Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Heated discussions on a hot topic.
User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11237
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 30, 2018 7:03 pm

Jim

You are not a climate scientist. Yet you feel free to dispute the findings of climate scientists. When you should be using reputable references, you quote yourself. Do you wonder that I find your statements lack credibility ?

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lausten » Fri Mar 30, 2018 7:30 pm

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote:Well, technically, yes, you showed some evidence. But you connected it to your argument in some weird way.


This is a perfect example Lausten of your failure to provide a meaningful rebuttal.

If you think what I reported was done in a "Weird way", then simply quote specifically what it is you disagree with and then supply the evidence to support your rebuttal. That would be a scientific approach.

But instead your criticism is just another unsupported snarky insult (weird) , followed by a completely irrelevant link to Biblical floods.

The first comment, besides the “monkey” one was a restatement of the obvious. You decided to respond to the monkey. Followed by further elaboration on what the paper obviously said and how it didn’t say much. That was the last reasonable response you gave. Then you got a poke about melomys, a scientific study. And you called it stupid, then tried to move on. It was pointed out that you do that. But seeing no one was biting on the groundwater, that is not agreeing with you, you tried to respond to the melomys, to no one’s satisfaction. Then a few more insults back and forth and you tried talking about groundwater again. I showed you how groundwater had nothing to with an anti-AGW argument, but you didn’t like that. You seem to think predictions being off by a few millimeters somehow refutes others parts of the theory, but you don’t explain how.

Then we got into the difference between pure reasoning and logic versus reasoning and logic based on empirical evidence. And it’s been insults ever since. And you say it’s all of us that do nothing but snipe? Your only non-insulting response back on page 1 was “our knowledge is incomplete”. I think we all agree on that. That is, we agree the article doesn’t add much of anything to the debate. But we’re stupid for not thinking that it does. That's the weird part.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Fri Mar 30, 2018 7:48 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Jim

You are not a climate scientist. Yet you feel free to dispute the findings of climate scientists. When you should be using reputable references, you quote yourself. Do you wonder that I find your statements lack credibility ?


There you go again. You avoid the evidence choosing instead to engage in hateful character assassinations. I have studied climate and its effects on wildlife for 30 years. I have made the correct analyses that led to successful watershed restoration. As an ecologist I had to examine all the factors.

If you are here to discuss the science then please, put aside your hateful characterizations and discuss the evidence. Otherwise you show that you are only obsessed with engaging in hateful personal attacks.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Fri Mar 30, 2018 7:59 pm

Lausten wrote:Then you got a poke about melomys, a scientific study. And you called it stupid, then tried to move on.


Lets be honest Lausten. You have attacked me for years and you publicly attacked my book without ever reading it. So you have demonstrated a great deal of your own hateful bias, with no respect for reality.

And here again you do the same. Regards the melomys I provided several pieces of evidence to show why I believed calling the extirpation of the melomys a climate change extinction is utterly wrong. There is no evidence to support the climate claim. But people here made the climate extinction claim and then "moved on" without discussion of all the facts as if making a claim must be the truth. Not good skeptics. It is just another example of some poster obsessed with a doomsday belief about every change even when it is better explained by other factors.

For you to say I called it stupid and then moved on, ignoring the arguments I listed is another example of your dishonesty in an attempt to hatefully denigrate me for being a skeptic.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11237
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 30, 2018 8:38 pm

To Jim

On ecology.

It is not climate science. Working in ecology does not equip you to comment on climatology.
I checked the name Jim Steele on the internet and you are described as a bird enthusiast and a biologist. Neither of those gives you the training to comment on climatology.

I am the same. I am a biologist also by training, though my specialty was the use of industrial microbicides. I am also fond of birds, though my amateur interest is more focussed on marine biology. I know DAMN well that I am not qualified to criticise the experts in climate science, and you may note that I present the material that 97% of climatologists publish. I support the real experts in that field.

Do you wonder that I regard your comments opposing standard climate science as being anti-science ?

