Guest “Good fracking grief!” by David Middleton
I do a lot of networking on LinkedIn. The vast majority of it is with oil & gas and other energy industry professionals and a broad range of geoscientists from multiple industries and academia. Generally, I try to avoid political debates on LinkedIn, because that’s not why I’m there… But, sometimes I just can’t resist.
This popped up in my news feed because a friend of mine commented on it:
Sarah XXXX 2nd
It seems this post is triggering the #climatedeniers. Whatever your views on Obama as a politician, it’s fascinating to see this flush out the anti-climate tropes – invariably delivered with sarcasm, whataboutery and as a defence mechanism by those in the sectors most affected by transition.
#climatecrisis#climateemergency#climateaction#sustainabledevelopmentgoals#SDGs#COP26
LinkedIn
It was accompanied by this narcissistic poster:
I’m redacting most of the names and only providing a direct link to the original post because I don’t know how accessible this is to those who aren’t on LinkedIn.
I just couldn’t resist reposting the image, with this comment:
“Just when you think things couldn’t get anymore moronic…”
Pretty well every civilization in human history felt the effect of climate change. Elements, the really stupid elements of our generation(s), are the first to be so narcissistic that they believe they “can do something about it.”
David Middleton
The first response was from a professor at University College London:
Dear David
It is clear that you have not had time to study the science or busy trying to justify fossil fuels – hence I wrote an article to cover all those denier arguments about the science.
https://theconversation.com/five-climate-change-science-misconceptions-debunked-122570
Mark XXXXXX (He/Him) 3rd
The article on The Conversation reads like a very weak Skeptical Science canned argument. This was my reply to Dr. Mark XXXXXX…
Dr. XXXXXX… Exactly what did I deny?
David Middleton
There was no response. But, Sarah, the author of the original post soon chimed in:
This quote should have mentioned the Anthropocene to be more accurate.
Sarah XXXX 2nd
Sarah’s comment was accompanied by this:
At this point, I was rolling on the floor, laughing my fracking @$$ off. I replied to her comment with this:
The Anthropocene does not exist as a geological time period. Periods ending with the syllable “-cene” are, by definition, epochs of the Cenozoic Era.
https://stratigraphy.org/chart
David Middleton
I accompanied the comment with this:
Undaunted by science, Sarah invoked Dr. Mark XXXXXX and his sidekick:
I think Prof Mark XXXXXX and Prof Simon L. XXXXX may beg to differ ….
https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Human_Planet.html?hl=fr&idrRNCDwAAQBAJ
Sarah XXXXX 2nd
My rebuttal…
The International Commission on Stratigraphy is the sole authority on the geological time scale. They don’t rely on science fiction and fantasy novels.
The Anthropocene Working Group has spent the past 12 years not coming up with a geologically coherent rationale for an Anthropocene Epoch.
David Middleton
Then… Dr. Mark XXXXXX popped in again…
Dear Sarah
Oh no here we go classic climate change denier arguments and this is when the Canada is under going the worst heat wave recorded and people are dying – and they will say it is all weather and nothing to do with pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere
And before you ‘fossil fuel’ guys reply please read this article just to make sure you come up with an original denier argument
https://theconversation.com/the-five-corrupt-pillars-of-climate-change-denial-122893
Mark XXXXXX (He/Him) 3rd
Surprise! Surprise! Another SkepSciBot canned argument!
I closed out the discussion with this pithy reply:
Send this to the International Commission on Stratigraphy… I’m certain they’ll fast track approval of an Anthropocene Epoch… 🙄
David Middleton
As of this morning, the International Commission on Stratigraphy has still not ratified the Anthropocene Epoch. Considering the fact that the Anthropocene Working Group hasn’t come up with a geologically coherent rationale for an Anthropocene Epoch in the 12 years they have been publishing newsletters, it’s a fairly safe bet that we will be living in the Holocene Epoch for the foreseeable future. Simon Turner, co-author of Sarah’s Science Fiction novel is actually a member of the AWG. As of August 2019, they expected to have a proposal ready by 2021. The new target is 2024.
Technically, the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS) would have to approve it and it would have to be ratified by the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS).
The utility of the Anthropocene requires careful consideration by its various potential users. Its concept is fundamentally different from the chronostratigraphic units that are established by ICS in that the documentation and study of the human impact on the Earth system are based more on direct human observation than on a stratigraphic record. The drive to officially recognize the Anthropocene may, in fact, be political rather than scientific.
Finney & Edwards, 2016
Finney, Stanley C. & Lucy E. Edwards. “The “Anthropocene” epoch: Scientific decision or political statement?” GSA Today, 2016; 26 (3): 4 DOI: 10.1130/GSATG270A.1
Dr. Stanley Finney is the Secretary General of the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS), which would have to ratify any formal changes to the geologic time scale.
