It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Church of AGW: Book of Revelations

page: 3
25
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by ManFromEurope
Wolfgang Thüne is not a person to be trusted. He made his doctor in a phd-mill, published in an extreme-right-wing publishing house and a notorious climate-change-denier.

Trust on him. Go on.

But don't expect me to trust him or the results in your text based on his opinions.


Ad hominem attacks are not a part of scientific method. Attacking some meteorologist instead of his argument is not science.



His findings are irrelevant. He was often enough attacked and couldn't defend his ideas. I will not even use a search-engine to prove that. There is Ad Hominem in there as Thüne is not a relevant source.
edit on 2-8-2012 by ManFromEurope because: so tired of this bullsh*tty arguments. you us-american ignorants are way beyond logical thought. go on and pollute more, you won't listen until you are all in a dying environment.




posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by senselessness

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by senselessness
 


AGW is not a "proven fact" it is being bandied about as such by the proponents of AGW who are conflating the very real fact of climate change with anthropogenic cause. No one has proven that humanity is causing this warming trend. It is this kind of false assertion that damages the AGW position. If the AGW crowd cannot be honest about this then they are no different than any Christian claiming that the end times are fact because it is in the bible.


Actually AGW is a proven fact... Scientific fact at that... You can't disprove the greenhouse effect.

You and many other deniers all make the same mistake... You don't realize that you don't have to see it happen to prove it will or is happening.

Just because they have yet to prove 100% that the CURRENT warming trend is caused by man (because it takes science many years to prove anything), it doesn't disprove the FACT that increasing greenhouse gases, like we currently are, WILL cause a warming trend like we are experiencing now.

One of the issues with deniers is they think temperature data, and current trends, can disprove the science behind the greenhouse effect. That is absurd.



Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
Oh my, look at that! Yet another uncertainty. It is unseemly to so boldly and parenthetically so declare you have determined these (FACTS) through all of this uncertainty.


Actually, your quote from wiki is highly misleading, and is not a real uncertainty. The effect of CO2 on the atmosphere can, and has, easily been modeled via computer, and reproduced in real experiments. You and I can even reproduce the experiments in our own backyards. It's already a proven fact that CO2 is a very effective greenhouse gas.

Increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will increase the greenhouse effect. The planet Venus which has an atmosphere made of 96.5% CO2 will easily confirm this...


Actually, the data on Earth is stronger than that. No inferences needed.

The increase in infrared emissions from the stratosphere because of increased greenhouse effect has been measured by satellites. It is physically impossible for the climate not to change.

Of course to all the scientists who do this for real, this is nothing surprising.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 04:55 AM
link   
Senseless and manfromeurope who clearly don't understand the meaning of "ad hominem" should be happy to learn that CO2 isn't to blame for the recent weather. Mother nature is.


Jim Inhofe is a senator or something. This was a senate hearing.



Dr. John Christy, Alabama’s State Climatologist, Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville testified before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works hearing on global warming and stated:




“During the heat wave of late June and early July, high temperature extremes became newsworthy. Claims that there were thousands of records broken each day and that “this is what global warming looks like” got a lot of attention.
However, these headlines were not based on climate science. As shown in Figure 1.3 of my testimony it is scientifically more accurate to say that this is what Mother Nature looks like, since events even worse than these have happened in the past before greenhouse gases were increasing like they are today.
Now, it gives some people great comfort to offer a quick and easy answer when the weather strays from the average rather than to struggle with the real truth, which is, we don’t know enough about the climate to even predict events like this.
A climatologist looking at this heat wave would not be alarmed because the number of daily high temperature records set in the most recent decade was only about half the number set in the 1930s as shown in my written testimony. I suppose most people have forgotten that Oklahoma set a new record low temperature just last year of 31 below. And in the past two years, towns from Alaska to my home state of California established records for snowfall. The recent anomalous weather can’t be blamed on carbon dioxide.