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lausten » Fri Mar 30, 2018 8:58 pm

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote:Then you got a poke about melomys, a scientific study. And you called it stupid, then tried to move on.


Lets be honest Lausten. You have attacked me for years and you publicly attacked my book without ever reading it. So you have demonstrated a great deal of your own hateful bias, with no respect for reality.

And here again you do the same. Regards the melomys I provided several pieces of evidence to show why I believed calling the extirpation of the melomys a climate change extinction is utterly wrong. There is no evidence to support the climate claim. But people here made the climate extinction claim and then "moved on" without discussion of all the facts as if making a claim must be the truth. Not good skeptics. It is just another example of some poster obsessed with a doomsday belief about every change even when it is better explained by other factors.

For you to say I called it stupid and then moved on, ignoring the arguments I listed is another example of your dishonesty in an attempt to hatefully denigrate me for being a skeptic.

Of course you moved on. The responses to your arguments are in the earlier thread on that topic. This is a different topic. If someone would have responded to your melomys comments in this thread you no doubt would have accused them of highjacking it. You asked me to show you where you were weird and I did. You didn't respond to that, instead you picked something out of the paragraph I wrote and attacked that. It's what you do. It's weird.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11237
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:28 pm

Ascribing climate change as a cause of extinctions is probably a move too far. I would oppose that, since there are numerous possible causes of extinctions.

I have argued on other threads about mass extinctions as being caused by primitive humans. There are many situations where people moved into a geographic area and numerous species died out soon after. My view is that most of those extinctions are caused by over hunting or by introducing new predators or diseases. The Bramble Bay melomys died out after Europeans arrived in Australia, and it is likely that something similar happened.

I still oppose Jim on his global warming denials. A different issue.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:30 pm

Lausten wrote:Of course you moved on. The responses to your arguments are in the earlier thread on that topic. This is a different topic. If someone would have responded to your melomys comments in this thread you no doubt would have accused them of highjacking it. You asked me to show you where you were weird and I did. You didn't respond to that, instead you picked something out of the paragraph I wrote and attacked that. It's what you do. It's weird.


Your melomys posts are further evidence of how dishonest and hateful your replies have been Lausten. Please find a way to drop that hate and engage in more scientific discussion.

I listed several reasons that could explain why the Melomys population was extirpated. I pointed out to you that "your link" provided evidence that could support a natural cause of its extirpation.

But you Lausten, chose to engage in more hit and run slander! Instead of discussing the evidence in your link that I addressed, you went on another hateful rant that of course I could twist the evidence and distort the truth. But you never showed any specifics of what I "distorted". Your reply was another example of your typical descent into character assassination that avoids real science.

Please put aside your hate that drives ALL your replies to me, and strive to create more productive scientific debates using the evidence instead of character assassinations. The forum will only benefit.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lausten » Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:37 am

Lausten wrote:
Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote:Well, technically, yes, you showed some evidence. But you connected it to your argument in some weird way.


This is a perfect example Lausten of your failure to provide a meaningful rebuttal.

If you think what I reported was done in a "Weird way", then simply quote specifically what it is you disagree with and then supply the evidence to support your rebuttal. That would be a scientific approach.

But instead your criticism is just another unsupported snarky insult (weird) , followed by a completely irrelevant link to Biblical floods.


Let's try to get back on track. You asked me to explain the "weird way". I did. In the process I reviewed page one of this thread. That included the thing on melomys. Whether or not I provided a complete response to your melomys post is an entirely differently issue. I did exactly what you asked, quoted specifically. I also demonstrated the pattern of evidence, insult, respond to something off topic, unclear conclusion, insult, etc. This SUPPORTS what I said. And now, I can just point to this page, because you're doing it again. Instead of responding to what I said, which was in response to what you requested, you now want me to start up a research project on melomys. What are the odds that you will stay on that topic if I drop this line and pick up that one? Not good.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:54 am

Lausten wrote: Whether or not I provided a complete response to your melomys post is an entirely differently issue. I did exactly what you asked, quoted specifically. I also demonstrated the pattern of evidence, insult, respond to something off topic, unclear conclusion, insult, etc. This SUPPORTS what I said. And now, I can just point to this page, because you're doing it again. Instead of responding to what I said, which was in response to what you requested, you now want me to start up a research project on melomys. What are the odds that you will stay on that topic if I drop this line and pick up that one? Not good.


