Author Topic: The Official Climate Change Thread  (Read 31496 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #70 on: August 15, 2011, 08:55:31 PM »
Here is a link to a "few" dissenters.

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Since there is no scientific consensus on global warming, I believe there should be no action on global warming. Especially any action that would increase taxation or curtail freedom.


Offline El JoNNo

  • Posts: 1778
  • Gender: Male
  • EMOTRUCCI
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #71 on: August 15, 2011, 08:58:54 PM »
I would like to know if those PHD's are in fields even remotely related to the study of climate change. I might look into it tomorrow. Something tell's me they are PHD's in Art or English or something.

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #72 on: August 15, 2011, 09:03:54 PM »
I don't know why I bother.  Once someone has decided that they, one of the bold, intelligent few, has accumulated enough hours of perusing various right-wing blogs and therefore has greater insight than those of the scientific community, all hope is lost.

Are you aware that the scientific community is not in agreement that global warming exists?

Over 30,000 scientists, including over 9,000 Ph.D’s, have now signed the “Oregon Petition”. The petition says this:

“We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.”

So, I believe we should take a step back and just observe the planet for another 40 or 50 years and see what happens, if anything. Than we would have more data, which would be a good thing, no?

Stating a number like 30,000 scientists is completely irrelevant without taking that number in context of how many scientists there are. Studies and surveys have shown a rather large consensus amongst scientists regarding the issue, and increasingly more in relevant fields.

Offline El JoNNo

  • Posts: 1778
  • Gender: Male
  • EMOTRUCCI
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #73 on: August 15, 2011, 09:04:42 PM »
Apparently it is fake.. lol I'll upload links in a minute.

Offline El JoNNo

  • Posts: 1778
  • Gender: Male
  • EMOTRUCCI
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #74 on: August 15, 2011, 09:07:49 PM »

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #75 on: August 15, 2011, 09:16:52 PM »
Here is a link to a "few" dissenters.

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Since there is no scientific consensus on global warming, I believe there should be no action on global warming. Especially any action that would increase taxation or curtail freedom.



Name a major scientific organization that holds a contrary view on global warming.  There is absolutely a consensus on global warming, and there has been (at least amongst climatologists, those whose opinions matter the most) for over 20 years.. 

Not even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists sides with you anymore. 
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #76 on: August 15, 2011, 09:30:27 PM »
Quote

Name a major scientific organization that holds a contrary view on global warming.  There is absolutely a consensus on global warming, and there has been (at least amongst climatologists, those whose opinions matter the most) for over 20 years.. 

Not even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists sides with you anymore. 

I'd rather deal with individual scientists. Organizations have a pesky way of pushing agendas, usually related to their funding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

As can be seen, there is lots of doubt among some incredibly well respected climatologists.

I know the urge is to discredit them, but they can't all be wrong. It is quite obvious that we need to take a time out and view the data over several more decades and see if a consensus develops. As of now, there is no consensus, and many highly decorated climatologists agree with me.



Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27196
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #77 on: August 15, 2011, 09:32:52 PM »
Quote

Name a major scientific organization that holds a contrary view on global warming.  There is absolutely a consensus on global warming, and there has been (at least amongst climatologists, those whose opinions matter the most) for over 20 years.. 

Not even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists sides with you anymore. 

I'd rather deal with individual scientists. Organizations have a pesky way of pushing agendas, usually related to their funding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

As can be seen, there is lots of doubt among some incredibly well respected climatologists.

I know the urge is to discredit them, but they can't all be wrong. It is quite obvious that we need to take a time out and view the data over several more decades and see if a consensus develops. As of now, there is no consensus, and many highly decorated climatologists agree with me.




Only 4 of those people doubt climate change. The others just aren't sure of the cause.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #78 on: August 15, 2011, 09:44:30 PM »
Hate to say it, but another 40 or 50 years of watch and wait might not end well.  I'm not saying that there definitely is climate change (although I believe there is), but I am a firm believer in erring on the side of caution.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #79 on: August 15, 2011, 09:45:53 PM »
Quote
Only 4 of those people doubt climate change. The others just aren't sure of the cause.

But the cause is the only thing to fight about! If we aren't causing it, then the issue is moot and we can just return to our regularly scheduled programming.

But aside from that let's get back to all those others who "just aren't sure of the cause". That's my whole point! A veritable who's who of climatology is "not sure of the cause". And that is why we need to wait and continue gathering more data in a calm and rational manner. Not turn the world upside down and mess with economies and behaviors and freedom and individual liberty. Let's just continue monitoring and see what happens.