Conclusions
Apparently, the following are “classic climate change denier arguments”:
- The fact that many, if not all, previous human generations have felt the effects of climate change.
- The fact that this is the first generation, narcissistic enough to think they can halt climate change.
- The fact that the Anthropocene doesn’t exist as a geological time period.
But none of these are the funniest part of this story. I wanted to verify that Obama actually said something that narcissistic; so I Googled the phrase: “We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change, and the last generation that can do something about it.” He did utter those exact words in 2015… Such eloquence! (/SARC)
As one of America’s governors has said, “We are the first generation to feel the impact of climate change, and the last generation that can do something about it.”
Barrack Hussein Obama, November 30, 2015
Barry-O was actually quoting the only person in government dumber than Joe Biden, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee…
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Slightly OT but with reference to the mention of the Canadian heatwave, did more people die of that than the ‘Texan’ coldwave? Do we have numbers?
And how many weeks of “heatwave” does it take to legitimately change the 30 year average outside of the error bars so that it is actually a change in climate ?
Does three hot days actually constitute a “heat wave”, used to be 5 days, or have they changed the definitions to make more of them ?
The definition of a heatwave was changed from 4 days to three in the UK in 2019. In USA It is now two days to qualify ” heatwave” also in the UK all sorts of parameters can be applied to qualify for heatwave temp, elevation moisture. Its all been rigged so a heatwave can be called at whim .
Meanwhile in my part of the UK afternoon (2pm) its been the low teens for 3 days with showers 13-14c so I’m declaring a cool wave in summer which is more unusual than a heatwave in summer.
Now now. Coldwaves in summer are absolutely more likely than heatwaves, in the UK.
As I settle into my 7th decade of life, looking back the weather seems almost exactly like it was in my childhood in the 1950s.
Wet dull and utterly miserable.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/125668127/more-older-new-zealanders-convinced-humans-are-driving-climate-change
All details the same for me.
“In USA It is now two days to qualify ” heatwave””
You’re serious about that? That was just a typical summer week when I was younger.
Yes iam serious
the United States, definitions also vary by region; however, a heat wave is usually defined as a period of at least two or more days of excessively hot weather.[9] In the Northeast, a heat wave is typically defined as three consecutive days where the temperature reaches or exceeds 90 °F (32.2 °C), but not always as this ties in with humidity levels to determine a heat index threshold.[10] The same does not apply to drier climates. A heat storm is a Californian term for an extended heat wave.[citation needed] Heat storms occur when the temperature reaches 100 °F (37.8 °C) for three or more consecutive days over a wide area (tens of thousands of square miles).[citation needed] The National Weather Service issues heat advisories and excessive heat warnings when unusual periods of hot weather are expected.
In Texas, we call heat waves… Summer… 😎
Here in Phoenix the paper would have a contest to guess the day and time it would first hit 100 degrees. That was a little too easy so this year the target was the first 110 degree day. During summer we are consistently over 100 degrees and it’s only a heat wave when we are over about 113 for an extended period of time.
We spent a night in Phoenix back in June 2004. At about 9 PM, we went down to the pool to cool off… I think it was still 110 F… 🙂
Was that 110F in the shade?
Is a cold wave symmetrically defined to a hat wave?
No ,a Mexican wave.
they cut it to 3 days in Aus a couple of yrs ago
bloody ridiculous
Well, they’ve changed the definition of pandemic to make the latest version of ‘flu into one, so why not….?
And, of course, we must remember that now CO2 is a pollutant. Orwell lives!
In Western Australia a “heat wave” used to be around 2-3 weeks of temperatures in the high 90s(F) every day. Now it’s apparently only 3-5 days.
So 2 days of 95F heat make a heat wave now? And that means…. well, but it’s weather, so the climate control freaks will just have to deal with it.
So Phoenix, AZ has an annual “heat wave” for 7-8 months. Every year. Hmmmmm… But that would mean any year there’s a break in that heat wave would be a clear indication of Climate Change (TM), right?
Viper, I’m still trying to sort out how heat makes things cold. Still can’t get that math problem to work….
Good timing: global warming causing more frost damage:
https://news.yahoo.com/global-warming-increasing-likelihood-frost-132159014.html
CdL, an intriguing question. So I looked it up.
According to TX, there were ~217 deaths attributable to the cold snap.
According US CDC, there are presently ~118 US deaths attributed to the PNW heat dome, including more specifically per local coroners 63 in metro Portland and 12 in metro Seattle.
i don’t trust the 233 heat dome ‘sudden deaths’ reported in BC. The CBC says heat somehow contributed to ‘all’—likely just warmunist propaganda. Sudden death (SD) is ordinarily heart attack or stroke, and altho there are written claims the SD incidence rose above normal for this time of year, nobody I could find had any hard excess death numbers (yet).