Give a man enough rope and he will hang himself and indeed you have done just that Lausten.

First you have failed to quote my arguments regards melons and have failed to rebut those arguments. It is not I who has raised the melomys extirpation as an example of climate change, It was TJ and then you. And it is. not a matter of you providing a "complete response" but your failure to provide an honest one!

Its hilarious that you now argue that I want you to "start up a research project on melomys".

I pointed out that the evidence in the link that YOU provided, does not in any way prove a climate change cause and effect. It does provide evidence from other researchers that the Melomys was affected by other factors, as I too pointed out.

You reply also demonstrated that you have yet to engage in a discussion of the facts, and instead chose to engage in ad Homs accusing me of twisting the facts, when all I did was point out the facts that YOU linked to.

Again your blind hatred for climate skeptics like myself has blurred your vision and eroded your integrity.

It is most hilarious that you try to denigrate me again stating "What are the odds that you will stay on that topic?" when the topic of this post has been groundwater recharge and discharge and NOT ONCE have you stayed on topic, choosing instead to sling insults at me.

Your hatred has not only blinded you, but destroyed your ability to engage in logical debate.

Image
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11237
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lance Kennedy » Sat Mar 31, 2018 3:22 am

Please do not call yourself a climate skeptic. You are an anti-science denier.

I agree that there is no strong evidence that climate change caused an extinction, but your belief that all the expert climatologists are wrong and you are right, Jim, is bull-shit, and arrogant.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sat Mar 31, 2018 3:32 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Please do not call yourself a climate skeptic. You are an anti-science denier.


Sadly Lance you revert to more hateful posts and attempt to make unsupported ugly definitions for you to manipulate the discussion without any evidence.

In contrast to your hateful personal attacks, I am the epitome of a great skeptic scientist!

Image
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sat Mar 31, 2018 7:06 am

Jim Steele wrote:"in 2010-2011, researchers reported that a La Nina event had caused global sea level to fall by the equivalent of 7mm/year (~0.3 inches/year). That dramatic drop happened despite concurrent extensive ice melt in Greenland and despite any base flow contribution. As described by Fasullo (2013), GRACE satellite observations detected increased groundwater storage caused by higher rates of rainwater falling on endorheic basins, primarily in Australia.

First, I want to point out that an endorheic basin is not an aquifer. It's a swamp or inland lake without an outlet. It's temporary and still part of the water cycle, being exposed to evaporation. Some portion might make it into aquifers, but not a lot. The biggest lake in Australia, Lake Eyre is only there 2 years every 20-30 years...

And secondly, I'd like to object to the "7mm/year" term. That indicates a rate. As if the decline is continuing. It's misleading and incorrect.

Jim Steele wrote:
Major Malfunction wrote:Dude, work out the surface area of Australia. Then work out the surface area of all the oceans. Then multiply that by 7 mm to figure out the volume.

We wouldn't be floating if that amount of water landed on us.


You need to argue with several scientists who have published this argument.

And what would you suggest as an alternative to the 7 mm sea level drop?

If you point me to them, I will. Because it's clearly bonkers.

Let's have some fun with numbers...

510 million square kms Earth
360 million square kms ocean
7.7 million square kms Australia

Australia = 1.5% surface area of Earth.
Or ~ 2% compared to ocean

So Australia is about 1/50.

Sea level decrease by 7 mm would require an increased rainfall of 50 x 7 mm ~ 350 mm.

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/annual/aus/2011/

The overall area-average rainfall = 465 mm
In 2011, the year you're talking about, it was a very wet year, 3rd wettest on record with = 699 mm area average. Many suburbs in Brisbane were 10 metres underwater.

