New Study Explodes Human-Global Warming Story, page 4

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 31 times

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:31 PM by Blaine91555

reply to post by EBE154

I don't think the Nobel Peace prize has any meaning

Arafat ended its credibility forever. I suspect a lot of favors pass hands before any voting is done. Gore was just so odd it brought the topic to the surface. Whether right or wrong, a Peace Prize is hardly relevant to anything Gore has done. Somehow it benefited those who made the decision I'm sure.

Honesty and integrity should be at least a small consideration in the awarding of any prestigious prize. Exaggeration for political gain and influence should never be rewarded or lauded as accomplishment. People without callouses, raised in luxury, who have never HAD to do anything only have one thing left in life to covet; Attention. In that Mr. Gore has succeeded. History will not be kind to him though, I'm afraid.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:31 PM by lonemaverick

It's 82 degrees here right now. 20 above average for this time of the year.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:35 PM by Equinox99

You want to reduce global warming? Go to the coal mines and stop them so maybe we can fund Nuclear power! It releases less fossil fuels then coal.

Maybe we can agree that funding research instead of taking action is the best way. Invest our money in Global Warming research programs so that we know if there is actual global warming.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:36 PM by DeadFlagBlues

reply to post by jimbo999

That was no threat.

But, if you'd like to keep your disrespectful tone with everybody trying to conduct a civilized conversation with you, be prepared... Factually. Especially when you're dealing with those who are slightly more intelligent than you are. All it takes is one person to dissect your every statement and dictate just how credible your past, present, and future comments are. We're all just trying to sort out the fine details of the matter, and we don't need any Magnum P.I.'s with an undeserved superiority complex thinking they're calling shots.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:41 PM by melatonin

Originally posted by Blaine91555
Gore was full of crap and any Intellectually Honest Person would admit that. So are those on the other side of the extreme. The fact is that Science does not have all the answers. They do not yet know what is going on. They gotta keep those dollars rolling so while they fight to hold down their bile while they parrot the statements that are expected of them.

...

The truth is that Science does not know at this point. Science is to be forgiven for their Intellectual Dishonesty though. Without funding no Science can take place. Without exaggeration and dishonesty there is no funding. As this battle rages all we can hope is that the truth wins out in the end.

OK, just for beachcoma I'll address this (although, I think the bigger crime is ignoring the actual research I posted earlier which shows what this palaver is really about, heh).

What are all the major scientific organisation saying? What is the UN saying? What are most climatologists saying?

something like: It is warming and we most likely are, and have been having, a significant impact on climate. We need to reduce our emissions to help stop this phenomena.

That's it. If we accept this, we can move on, we can reduce funding to this area and fund new technology etc, rather than more studies telling us what they are already finding anyway.

Your suggestion doesn't hold. If we listen to the scientists then they are essentially saying 'job done for now'. Their funding can be reduced, they have done the main job.

To keep the $$$ rolling, scientists would be saying 'we don't know, need more studies', that's not what they are saying, no? Or am I missing something?

[edit on 10-12-2007 by melatonin]

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:42 PM by Blaine91555

reply to post by Beachcoma

I think more than a few of us here are able to read the posts between the petty bickering and nonsense by those with extreme points of view. I see a debate is raging on this thread now between extremists with differing points of view. When the name calling starts the brain disengages. Although, being Human, I've often partaken of the pleasures of that game. It's in our genes. A good argument is cleansing for the soul.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:43 PM by intrepid

Alright guys, discuss the topic without the personal jabs.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:48 PM by Unit541

reply to post by melatonin

So it's the Martian dust storms that are warming Saturn, Jupiter, Neptune, Uranus, and even pluto.

Every celestial body in the solar system warming up couldn't have anything to do with that giant ball of fire in the center could it. I mean, who am I to think that a concept so immense as the entire solar system warming just might not be something that us all powerful humans are responsible for.

Is this planet warmer than it would be if there were no humans? Probably.
Would the planet be warming if there were no humans? Probably.

These are natural cycles, that have come and gone since this solar system was formed. This planet, like all of our neighbors, will warm and cool, warm and cool, warm and cool. It was happening before we were here, and it'll happen after we're gone. They call them Ice Ages because they end... with guess what... global warming.

Yes, the planet is warming up. This much is obvious. So is every other planet in our solar system. I'm just not so self absorbed to think that its because of me, or that I can do anything about it.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:55 PM by melatonin

Originally posted by Unit541
So it's the Martian dust storms that are warming Saturn, Jupiter, Neptune, Uranus, and even pluto.

No, martian dust storms affect mars...

Uranus is not warming, in fact, it is cooling. So, I can ignore the rest of the post.

Pluto does appear to be warming. It has warmed about 2'C apparently. Given it is about 30 times the distance of the earth from the sun, I don't think solar activity can account for that.