CDC has no information linking heart attack and stroke to extreme outdoor heat, but rather definitely to cold (e.g. snow shoveling induced heart attacks).
OK, finally found the typical 5 day sudden deaths for metro Vancouver—about 165. So 233-165=68. So metropolitan Vancouver heat deaths is about like metropolitan Portland. That fits. Cold is more lethal than heat.
I have seen the number at over 700 deaths in Texas from both the cold, carbon monoxide poisoning, and those who died due to the power failure caused by closing down coal generation and then stupidly powering the gas supply infrastructure from the grid that was failing thus causing problems for gas generation.
Canadian news media keep saying that the heatwave “is believed to have caused hundreds of deaths”. No actual numbers yet.
That is the way to get the message of doom and gloom out there in the absence of actual data. If an actual number comes out of a government agency and it’s less than “hundreds” you can be sure it will be buried on the back pages, if reported at all.
They’ll be massively conflicted with the propaganda requirements. Do ALL deaths get ticked as “climate related” or ALL as “covid related”. Maybe covid can spare a few cadavers for a good cause.
Or maybe they tick both boxes and do some creative accounting to boost both.
On a related note, an acquaintance’s mother was recently and sadly killed in a serious car crash. The causes of death on the death certificate included COVID despite the victim having shown no symptoms at all.
“That is the way to get the message of doom and gloom out there in the absence of actual data.”
That looks like what is going on. They are just hyping the story for one reason or another, without evidence. They’re fiction writers.
The typical MO. Get the panic-mongering BS out early so it spreads, then issue a retraction that nobody notices. Job done.
How hot does a “heat wave” have to be, in order to cancel out the fact that at the same time, the rest of the continent was substantially below normal in temperature.
Historically speaking the number of cold-induced human deaths is at least 7 times the number of heat related deaths.
Actually, I’m quite fine naming this the Anthropocene Epoch, on the basis of all the ridiculous volumes of hot air generated by the climate warmist hysterics. That has to affect the climate, right? It makes the climate way more annoying!
Anthropocene, if it existed, would be a geological age
Man has changed geology by leaving huge dollops of reinforced concrete dotted all over places that were once forests, hills and farmland !
All of that will be indistinguishable from the natural materials they were made from within a few 100 thousand years of our demise.
Most will be gone in 5000 years, you are right in 100 thousand nothing will be left.
Much like the iridium determines the KT boundary, the radionuclides from atomic testing circa 1950 will most likely determine the new epoch.
While this is one of the AWG’s strategies, those radionuclides will be gone in a few million years. They will have decayed (>99%) to common, naturally occurring isotopes.
The K-Pg boundary iridium isn’t a radioactive isotope.
You are going to need some dang sensitive instruments to even find those radionuclides in just a few thousand years. By a few hundred thousand years, they are going to be gone.
Heck, it’s dang hard to find those radionuclides in today’s rocks.
Just as you need some dang sensitive instruments to detect any “Climate Change (TM)”, particularly when the “baseline” you are comparing against for the variance lacked such sensitive instruments. That is, when you average today’s number out to 7 decimal places just cause that’s how many digits appear on your calculator screen, and then try to subtract it from the number derived 30 years ago, with instruments of an accuracy only +/-2 degrees, and then try to tell me today was 0.004 degrees above (below) the long term average, that’s just bull f***ing s**t!
quarries and mines?
I doubt these will be recognizable in the rock record, a million years after we’re gone… Plus, there won’t be anyone around to recognize them.
Quarries and mines will start to weather away as soon as man is no longer around to maintain them.
Yes, even mines will weather. First the mines will start collapsing from the weight of the rocks, and they will fill in from run off.
That leads to a question that I was about to ask…
Yes, the mine shafts and tunnels will collapse, and run off (plus ground water seepage) will fill them – but won’t there be a rather odd signature left of material (composition and density) that does not match the surrounding rock? Rather too regular?
I think that even the latest advance in underground mining – in situ leaching – would leave a volume of material that has a very different chemical signature from the surroundings.
BTW, it IS a question that I want to hear the answer to from those with far more expertise than I have. Not rhetorical.
The Anthropcene will be plainly evident until plate tectonics recycles it back into the Asthenosphere.
There are billions of tons of tailings, huge layers of anomalous sediment, mass extinction, thousands of other species spreading ‘instananeously’ to all ends of the earth, dozens of weird isotopes, carbonaceous particles, seams of plastic residue etc, etc, etc.
Despite all that and despite it not being officially sanctioned, yet, and despite it being one Middleton’s idealogical lines in the sand, the Anthropcene has well and truly bolted.
I’m still waiting for someone to list the species that have died off during this “mass extinction”. To date the ideologues remain silent, or they claim that models have proven it.
History is replete with examples of species spreading on their own.
Isotopes are unstable and disappear over time, usually a few hundred to a few thousand years.