But that's still only = 235 mm. Falling short of the required 350 mm by 115 mm.

And this is assuming every single drop stayed there. Of course most of it quickly runs off and evaporates. It's hot here. And most of the rain is coastal.

Now, of course all the rain didn't land on just Australia, but it certainly didn't all soak into aquifers.

One thing you fail to mention is how long the sea-level drop lasted. Just the duration of the El Nino? What is it now?

And to finally answer your question, another mechanism for the (temporary) sea-level reduction could be the atmospheric water-load. The warmer the air is, the more water it can hold.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sat Mar 31, 2018 7:12 am

Jim Steele wrote:In contrast to your hateful personal attacks, I am the epitome of a great skeptic scientist!

I'm actually an Environmental Scientist with majors in Chemistry and Biology.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21423
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:25 am

Major Malfunction wrote:
Jim Steele wrote:In contrast to your hateful personal attacks, I am the epitome of a great skeptic scientist!

I'm actually an Environmental Scientist with majors in Chemistry and Biology.

How is that in any way relevant to what Little Jimmy has been saying?
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:31 am

I knew I should've taken that Dank Memes elective.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21423
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:15 pm

Major Malfunction wrote:I knew I should've taken that Dank Memes elective.

More accurate estimates of methane emissions from dairy cattle developed
Date: March 29, 2018
Source: Penn State
Summary: Leading the worldwide effort to get a better handle on methane emissions from animals, an international consortium of researchers devised more accurate models to estimate the amount of the potent greenhouse gas produced by dairy cattle.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:54 pm

I'm sure "fartless beef" will be the new gluten intolerable fad.

I'd like to know some numbers how many wild ruminants there were before humans started eating them all, compared to farmed ones now.

I've got a sneaking suspicion there were more farting bovines before industrialisation. So we can't really blame the weather on them...
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:14 pm

Here's some more fun with numbers...

The Human bladder holds on average 350 mL.
There are about 7 billion people.
That means there's about 2.5 gigalitres of piss being retained at any moment.
And given that most people piss at least 4 times a day,
That's roughly 10 billion litres of piss per day.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Real Skeptic
Posts: 21423
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:25 pm

I peed 400 ml once, after three hours on the operating table. The staff seemed to think that I could "wait". I advised them otherwise using selected sailor-speak.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sat Mar 31, 2018 1:47 pm

Haha! Oh, I've done way more than that... One time after a boozy uni party i was sleeping in the back of my shwagon and I woke up early morning busting for a piss. I didn't wanna get out and go and knock on their door at some ungodly hour, so I hunted around in the garbage in the back seat. You know what they say about wagons... You chuck the rubbish in the back seat, the back seat passengers chuck it in the rear, and once a year you open the tailgate and sweep it all out...

So I found a 500 mL bottle and filled it. Had to shut off when it was reaching the top. As any bloke knows, that's not an easy ask. Never interrupt the stream! Surreptitiously opened the door and poured it in the gutter, half-filled it again. Again, switching the stream on again after premature interruption is no easy task. Do not try this at home!

I wasn't home, it was an emergency survival situation, so it was OK in that instance.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lausten » Sat Mar 31, 2018 3:47 pm

Jim Steele wrote:Give a man enough rope and he will hang himself and indeed you have done just that Lausten.

First you have failed to quote my arguments regards melons and have failed to rebut those arguments. It is not I who has raised the melomys extirpation as an example of climate change, It was TJ and then you. And it is. not a matter of you providing a "complete response" but your failure to provide an honest one!


