[lug] Anyone else hate to get rid of old equipment?

[David L. Anselmi]

Davide Del Vento wrote:
>> So where can I go to see the evidence that convinces you that man-made CO2 is causing a continual
>> increase in global temperature?
>
> Let's start with the past and present status.
> There is overwhelming evidence in thousand of publications.  You can
> even download CCSM, study its code and do your own simulation and see
> by yourself.

Can you give me a link to something you think is credible (and preferably without an opposing 
conclusion drawn from the same data)?  I'd prefer measured data, not models.

> The ball does indeed fall, according to any gravity theory. This is a fact and who doesn't
> "believe" it is "Flat-Earth-er"

So I can make a calculation that tells me how long the ball will fall and then measure that my 
calculation was reasonably accurate.  Can we do that at all with the climate change data?  Maybe not 
because there's a fundamental difference but perhaps you need a better analogy in that case.

> I believe the problem with this topic is that everybody takes it
> personal, uses it for political or ideological goals, so too many
> people (from both sides) tends to spread FUD instead of using his/her
> brain to "negotiate" with the other part.

For the record I'm not stating an opinion about climate change.  Just asking for information since 
you seem to be more informed on it than anyone I've seen on TV.

> The first is what I stated before: global warming (or climate change,
> if you prefer the word) is a fact, today. We know "how much" is a
> fact, because the models tell us pretty well what the climate would
> look like without human emissions (mostly burning fossil fuels, but
> non only). It is different from what we measure today.

How do we know how accurate the models are?

> The third point is the most important, and the only one we should argue about. Human presence
> change the environment, period. [...] The point of the discussion is what we agree is ok to
> "kill" or "destroy", and what is not.

Which has nothing to do with science except that people try to use it to label certain behaviors as 
killing.

> This should be the core of the discussion, at least in a geeky-smart
> circle like ours.

That's not really why I read this list.

[...]
> Of course a big, huge part of that is that there are too many people on the Earth, and counting!

How sad.  "How can there be too many children? That is like saying there are too many flowers." 
(That is an opinion, but not about climate change.)

Dave