Plastic is eaten by microbes very quickly, often as little as a few decades.
The only thing that has bolted is your credibility.
If memory servs, no life form has been put on the so called “Red List” for donkeys years!!!! If it had, they Greenalists would never let us hear the last of it!!! They hate nature so much they actually want life on Earth to start failing to prove their argument, sick or what?
How did them cow bones get to NZ dang it? They swam?
Meaningless emote.
No relation to a global geological layer.
Again, speculation utterly without knowledge is pure fantasy.
Tailings will be indistinguishable from erosion.
There is not such thing as anomalous sediment. It is sediment identical to existing sediments, especially after a few thousand years.
There have been extremely few extinctions. Quite within normal extinction rates.
Species spreading instantaneously?
Exactly, how is that a geological marker? Be specific, no fantasy allowed.
The sheer fact that you claim there are “weird” isotopes again proves your utter ignorance.
Also, we note that in spite of science, you believe in fantasy. In spite of ignorance, you claim the anthropocene exists, yet it does not.
Clear bias and fantasy.
Interesting subject,I’ve dug out bronze age workings that are 4000 odd years old, perfectly preserved because they were back filled, jump forward to the roman era, hand cut levels ( coffin levels) no decay, you can still walk them, jump forward 19th cent mine workings , you can access them ,but the difference between the former and the later is explosives, shatter surround ing rock and make over time a unstable environment. Water and air play thier part in destabilising a mine. Geologically speaking depending on the country rock mine workings will squeeze up,
Shaft collars are the first to go,leaving a funnel shape at the top of the shaft ,the shaft may or may not be plugged, working chambers ( stopes) will fail because there supported by timbers ,with a few pillars left by the miners air and water play a big part in delamination of the stopes sides ( hanging wall, foot wall) bad mining practices will see a mine fail .
So eventually a mine will crumble to the casual observer nothing is left, there will be voids ,ground radar will show anomalies, over time Geological pressures along the faults will squeeze up and obliterate any evidence of mining ,we know this happens along faults because when the fault is worked the load consists of breccia ,a load that has been broken up and recemented. The geology bods here can explain more.
In my experience the older the mine ( pre industrial) the more chance it will survive at least in part.
I think that a few hundreds of thousands to a few million years after humans are gone, those things will be unrecognizable. If an intelligent branch of dinosaurs has built cities and developed nuclear weapons, I don’t think there would be a trace of those things in the rock record.
You think bones fossilize better than cities?
Your ignorance is mind boggling.
If we couldn’t find their dino cities how the hell do you think we could find their dino bones? Your ignorance is barely notable.
Doubling down on ignorance is not a brilliant strategy.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-astrobiology/article/silurian-hypothesis-would-it-be-possible-to-detect-an-industrial-civilization-in-the-geological-record/77818514AA6907750B8F4339F7C70EC6
Pure speculation without knowledge, i.e. fantasy.
Just what do you think they use for leaching?
Cyanide solutions, commonly used for leaching metals, will not be ‘unique to man’ chemistry, ever.
Both, along with other cyanide chemicals are very reactive and don’t last long.
Mining safety requires that leach fluids are neutralized. Permits for leaching require impermeable layers in place that contain the leach material.
Nor is it effective leaching if the mine operation leaves leach fluids in leached ore.
Just how do mining tunnels form a common layer globally? Or do you believe people can declare epochs anywhere they believe there is an old basement or pit toilet?
Not even urban basements or building foundations will form any sort of permanent layer.
As one drives through urban areas it is easy to spot concrete and metals degradation caused by rain, sunlight, ozone, heat, freezing, etc.
It is hard enough to build structures that can last a couple of centuries without falling apart or complete restoration.
Given the rapid disintegration of concrete when not maintained, I doubt that a couple of hundred years will obliterate most if not all of man’s structures. Although, I’ll grant that the Romans seem to have been able to create somewhat longer lived concrete structures.
The Romans didn’t have an EPA or OSHA… 😉
“Given the rapid disintegration of concrete when not maintained”
Ever see “Life After People”?
It’s pretty clear that nature always wins in the end. And it doesn’t take anywhere as long as we imagine it would.
Great program… 👍👍
And it’s still all relative. We know of a few hundred (thousands?) artifacts from Roman times, but how many thousands or even millions disintegrated and vanished without a trace? And furthermore, that’s only ~2,000 years for most of them. Give another 5 millennia and these known artifacts will be gone too.
The Canadian concrete and asphalt will be part of the till formed in the next glacial advance which will end the Holocene.
You can find them by following the mangled raptors and bats…
We’re in the Moronocene fer sure.
Werent these heatwave and coldwave deaths all classified as Covid19 deaths?
It made butter go soft!
Only soft?
Even with A/C running here during summer, butter goes liquid.