Either we debate this intelligently or reduce ourselves to ad hominem spouting marionettes. The phrase "denier" is a crafted insult, with which many "global idiots" begin their statements. (not just idiots, but idiots who think they should be in charge of the globe, ie the rest of us)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 05:06 AM
link   
I don't believe that global warming is a lie, I think over the last 250 years we have no doubt polluted our environment
and more than likely the effects of mechanised society has done a great deal of damage.
What amazes me is that those who could make the biggest difference choose not to as they put their bottom line ahead of everything else.
There's is no doubt that the world is heating up, in Australia we are experiencing a very mild winter, I am certain the temp is a few degrees higher than in the 1970's when I was growing up.
The technology exists to do away with the combustion engine, but there is no way known the oil companies will support this.
No doubt the governments of the world are pressured via kickbacks from the fuel companies to not push the issue too far. Now in Australia we have a carbon tax, so the Government can collect from both sides. We know the big polluters wont pay much tax. So its Win/Win for the Government. Ka - Ching



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 05:18 AM
link   
What about the effect of all that co2 has on the oceans, making them more acid? also nonsense?

Oceans Acidifying fastest in 300 million years due te emessions

So when things do get really wrong, then only we are willing to change, but often it's too late then.

Now we just stuck in personal beliefs and with different governments. Like for example if 1 government says; we don't fish a certain fish since it's endangered, another country will just catch more of them.
The same with dealing co2, and the ever growing human population, and so on making it pretty impossible to change for the better really.



edit on 2-8-2012 by Plugin because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Plugin
What about the effect of all that co2 has on the oceans, making them more acid? also nonsense?


From your link:



The Earth’s oceans may be acidifying faster than ..


Maybe? Don't they know? Can they be sure? Of course not. The entire argument is based on "models" ... and frankly science cannot model that well yet, far from it, we don't even have accurate records. The ocean is a massive heat and carbon sink for the planet. Comparisons to Venus are hopelessly invalid.

Science 1
Media hype 0



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 06:04 AM
link   
Just read the last part:

“Although similarities exist, no past event perfectly parallels future projections in terms of disrupting the balance of ocean carbonate chemistry -- a consequence of the unprecedented rapidity of CO2 release currently taking place,” the researchers wrote.

We do know that co2 makes the oceans more acid and so many species will die as a consequense. We already seeing that, no? And co2 is linked before in the long past to mass extinctions, which normally happens I guess but just very rarely and slowly.
We doing it in a very short time!



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Well, we need to stop with the fossil fuels and start planting tree's in mass.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by harryhaller
Senseless and manfromeurope who clearly don't understand the meaning of "ad hominem" should be happy to learn that CO2 isn't to blame for the recent weather. Mother nature is.



Increasing greenhouse gases are the cause for the recent weather! "Mother nature" is not a thing, nor a being, it is an abstract noun for collection of processes, and humans are effecting those processes! The lot of you deniers always seem to imply that "mother nature" is some supernatural entity that can save us all, and "knows" what to do, when it is not!

The fact remains that increasing greenhouse gases will increase the greenhouse effect, and increase warming. You can NOT deny that ever...



Originally posted by harryhaller



Dr. John Christy, Alabama’s State Climatologist, Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville testified before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works hearing on global warming and stated:




Wow, the ignorance from Dr. John Christy is dumbfounding! The nonsense he speaks is exactly the problem that perpetuates the denial.

To sum up Dr. John Christy's main point; "extreme weather happened in the past without the CO2 increase, therefore the extreme weather happening now is not related to the current CO2 increase". That couldn't be more deluded and illogical because there are several factors that cause extreme weather changes, not just one. In the past it could have been a totally different factor which caused the extreme weather, yet today it could very well be the greenhouse gas increase that is causing it.

Let me simplify Dr. John Christy's illogical point using an analogy... Imagine a child's body temperature was above normal (has a fever). The child is taken to a doctor, and the doctor finds out the child caught the flu virus, and so he treats him, and days later he was well. A year later the same child's temperature rises again (another fever), and is taken to a doctor again. If Dr. John Christy was a medical doctor he might say something illogical like "well he had a fever in the past which was caused by the flu, so his fever now can't possibly be caused by anything else". That would be just pure lunacy. What if the fever isn't caused by a flu virus but instead by a bacteria or fungal infection? What if the fever is caused by another more serious factor? Then the child would die because of Dr. John Christy's ignorance. The point being, you can't always prove or disprove what is causing the symptom just by looking at the symptom. The Earth's symptom is extreme weather and climate changes... It can be caused by many different factors, and the increase of greenhouse gases is a proven factor, and is happening right now.

Since the many factors that control the weather are all dynamic and unpredictable, it is not feasible to use past climate and weather data to confirm or deny the existence of Global Warming! That is like using symptoms of illness from a baby in the past to confirm or deny causes of symptoms in the present.