I did not “fail” to quote them, I pointed to where they were, and I did not intend to discuss them at all. As I have explained, that was not the point of my bringing them up. You have shown once again that you are not interested in engaging in the specific thing that you asked me to engage on the previous page. It is quoted at the top of this page. The difference between you and me is, I have a life. Okay, that’s debatable but start a different thread on that. But as you have recently noted, I was gone from this forum for a long time and just came in and made a few quick hits. You have been doing this for years. What have you accomplished? Has the consensus changed? Have there been any cracks in the armor of science? Is there a new theory of global warming that I haven’t heard about? I suppose to you there are, but you can’t demonstrate it any better than you can anything else, so, I’ll move on, check in now and then, and things will be the same I’m sure.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lausten » Sat Mar 31, 2018 3:48 pm

Also, idea for new band name, "regards the melons"
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:36 am

Lausten wrote: It is quoted at the top of this page. The difference between you and me is, I have a life.


ROTFLMAO more Lausten ad Homs from his imagination about my life

Lausten wrote: you now want me to start up a research project on melomys.


ROTFLMAO

Lausten you really have a problem with accurately interpreting other people's posts.

All I asked was for you to supply the "specifics" to support your blather. But true to form you just engaged in rants, and more hit and run personal attacks once again totally failing to quote any relevant scientific evidence.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lausten » Fri Apr 06, 2018 4:27 pm

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote: It is quoted at the top of this page. The difference between you and me is, I have a life.


ROTFLMAO more Lausten ad Homs from his imagination about my life

Lausten wrote: you now want me to start up a research project on melomys.


ROTFLMAO

Lausten you really have a problem with accurately interpreting other people's posts.

All I asked was for you to supply the "specifics" to support your blather. But true to form you just engaged in rants, and more hit and run personal attacks once again totally failing to quote any relevant scientific evidence.


Oh darn, you didn’t give up, what a surprise. The page 1 analysis was about how you show a preference to responding to tangents and attacks on how you construct your arguments, then you complain that people do that. You actually did respond to the Major, but then you dropped your own line of logic and went on complaining for 2 pages, until here, where you said,

Analyzing natural change as a causative agent is required science. It is the only way to make our climate models better.

It’s patently NOT the ONLY way. Just like evolution does not need genetics, the causative nature of carbon does not change because of some other effect on sea level. I never said we shouldn’t study it, or the article was wrong. I said it doesn’t say anything about anyone being locked in groupthink or the other weird claims you make. You go on about “natural” change and cite isolated weather variations that are not predicted correctly by the models. That’s the definition of what a denier does. But you call it science.
And to clarify, I’m responding to this, where you asked me to clarify what you did that was “weird”. I’m not discussing the article about groundwater, I’m discussing how you abuse the article to claim people aren’t doing science correctly.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11237
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:23 pm

Jim is not a true scientist. He believes that the road to the truth is via logic and reasoning. Any truly competent scientist knows that logic and reasoning is just one of many tools, and misused can be the road to total fallacy.

Science is much more about induction than deduction, and empiricism rises above all else. A well trained, experienced climate scientist will dedicate him/herself to empirical studies and will make conclusions based on the empirical results, not on some crappy form of reasoning.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:35 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Jim is not a true scientist.


ROTFLMAO Typical troll dishonesty and ad Homs.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11237
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:03 pm

If you think you are a good scientist, Jim, show it by dispensing with the idiotic reasoning, and going with good science.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sun Apr 08, 2018 1:27 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:If you think you are a good scientist, Jim, show it by dispensing with the idiotic reasoning, and going with good science.


Clearly by that logic, Lance certainly does not qualify as even a wanna be scientist
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sun Apr 08, 2018 1:34 am

Lausten wrote:It’s patently NOT the ONLY way. Just like evolution does not need genetics, the causative nature of carbon does not change because of some other effect on sea level.


With no disrespect intended,Your replies are totally unintelligible and prevent any sincere response. I suggest you get a friend to edit your remarks. The only thing I can discern is you are obsessed with denigrating me personally in every post by using whatever your blathering imagination conjures up, while remaining totally devoid of science!

So to start, just what is the "causative nature of carbon"? I have never heard that phrase ever before.
Last edited by Jim Steele on Sun Apr 08, 2018 1:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sun Apr 08, 2018 1:50 am

Major Malfunction wrote:But that's still only = 235 mm. Falling short of the required 350 mm by 115 mm.....

