Polar Bear Expert's Opinions "Unhelpful" to GW

[hcap]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

You still haven't found a dictionary and looked up theoretical yet have you?
Hawking makes educated guesses, that is his life's work. He hasn't proved anything that was previously unknown. All those big words you throw around that theoretical physicists use all point to the same thing, theories which are nothing but guesswork.

Bull. His work on black holes is considered more than theoretical.

https://www.theverge.com/2016/8/17/1...-hawking-proof

New evidence supports Stephen Hawking's theory of shrinking black holes

And

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/black-holes-hawking

Black holes created in a lab ‘prove’ radiation does escape from the astronomical objects

A black hole 'made' in a lab proves Stephen Hawking's theory correct, for the first time

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Name one physical process other than those on the probabilistic quantum level where cause may precede effect? There are none. Zero, Nada, Zilch.

0.0.0.0

I've done this along time ago in the original Religion thread when I discussed Thomistic-Aristotleian Realism -- and even more specifically with the Hand, Stick and Stone illustration I borrowed from Dr. Feser. Try to keep up.

Meanwhile...I couldn't help but notice you took a pass on my GP race card challenge for yesterday. Are you up to it for today's card?

[hcap]

Originally Posted by boxcar

I've done this along time ago in the original Religion thread when I discussed Thomistic-Aristotleian Realism -- and even more specifically with the Hand, Stick and Stone illustration I borrowed from Dr. Feser. Try to keep up.

Meanwhile...I couldn't help but notice you took a pass on my GP race card challenge for yesterday. Are you up to it for today's card?

Tell you what. Answer this. Name one physical process other than those on the probabilistic quantum level where effect may precede cause? Even though I said accurately predicting future events require an accurate understanding of the past and an accurate understanding of interacting causes, we can play horse racing.

Of course if the future precedes the past and present, as you babble, you would already know the outcomes of all races forever and there would be no point to any game of chance. Chance means probability.Maybe you should sell insurance instead of used cars and 17th century philosophy

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

Tell you what. Answer this. Name one physical process other than those on the probabilistic quantum level where effect may precede cause? Even though I said accurately predicting future events require an accurate understanding of the past and an accurate understanding of interacting causes, we can play horse racing.

Of course if the future precedes the past and present, as you babble, you would already know the outcomes of all races forever and there would be no point to any game of chance. Chance means probability.Maybe you should sell insurance instead of used cars and 17th century philosophy

That's pure nonsense and you know it! The Future is always the big unknown to all of us precisely because it does not precede from Past! The Past precedes the Present and Future ONLY CHRONOLOGICALLY -- but not logically. Why do you have such a time time understanding the difference!?

[hcap]

What da f**k does "The Past precedes the Present and Future ONLY CHRONOLOGICALLY -- but not logically"mean?

Logically and chronologically, before always precedes after. Always!.

COMMON DEFINITIONS ARE NOT A MATTER OF CHOICE Or fancy

Question? Do we speak the same language?

Remember not all of us speak Boxcarian

[davew]

Originally Posted by hcap

Bull. His work on black holes is considered more than theoretical.


New evidence supports Stephen Hawking's theory

If evidence supports a theory, does it become indisputable law supported by over 97% scientists in that field? It seems to with AGW....

[Tom]

What is more than theoretical?
It is truth or it isn't.
hcap ignores the fact that science has a history of evolution.

The sun revolved around the Earth - now it doesn't
The Earth was flat - now it's not.
Pluto was a planet,now it's not. What happened, global warming caused it to shrink?


https://www.buzzfeed.com/natashaumer...JNW#.naMRll5bZ

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by hcap

Bull. His work on black holes is considered more than theoretical.

https://www.theverge.com/2016/8/17/1...-hawking-proof

New evidence supports Stephen Hawking's theory of shrinking black holes

And

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/black-holes-hawking

Black holes created in a lab ‘prove’ radiation does escape from the astronomical objects

A black hole 'made' in a lab proves Stephen Hawking's theory correct, for the first time

It is still theory and proves nothing, if you want to believe it fine and dandy, just stop demeaning people that don't share your faith. No one can prove a damn thing about how the universe was created, they can build models and do experiments till the cows come home. You still haven't explained away that ice age all the 1970's scientists predicted that never showed up. You seem to support any nut that believes how you do and post their work like it is gospel.

If Stephen Hawking is so smart, with knowledge way beyond everyone else, and can solve problems that no one else can, can prove the reality of time travel, why is he sitting in a wheelchair, immobile and unable to do anything to take care of himself? If all the far fetched science fiction he believes in is true he should have transported his mind into the body of a 25 year old world class decathlete by now. Or maybe he should went back in time and cured the disease that crippled him. I believe because of his handicap the left has raised him to an icon status he does not deserve.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

I believe because of his handicap the left has raised him to an icon status he does not deserve.

I have nothing against Hawking, but have always thought the above statement was true. He's extremely intelligent and creative, but he's no Einstein, whose theories have stood the test of considerable time.