Global Warming can already be proven to exist using other methods, for example Satellite measurements of infrared spectra over the past 40 years observe less energy escaping to space at the wavelengths associated with CO2! source

By the way... Extreme heat, and extreme cold are symptoms of Global Warming. So when people say, "global warming doesn't exist because we just had a record cold temperature where I live" ( Like Dr. Christy implied ), they can be ignored because they obviously don't understand the basics of atmospheric science. It's quite simple really.... Increased heat causes the air pressure to rise. High pressure areas are responsible for extreme hot and cold temperatures.

So from here on out, anyone trying to use past climate and weather data to disprove Global Warming can be ignored. Those points are not exactly valid.



Originally posted by harryhaller
Either we debate this intelligently or reduce ourselves to ad hominem spouting marionettes. The phrase "denier" is a crafted insult, with which many "global idiots" begin their statements. (not just idiots, but idiots who think they should be in charge of the globe, ie the rest of us)


Actually, calling someone a "denier" in the context of believing or denying a certain fact is not an insult, nor an ad hominem. It's simply a noun to refer to opponent or proponents. If you don't like it, then stop denying....

However, calling someone an idiot is an insult, so I will report your post.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 08:54 AM
link   
reply to post by harryhaller
 


You do know the difference between "weather" and "climate", right? A climate change depends on the overall input and output of matter and energy into the athmosphere combined with larger processes like CO2-storing in oceans etc.
Weather is rain or sunshine. For shorter periods of time, not the long distance run. Weather happens because of minor influences. Climate happens by large influences, and happens on a much larger scale time- and locationwise.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by harryhaller


The Earth’s oceans may be acidifying faster than ..


Maybe? Don't they know? Can they be sure? Of course not. The entire argument is based on "models" ... and frankly science cannot model that well yet, far from it, we don't even have accurate records. The ocean is a massive heat and carbon sink for the planet. Comparisons to Venus are hopelessly invalid.

Science 1
Media hype 0


Wow you couldn't be further from the truth!!

Did you just say "science 1", "media hype 0"? Global Warming was discovered by SCIENCE, and is supported by SCIENCE!

The nonsense and ignorance you just regurgitated was purely hype, and not even close to being scientifically accurate. You even base your intro on semantics because someone used the word "maybe" when highlighting their own uncertainty when the uncertainty is actually non-existent with others.


Anthropogenic carbon dioxide absorption into the ocean IS making the water more acidic, and we don't need models to prove it. The amount of carbon in the ocean is rising with the atmospheric carbon increase...

Ocean Acidification.



As the amount of carbon has risen in the atmosphere there has been a corresponding rise of carbon going into the ocean. Between 1751 and 1994 surface ocean pH is estimated to have decreased from approximately 8.25 to 8.14, representing an increase of almost 30% in "acidity" (H+ ion concentration) in the world's oceans.


SOURCES

^ Jacobson, M.Z. (2005). "Studying ocean acidification with conservative, stable numerical schemes for nonequilibrium air-ocean exchange and ocean equilibrium chemistry". Journal of Geophysical Research – Atmospheres 110: D07302. Bibcode 2005JGRD..11007302J. doi:10.1029/2004JD005220.

^ a b Hall-Spencer JM, Rodolfo-Metalpa R, Martin S, et al. (July 2008). "Volcanic carbon dioxide vents show ecosystem effects of ocean acidification". Nature 454 (7200): 96–9. Bibcode 2008Natur.454...96H. doi:10.1038/nature07051. PMID 18536730.

^ a b "Ocean acidification and the Southern Ocean" by the Australian Antarctic Division of the Australian Government

^ a b Report of the Ocean Acidification and Oxygen Working Group, International Council for Science's Scientific Committee on Ocean Research (SCOR) Biological Observatories Workshop


Originally posted by harryhaller
The ocean is a massive heat and carbon sink for the planet.


...and like all sinks, the ocean has a limit! That limit has already been exceeded! That is why CO2 levels are RISING! If the limit wasn't exceeded then CO2 levels wouldn't be rising, they would be steady.

The RISE of CO2 levels proves we can't simply say "the ocean is a massive heat and carbon sink so we don't have to worry, har har har"!, because the ocean is already at its peak.

Plus, we have to worry about the Carbon Cycle Feedback.