Just think about it a bit...

Sun ----> earth

Sun ------------------------------------------------------------------>pluto (2'C)

We also know that solar activity has been pretty constant for a few decades, it can't even account for warming here, never mind mars.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:56 PM by TrentReznor

jimbo999

the argument your making about proof in 800,000 year old ice samples depicting CO2 lvls Only proves that Co2 levels are at there highest in 800,000 years..........and quite rightly so , they must be with us churning it out everyday.

but thats not the argument here, the argument is "Does Co2 lvl's Effect global warming on the scale that is put forward to us by our governments.

them Ice Samples show nothing about global warming whatsoever.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 02:59 PM by Blaine91555

Originally posted by melatonin
Or am I missing something?

[edit on 10-12-2007 by melatonin]

Yes you are. The entire spirit of my post. All I actually said, in an overly verbose post, is that to accomplish anything we need to work together and stop arguing. That pretty well sums up my statement.

Of course Science is influenced by money. I'm not attacking Science. In fact, I defended their need to play along to get funding.

I think both sides have valid points. I also think Scientists are normal Humans prone to Political points of view, biases and a need for money to support themselves and their families.

Factor in that the Left and Right have taken their normal extreme points of view in this topic and you can be sure the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Lets hope calm rational minds prevail in this important topic.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 03:03 PM by melatonin

Hi trent,

Look into the PETM event. Over a period of a few thousand years, thousands of tonnes of carbon (about 5000GtC, IIRC) was released into the atmosphere.

It led to massive increases in temperatures that lasted for tens of thousands of years. This led to a large extinction event.

We are releasing carbon faster than during that period, and we have lots more left to burn.

Is that enough?

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 03:07 PM by mrmanuva

Wow, a group of scientists happy to get themselves some column inches and cash money, by going against popular consensus. I never thought id see the day (sarcasm).

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 03:10 PM by jimbo999

Originally posted by Unit541

Originally posted by jimbo999

The truth??? Puleeeze! This is just more Bu#e, pro-oil propaganda - plain & simple.

J.

I suppose it's my SUV that's melting the ice caps on Mars too.

No! That's those damn Martians and THEIR SUV's!

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 03:13 PM by Unit541

reply to post by melatonin

Alright, I'll bow out of this now, as debating this with you is obviously an exercise in futility. Did you really say that Pluto is too far from the sun to be affected by solar activity? Scientists have observed the suns direct affects on Pluto many many times. As it nears, the atmospheric pressure increases exponentially, then condenses and falls to the surface as it cools. What do ya know! Pluto's temperature seems to be affected by the sun! Far out. Even more impressive is the fact that Pluto continues to warm, even as it's distance from the sun increases. Must be that blast furnace in the kuiper belt.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 03:13 PM by Beachcoma

Originally posted by melatonin
Just think about it a bit...

Sun ----> earth

Sun ------------------------------------------------------------------>pluto (2'C)

That's simplifying it. The real scale model would have put Pluto in your neighbour's living room

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 03:17 PM by jimbo999

reply to post by DeadFlagBlues

Trust me - I really don't consider that a threat.

Slightly more intelligent? How amusing. Ever heard of Mensa? Oh, nevermind...

Fine, you stay out of my way - I'll stay out of yours...I can't be any fairer than that.

J.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 03:18 PM by melatonin

Originally posted by Blaine91555
Of course Science is influenced by money. I'm not attacking Science. In fact, I defended their need to play along to get funding.

I think both sides have valid points. I also think Scientists are normal Humans prone to Political points of view, biases and a need for money to support themselves and their families.

But what you said doesn't make sense. If scientists were solely motivated by keeping the funding flowing, they would say 'we don't know, need more studies'

That's not what they are saying. They have made a conclusion from the evidence, and it just gets stronger every year.

I also doubt that most scientists are motivated by personal gain money-wise. Plumbers can make more than the average scientist...

I also refuse to accept that most scientists are dishonest in an attempt to keep money flowing. That is BS. I'm sorry, it is.

The one thing that any scientist needs is their integrity. Some do over-egg their findings, that can be found, especially in the media. But that's not dishonest. Just a scientist convinced a bit too much that their studies are important.

reply posted on 10-12-2007 @ 03:21 PM by jimbo999

Originally posted by TrentReznor

jimbo999

the argument your making about proof in 800,000 year old ice samples depicting CO2 lvls Only proves that Co2 levels are at there highest in 800,000 years..........and quite rightly so , they must be with us churning it out everyday.

but thats not the argument here, the argument is "Does Co2 lvl's Effect global warming on the scale that is put forward to us by our governments.

them Ice Samples show nothing about global warming whatsoever.

Well, according to most credible scientific research - CO2 is what's causing global warming - hence the importance of what the ice cores contain.

J.