It is when we hear statements like "global warming is the key issue of our time" that I cringe. It is NOT the key issue of anything, and I just presented a list of respected climatologists who are as divided as anyone else. There is no consensus because there can be no consensus. We have not been observing the data for anywhere near long enough to draw any conclusions. We do not yet have 5% of the necessary modelling technology and power to even approach resolving the question to a logical conclusion.

In short, we need to do nothing. Immediately.


Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27196
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #80 on: August 15, 2011, 09:47:10 PM »
Dude, if there's an electrical fire in your house, you don't say "Well........I didn't cause it, no need to leave". You get the hell out and call the fire department.


Human beings don't need to be the cause of something that can drastically effect us.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #81 on: August 15, 2011, 09:59:02 PM »
Uncle. For tonight. I can no longer keep up. DT fans love to argue! Global warming, freeloaders, religion, I'm exhausted. I'm going to play some major 13ths as well as some other chords and just go to bed.

I have to wonder if this dialogue would take place on an Avenged Sevenfold forum. Probably not...


Offline El JoNNo

  • Posts: 1778
  • Gender: Male
  • EMOTRUCCI
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #82 on: August 15, 2011, 10:12:19 PM »
Uncle. For tonight. I can no longer keep up. DT fans love to argue! Global warming, freeloaders, religion, I'm exhausted. I'm going to play some major 13ths as well as some other chords and just go to bed.

I have to wonder if this dialogue would take place on an Avenged Sevenfold forum. Probably not...



That would be a NIGHTMAAAAAAREEE!


























I'm sorry...

Offline Scheavo

  • Posts: 5444
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #83 on: August 15, 2011, 10:20:22 PM »
Quote
Only 4 of those people doubt climate change. The others just aren't sure of the cause.

But the cause is the only thing to fight about! If we aren't causing it, then the issue is moot and we can just return to our regularly scheduled programming.

And for a variety of reasons, the regularly scheduled programming should be just about the exact same as if we are causing global warming. Less CO2 is good for a variety of reasons, not just the greenhouse effect. The same goes for other green house gases.

Look at it this way; the US moving to solar, wind, geothermal, and hydrogen means less foreign dependence, less money going overseas, and the end of any justification to have our horrible empire in the middle east. We have the physical empire we have because of economic necessity, and oil. The end of this relationship would be immensely beneficial to our economy, and world peace. This would hardly be an economic catastrophy, it would be a great boon.

Offline Super Dude

  • Hero of Prog
  • DTF.com Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16166
  • Gender: Male
    • The Nerdy Millennial
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #84 on: August 16, 2011, 06:15:42 AM »
We have not been observing the data for anywhere near long enough to draw any conclusions.

So over 150 years (actually as of last year, 160 years) of solid confirming data is insufficient...interesting.
Check out my blog!
Quote from: bosk1
As frequently happens, Super Dude nailed it.

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #85 on: August 16, 2011, 06:53:27 AM »
Quote

Name a major scientific organization that holds a contrary view on global warming.  There is absolutely a consensus on global warming, and there has been (at least amongst climatologists, those whose opinions matter the most) for over 20 years..  

Not even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists sides with you anymore.  

I'd rather deal with individual scientists. Organizations have a pesky way of pushing agendas, usually related to their funding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

As can be seen, there is lots of doubt among some incredibly well respected climatologists.

I know the urge is to discredit them, but they can't all be wrong. It is quite obvious that we need to take a time out and view the data over several more decades and see if a consensus develops. As of now, there is no consensus, and many highly decorated climatologists agree with me.




I counted 40 scientists on that list.  10 were from the fields of atmospheric science (a little too general, but whatever), meteorology, and climatology.

Thousands of scientists were involved in writing the latest IPCC report.  There are 14,000 people in the American Meteorological Society.  There are ~2,650,000 American scientists.  Do you see how small a number 40 is?

Your claims are incredibly inconsistent.  You say that if 40 accredited scientists deny, to varying degrees, the theory of anthropogenic global warming, they cannot all be wrong.  At the same time, you're claiming millions of other scientists are wrong.  

Meanwhile, I'm sure if someone produced a list of scientists denying evolution you would not claim "they can't all be wrong."