As ocean temperatures rise the oceans will absorb less CO2 resulting in more warming.


When the temperature rises, the ocean absorbs less CO2, and that causes more warming, which causes the ocean to absorb even less CO2, and causes more warming... rinse and repeat... in a loop. This is part of the causes of a "runaway greenhouse effect".


Originally posted by harryhaller
Comparisons to Venus are hopelessly invalid.


Actually, comparisons to Venus are NOT hopelessly invalid, and your saying that just proves your lack of knowledge in this subject, and in science.

It was proven that Venus used to have oceans. It is believed that Venus had a "runaway greenhouse effect" happen to it, which boiled away its oceans!

Runaway greenhouse effect



A runaway greenhouse effect is a process in which a net positive feedback between surface temperature and atmospheric opacity increases the strength of the greenhouse effect on a planet until its oceans boil away. An example of this is believed to have happened in the early history of Venus.


Science for the win... Oh wait, harryhaller claimed to be on the side of science...

edit on 2-8-2012 by senselessness because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by senselessness
Increasing greenhouse gases are the cause for the recent weather!


Prove it.


"Mother nature" is not a thing, nor a being, it is an abstract noun for collection of processes, and humans are effecting those processes!






The fact remains that increasing greenhouse gases will increase the greenhouse effect, and increase warming. You can NOT deny that ever...


I'll deny anything i want thanks, especially your declarations of ignorance. I prefer to affirm though.



Since the many factors that control the weather are all dynamic and unpredictable, it is not feasible to use past climate and weather data to confirm or deny the existence of Global Warming!


We can't even measure temperature accurately. Never mind models "based on" faulty observations. They're worthless. Ask Mann, but he'll deny it.



By the way... Extreme heat, and extreme cold are symptoms of Global Warming.


And up is down and left is right? You missed a memo, it's called global climate variability now.



Actually, calling someone a "denier" in the context of believing or denying a certain fact is not an insult, nor an ad hominem. It's simply a noun to refer to opponent or proponents. If you don't like it, then stop denying....


It's a label, that's all. A preconditioned label that doesn't necessarily have any relation to what is being labelled at the time, only the labler's limited perception of it.



However, calling someone an idiot is an insult, so I will report your post.


Did you take personal offense at that? I never said you were, does the shoe fit?



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by harryhaller
Prove it.


Increased greenhouse gases increases atmospheric temperature which increases air pressure which causes extreme high temperatures in some areas and extreme low temperatures in other areas. The changes in air pressure caused by this increased temperature causes stronger winds and more storms.

All this is already proven, and is a fact. All of it can be explained and proven with simple thermal dynamics, and fluid dynamics, and simple physics. Get with the program.



Originally posted by harryhaller
We can't even measure temperature accurately. Never mind models "based on" faulty observations. They're worthless. Ask Mann, but he'll deny it.


Do you even know how to read? I just said using climate and weather data from the past can not be used to confirm nor deny Global Warming... We must use other methods such as measuring IR emission from the Earth via Satellites (which we have done and already proves Global Warming is happening).



Originally posted by harryhaller


By the way... Extreme heat, and extreme cold are symptoms of Global Warming.


And up is down and left is right? You missed a memo, it's called global climate variability now.


...and the above, folks, is the definition of an ignorant rant.

Global Warming will increase air pressure all around the world. High air pressure causes lower lows, and higher highs in regards to temperature. Duh...

Global Climate Variablility is effected by humans... do some research why don't you.




Originally posted by harryhaller
Did you take personal offense at that? I never said you were, does the shoe fit?


Yes I took offense to it. I used the word "denier" and you called anyone who uses that an idiot. So I reported you for being a troll.

By the way... I've debated with your type before. I will post a well thought out post, and you will just do one line ignorant responses and never say anything of any value. So I will ignore you from here on out.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by senselessness
reply to post by conspiracy88
 


Actually, I am involved in several scientific experiments and the production of several inventions that can revolutionize the world, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions all around the world. What are you doing?

Also, how do you know I don't run my computer off of solar panels? How do you know I don't own an electric car/motorcycle charged by my solar panels? How do you know I don't just ride a bike to and from the store? How do you know I don't produce my own power with an exercise bike attached to a generator that charges batteries? You don't know... You really don't know crap.

Our greenhouse gas emissions are a huge problem, and anyone denying it is simply deluded.