My relatives in California, Nevada, Arizona, Kentucky and Texas have trouble believing that butter can ever be left on a table.
Ditto. The “climate change” mantra is a political agenda — designed by politicians — to enact political change. They use junk science as a cover story. The IPCC says so directly … https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36cyEt5JfRA
Dave, I admire your persistence. It illustrates the oft mis attributed aphorism:
Never wrestle with a pig. You both get muddy, and the pig likes it.
Obama quoting Inslee also shows how ‘birds of a feather flock together’. Bird brained as well as feathered.
I’ve wondered about the origin of the phrase “bird brained,” considering that some birds are actually quite smart. I’ve concluded that the defining characteristic is that birds routinely drink their own bath water.
Birds’ intelligence is remarkable in that they have reptilian brains, ie without the mammalian neocortex. Avian mental abilities are a marvel of miniaturization.
Yes, birds pack more neurons into the same space than do humans. I bet that applies to a lot of small animals.
I saw an article yesterday claiming Crows are self-aware.
Crows are some of the smartest birds around. Parrots, too.
Try raising chickens.
There are birds dumber than chickens—domesticated turkeys. They will drown themselves in a thunderstorm if you don’t herd them into shelter.
“Obama quoting Inslee”
Rud, are you sure the Great One just quoted Inslee or was it plagarism?
Obama did say that he was quoting a governor, so it wasn’t plagiarism.
If you want good examples of plagiarism, you need to check the speeches of the current Democrat standard bearer.
Inslee did however accuse “Beto” O’Rourke of plagiarizing him.
Gotcha, Mark. I didn’t know that Obama cited Inslee.
Where is the marker supposed to go? Trinity Site, NM?
If nuclear explosion radioisotopes be the defining characteristic, then they’ll be gone by the next geologic period.
They have a list of potential GSSP’s. I may write up a post on their “geological significance”… 😎
that would be amusing!
Is fossil prints of beer pull tabs and bottle caps one of the markers?
I don’t think there has been enough time for them to form, but then what do I know? I’m no Obama when it comes to Climate Science®
Back in college… I thought future paleontologists would put pull tabs together and discover aluminum crinoid stems… 😆
LOL! When I was a kid, I’d find crinoid segments and thought they were ‘Indian Beads.’
Who knows what future generations will think all those pull tabs were used for? But if the archeologists hold true to form, they will interpret them as religious talismans of some sort sprinkled on the ground as offerings to Mother Earth.
Many, perhaps 20, years ago I read an article about silt deposits in a delta, bay or river somewhere. Researchers were able to calculate the rate of deposition from the depth of ring pull cans which have a known introduction date. It’s the only thing I remember from the piece.
Fortunately, for us.
Aluminum is reactive. Steel pull tabs have shorter lifecycles.
I doubt any of the pull tabs will last long enough to form a clear imprint in stone. Meaning the pressure of overburden needed to compress silt/sediment into stone will cause the voids to disappear.
A different possibility would be mineral replacements for the tabs. Those would last. And yes, turned into obvious religious objects by future ologists.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0012825217304087
Abstract (my paragraphs)
The Anthropocene as a potential new unit of the International Chronostratigraphic Chart (which serves as the basis of the Geological Time Scale) is assessed in terms of the stratigraphic markers and approximate boundary levels available to define the base of the unit. The task of assessing and selecting potential Global Boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) candidate sections, a required part of the process in seeking formalisation of the term, is now being actively pursued.
Here, we review the suitability of different stratified palaeoenvironmental settings and facies as potential hosts for a candidate GSSP and auxiliary sections, and the relevant stratigraphical markers for correlation. Published examples are evaluated for their strengths and weaknesses in this respect. A marked upturn in abundance of radioisotopes of 239Pu or 14C, approximately in 1952 and 1954 CE respectively, broadly coincident with a downturn in δ13C values, is applicable across most environments.
Principal palaeoenvironments examined include: settings associated with accumulations of anthropogenic material, marine anoxic basins, coral reefs, estuaries and deltas, lakes at various latitudes, peat bogs, snow/ice layers, speleothems and trees. Together, many of these geographically diverse palaeoenvironments offer annual/subannual laminae that can be counted and independently dated radiometrically (e.g. by 210Pb).
Examples of possible sections offer the possibility of correlation with annual/seasonal resolution. From among such examples, a small number of potentially representative sites require the acquisition of more systematic and comprehensive datasets, with correlation established between sections, to allow selection of a candidate GSSP and auxiliary stratotypes. The assessments in this paper will help find the optimal locations for these sections.
Anthropocene will pass into nomenclature some time in the future when deep stratas of bullshit will be dug up where universities used to be sited.
We need to develop a firm rationale for the Narcissistocene/Libtardocene which is detected by the thick layer of dung found in layers that date to now.
“Libtardocene”…..definitely has my vote if the ISC is listening.
