@oneeyedundertaker so you were not here when CO argued our measurements were off, too many stations in heat islands and unreliable satellite data were used in many threads
As to the old data being wrong, there were some outliers that are used to ridicule. But most projections were in the ballpark:
As to human involvement, any explanation has to account for the troposphere warming and the stratosphere cooling. In other words, heat is coming into the system but isn't reaching the stratosphere when it radiates out. Things like increased solar output, which we measure and know isn't the issue, would cause warming in the stratosphere too. But it is cooling. So any alternative thesis has to explain why the heat radiating off of earth isn't reaching the stratosphere.
The best answer is greenhouse gasses. Much of the heat radiating off is being grabbed by these gasses. We can run experiments on CO2 and see if radiated heat gets trapped by it. So we know they grab onto heat. Now, I fully acknowledge there could be a different theory that is right, just as Einstein's theory of relativity could be replaced by a better theory. But at the moment, based on what we know, the current theory fits.
She was so bad at her job any response to her nonsense would have been seen by her fan club as unprofessional. Why do you defend her? Respect is earned.
@oneeyedundertaker so you were not here when CO argued our measurements were off, too many stations in heat islands and unreliable satellite data were used in many threads
As to the old data being wrong, there were some outliers that are used to ridicule. But most projections were in the ballpark:
As to human involvement, any explanation has to account for the troposphere warming and the stratosphere cooling. In other words, heat is coming into the system but isn't reaching the stratosphere when it radiates out. Things like increased solar output, which we measure and know isn't the issue, would cause warming in the stratosphere too. But it is cooling. So any alternative thesis has to explain why the heat radiating off of earth isn't reaching the stratosphere.
The best answer is greenhouse gasses. Much of the heat radiating off is being grabbed by these gasses. We can run experiments on CO2 and see if radiated heat gets trapped by it. So we know they grab onto heat. Now, I fully acknowledge there could be a different theory that is right, just as Einstein's theory of relativity could be replaced by a better theory. But at the moment, based on what we know, the current theory fits.
What does this have to do with Zeldin’s point that EPA’s statutory authority to regulate something like “climate change” is actually quite limited. (Despite Democrats trying to push those limits each time they gain office). It’s a simple point the blue haired freak seemed incapable of grasping as she didn’t know any of the associated case law or even have an understanding of the Clean Air Act as it relates to EPA.
@carramrod nothing, just pointing out a lot of Republicans have embarrassed themselves making arguments just for the identity marker. It happens on both sides.
Since the >10 years ago when I argued data collection was suspect we have seen substantial improvements. Data collection is now pretty good. The problem still is we model data backward and forward. Models have the same problems they always have had, they are based on assumptions, more complex assumptions. When we say the earth’s temperature has increased, that is not based on averaging the hundreds points of data, it is based on modeling the data.
Your post makes it seem like climate science is settled, it isn’t. It’s more complex than ever.
One constant is that the liberal/democratic climate dogma will always outpace actual science and study. That hasn’t changed for decades. Part of the reason is the liberal democrats use climate as an excuse and justification for other economic goals. As a result we get policy stupidity like “net zero,” the Paris accords, and the endangerment finding all of which were disconnected from reality.
@oneeyedundertaker What exactly was said that you think was "wonderful?"
I’d have better luck explaining it to my dog. Go be stupid in another thread.
why? because you've already filled this thread with enough stupid on your own?
@oneeyedundertaker so you were not here when CO argued our measurements were off, too many stations in heat islands and unreliable satellite data were used in many threads
As to the old data being wrong, there were some outliers that are used to ridicule. But most projections were in the ballpark:
As to human involvement, any explanation has to account for the troposphere warming and the stratosphere cooling. In other words, heat is coming into the system but isn't reaching the stratosphere when it radiates out. Things like increased solar output, which we measure and know isn't the issue, would cause warming in the stratosphere too. But it is cooling. So any alternative thesis has to explain why the heat radiating off of earth isn't reaching the stratosphere.
The best answer is greenhouse gasses. Much of the heat radiating off is being grabbed by these gasses. We can run experiments on CO2 and see if radiated heat gets trapped by it. So we know they grab onto heat. Now, I fully acknowledge there could be a different theory that is right, just as Einstein's theory of relativity could be replaced by a better theory. But at the moment, based on what we know, the current theory fits.
So we don’t know. It is a great way to virtue signal though.
edit: “So any alternative thesis has to explain why the heat radiating off of earth isn't reaching the stratosphere.”
This statement is ridiculous….
”The best answer” - “guess” is the correct word to use here…
You’re evidently missing my point.She was so bad at her job any response to her nonsense would have been seen by her fan club as unprofessional. Why do you defend her? Respect is earned.
Ever since (or before?) “You lie!” was ejaculated at Obama in Congress, many Republicans, politicians and donors, have glorified disrespecting our institutions and institutional norms as a means of protesting their counterparts in politics. You’re doing the same here.
MAGA (the idea) must of necessity maintain the institutions of our founding fathers and anyone in any position of power must set a good example for such. Otherwise you’re making America less great
You don’t like her behavior? The solution is to set the right example in a congressional hearing. That maintains the institution and its norms.
As a conservative lawyer you surely understand this far better than most. We have no justice system if participants in a trial don’t respect the judge. Is the courtroom the proper place to air your grievances about an extreme liberal judge?
In short, a congressional hearing is not the place to deal with your objections to her (unless the chairperson so cautions her). You disrespect and disestablish the American Experiment to some degree in doing so.
As for her usage of her time in the hearing, that’s another discussion. By design it’s her time, not the guest answering questions.
You think exposing oneself as a total asshat and disrespecting another branch of government and the media is wonderful? That's incredible.Exposing the total ignorance of the democratic member could be considered wonderful. Although, as I said, I think it’s pathetic that she is a member of Congress and has a vote on important policy matters. No wonder congressional approval is in the dumpster.
@arthur-dent Don’t disagree but the clip isn’t about that. It’s about a rep being so grossly unprepared and uninformed that actual business can’t get done. How is that guy supposed to discuss anything meaningfully with her.
Why would anyone want to pay taxes to these people beyond the bare minimum. They’re not competent stewards.
The thing is, she wasn't unprepared. She had a valid question to ask. And he had a valid answer for that question. The problem was, he didn't give that valid answer. Instead he just acted like a dick. He could have said, "After going through the rulemaking requirements of the APA, we came to a final determination that climate change was not within the purview this Congress granted our agency. If anyone thinks our determination was wrong, there are avenues they can take to address that. Certainly, Congress has the authority to simply amend the law, and make it part of our purview." But he didn't do that. Instead he strutted around like a peacock.
Like most Reps who bother to ask questions in these hearings, DeLauro is more performance artist than legislator, but the question of whether or not the EPA should, or even can, address climate change is a valid one, and a discussion Congress should be having. He didn't shoot her down because she's uninformed. He shot her down because he's an ass.
@goat COuldn't disagree more. she wasn't able to demonstrate an even rudimentary understanding of the legalities involved. without same why bother. i'm sure these people are so tired of dealing with people like her. take the time to understand how things work then come have a discussion. otherwise it's just performa bullshit. and i fully understand the role of agencies and expertise. but he was showing she knows nothing and this is wasting his time.
@goat COuldn't disagree more. she wasn't able to demonstrate an even rudimentary understanding of the legalities involved. without same why bother. i'm sure these people are so tired of dealing with people like her. take the time to understand how things work then come have a discussion. otherwise it's just performa bullshit. and i fully understand the role of agencies and expertise. but he was showing she knows nothing and this is wasting his time.
And he could have cleared up where her knowledge was lacking by answering her question honestly and respectfully. But he chose not to do that.
@goat i have a bach in poly sci and a master's in public administration and policy. i know how all this stuff works. but i don't know how it actually works in practice. like do these people email each other before. hey joe just wanted to touch base on next week. here's what i'm thinking and what info i think will be useful. got it. take a look at such and such. that'll help.
i don't know
@goat i have a bach in poly sci and a master's in public administration and policy. i know how all this stuff works. but i don't know how it actually works in practice. like do these people email each other before. hey joe just wanted to touch base on next week. here's what i'm thinking and what info i think will be useful. got it. take a look at such and such. that'll help.
i don't know
That would be ideal, but I'm guessing they don't. They all know they are posturing the entire time. It's just depressing it has to be that way. Government could actually accomplish some things if they actually did the job as described, instead of constantly campaigning for something.
This statement is ridiculous….
”The best answer” - “guess” is the correct word to use here…
Why is the statement ridiculous? We have a series of facts, the earth from troposphere down is warming, but cooling above. Find theories that fit those facts.