Everything you have, was made using fossil fuels. If you were really serious about reducing your carbon footprint, you would go and live in a cave, or in a tree or something.




posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by senselessness
All this is already proven, and is a fact. All of it can be explained and proven with simple thermal dynamics, and fluid dynamics, and simple physics. Get with the program.


No it isn't.

Did you read the OP before deciding to argue it?

The science is not settled. Politically yes, not scientifically.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
You must be one of these "Professional Bloggers" and if not, you are the longest winded "Closet Genius" I have encountered on ATS or anywhere else for that matter. Unfortunately, Global Warming is a Globalist Scheme that will not fly when the earth's climate history clearly shows that a combination of the SUN, the earth's electromagnetic field (which is quickly weakening in preparing for a flip) are the rel dictators of earth's climate. Add to this that earth is quickly approaching a Once In A Lifetime Solar Storm that involves a list of other factors humanity can do nothing about: www.thegic.org... I expect death and destruction is just around the corner and we will see who is going to inherit the earth with or without Al Gore. Strange but from my perspective something like this would be the only way to rid the earth of all the crud.


By the way,the Sun is electric:




edit on 2-8-2012 by MajorKarma because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-8-2012 by MajorKarma because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by senselessness
 


That's rather funny when you add in the lack of heat in the fluorescent bulbs. In place where it freezes things like traffic lights get covered by snow and ice. Without the heat generated by the bulbs you end up wasting time, money and energy to clean them off. As for the disposal of the fluorescent bulbs you do realize that most people [including some so called environmentalists] do just throw them in the trash. Plus we are not even getting into the mess it makes if a bulb breaks like when you go to change it. Big difference between in the atmosphere and a room. Parts per million mean anything to you?
Man made global warming is not a settled issue since first off science is never truly "settled". New data or reviewing old data does often change the issue. Second even now we are not locked onto it being "settled". A consensus is not the same as fact. It is just a agreement on something by a group of people. I myself still doubt it because of the warming of the rest of the planets. More then just human factors are affecting the planet and I think the masses like hearing they are making a difference even if they are really not. And we all know how are leaders like to play on that.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Plugin
What about the effect of all that co2 has on the oceans, making them more acid? also nonsense?


It's also a "natural cycle". Probably from mermaid piss or something.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by senselessness
 





Actually AGW is a proven fact... Scientific fact at that... You can't disprove the greenhouse effect.


Your ellipses only reveal your ignorance. Here are the actual scientific facts about The Greenhouse Effect:


The greenhouse effect is a process by which thermal radiation from a planetary surface is absorbed by atmospheric greenhouse gases, and is re-radiated in all directions. Since part of this re-radiation is back towards the surface and the lower atmosphere, it results in an elevation of the average surface temperature above what it would be in the absence of the gases


The greenhouse effect is a process that can be found on Venus. Your sad attempt to link the greenhouse effect as a human induced phenomenon only shows how very little you know about climate and the greenhouse effect. Perhaps you meant to say "enhanced greenhouse effect":


Strengthening of the greenhouse effect through human activities is known as the enhanced (or anthropogenic) greenhouse effect.[18] This increase in radiative forcing from human activity is attributable mainly to increased atmospheric carbon dioxide levels.[19] According to the latest Assessment Report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations


However, please take note, even the IPCC avoids using the absurdity of "scientific fact" when making this link. Did they teach you in school that "very likely" means "fact?"

I am not going to respond to the rest of your post until you've clarified what you meant by your initial assertion. In science, it is not a good idea that I assume on your behalf that you meant to type "enhanced greenhouse effect" and that what you meant by "scientific fact" is "very likely". Reification is a logical fallacy and claiming something is a scientific fact doesn't make it so.


edit on 2-8-2012 by Jean Paul Zodeaux because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ManFromEurope
 





His findings are irrelevant. He was often enough attacked and couldn't defend his ideas. I will not even use a search-engine to prove that. There is Ad Hominem in there as Thüne is not a relevant source.


Naturally. It is always the same with the religious zealots. They rely upon nothing but logical fallacies and will always claim that they could prove their assertions, they just cannot be bothered to do so and they say this as if this is somehow impressive, and ironically say this as if can't be bothered to prove an assertion somehow makes them appear to be scientifically informed.

Sigh.




top topics



 
25
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join