Now, of course all the rain didn't land on just Australia, but it certainly didn't all soak into aquifers.


But as you mentioned, Australia was just the primary region, and not solely reposnibl for the 7 m sea level drop. Furthermore the peer reviewed science that I reported used gravity based estimates, which suggest your math may not be using the most precise figures for your cacluatlions

Major Malfunction wrote:One thing you fail to mention is how long the sea-level drop lasted. Just the duration of the El Nino? What is it now?


Clearly your replies show you did not read my essay in which I most certainly did mention the light of time, as well as defining precisely what endorheic basins are. Only you conjured up the silly misinterpretation that an aquifer and an endorheic basin are the same

Major Malfunction wrote:And to finally answer your question, another mechanism for the (temporary) sea-level reduction could be the atmospheric water-load. The warmer the air is, the more water it can hold.


Now that is a silly answer, and explains you do not provide any math to back up your claim. You admit there was extreme rainfall but then you contradict your self by arguing the atmosphere held more water. Cant have it both ways. Furthermore do the math. You alternative explanation would require the atmosphere to hold over 20% more water than normal and that defies the physics!

Nevertheless Malfunction, you have been the only person here who has tried to engage in a scientific debate and I give you props for trying!
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3573
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lausten » Sun Apr 08, 2018 2:55 am

Jim Steele wrote:
Lausten wrote:It’s patently NOT the ONLY way. Just like evolution does not need genetics, the causative nature of carbon does not change because of some other effect on sea level.


With no disrespect intended,Your replies are totally unintelligible and prevent any sincere response. I suggest you get a friend to edit your remarks. The only thing I can discern is you are obsessed with denigrating me personally in every post by using whatever your blathering imagination conjures up, while remaining totally devoid of science!

So to start, just what is the "causative nature of carbon"? I have never heard that phrase ever before.

If you'd like to start a game where we point out each other's typos, find someone else to play. I meant CO2 obviously. I must have you stumped because you are doing nothing but avoiding me.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:05 am

Lausten wrote: I must have you stumped because you are doing nothing but avoiding me.


I would gladly engage in a debate if you offered an intelligible scientific argument and refrained from all your ad Homs.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sun Apr 08, 2018 3:52 am

Jim Steele wrote:
Major Malfunction wrote:But that's still only = 235 mm. Falling short of the required 350 mm by 115 mm.....

Now, of course all the rain didn't land on just Australia, but it certainly didn't all soak into aquifers.

But as you mentioned, Australia was just the primary region, and not solely reposnibl for the 7 m sea level drop. Furthermore the peer reviewed science that I reported used gravity based estimates, which suggest your math may not be using the most precise figures for your cacluatlions

Of course not. I don't have access to that data. That's just some back-of-the-envelope fun with numbers. But it's in the ballpark, isn't it? Within the realms of physics. There's always a lot of Fudge Factor in reality.

If you weren't so combative, you might realise I'm seceding you a point. Yes. I concur. There was a temporary reduction in the sea level caused by an a-typical weather event.

But I still don't understand the relevance of the point you're trying to make. You know... The topic.

Jim Steele wrote:
Major Malfunction wrote:One thing you fail to mention is how long the sea-level drop lasted. Just the duration of the El Nino? What is it now?

Clearly your replies show you did not read my essay in which I most certainly did mention the light of time, as well as defining precisely what endorheic basins are. Only you conjured up the silly misinterpretation that an aquifer and an endorheic basin are the same

TL;DR

Why don't you just answer the question I asked? In science communication we learnt precise and concise explanations are the best way of conveying important information.

Insisting I read your entire essay to sift-out the answer to an easily-answerable question seems overly narcissistic.

Just tell me. I might even believe you. Being all verbose and defensive isn't inspiring my confidence in your understanding of the matter at hand.

And we were talking about aquifers. The Topic.