Your logic is quite confusing.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5225
  • Kabbalah
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #86 on: August 16, 2011, 07:33:11 AM »
Uncle. For tonight. I can no longer keep up. DT fans love to argue! Global warming, freeloaders, religion, I'm exhausted. I'm going to play some major 13ths as well as some other chords and just go to bed.

I have to wonder if this dialogue would take place on an Avenged Sevenfold forum. Probably not...



That would be a NIGHTMAAAAAAREEE!

:clap:  I think I love you.



On topic:  I have to admit, whenever this subject comes up, I VERY rarely weight in because, personally, I am undecided on much of this.  I am not taking side here, but feel compelled to back up Maj13th on something:  While some of this conclusions may not appear to be the most well-reasoned, if I could restate part of his bigger point on this issue (for the last page or so at least), that there is not the almost-universal agreement on global warming/climate change that some would have us believe (i.e., that it is occuring to the degree some say, that it is harmful, that it is unnatural and can be curbed, etc.).  Some of his facts may not be correct.  And perhaps his ultimate conclusion, that we should just "wait and see" until there is more of a consensus before taking action, may not be the best.  But his point that there are a sizable number of credible dissenters absolutely stands. 
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #87 on: August 16, 2011, 08:04:41 AM »
Quote
I counted 40 scientists on that list.  10 were from the fields of atmospheric science (a little too general, but whatever), meteorology, and climatology.

Thousands of scientists were involved in writing the latest IPCC report.  There are 14,000 people in the American Meteorological Society.  There are ~2,650,000 American scientists.  Do you see how small a number 40 is?

Your claims are incredibly inconsistent.  You say that if 40 accredited scientists deny, to varying degrees, the theory of anthropogenic global warming, they cannot all be wrong.  At the same time, you're claiming millions of other scientists are wrong.  

Meanwhile, I'm sure if someone produced a list of scientists denying evolution you would not claim "they can't all be wrong."

Your logic is quite confusing.


My contention is there is dissent on global warming within the climatological community. The dissent I produced was the result of a quick search that took only trivial time and effort. Do you seriously not think that I could produce 50 links to thousands of scientists who dissent the premise of global warming? I could. But that would just bore everyone. There is a lot of dissent on the subject, and I predict that dissent will grow over time.

And another thing. The published view of the American Meteorological Society is one thing. The views of its individual members are another. There is significant dissent within the AMS. How do I know this? Because I know 2 of its members who happen to be personal friends of mine. And we have discussed it at length and they both told me that many members disagree with the premise of global warming, either in whole or in part. So you can pretty much throw out "official pronouncements" of the AMS. Those pronouncements do not reflect the individual views of the membership. There is dissent within the AMS, there is dissent without the AMS, there is dissent pretty much throughout the professions related to the discussion.

Offline j

  • Posts: 2794
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #88 on: August 16, 2011, 08:25:13 AM »
What does the existence of dissenters--a universal phenomenon--have to do with anything?

-J

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3070
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #89 on: August 16, 2011, 08:44:19 AM »
I still don't see how pushing towards new inventions and ideas is a bad thing? Pushing towards using more sustainable devices is a bad thing?

Offline El JoNNo

  • Posts: 1778
  • Gender: Male
  • EMOTRUCCI
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #90 on: August 16, 2011, 09:01:23 AM »
I still don't see how pushing towards new inventions and ideas is a bad thing? Pushing towards using more sustainable devices is a bad thing?

It's not. I'm not even sure why M13 brought that up as an issue.

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5225
  • Kabbalah
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #91 on: August 16, 2011, 09:05:17 AM »
I still don't see how pushing towards new inventions and ideas is a bad thing? Pushing towards using more sustainable devices is a bad thing?

Can't speak for him, but I don't think he is against it.  I think he is merely against the government spending tax money to do it as opposed to the free market dictating that it be done privately.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline MasterShakezula

  • Posts: 3733
  • Owes H $10
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #92 on: August 16, 2011, 09:34:23 AM »
I'd personally prefer that innovation towards a country that is friendly to the environment be spearheaded by the free market, too.  Unfortunately, the cats who profit from sticking with the old ways are the ones with wallets fat enough to get Washington to make policies that give them an unfair advantage over alternative energies.  So, I realize that game-breaking changes have to be made in Washington to even the playing field for alternative energies to make any sort of progress towards their being the new standard.  The free market has its pros and cons; it's not some sort of magic cure-all.  There is no magic cure-all; hence why no tactic is guaranteed to work in all circumstances.  Hell, the solution I proposed probably would have its drawbacks, as well, though I bet there would be fewer than relying on the free market, and in a situation in which the potential solutions have their share of pros and cons, I'm going with the one with a pro to con ratio stacked in favor of the pros. 

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3070
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #93 on: August 16, 2011, 09:49:57 AM »
I still don't see how pushing towards new inventions and ideas is a bad thing? Pushing towards using more sustainable devices is a bad thing?

Can't speak for him, but I don't think he is against it.  I think he is merely against the government spending tax money to do it as opposed to the free market dictating that it be done privately.

So that makes sense... then why the focus on whether Global warming is real or man caused? If the end result is innovation and progress, does it matter what the catalyst for that is?

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #94 on: August 16, 2011, 10:11:04 AM »
Quote
I counted 40 scientists on that list.  10 were from the fields of atmospheric science (a little too general, but whatever), meteorology, and climatology.

Thousands of scientists were involved in writing the latest IPCC report.  There are 14,000 people in the American Meteorological Society.  There are ~2,650,000 American scientists.  Do you see how small a number 40 is?

Your claims are incredibly inconsistent.  You say that if 40 accredited scientists deny, to varying degrees, the theory of anthropogenic global warming, they cannot all be wrong.  At the same time, you're claiming millions of other scientists are wrong.  

Meanwhile, I'm sure if someone produced a list of scientists denying evolution you would not claim "they can't all be wrong."

Your logic is quite confusing.


My contention is there is dissent on global warming within the climatological community. The dissent I produced was the result of a quick search that took only trivial time and effort. Do you seriously not think that I could produce 50 links to thousands of scientists who dissent the premise of global warming? I could. But that would just bore everyone. There is a lot of dissent on the subject, and I predict that dissent will grow over time.

And another thing. The published view of the American Meteorological Society is one thing. The views of its individual members are another. There is significant dissent within the AMS. How do I know this? Because I know 2 of its members who happen to be personal friends of mine. And we have discussed it at length and they both told me that many members disagree with the premise of global warming, either in whole or in part. So you can pretty much throw out "official pronouncements" of the AMS. Those pronouncements do not reflect the individual views of the membership. There is dissent within the AMS, there is dissent without the AMS, there is dissent pretty much throughout the professions related to the discussion.

Yes, there is dissent.  There is dissent within the scientific community on nearly every theory.  So what?  The amount of dissent is trivial when compared to the amount of support.  There is absolutely a consensus on the causes of global warming.

Your claims are incredibly illogical.  By your view, the views of two of its members conclusively undermine the premise that the official stated position of the AMS is that anthropogenic global warming is real.  By that standard, I could claim that the Republic Party opposes universal suffrage.

You make no distinction between the existence of claims and the prevalence of them.  That is a ludicrous approach to have.  By your logic, Ron Paul won the last Presidential election, because thousands of people voted for him.  How could Obama have won a majority of the popular vote if thousands of people voted for other candidates? 

As for dissent within the scientific community over global warming, it's reasonably fair to say it's gone down over time.  It's emergence as a political issue has increased coverage of the science and the opinions of those on either side, but ever since the consolidation of a consensus amongst climatologists in 1988, the evidence for the phenomenon has solidified (both with more accurate estimations of past temperatures, the increased prevalence of satellite data, and the rising temperatures of the '90s and '00s) and accordingly, those holding opposing views have diminished.  Just as importantly, no other theory has emerged that accounts for the changes we are experiencing in our atmosphere.
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline William Wallace

  • Posts: 2791
    • My blog
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #95 on: August 16, 2011, 11:29:09 AM »
Just as importantly, no other theory has emerged that accounts for the changes we are experiencing in our atmosphere.
Being aware of Roy Spencer's research, and discussing it on this forum, I don't understand how you can say that. But even if he turns to be wrong, an entirely new theory isn't necessary. There's a whole lot of literature that raises questions not about the cause or existence of the warming but the amount of warming and how society will adapt to it. By the way, economists have much to say about that last issue and they're conclusions are almost entirely ignored when conclusions about climate change are drawn. 

Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #96 on: August 16, 2011, 11:39:32 AM »
Just as importantly, no other theory has emerged that accounts for the changes we are experiencing in our atmosphere.
Being aware of Roy Spencer's research, and discussing it on this forum, I don't understand how you can say that. But even if he turns to be wrong, an entirely new theory isn't necessary. There's a whole lot of literature that raises questions not about the cause or existence of the warming but the amount of warming and how society will adapt to it. By the way, economists have much to say about that last issue and they're conclusions are almost entirely ignored when conclusions about climate change are drawn.  