Datanotcene
Unfortunately, I think it’s more the AdjustoDatanotecene.
The great and marvelous Josh did a sketch of the Adjustocene
You ought to post it to the LinkedIn conversation, David. 🙂
Another of my favorite quotes from the guy who bought an ocean-front home right after he left the White House… “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal …”~~Barack Obama upon winning the Democratic nomination for presidency conveys his thinking of what that means ….for the world, Tuesday, JUNE 03, 2008”
It appears that the all knowing one is wearing a polymer fabric Carhartt jacket. There can’t be many Carhartt jacket wearing Obama supporters.
So why do we see Climate Alarmists wearing jackets so frequently? You would think they would be wearing tank tops, shorts, and flip-flops with all the heat.
Carhartt is often American made.
Does that clarify the quote?
And as usual the leftists throwing rocks at you David all use fossil fuels every day and have no plans of stopping!
Note the arrogant and hateful way they responded to you. There was NO possibility of changing their minds on any detail no matter how small. They don’t care about facts or being “correct”, they only care that they can agree within their flock of sheep – it’s a religion.
You shouldn’t have wasted your time – you are much more valuable in writing accurate articles for this site! 🙂
I got a lot of new material out of this… 😎
Climate De-bait? ;).
Using “Anthropocene” in that way in front of Dave, is liking waving a red flag in front of a bull. 🙂
I think one of them even questioned Dave’s scientific understanding. That shows how uninformed that person is.
If they can make a geologically coherent case for an Anthropocene Epoch, I’m fine with it.
If they suggested renaming the Holocene, the Anthropocene, I’d probably be OK with that.
I don’t think they can do the former and won’t even consider the latter.
I imagine their CV-19 Vax rates are very high as well. ::sigh::
Maybe I’m odd… But this is what CV-19 means to me…
The Hancock was launched 20 days after I was.
The mistake is arguing with climate change scammers as if they can be convinced to abandon the scam. Won’t work. As professional scammers will tell you, “Never give up the con.”
So just point out the con?
We see Simon on here proving it all the time.
For a new geological time period to be adopted, the working group would have to recommend a GSSP. This would have to be approved by two >60% votes and the ratified by the IUGS executive committee…
Science by voting. How come they use 60% instead of 97% ?
It’s not “science by voting.” The working group does the science, then three successive super-majorities must agree that the science merits a new subdivision of the geological time scale.
At this time, I don’t think 97% of the Anthropocene Working Group would agree that they’ve made a geologically coherent case.
I really don’t know who joe thinks he’s impressing. Or does he not care that he’s making a fool of himself?
“For a new geological time period to be adopted, the working group would have to recommend a GSSP. This would have to be approved by two >60% vote and the ratified by the IUGS executive committee… “
…
Yes it is “science by voting”
No, it is “naming by voting.”
When there is something that is demonstrably “its own thing” – i.e., qualitatively different from other similar things – you need a name to identify it and communicate coherently with others.
For geological time periods, these are Eon / Era / Period / Epoch / Age. (The various levels are an indication of HOW different each time period was from its “neighbors.”)
But the first step is doing the science to prove to those qualified to judge that your “new thing” really IS new. Which the AWG is not even ready to attempt, and most likely never will be – as the “anthropic signature” is barely a dot on the canvas of the current (Meghalayan) Age.
No it is not.
The voting is on whether or not the science justifies a change in nomenclature.
When IAU voted to reclassify Pluto as a dwarf planet, they were voting on nomenclature.
This isn’t science, it’s naming of things.
No wonder you are so confused if you can’t keep that straight.
They’ll just keep pushing the climate illiterates into positions of power in the ICS until they have enough “votes” to get the “anthropocene” bullshit “accepted.” Then they’ll wave its “acceptance” as further confirmation of the bullshit.
Just like they’ve done at most universities and other “scientific” bodies/associations/what have you.
You can always tell a CAGW / CCC proponent. You just can’t tell them much. Kudos for trying, David, but it has got to be frustrating.
To the narcissist their feelings are facts.
Hard to believe but absolutely true.
IMO we live in a society full of this pathology.
And I thought we were in the “Adjust-o-cene”. Where records are adjusted to fit failed model predictions.
I made a similar comment before reading yours. I’m an old guy with an EE degree (barely) from a prominent Michigan university which hasn’t figured out how to beat both Michigan State and Ohio State football teams in the same year for decades (or so it seems). I graduated in 1959 and can’t recall having a statistics course. We were probably warned about outliers and instrument calibration and such, but nobody bothered to teach us how to take perfectly good data and “correct” it so it fit a narrative we were trying to prove. In that regard, my engineering education, which included a considerable amount of measurement and data taking and analysis, was probably inadequate by today’s “scientific” standards. This has probably contributed to my CAGW and government data skepticism.