Jim Steele wrote:
Major Malfunction wrote:And to finally answer your question, another mechanism for the (temporary) sea-level reduction could be the atmospheric water-load. The warmer the air is, the more water it can hold.


Now that is a silly answer, and explains you do not provide any math to back up your claim. You admit there was extreme rainfall but then you contradict your self by arguing the atmosphere held more water. Cant have it both ways. Furthermore do the math. You alternative explanation would require the atmosphere to hold over 20% more water than normal and that defies the physics!

Nevertheless Malfunction, you have been the only person here who has tried to engage in a scientific debate and I give you props for trying!


WTF? You make no sense at all. How do you think the rain from the Pacific got to Australia?

HINT: It didn't paddle a canoe.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:07 am

Major Malfunction wrote:Insisting I read your entire essay to sift-out the answer to an easily-answerable question seems overly narcissistic.

ROTFLMAO Most honest people read an essay before they criticize it. You did not! Yet you criticized! Showing its all about your biased imagination. Showing out the ad how of narcissistic is a Nice ploy to cover your bogus fabrications. .



Jim Steele wrote:
Major Malfunction wrote:And to finally answer your question, another mechanism for the (temporary) sea-level reduction could be the atmospheric water-load. The warmer the air is, the more water it can hold.



Major Malfunction wrote:WTF? You make no sense at all. How do you think the rain from the Pacific got to Australia?


I suspect you spend toooo much time measuring your alcoholic drainage. I also suspect you are no scientists but a boozing student. A tine bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing

But prove me wrong. How do you explain storage in the atmosphere simultaneously happening with extreme rainfall that drains the atmosphere? The scientific evidence I relayed correlated falling sea level with precipitation.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:52 am

Jim Steele wrote:
Major Malfunction wrote:Insisting I read your entire essay to sift-out the answer to an easily-answerable question seems overly narcissistic.

ROTFLMAO Most honest people read an essay before they criticize it. You did not! Yet you criticized! Showing its all about your biased imagination. Showing out the ad how of narcissistic is a Nice ploy to cover your bogus fabrications. .



Jim Steele wrote:
Major Malfunction wrote:And to finally answer your question, another mechanism for the (temporary) sea-level reduction could be the atmospheric water-load. The warmer the air is, the more water it can hold.



Major Malfunction wrote:WTF? You make no sense at all. How do you think the rain from the Pacific got to Australia?


I suspect you spend toooo much time measuring your alcoholic drainage. I also suspect you are no scientists but a boozing student. A tine bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing

But prove me wrong. How do you explain storage in the atmosphere simultaneously happening with extreme rainfall that drains the atmosphere? The scientific evidence I relayed correlated falling sea level with precipitation.

*sing-song sound*

Oh, hey, Pyrrho!
This guy is insulting me!
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sun Apr 08, 2018 5:44 am

Major Malfunction wrote:*sing-song sound*

Oh, hey, Pyrrho!
This guy is insulting me!


Well that would be a good way for you to dodge this debate

Hmm you call me "narcissistic" for simply asking you to read the essay BEFORE you criticize it. All would agree that would be the honest thing to do. But you think pointing out such bad behavior means I am insulting you?

ROTFLMAO

And you were bragging about how much you could piss! That is typical student behavior. What kind of reply would you anticipate. Why did you interject it into this thread if you were engaging in sincere scientific discussion.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 12131
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Major Malfunction » Sun Apr 08, 2018 5:57 am

Mate. You're off the rails.

Why don't you just log off and go away before you have to be dishonourably discharged?

You're not making any friends here.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2787
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: A Proven Scientific Skeptic
Contact:

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Jim Steele » Sun Apr 08, 2018 2:35 pm

Major Malfunction wrote:You're not making any friends here.


Indeed. There is a lot of hate against real scientific skeptics here.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11237
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Ancient Groundwater Discharge Explains Steady Sea Level Rise

Postby Lance Kennedy » Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:57 pm

Jim

Once more.
Show us a reputable reference. No one is going to take your own essays seriously.


Return to “Climate Change”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest