BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science

Subject: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Mr Red
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 11:30 AM

Biggest source of energy on the surface of this planet is  Solar  
Most abundant element, ditto, is  Silicon  

Connecting the dots ain't rocket science really.
Just saying.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 11:41 AM

What, they both begin with S you mean?

Silicon isn't the most abundant element on the surface of the planet, the most abundant elements are Hydrogen (by number) and Oxygen (by mass) as these two elements make up the water molecule. Silicon isn't the most abundant element even on land, seeing as most of it is in the form of silicates (SiO4) and the 4 indicates that for each Silicon atom in a silicate there are 4 Oxygen ones.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 11:46 AM

All we need are a bunch of extension cords from parts of the world where the sun is up and where it is not cloudy. I hope there is an abundance of copper and plastic to make the cords.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 11:48 AM

Two other words which begin with 'S' are 'silly' and 'stupid'. Just saying - which, coincidentally, also begins with 'S'! Can anyone else think of some words beginning with 'S'? It ain't rocket science really!

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,#
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 12:13 PM

Suddenly swallows swiftly skimming,
sunset's slowly spreading shade,
silvery songsters sweetly singing
summer's soothing serenade.

Susan Simpson strolled sedately,
stifling sobs, suppressing sighs.
Seeing Stephen Slocum, stately
she stopped , showing some surprise.

' Say, ' said Stephen, ' sweetest sigher;
Say, shall Stephen spouseless stay? '
Susan, seeming somewhat shyer,
showed submissiveness straightaway.

Summer's season slowly stretches,
Susan Simpson Slocum she—
So she signed some simple sketches—
Soul sought soul successfully.

Six Septembers Susan swelters;
Six sharp seasons snow supplies;
Susan's satin sofa shelters
Six small Slocums side by side.

Found on the 'net. Attribution to Anon.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Stu
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 12:28 PM

Thilly thods.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Mrr
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 12:45 PM

I have friends whose stairs say Thtairs and whose sink says Think.

Also, overheard recently, it ain't rocket surgery. Made me wonder, since we do have brain science...

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 12:50 PM

Steve Shaw.

When you've generated your electricity you can get at it by plugging things into the wall. Socket Science.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Westernesse
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 03:25 PM

most abundant metal

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Mr Red
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 04:52 PM

All we need are a bunch of extension cords from parts of the world where the sun is up and where it is not cloudy
that is certainly being condsidered, and given that a lot of hot countries (just south of a power hungry free trade area), are going to get hotter and probably drier, and crops that grow there are going to struggle as it gets hotter, not a bad scenario.

Fortunately no-one suggested wind and hydro, both driven by insolation.

Perhaps I should have said "metal", surface (another "s") already covers the rest.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Mr Red
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 04:59 PM

Having been a potter and an electronic engineer - I can assure you Silicon is more abundant (as Silica/quartz) than Aluminium (as Alumina or Bauxite). Both of which I used in making glazes for porcelain &/or stoneware.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Kampervan
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 05:33 PM

10 Most Abundant Elements in the Earth's Crust

Source: CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 77th Edition
Element        Abundance
percent by weight        Abundance
parts per million by weight
Oxygen        46.1%        461,000
Silicon        28.2%        282,000
Aluminum        8.23%        82,300
Iron        5.63%        56,300
Calcium        4.15%        41,500
Sodium        2.36%        23,600
Magnesium        2.33%        23,300
Potassium        2.09%        20,900
Titanium        0.565%        5,650
Hydrogen        0.14%        1,400

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Greg F.
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 05:37 PM

"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe."

- Frank Zappa

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Westernesse
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 07:04 PM

Mr. Red, no pretense intended. Perhaps aluminium is the dot connector?

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Rapparee
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 08:17 PM

A serious question deserves a serious answer.

Cells are made from several types of silicon, such as polycrystalline, as well as from other things. Germanium arsenide seems to be the current champion in energy conversion (light to electricity), but gallium, various lead mixtures, and other things are also very much in the running. One rather interesting experiment occurred at MIT a few years ago, using a material with 65% transparency and a 2% energy conversion, but before you decide that your car windows could be used to power your car you should know that this was in the lab and it's a long way from being commercially feasible!

This is a hot area for research, especially in infrared conversion (no, I'm NOT sorry!) with ultraviolet also very much in the running.

I've been following it and let me tell ya, it ain't easy when your background is in the liberal arts! But then you do learn things when you venture into other areas.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: michaelr
Date: 04 Dec 15 - 09:35 PM

Fortunately no-one suggested wind and hydro, both driven by insolation

What the heck is that supposed to mean?

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,#
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 07:45 AM

"What the heck is that supposed to mean?"

I think insolation is the term used to measure radiation from the sun that hits Earth.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 09:16 AM

To an astrophysicist Silicon is a metal, but then so are Carbon and Oxygen, and anything that isn't Hydrogen or Helium. Although Aluminium may be the most abundant metal (in a chemical rather than astrophysical sense) in the Earth's crust, in the Solar System as a whole it is Iron. This is because Iron has the highest binding energy per nucleon, and thus is the natural end point of nuclear reactions. The iron in the earth is concentrated in the core.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,#
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 09:43 AM

'Some Stars are Totally Metal: A New Mechanism Driving Dust Across Star-Forming Clouds, and Consequences for Planets, Stars, and Galaxies'

Precis of paper at

http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.5509

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Reinhard
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 09:57 AM

"Cells are made from several types of silicon"

Cells may perhaps contain several types of silicon, but lifeforms on Earth are carbon-based, not silicon-based, with the possible exception of some trolls posting here.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 03:25 PM

Based on the posts...maybe 'climate change', commonly known as 'global warming', is 'rocket science'....or is it just the proponents, who just see another money grab, have to make it such.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Dave
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 03:36 PM

Reinhard,

Didn't that mean fuel cells rather than living cells?

GfS - what tosh, there is no money grab, just attempts to understand effects, causes, and possible remedial action.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 04:11 PM

Climate change is real and cyclical, and has been for as long back as scientific knowledge can take us. Warmer, cooler, warmer, cooler and will be so until our sun burns out (not in my lifetime, I hope). Waddya know, it ISN'T rocket science.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: pdq
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 04:19 PM

"Biggest source of energy on the surface of this planet is Solar" ~ OP


So, please tell us what energy source comes in second place?

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,McGillicuddy
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 04:24 PM

It doesn't matter if it's natural or manmade. It could be a bit of both. Either way, sea levels are rising, the permafrost is thawing, and Miami is talking about building levees to keep their basements dry. The US is in denial about it; Europe seems to understand because of their recent weather. People in places like Bangladesh and the Marshall Island are really screwed. So why keep pumping crap into the air that makes it happen faster?

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 05:16 PM

The US is in denial about it;

As apparently is Sunset John.

Not ALL of the folks in the U.S. are Deniers - you'll find most of such in the Republican Party, "The Party Of Stupid".

Hey, what the f**k to 99.5% of climate scientists know, anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 05:33 PM

Climate change is real and cyclical, and has been for as long back as scientific knowledge can take us. Warmer, cooler, warmer, cooler and will be so until our sun burns out (not in my lifetime, I hope). Waddya know, it ISN'T rocket science.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 06:38 PM

So, John otSC, would you mind telling us what qualifications you've got in climate science, please?

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 06:43 PM

Its OK, Shimrod - John apparently has the same conceit as the several Repulican presidential candidates: that repeating bullshit makes it true.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 07:14 PM

John's problem, like all climate change deniers, like evolution deniers, like moon-landing deniers and like Holocaust deniers, is that he can't, or won't, avail himself of the facts required to come to any sensible judgement. Any fact that even threatens to militate against their predigested view must be dismissed and ridiculed. It is impossible to discuss anything sensibly with these antediluvian charlatans. The only people who deny anthropogenic climate change are big oil companies, the more wacky branches of the Republican party and a small handful of disreputable scientists who have been bought off. We find exactly the same attitude with people of religious faith who give up on facts and resort to what they "hold sacred". The founder of the Guardian all those years ago, CP Scott, had it exactly right when he said that opinion is free, but FACTS are sacred. Beliefs can't be sacred. Only lunatics think that.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,#
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 07:15 PM

John o t S C is correct. The difference this time is the man-made component.

Speaking of which, it's great to see you posting, John. I trust things are well with you :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 07:21 PM

He is not correct. A proper reading of his post reveals that he is denying anthropogenic climate change. In effect he is denying all the science that overwhelms his standpoint. So, asking him what his qualifications are is entirely germane.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,#
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 07:43 PM

"John o t S C is correct. The difference this time is the man-made component."

I don't see that John is denying anthropogenic [man-made] climate change.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 08:02 PM

Well let's ask him then. From what I see, he's saying that what he regards as the cyclical nature of climate change is what nature determines and it will go on forever until the death of the solar system, no matter we do. Unfortunately, and weasel words not intended, as far as I can glean not one of the finest climate scientists on earth agrees with that. Of course, John may know better. So enough from me until he delivers his evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 08:03 PM

no matter what we do

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,#
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 08:47 PM

Fair enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 10:32 PM

Man made??..Gosh, we'd better do something about that now!!...start with throwing away your cars and computers, electric homes, and all the factories...


..or shut up!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,#
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 11:20 PM

And leave you talking only to yourself? Perish the thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Stanron
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 11:44 PM

Every creature with a lung converts oxygen to carbon dioxide with every breath. Has anyone calculated the weight or volume of carbon dioxide one human exhales in the course of a lifetime?

Could it be a better option to keep the cars and just do away with the drivers?

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 05 Dec 15 - 11:45 PM

Climate change is real and cyclical, and has been for as long back as scientific knowledge can take us. Warmer, cooler, warmer, cooler and will be so until our sun burns out (not in my lifetime, I hope). Waddya know, it ISN'T rocket science.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 12:46 AM

Our world is in danger whilst ever redneck lunacy prevails.

If your stance is stupid, just keep repeating it ad nauseum.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 12:54 AM

John on the Sunset Coast is correct, and it is WELL known, in the scientific community...but inconvenient, in the political one.
that's not rocket science, either...but it's hard to argue with delusions.


GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 01:46 AM

Climate change is real and cyclical, and has been for as long back as scientific knowledge can take us. Warmer, cooler, warmer, cooler and will be so until our sun burns out (not in my lifetime, I hope). Waddya know, it ISN'T rocket science.

This does not happen? And I'm the denier? Look to yourselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 03:37 AM

I was hoping that you were going to tell us what qualifications you've got in climate science, John otSC. Instead you just keep on repeating the same old mantra which adds NOTHING to the debate.

It adds nothing to the debate because, OF COURSE, reputable climate scientists know about cyclical climate change - do you think that they don't? Do you know how science works? What the scientists' models are telling them is that there is now an additional, very large, man-made component to the cycle resulting from the burning of fossil fuels.

There seems to be a common pattern among sceptics and deniers of all types. They generally seem to know very little about how science works but they seize on one or two variables that they do know about (e.g. "Climate change is real and cyclical") and imagine that these trump every other variable that the REAL scientists are dealing with.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Stu
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 07:14 AM

"This does not happen? And I'm the denier? Look to yourselves."

But what is happening now is not part of those cycles. We are familiar with them from the fossil record (I saw a spectacular sequence of beds in a quarry in Virginia that were the result of the long-term cyclicality of wet/dry periods) and they're well understood.

Although we are still trying to understand the effects of climate change on the planet's systems (for example oceans are massively complex and by nature hard to study) the foundation that underpins current climate and oceanography work is strong and the science robust; it makes no odds to the scientists studying it whether anthropogenic climate change is occurring or not, but they're found it is and have been looking beyond that for a while. My own university has deployed autonomous pelagic drones to collect data from the North Atlantic and these aren't looking for evidence of anthropogenic climate change, they're part of an effort to understand the effect it's having now.

I think we'll find one day that climate denial is a sociological issue similar to creationism or flat-earthers, and people's desire to believe in such causes is exploited in a similar way by the actions of those with a vested interest (in climate change's case the hydrocarbon industry, in creationisms case religious literalists). They don't look at and assess the science, they simply believe and you can't argue with them. More often than not, they know very little of the subject they are discussing. It's ever been thus.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 07:46 AM

I think we're at that point already. The difference this time is that the creationists and flat-earthers, whilst not exactly harmless, can be reviled and ridiculed at our leisure. Obstructionist behaviour by climate change deniers with vested interests is urgently dangerous. We can't afford the luxury of sitting around forever arguing with these nutcases and their ignorant camp-followers (of whom we have at least two in this thread). Atmospheric carbon dioxide is now at 0.04% for the first time in human history and is still rising, revealing that whatever steps we have so far taken are woefully inadequate.

With respect, Stanron, I think it would be a good idea if you acquainted yourself with the carbon cycle.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 07:55 AM

Oh well, if Windgust from Insanity endorses his view...

Keep it up. We have a programme over here on The BBC where they show news clips and speeches from such Americans for our entertainment.

Climate deniers, Jesus Freaks, immigrant fearers, gun lobbyists, capital punishment supporters.. The Russel Howard Good News Show gives them all an airing so we can point and laugh.

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Ed T
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 08:10 AM

More about silicon and boobs:

""Seventy-seven percent of breast implants used in 2014 were silicone and the rest were saline. Both implants have upsides and downsides.""

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 09:03 AM

Only upsides and downsides, Ed? Have you never heard of the sideboob look?

Subject: RE: BS: Climate Change ain't rocket science
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 Dec 15 - 10:41 AM

We need to find a pirate with an eye patch and hook for Jack Sunset.