all about going after persons and personalities and miniscule minutiae,
. . .  endlessly talking about everything but the real effort to understand and the observations being made.

These folks (SkS contributors) have taken the time to understand the science that has been produced, they explain it in a clear manner,
and include all the references to the science upon which they base their articles.

Following the articlea are some pretty interesting discussions - where serious students can participate,


http://www.skepticalscience.com/search.php?Search=tim+ball&x=0&y=0

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 November 2012 06:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 83 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4858
Joined  2007-10-05

Looking at that list I see seven of the arguments SD has presented here. I really wish he’d come up with something new instead of regurgitating the same crap the deniers have been shoveling for the past two decades.

 Signature 

You cannot have a rational conversation with someone who holds irrational beliefs.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 28 November 2012 12:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 84 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4400
Joined  2010-08-15

Thanks Darron.  You know I’m beginning to appreciate more and more how defenders of the scientific process and climatology have neglected the IPCC reports.

Lately I’ve had a chance to read through some if it again -  I’m constantly surprised at what an impressive piece of work it is… considering all the slander it gets.
I’m mentioning it because I know you, and some others here, are into communicating the science regarding global warming.

Weelll, understand now it’s late and I’ve had a beer cool smile guess I’m feeling subversive
now it seems to me
We need to stand up and be proud of what the IPCC has accomplished and stop letting thugs get away with slinging mud at it.  tongue wink


cheese

a couple examples:
Re:  A Hate-On for The Medieval Warming Period
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=310140#p310140

Re: Mann against the world
http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=310145#p310145
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

On a similar track, a couple weeks ago it was reading through a few climategate emails and again noticed how much cool stuff was in there.
You know, examples of how science works, scientists discussing issues.  Some of it is downright impressive, if you’re willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.
And I know there are a couple exchanges that make one kring, but they were isolated and pretty much of the blowing off steam variety, humans, sometimes pissed off (for good reason it’s worth noting) but in the end the fact is that most of those texts in those emails reflect well on how scientists operate behind the closed doors.

But that story never get’s aired or fleshed out.  It’s a shame.  So many projects and so little f’n time.

 Signature 

We need each other, to keep ourselves honest

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 December 2012 06:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 85 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  123
Joined  2012-11-15
TimB - 26 November 2012 01:21 PM

I admire your vocational choice for its potential service to mankind.

I think that people tend to be much more motivated by the prospect of financial benefits than by the vague prospect of damage somewhere out in the future.  I am sure you will do well effectively bringing into focus and highlighting the latter.  But I would suggest that you also heavily emphasize the prospect of superior affordability of alternatives.

Thanks. Yes, I agree. Here’s a good example of the potential prospect of superior affordability of alternatives:

Saltwater microalgae farms. They don’t compete with land use for food production. We can use the most barren land available. Right now a barrel of microalgae oil costs about $800 which is a lot more than the $100 for crude oil.

Now think 2020. Then think 2025. Just demand increase from India and China alone will drive up the cost of crude oil. In addition, the days of cheap crude oil drilling and processing will soon be over.

We need the best scientists and engineers to bring down the cost of microalgae farming. It is possible to bring down the cost per barrel significantly. There won’t be a shortage of saltwater. And algae reproduce eagerly…

Here’s another example:

Advanced fungal cellulose processing for second-generation biofuel using cellulose, not carbohydrates. Someone mentioned this this November 2012 article to me:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6110/1055

“Greater understanding of the mechanisms contributing to chemical and enzymatic solubilization of plant cell walls is critical for enabling cost-effective industrial conversion of cellulosic biomass to biofuels. Here, we report the use of correlative imaging in real time to assess the impact of pretreatment, as well as the resulting nanometer-scale changes in cell wall structure, upon subsequent digestion by two commercially relevant cellulase systems. We demonstrate that the small, noncomplexed fungal cellulases deconstruct cell walls using mechanisms that differ considerably from those of the larger, multienzyme complexes (cellulosomes). Furthermore, high-resolution measurement of the microfibrillar architecture of cell walls suggests that digestion is primarily facilitated by enabling enzyme access to the hydrophobic cellulose face. The data support the conclusion that ideal pretreatments should maximize lignin removal and minimize polysaccharide modification, thereby retaining the essentially native microfibrillar structure.”

The potential is enormous. High-tech countries need to be on the forefront of this.

[ Edited: 07 December 2012 06:26 AM by dansmith62 ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 December 2012 10:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 86 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

Quoting Dansmith62: 

Advanced fungal cellulose processing for second-generation biofuel using cellulose, not carbohydrates. Someone mentioned this this November 2012 article to me:

By the way, cellulose is a carbohydrate, just higher molecular weight than, say, starch or sugar.  smile

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2012 08:18 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 87 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  123
Joined  2012-11-15
Occam. - 07 December 2012 10:52 AM

Quoting Dansmith62: 

Advanced fungal cellulose processing for second-generation biofuel using cellulose, not carbohydrates. Someone mentioned this this November 2012 article to me:

By the way, cellulose is a carbohydrate, just higher molecular weight than, say, starch or sugar.  :)

Occam

I was using nutrition terminology which distinguishes between carbohydrates and fiber.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 December 2012 10:21 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 88 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

Then specify, “Digestible carbohydrates”.  Nutritional chemists know how to use the correct terminology.  I assign no value to the highschool dropouts who work in “heath food” stores and have no idea what they are talking about. 

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 December 2012 12:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 89 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2425
Joined  2007-07-05

Merry Climate Change

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmPSUMBrJoI

psik

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 December 2012 01:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 90 ]
Jr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  83
Joined  2012-12-01
Occam. - 21 December 2012 10:21 PM

...
  I assign no value to the highschool dropouts who work in “heath food” stores and have no idea what they are talking about. 

Occam

You mean like the one who told me “chlorine is an evil compound, the world would be better off with no chlorine”.

Wow, just wow. How many things can somene get wrong in one statement?

Profile
 
 
   
6 of 7
6
 
‹‹ Weather forecast      The Vanishing North ››