The increase in temperatures can't be radiatively forced.  It fails on two very basic levels:

1. We can measure insolation; it follows (in the short-term) an 11 year pattern, and does not correlate with observed temperature increases
2. Temperatures in the stratosphere are decreasing

As for economists, the way we adapt to global warming would be a secondary consideration if we could prevent it.  But I agree in principle that solutions from outside the scientific community would be welcome on how best to frame and plan long-term responses to increasing temperatures and the other considerations that brings with it.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 11:46:53 AM by GuineaPig »
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline TempusVox

  • Descendant of Primus
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 5359
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #97 on: August 16, 2011, 11:49:48 AM »
  Just as importantly, no other theory has emerged that accounts for the changes we are experiencing in our atmosphere.

No. That's wrong. What you should have said is that "no other theory has emerged that I accept". Other theories have emerged.

The FACT is the sun is by far the single most powerful driving force on our climate, and the fact is we do not understand how it affects us as much as some think we do.

Prevailing theories supporting the anthro model generally agree that the Sun had a major influence on climate change for most of the 20th century, but that it's influence paled in comparison to our own in the past 20 or 50 years; while the Sun showed a significant warming trend for over 150 years!

Temperatures increased from 1975 to 1998. From about 1990 onward the Sun has shown a downward trend in temperature (albeit it's sunspot cycle is for reasons unknown now stronger and shorter and, technically speaking, its magnetic field leakage is weaker and its cosmic ray shielding effect stronger).

However- with the exception of 2010, NOAA has stated that since 1998 global temperatures have stalled. So, temperatures increased as the Suns temperature and activity increased, and when it peaked in activity about 1990, within a few years global warming stalled. A coincidence? You betcha! A connection? Probably!

To basically plug your ears and shout down any other theory or explanation is just ridiculous! Again, anthro supporters play the numbers game citing the number of scientists supporting their theories, which is fine I guess if that helps them win an argument. But hell, prevailing wisdom once thought the world was flat too.

My OPINION is that the inherent danger I see with this whole thing is the politicizing of this issue. We've even seen many people who can't even get grant money (always follow the money first) who not necessarily disagree, but who simply question the science behind this issue. AND there are those who would like for us to simply return to the damn stone age basically when it comes to our energy policies globally, and they have a huge voice in this issue (albeit they are small in number for sure).

I'm ALL for finding alternative energy sources for cleaner air, water, environment, no dependence of foreign oil, reduced pollution, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc. But DO NOT tell me it has to be done through penalizing people, or denying people energy at all, because were blaming us for climate shifts and changes that we might not be responsible for and we certainly don't yet fully understand!

Also, I'm not as quick to shout that the sky is falling, and IF we find out it is indeed NOT, risking setting science back on it's ass for a 100 years because the "sheeple" will then choose to ignore the "scientific community" at large for other things because of lack of credibility over getting this one wrong.

Now, I won't change your mind, and you won't change mine on this issue on this message board, so attacking my points, producing someones stats that are sure to support your THEORY, and calling me a "conspiracy theorist" won't do any good really, but to say there are NOT any other theories is really rather absurd wouldn't you say?
You don't HAVE a soul.You ARE a soul.You HAVE a body.
"I came here to drink milk and kick ass; and I just finished my milk."

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #98 on: August 16, 2011, 12:15:10 PM »
So I think we have established conclusively that there is lots of credible dissent to the theory of global warming. So, with that in mind, it is important to take a step back and collect more data over the next 100 years. During that period of time, there should be no talk of destroying our freedom or our opportunity. It would be a waste to attempt to solve a problem that many do not even believe exists.

I believe that the political strategy of those who support global warming is to create fear and panic by making claims that there will be a tipping point after which the planet will basically enter an event horizon from which escape will be impossible. The hysterical nature of global warming proponents is probably what made me suspicious of them in the first place. They seem to be in such a rush to construct taxpayer supported programs where vast sums of money are moved around the globe to "responsible" people who "know what to do". Or rich countries being forced to send trillions to "developing" countries to fund their "green" development. The whole thing has a foul stench.

I do think we need to "follow the money" as was mentioned. I suspect we will discover unsavoryness.


Offline GuineaPig

  • Posts: 3754
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #99 on: August 16, 2011, 12:17:13 PM »
 Just as importantly, no other theory has emerged that accounts for the changes we are experiencing in our atmosphere.

No. That's wrong. What you should have said is that "no other theory has emerged that I accept". Other theories have emerged.


No, I'm right.  I'd suggest you look up the scientific definition of "theory," because there is no other well-accepted or well-supported hypothesis that accurately accounts for the changes in our atmosphere.

Quote
The FACT is the sun is by far the single most powerful driving force on our climate, and the fact is we do not understand how it affects us as much as some think we do.

Prevailing theories supporting the anthro model generally agree that the Sun had a major influence on climate change for most of the 20th century, but that it's influence paled in comparison to our own in the past 20 or 50 years; while the Sun showed a significant warming trend for over 150 years!

Of course the Sun is the most influential single factor in our climate.  That doesn't mean it is necessarily the source of this particular period of warming.

I don't know where you're getting these claims from.  Sunspot activity peaked in the '60s and then again in the '80s; there's no evidence to suggest continued warming is due to higher solar energy output.

Quote
Temperatures increased from 1975 to 1998. From about 1990 onward the Sun has shown a downward trend in temperature (albeit it's sunspot cycle is for reasons unknown now stronger and shorter and, technically speaking, its magnetic field leakage is weaker and its cosmic ray shielding effect stronger).

Uhh, temperatures have continued to rise after 1998.  And I still don't know where you're getting these claims about general increases or decreases in the Sun's temperature.



Quote
However- with the exception of 2010, NOAA has stated that since 1998 global temperatures have stalled. So, temperatures increased as the Suns temperature and activity increased, and when it peaked in activity about 1990, within a few years global warming stalled. A coincidence? You betcha! A connection? Probably!


What?  This isn't true at all.  2005 and 2010 were within the margin of error of 1998, and the five-year averages of temperature have continued to rise.  And the above image shows that in accordance with the 11-year cycle, solar output has been just as high since 1990 in the most recent maximum.

Quote
To basically plug your ears and shout down any other theory or explanation is just ridiculous! Again, anthro supporters play the numbers game citing the number of scientists supporting their theories, which is fine I guess if that helps them win an argument. But hell, prevailing wisdom once thought the world was flat too.


Comparing the opinion of highly trained, educated, and specialized scientists with the opinion of uneducated peasants 1000 years ago is pretty dumb.


But I'll re-post the simple 2 reasons why the increase in global temperature is not due to the Sun:


1. We can measure insolation; it follows (in the short-term) an 11 year pattern, and does not correlate with observed temperature increases
2. Temperatures in the stratosphere are decreasing
"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27196
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #100 on: August 16, 2011, 12:18:17 PM »
So I think we have established conclusively that there is lots of credible dissent to the theory of global warming.

No we haven't. You showed 4 people who denied it.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #101 on: August 16, 2011, 12:34:40 PM »
No we haven't. You showed 4 people who denied it.

Please re-read. The links of dissenters I found in about 30 seconds was well over 30,000. I could find tens of thousands more and post pages and pages of credible and informed descent. But that would not be entertaining. There is credible dissent, there is lots of it, it stretches far and wide, it is interdisciplinary, it is highly qualified, it reaches around the globe, and it will eventually increase as the inconvenient truth becomes better researched and exposed for what it is.

So let's stop and NOT send trillions of dollars to anyone for the time being.


Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 27196
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #102 on: August 16, 2011, 12:36:19 PM »
No we haven't. You showed 4 people who denied it.

Please re-read. The links of dissenters I found in about 30 seconds was well over 30,000. I could find tens of thousands more and post pages and pages of credible and informed descent. But that would not be entertaining. There is credible dissent, there is lots of it, it stretches far and wide, it is interdisciplinary, it is highly qualified, it reaches around the globe, and it will eventually increase as the inconvenient truth becomes better researched and exposed for what it is.

So let's stop and NOT send trillions of dollars to anyone for the time being.



Yes, 29,700 or so of which are just random people with no authority. Those don't count. Or else you count as a credible dissenter.
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #103 on: August 16, 2011, 12:40:08 PM »
Quote
Yes, 29,700 or so of which are just random people with no authority. Those don't count. Or else you count as a credible dissenter.

OK, so that gets us up from 4 to 304, I guess that's a concession...


Offline Major Thirteenth

  • He has his father's eyes... Gomez, take those out of his mouth.
  • Posts: 148
Re: The Official Global Warming Thread
« Reply #104 on: August 16, 2011, 12:43:52 PM »
Here are a few more:

http://www.co2science.org/