[FantasticDan]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

If Stephen Hawking is so smart, with knowledge way beyond everyone else, and can solve problems that no one else can, can prove the reality of time travel, why is he sitting in a wheelchair, immobile and unable to do anything to take care of himself? If all the far fetched science fiction he believes in is true he should have transported his mind into the body of a 25 year old world class decathlete by now. Or maybe he should went back in time and cured the disease that crippled him. I believe because of his handicap the left has raised him to an icon status he does not deserve.

This is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this forum.

Seriously, it sets a new standard. Congrats?

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by hcap

What da f**k does "The Past precedes the Present and Future ONLY CHRONOLOGICALLY -- but not logically"mean?

Logically and chronologically, before always precedes after. Always!.

COMMON DEFINITIONS ARE NOT A MATTER OF CHOICE Or fancy

Question? Do we speak the same language?

Remember not all of us speak Boxcarian

Well, then look up the common definitions of "chronological" and "logical". But thank you for finally admitting that this is your fundamental problem. I've been saying this for years now -- that you fail to understand there is paradox with Time -- that Time can be and is commonly understood in chronological terms but it should also be understood in logical terms. Logically, it's not possible for the Future to flow FROM the Past because if it did, we would have full knowledge of all Future events.

Moreover, you would logically have Time terminating in the Present, since the flow would be From the Past through the Future to the Present. But, LOGICALLY, if time terminated in the Present, then you would cease to exist the moment you read this, since there would be nothing beyond the Present. (What can be beyond Time's termination point?) But we escape this absurdity by postulating the real flow of time as logically flowing from the Future through the Present to the Past. The Future is the reservoir of all Time and the Past is its basin. The Present? It could be said that it's the canal that moment by moment connects the two.

[Stevecsd]

From: http://libertyunbound.com/node/1317

I agree with Pascal Bruckner, that CAGW is just another ideological meme to control people. And, the good news, I hope, is that more & more facts are coming out that rebut CAGW. Most people are just not aware of some basic facts about climate & CO2. Here are some I have learned over the last few years.

1. Currently carbon dioxide amounts to about 0.04% of the atmosphere. (4 / 100ths by percentage or 400 parts per million.)
2. From all of the reading I have done it appears that human caused CO2 generates somewhere between 3-7% of all global carbon dioxide. (For one source see http://www.manhattan-institute.org/e...ths/myth10.htm ) Even if it as high as 10% per cent, natural causes dwarf human generated CO2. And if humans double their CO2 output, global concentrations go up 10%. (400 current ppm all sources minus 10% by humans [40 ppm] when doubled gives 360 ppm natural sources + 40 (current human caused) +40 [doubling] which is 440 ppm.)
3. There is proof that over the history of the earth there have been times when temperatures climbed first, then an increase in CO2 appears.
4. There have been times when CO2 concentration was as high at 7,000 ppm, one of those during the Cambrian period about 500 million years ago.
5. If the level of CO2 in the atmosphere goes too low (somewhere around 200 ppm) it will be very detrimental to growing crops.
6. There has also been some research about CO2 “climate sensitivity”. Which means how sensitive is global climate to increases or decreases in CO2. Recent research is showing that climate may less sensitive to CO2 increases than earlier studies showed.

Now some comments on the computer climate models used by the people who support CAGW. Not one of them predicted the current temperature “hiatus”. They call it a “pause”, but that assumes global temperature will go up in the future. They all predicted a much higher global temperature average by now. I think there are a couple of major issues with modeling climate and temperature. I don’t think climate scientists know all of the factors that affect climate and global temperatures. One of their latest theories is that the heat has been hidden in the oceans. But recent studies show that the oceans are stable or cooling slightly. The other issue with the models is I don’t think they take “chaos” theory into consideration. The people building models assume that there are knowable & predictable outcomes from a specific set of inputs. But the current failure of the climate simulation models argues against that. Climate could be “chaotic” where it is not “knowable” with our current human knowledge base. And it is possible that it can never be predicted.

There is also quite a bit of “smoothing” (read “changing”) of historical data to fit their models. Climategate showed that certain people are not above fudging data or outright lying. Having done software design and programming on large data sets for many years, I am very skeptical that they are working with the data with any kind of integrity.

Here’s a web site for a more balanced picture than the “sky is falling” CAGW crowd:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/

http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot...ticism-of.html

Interview with Canadian scientist Tim Ball
http://thestagblog.com/qa-with-timot...imate-skeptic/

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

This is one of the stupidest things I've ever read on this forum.

So now we know that you don't read your own posts...

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Stevecsd

Here’s a web site for a more balanced picture than the “sky is falling” CAGW crowd:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/

http://whatsupwiththatwatts.blogspot...ticism-of.html

Interview with Canadian scientist Tim Ball
http://thestagblog.com/qa-with-timot...imate-skeptic/

Ha, quoting WUWT is not going to get you rep points from HCAP.

That said, water vapor is much more significant greenhouse gas than CO2 ever hopes to be. Why the AGW crowd hitched their wagon to CO2 is hard to fathom. Unless we can't do without clouds and rain that is.

As Steve said in his post, and as Tom oft states, ben colder; ben hotter; ben drier; ben wetter.

[PaceAdvantage]

Speaking of Stephen Hawking, how the hell is this guy still alive?

That's the most astonishing thing about Hawking that nobody really talks about.