quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

I see the usual suspects are out in force, they even brought a few rookies to the debate.

Sad news for you believers, even George Noory of Art Bell's Coast to Coast fame has seen the truth.

Carbon Dioxide Final Proof

Al Gore is wrong

Violent Weather is NOT getting worse

quote:

Friends of Science is a non-profit organization run by dedicated volunteers comprised mainly of active and retired earth and atmospheric scientists, engineers, and other professionals. We have assembled a Scientific Advisory Board of esteemed climate scientists from around the world to offer a critical mass of current science on global climate and climate change to policy makers, as well as any other interested parties. We also do extensive literature research on these scientific subjects. Concerned about the abuse of science displayed in the politically inspired Kyoto protocol, we offer critical evidence that challenges the premises of Kyoto and present alternative causes of climate change.

My source

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

Oh good grief!

Like I've said before to anyone that will listen-

With all the carbon dioxide dumped into the atmosphere in the last century- what exactly do you think is going to happen? 

A)  Nothing
B)  Temps will go up because it's a greenhouse gas.
C)  Temps will go down because some miracle will occur.

To anyone who doesn't have first hand experience of working with scientists- let me again point out that at the 2008 MRS meeting when the data on CO2 emission and global climate change was presented, the conclusion was that anybody who wants to argue now with the hypothesis is arguing with physics.  Nobody disagreed- at least not publically- and most of us were shook.  I'm sure that somebody  on this board is thinking - well, they were just scared to speak out.  Don't think so- scientists like controversy and love a chance to speak out.   The same group (to a first order approximation) a year later when presented with data on the economics and technology of nuclear power generation was anything but polite- things got quite heated.  So I've seen good agreement in the science community, and I've seen contention.  Global climate change is not contentious.  What to do about it may be, and it's clear that its very tough to extrapolate the effects of climate change- but something is going to happen.  There's no question about that.  Might be a fizzle, might be a catastrophe.

People in this country love to argue with scientists.  Our science education in this country is in tatters and one of the reasons is that religious zealots in Texas have an incredibly absurd amount of influence over textbook publishers.  It's incredible to me that a state board of idiots has the power to overrule what teachers and other professional educators have worked long and hard at as a guideline for textbook publishers (and apparently actually did a pretty good job.)  So we've got a religious nutcase dentist dictating what can be taught in our classrooms.

We're still fighting over evolution in this country so why is it surprising that global climate change is accorded the same respect?  And if you think I'm comparing the people that deny the existence of global climate change with the folks that don't believe in evolution- well, you win a cookie.....


Sam

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dominatist

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
You guys are in the wrong thread.
You belong here. I think.
Firm

This has been explained as when the adult tells the young child that in fact 2+2=4 and the young child refusing to believe no matter what he is told...feels the adult becoming condescending to continue to argue that 2+2 in fact does equal 4.

So...does this post mean that Greenland is not melting before our eyes ? Does this post mean that 77 cubic miles of the Arctic didn't fall and break off into the ocean ? Does this post mean that Canadian lakes that remained water in the winter months 3 times in 100 years didn't remain water 18 times since 1980 ?

No some on this post are having fun at the expense of the fact that real science requires objective analysis over time while supposition to the contrary takes no time or research at all.

To all of you that have been here for years, let's do an experiment...

We have had record snowfalls in the mid-Atlantic (30 inches Dulles airport, Va.) area and we've seen much more than usual in Georgia and particularly in Dallas. This is being caused by global warming.

The reason we see not just snowfalls but extraordinary snowfalls is because our atmosphere is getting warmer and holding much more moisture. So let's check back the next couple of years and see whether or not we get yet more record snowfalls. We are to also look for record rainfalls.
The proof is always in the pudding, let's just sit back wait and watch.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

FR..

In the entire existence of this planet, all the far more sever periods of cooling and warming...thousands and thousands of such periods and since the rise of modern man, hundreds and hundreds and mind you periods where this planet was an ice ball and periods where there was no ice at all... and yet...

quote:

Man is causing the worst one in just less than 100 years.

quote:

Really, you really expect the human population to believe this?

That we should spend all of the planets capital resources to stop and reverse, the whatever climate change is happening, even though no such reverse of climate change HAS EVER EVER happened before? And that SOMEHOW... should man STOP AND REVERSE whatever climate change is currently happening; THAT ACHIVEMENT is better and more advantageous for the planet than the natural cycle?

Is that what you want the world’s population to believe?

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Apologies would be a good place to start.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

 
You still sound like a Vatican spokeshole trying to insist Jesus is still the messiah, no matter what those priests were doing to the altar boys, Ken. 

You've got nothing left, ok?  The books were cooked, and the raw data was thrown away.  The fucking IPCC was cribbing from the propaganda sheets, letting it be called "settled science" and you were at the head of the parade, shrieking "Denier!" at people who suggested the very things which are now being admitted to. 

Apologies would be a good place to start.

quote:

I am hardly a scientist or an expert, and I don't have a dog in this fight.
BUT, something appears to be going on with climate changes and the weather.
I tend to agree with people like samboct and Dominatist in this thread.
At the end of the day, all this talk is cheap.

Many people are cognisant of the frequent/weird and wild weather changes lately, so all we need to do is sit back and wait and watch.
At the end of the day, the proof will be in the weather.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Have you looked at the data? Have you found any data that wasn't accurate? Or are you relying on cherry picked quotes from emails that are being used to blow this out of proportion?

Let's take the most famous example. the supposed "trick". What was the trick? Using real temps on a series of dendrochronology derived temps. Why was this valid? Because it is well established that significant changes in CO2 concentration throw off the "calibration" of tree ring derived temps. So when the authors of the paper got to the modern era for wqhich accurate direct temperature readings are available they simply used those. Why not just use the tree ring data? Because we are still working out how to "calibrate" the data for the present rapidly rising CO2 concentrations.

I will note, just for the sake of saving you the trouble of some foaming at the mouth denunciation of the method involved, that one other bedrock measurement tool has lately been rendered inaccurate due to human activity. For anything that was alive since the 1950's Carbon 14 dating gives an inaccurate measurement since atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons changed teh ratio of C-14 usually in the air. We have not however abandoned C-14 dating for things that died before 1945 and we will not be abandoning dendrochronology for studying weather prior to 1850 or so.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You know... this subject belongs in "off topic" ... not politics

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You know... this subject belongs in "off topic" ... not politics

I think it is more closely related to a religious belief, but you know...

quote:

ther side or another explanation they quickly refer to the chants of "flat earther" and the like.

quote:

Those are the folks that have made much of these debates much more about being a religion than a scientific pursuit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You know... this subject belongs in "off topic" ... not politics

I think it is more closely related to a religious belief, but you know...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Global warming is a religion for the true believers, yet also a political weapon for those seeking to use it to further their global wealth redistribution scheme (many of whom seek to have said wealth redistributed into their own pockets).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You know... this subject belongs in "off topic" ... not politics

I think it is more closely related to a religious belief, but you know...

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

. I have never seen.......a temple of climate change

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

It's not surprising that there will be disagreement on the statistics, since as we've agreed before, there's a lot of computer modeling involved. The data on carbon dioxide levels however, are much firmer.