Posted by: graemebird | January 3, 2007

CRUSADER!: Don’t Call Me Troll

I write a lot of emails and posts on obscure blogs. And a lot of them are couched in a sort of pseudo-evangelical tone.

So many things I write are trying to get pretty smart people to swap sides. Of course looking for converts is a pretty low-productivity activity. Sometimes I’ll write to people telling them how cool they are and to keep on keeping on.

I don’t spend as much time on this sort of thing as stoushing. But I have been spending a bit of time on it and usually when I get hold of something stronger then light beer.

I’m sure this sort of behaviour pisses people off far more and is far more socially undesirable then straight stoushing and abuse.

But this here one post in this sort of vein is pretty useful. Because I’m assuming that there is one or two people watching my inductive venture into alarmist climate-science territory.

And this here post is a sort of reworking of ideas already discussed.

And its hard to get these ideas sorted the first time round just by reading.

Here is a recent post in an obscure blog… Just try and sort out in your mind why I think these various areas are what we must do research on supposing we want advanced knowledge of global cooling and or warming.

“# 59 | GMB | January 3, 2007 08:09 AM

“”Climate change presents a very real risk,” said Carl Wunsch, a climate and oceans expert at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It seems worth a very large premium to insure ourselves against the most catastrophic scenarios.”


Carl Wunsch. Can you change your last name to Wuss!!!

Way to go to say something that is literally true but still misleading and still appeasement.

Yes its true that if we forsaw a new glaciation it would be worth paying a premium if paying that premium might help us avoid it.

But on what basis would an oceanographer think that we faced any chance of catastrophic global warming?

The terrible thing here is that resources are getting diverted from that oceanography work that could really tell us where the climate is going.

An ocean-based focus potentially turns everything on its head.

Vranes why go into politics? With your qualifications you could be doing good science and getting about in Scuba-diving gear all the time.

Cool fucking lifestyle I’d reckon.

We need to know about upwelling and down-welling. Volumes speeds and temperatures. Temperature trends at many different depths.

We need to know about strategic areas where the currents lead to the mixing of warm and cold water.

About Ozone depletion and its effect of the scope of the photic-zone. We want to know whether industrial CO2 release leads to the oceans absorbing more CO2 at any given temperature. What that does to the photic-zone via increasing the abundance of plant-life. And how long thats going to take to feed into the climate.

We need to focus on the photic zone because the greenhouse effect is all about penetration.

We need to know how far the wall of white death can get before its very presence starts restricting the ocean currents since that could be a point of no return.

But is anyone really doing this work and trying to tie it in with climate?

Because all these gas-obssessed freaks are stealing all the fucking media and research oxygen.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: