ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags agw , climate change , global warming , global warming denial

Reply
Old 28th January 2020, 01:36 PM   #281
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Originally Posted by Red Baron Farms View Post
....
Some "falsified" nonsense when you have not analyzed the actual correlation:
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
ETA: If you want to support Savory's denial of climate science, you have to look at the actual correlation between increasing numbers of cattle and increasing CH4 in Lassey (20007) and maybe in IPCC (2013). It is obviously not a correlation from recent data because the paper is 13 years old! When you use data older than 2007, you are automatically wrong because you are not analyzing the actual correlation.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2020, 07:59 PM   #282
Red Baron Farms
Illuminator
 
Red Baron Farms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 4,966
Nice try for a face saving post RC, but you are still not following the evidence.

1)Savory doesn't deny mainsteam science regarding Anthropogenic Global Warming.
2)The cause for increased methane is MOSTLY due to Natural gas leaks, although there is a small factor caused by feedlots and plowing up grasslands which are natural methane sinks and a few other small changes like rice production all very minor in comparison.
3) In any case taking desertified land and restoring it back to life will of course increase methane emissions since all life causes methane at some point. But it also restores the ONLY biological methane net sink on the planet as well. So this activity does NOT cause AGW. In fact the opposite.
4)Your lame attempts to claim ruminants cause anthropogenic global warming is actually what is not mainstream science. That a merchants of doubt argument that some Vegans and PETA guys came along and latched onto, but there is no evidence. In fact it is primarily fossil fuels D'oh.
__________________
Scott
"Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted & thoughtless labour; & of looking at plants & animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system." Bill Mollison
Biome Carbon Cycle Management

Last edited by Red Baron Farms; 28th January 2020 at 08:01 PM.
Red Baron Farms is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2020, 08:37 PM   #283
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Originally Posted by Red Baron Farms View Post
1)Savory doesn't deny mainsteam science regarding Anthropogenic Global Warming.
An obvious error because you know that Savory is ignorant of and denies well known mainstream science regarding Anthropogenic Global Warming.
16 January 2020: Why Savory and his institute is a bad source of climate science (CO2 and CH4 ignorance from an agriculturist touting his debated system with only a 2013 TED talk and documents on his web site).
Climate Change – Cause and Remedy
He blames climate change on "management" of resources: "With 100% certainty it is management causing global desertification and climate change and all the many symptoms.". Not denial but ignorance of the fact that the industrial age started before we knew about the impact of fossil fuel burning and cement plants on CO2 levels which is the cause of global warming. The increase in livestock during the time also did not help by increasing methane levels.
"CH4 ignorance" is being charitable. He denied the mainstream science about the correlation between increasing cattle numbers and increasing methane by cherry-picking a report rather than looking at the mainstream science.

2) The climate science remains that there is a correlation between increasing cattle numbers and increasing methane.
Nordborg, M. (2016): Appendix 7. Anthropogenic emissions of methane gives 35-50% (not MOSTLY) from natural sources between 100 and 2009.
3) Whatever land he converts to HM will increase the number of cattle and thus methane levels. Going from basically no cattle in desert to lots is not good!
4) An obvious "Your lame attempts to claim ruminants cause anthropogenic global warming" lie when cattle emit methane and have to contribute (not cause because the cause is CO2) methane to the atmosphere and thus anthropogenic global warming.
Nordborg, M. (2016): Appendix 7. Anthropogenic emissions of methane lists the scientific evidence you are denying.

Last edited by Reality Check; 28th January 2020 at 08:44 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th January 2020, 11:40 PM   #284
Red Baron Farms
Illuminator
 
Red Baron Farms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 4,966
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
An obvious error because you know that Savory is ignorant of and denies well known mainstream science regarding Anthropogenic Global Warming.
16 January 2020: Why Savory and his institute is a bad source of climate science (CO2 and CH4 ignorance from an agriculturist touting his debated system with only a 2013 TED talk and documents on his web site).
Climate Change Cause and Remedy
He blames climate change on "management" of resources: "With 100% certainty it is management causing global desertification and climate change and all the many symptoms.". Not denial but ignorance of the fact that the industrial age started before we knew about the impact of fossil fuel burning and cement plants on CO2 levels which is the cause of global warming. The increase in livestock during the time also did not help by increasing methane levels.
"CH4 ignorance" is being charitable. He denied the mainstream science about the correlation between increasing cattle numbers and increasing methane by cherry-picking a report rather than looking at the mainstream science.

2) The climate science remains that there is a correlation between increasing cattle numbers and increasing methane.
Nordborg, M. (2016): Appendix 7. Anthropogenic emissions of methane gives 35-50% (not MOSTLY) from natural sources between 100 and 2009.
3) Whatever land he converts to HM will increase the number of cattle and thus methane levels. Going from basically no cattle in desert to lots is not good!
4) An obvious "Your lame attempts to claim ruminants cause anthropogenic global warming" lie when cattle emit methane and have to contribute (not cause because the cause is CO2) methane to the atmosphere and thus anthropogenic global warming.
Nordborg, M. (2016): Appendix 7. Anthropogenic emissions of methane lists the scientific evidence you are denying.
We started this whole argument because you decided to burn down a strawman, and now you are all the way back in circles to burning down strawmen again.

It's tiresome.

ANYONE can misrepresent ANYONE and then pretend they are wrong.

And natural emissions whether CO2 or CH4 don't mean anything unless compared to the sinks. Something you and Nordborg still haven't done.

Its a fail argument.

So between the strawmen and the fail arguments which you still refuse to acknowledge and the going round and round in circles, I am simply tired of discussing it with you.

I said it several times already, come back when you have something meaningful to say. Denialist after all these years are simply boring. Maybe go spread your denialist BS somewhere else?
__________________
Scott
"Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted & thoughtless labour; & of looking at plants & animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system." Bill Mollison
Biome Carbon Cycle Management
Red Baron Farms is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 02:04 PM   #285
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Originally Posted by Red Baron Farms View Post
...strawman and denialist nonsense...
In the real world we started this argument because you cited the Savory Institute as having a as a "pretty good too and gaining traction" plan. The many problems with that remain.
You linked to Savory Institute: Our Mission which is an agricultural institute's advertisement. There is only 1 mention of climate in the first sentence. Luckily I knew about Alan Savory's invalid claim to reverse global warming by bringing CO2 levels down to pre-industrial levels so I supplied the actual "plan". Plan in quotes because this is not a published scientific, peer-reviewed plan. Savory has a 2013 TED talk and documents on the institute web.
16 January 2020: Why Savory and his institute is a bad source of climate science (CO2 and CH4 ignorance from an agriculturist touting his debated system with only a 2013 TED talk and documents on his web site).
This are real world facts:
  • Alan Savory is not a climate scientist.
  • Alan Savory has stated ignorance about CO2 (but see below) and CH4.
    Nordborg, M. (2016): Appendix 7. Anthropogenic emissions of methane: Scientific literature that a good proportion (up to 50%) of methane comes from livestock. There is a published correlation between the increasing number of cattle and increasing CH4 in Lassey (2007) and presumably acknowledged in IPCC 2013 (it explains a plateau in Ch4 levels as an offset by decay - what is being offset?).
  • Alan Savory's HM does not have a clear body of evidence (thus "debated") showing that it is a better sequester of carbon than other systems.
    See the scientific literature cited in Holistic management – a critical review of Allan Savory's grazing method by Nordborg, M. (2016).
  • Alan Savory has never published any climate science in journals especially his claim.
When I first read his "Climate Change – Cause and Remedy" opinion piece I thought that "With 100% certainty it is management causing global desertification and climate change and all the many symptoms." was ignorance that it is CO2 that is causing climate change. It is different ignorance. He thinks that we "manage" the release of CO2 to the atmosphere and it is mismanagement that of that release that causes climate change. Obviously wrong because the Industrial Revolution began over a century before we knew about our CO2 emissions causing global warming.

This bad source of climate science then has a scientifically invalid claim:22 January 2020: Published scientific literature showing that Savory's reversal of global warming by his HM system is wrong

Last edited by Reality Check; 29th January 2020 at 02:14 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th January 2020, 02:44 PM   #286
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 26,422
Exclamation Savory had no evidence that HM can sequester carbon enough to support his claim

We have not really discussed the issue of HM not having clear evidence of increasing carbon sequestration in soils enough to support his claim. Savory's claim came to public attention in a 2013 TED talk so he must have had scientific evidence for a high enough sequestration rate in 2013.

The published literature on grazing management methods is that they can only mitigate a proportion of global warming. Savory's claim is reversal of global warming. He needs scientific evidence that HM can sequester carbon at a rate many times of the other methods. Nordberg (2016)
Quote:
Improved grazing management on grasslands can store on average approximately 0.35 tonnes of C per ha and year – a rate seven times lower than the rate used by the Savory Institute to support the claim that holistic grazing can reverse climate change.
...
3. Scientific studies of holistic grazing........................................... ....................................... 11
3.1 Review of the research portfolios of the Savory Institute......................................... .......................11
3.2 Studies not included in the research portfolios of the Savory Institute......................................... ....16
Nordberg describes eleven peer-reviewed studies of holistic grazing from the SI. Only 4 were focused on soil: Ferguson et al. (2013), Manley et al. (1995), Sanjari et al. (2008) and Teague et al. (2011) which found that "Multi-paddock (= holistic grazing)" gave a 144% increase over "Heavy continuous" and 111% for "Light continuous". Much too low to support Savory's claim. Nordberg looked at review studies that were omitted from Savory’s research portfolio that do not show HM is general superior to other methods. Her conclusion: "Based on the material reviewed here, there is only indicative evidence for the general superiority of holistic grazing over other grazing systems or no grazing."

Last edited by Reality Check; 29th January 2020 at 02:49 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:26 PM   #287
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,648
The figures for CO2 output for the first quarter (at least) of this year will be interesting - China's output right now must be down 50%.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 10:44 AM   #288
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,642
They'll probably beat that as they really care about western environmentalists.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th February 2020, 12:30 PM   #289
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,648
I'm not sure whether this has been widely circulated in the NH, but it's big news here since we're closer to Antarctica than most - a new record high, of 17.5 deg C (63.5F) was set for Antarctica in 2015, at the height of the then El Nino, which was one of the three strongest on record.

That record was utterly smashed last week, with a recording of 18.3C (64.9F).

https://www.accuweather.com/en/weath...re-ever/676772
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:15 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.