Nine out of ten Big 10 coeds are beautiful. The tenth goes to UM.
The subtitle should be…..
“And I’m still working on getting the carbon tax on the U.S. economy to fund redistribution of wealth and all our Party’s slush fund needs.”
Sorry David,
but Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) has them all beat, hands down, as the current title holder of The Dumbest Person (at senior levels) in American politics.
Folks in Hawaii know it. Folks in DC see it everyday she talks in the Senate or in committee there.
https://oahugop.com/whats-wrong-with-senator-hirono/
This is quite correct.
Obama as liar is only outdone by the biggest liar of all the scaly reptilians in Wash DC, Adam Schiff-XXXX.
Maybe I should have phrased it this way: “Barry-O was actually quoting the only chief executive in government dumber than Joe Biden, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee…”
@joel:
From your linked article:
“towed the party line”? How much did the party have to pay to get their line released from impound?
“Towed the party line” has always been one of my favorite malapropisms. In reference to Mazie Hirono it’s perfect.
handmade tale is rapidly becoming another.
That’s why i have bumper stickers that says: “My governor is an idiot”. Idiot Inslee is constantly going on about his global warming death cult. What ever happened to separation of church and state?
Can’t figure it out, Inslee is a complete dullard but the people in Washington, esp. King and Pierce counties, keep voting for him.
That’s because much of the population in those areas are transplants from California.
You might have forgotten: “You can’t fix stupid”
You know you’re dealing with a “woke” retard immediately when they include their “preferred pronouns” in their signature line.
It’s actually a LinkedIn option… I’m thinking about using (Dude, The Dude)… 😉
Mine is “Royal Majesty,” or “R-M” for short, for the Woke to address me.
Mean, Ugly. Snowflakes beware.
(Sir) will suffice.
I was asked to add a pronoun for myself when modifying my profile recently. Apparently it’s now a feature of LinkedIn. Sigh….
The perniciously spreading use of the singular “they” is barbarous. English has a vestigial neuter gender, as in the singular third person pronoun “it” and possessive (vestigial genitive) “its”.
Masculine and feminine are grammatical genders, not biological sexes. Using “his” rather than “theirs” thus remains correct when referring to a mixed-sex group, but if you must be PC, then please say “his or her”.
Lots of languages use the same form as the masculine when referring to both males and females. It doesn’t mean that girls and women aren’t equal to boys and men. It’s just grammar.
Sometimes they just need a salute with one’s preferred finger.
Aussies solved all this ages ago.
Just call everyone “maaate”.
my mate wants to feela sheila….
Totally agree….referring to a singular person as “they” is grammatically absurd. “They”, whether referring to living things, figures or inanimate objects, is used when there are more than one. That totally grates on me. I’d be sorely tempted to ask if there was a mouse in a pocket…
That said I can see where the use of “it” tends to be dehumanizing, though. IMO they need to come up with or use some other word or words to denote a singular someone who doesn’t want to be labeled as male or female. Words like “zhe” might be made up and sound odd, but at least they don’t butcher grammar.
And if they start using “Them,” I’ll be thinking “giant ants.”
I find it fascinating that Sarah’s quote, taken from a completely unknown and probably non-authoritative source, is regarded as gospel, while data from the scientific body actually assigned responsibility for naming geological periods, is dismissed out of hand.
Classic cognitive dissonance. Her dismissal of David’s hard facts about the ICS and its sole authority in naming epochs is an attempt at reduction of the discomfort caused by the dissonance between her beliefs and objective facts that contradict those beliefs.
Dunning Kruger in action.
Dunning Kruger on steroids… 😆
That’s an awful lot of words to say, “She’s full of s**t!”
Just ran across this from someone [“I grew up in a city that in its short history (barely over 150 years) had its name changed three times”] who knows about renaming. Article starts with —
“It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words. Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thought crime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.
–George Orwell, 1984”
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpclett.1c01475 The Peril of Politicizing Science. Anna I. Krylov, Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters. 2021, 12, 22, 5371–5376
Publication Date:June 10, 2021 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpclett.1c01475
“ Whereas in 1950, the greater good was advancing the World Revolution (in the USSR; in the USA the greater good meant fighting Communism), in 2021 the greater good is “Social Justice” (the capitalization is important: “Social Justice” is a specific ideology, with goals that have little in common with what lower-case “social justice” means in plain English).”
Not just the Anthropocene. One of Krylov’s citations was this. I taught evolution, thought Coyne’s book was great. Darwin’s Cousin was claimed to be founder of “eugenics, ” started out as logical reasons, some still medically sound. Fisher, among a lot of other stat contributions, was a co-author that corrected an error in a chi-square table. Probably still more reliable than “bootstrapping.”
Evolution society renames Fisher Prize; Comments are interesting, lots of pushback. https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/04/02/evolution-society-renames-fisher-prize-a-letter-some-of-us-wrote-in-response/
… and Social Justice is advancing the World Revolution, and Russia is a democratic state with a church with traditionial Christian values.
During the Soviet era, the Russian Orthodox church was fully under control of the government. Things haven’t changed much in the years since then.
PS: Claiming that Russia is a democratic state is going a bit to far. Saddam Hussein claims to have been elected as wel.
When the prophets stop profiting and start walking their talk, then panic. Until them, live just like them, like it’s 1999!
I won’t even panic then, since the only thing to panic about will be cooling climate, not warming. And that won’t be our fault, either.
If the fools ever do resort to geoengineering to cool the planet, it will be our fault… And really bad.
David,
It looks like your geology-customized dictionary for Spell-Check has sabotaged you:
“The fact that many, if not all, pervious human generations have felt the effects of climate change.”
Fixed.
CACA spewers are impervious to evidence and reason.
As typos go, that was pretty interesting.
Barack Obama is being true to those words by going out and buying $17 million worth of mansion on oceanfront property so he can feel the impact of climate change everyday.
Oh, but he stopped the rise of the oceans, remember?
Dear Climate Advocate,
We have developed a way to transport you back 12,870 years into the past. You will be responsible for preventing Climate Change. What do you need in resources to prevent the glacier 2 km above the future NYC from receding?
Regards,
The future that can do this
What is the minimum required thickness for a stage? Does a single-atom layer of C14 suffice? Or does a half-and-half mixture of C14 and polyester qualify as a defining boundary? 🙂
Your experience with your nemeses on Linkedin certainly makes the case that humans are not rational creatures — particularly the left-leaning ones!
He he, I feel your pain.
I deal with their baloney every day in forums I visit, where their incoherent rants and stupid retorts are easy to tear apart with rational fact/evidence based replies.
A lot of the time they just spray fallacies all over the place. Then I just mock them for not being able to address the CONTENT of the articles I posted, some that came from here.
Often end my replies with Post one article remains unchallenged in some threads to make clear they haven’t address the post one article at all.
Example HERE
Where Is The “Climate Emergency”?
There is an additional WUWT article in the thread too.
Jay Inslee, “the only person in government dumber than Joe Biden”. I think you have this in reverse. No one beats Joe. Clarence Thomas probably agrees.
I agree with David here as Inslee as the Governor in my state is a certified Whack job!
Biden is bad, Inslee is a LOT worse.
Don’t forget dear Gretchen here in Michigan…
I actually attended that first day of those 1991 hearings on Clarence Thomas’s Senate confirmation hearings*. Biden was rather alive and animated, unlike he is today, which is confused to barely there at all. The one senator who looked like they had just rolled in from an all-night drinking and party binger was Senator Ted Kennedy. Ted Kennedy looked like he’d been run over by a bus and couldn’t remain awake as he kept dozing off. The cameras stayed off him as a courtesy.
I was in Brazil at my brother’s wedding. You could tell exactly who the Americans were in the hotels. They were the the ones glued to tv’s watching the hearings.
You mean that Ted Kennedy looked just like Ted Kennedy?
At least he wasn’t dripping Chapaquiddick water. Or was he?
When I see that an article was published in The Conversation I know that it is second or third rate. If it were first rate, the writer would want it published in one of the main scientific journals. I invariably find the reasoning and logic of articles in The Conversation flawed. I do not have to be a scientist to notice a lack of cohesion, coherence or clarity and how much can be concealed when the article is not concise.
Yes, the quality of the scholarship is typically low. That is why the editors and authors are so defensive about anything critical in comments. That is why they reserve the right to delete any comments they don’t like.
Clyde,
The Conversation uses elementary methodology. If they disagree with the view of a contributor or commentator, they cancel the account of that person. He/she can no longer log in. Correspondence to correct this censorship is met with “No further correspondence will be entered into.”
I know this, because I am probably the first scientist, globally, to have my account locked. I have asked them how they can assume the authority to censor, when they are part-funded with public monies. (No answer).
Planning has commenced to take them to Court. Geoff S
Geoff,
I’m glad to hear that some pressure is planned to be applied to them.
I’ve had many of my comments deleted. Therefore, I quit reading and commenting as often as formerly. Although, sometimes I can’t help myself. When I log in to comment I’m half expecting to be told that I can’t comment. However, surprisingly, it hasn’t happened yet.
It is the height of hubris on their part to specialize in academics, and then routinely delete anything that questions the competence of the academic. They have a reputation to keep up, whether they deserve it or not. I guess they find it easier to follow the example of “Ignore that man behind the curtain,” than to improve the quality.
I may still have some of the email exchanges between me and the editor. If it comes to it, and they might prove useful, I’ll look to see if I can find them on my older computer.
I wish you success!
When I see the words “The Conversation,” I hear the words “The Monologue.”