Oh About Those 32,000 "Leading Scientists" Against Global Climate Change.

Originally posted by Kaytagg
It's winter, people.

Haven't you ever heard of the seasons?

Have you ever heard of records being broken all over the world?

You are obviously familiar with the other type of broken record, endlessly repeating.

Here is a clue for the deniers.

There is weather.

and

there is climate.


They are both completely different things.



[edit on 11-1-2010 by AllexxisF1]

Originally posted by Kaytagg
reply to post by bigyin

 

Are your opinions grounded in good science, or is this a faith-based initiative?

What does it matter where my opinions come from. They are mine and thats that.

btw What do you class as good science ?

Climate change is just a synonym for climate.

Show me a static climate.

Heaven and hell? Only two I know of.

It's the new black.

In other words it's nothing. A new god for believers.

They have been fooling your type for millennia.

Originally posted by AllexxisF1
Here is a clue for the deniers.

There is weather.

and

there is climate.

They are both completely different things.
[edit on 11-1-2010 by AllexxisF1]

BS! Climate is weather over the span of many years based on statistical data.

And neither can be predicted.

No one is "DENYING" climate change. In fact we recognize the fact that the earth "NATURALLY" goes through periods of heat and cold. There is no denial of that.

We are "SKEPTICAL" over the brou-haha that is MMGW.

To sit there and say with 100% certainty that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, man is behind the raising of the temperature of the planet based on our research and computer models? Well that's complete and utter BS!
You can't predict the weather. And now scientists want to tell us that without any doubt they can predict the weather on a global scale? You insult my intelligence.

Originally posted by grey580
BS! Climate is weather over the span of many years based on statistical data.

And neither can be predicted.

It can. I predict that the 11th August will very likely be something like 15-20'C where I am, give or take - certainly a dozen or more 'C warmer than today! There are statistical regularities which underpin climate, the same regularities which allow us to time all kinds of relevant phenomena (planting etc).

No one is "DENYING" climate change. In fact we recognize the fact that the earth "NATURALLY" goes through periods of heat and cold. There is no denial of that.

We are "SKEPTICAL" over the brou-haha that is MMGW.

Aye, nits to pick.

To sit there and say with 100% certainty that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, man is behind the raising of the temperature of the planet based on our research and computer models? Well that's complete and utter BS!

It is. That's why it's a strawman. Lets say 95% certainty. Perhaps 99%.

You can't predict the weather. And now scientists want to tell us that without any doubt they can predict the weather on a global scale? You insult my intelligence.

You keep conflating weather and climate, and also building strawmen. Climate projections aren't trying to tell us whether it will rain on the first wednesday in july 2100, but, say, how warm the earth could well be on average in the 2100s if x, y, and z.

Different kettle of fish.

reply to post by grey580


MMGW at it's most fundamental root has nothing to do with trying to "predict the weather".

It has to do with simple arithmetic.

We KNOW with 100% certainty greenhouse gases trap heat.

We KNOW with 100% we are putting them into our atmosphere and they are accumulating thanks to us.

And we KNOW with 100% certainty that 1 + 1 = 2.

That's the big scary complicated "science" for you in a nutshell.

Global Warming deniers are always trying to seed irrelevant doubt into this simple logic by pointing out 7134436/3567218 = 2 as if that somehow proves that 1 + 1 does not.

The question of HOW MUCH do human caused GHG's influence global climate is where the story gets more complicated. But if you're going to make a counter-argument you need to not only come up with a separate explanation that accounts for the observed warming - you also need to apparently re-write the laws of electro and thermodynamics to explain how GHG's do not.

To simply dismiss the whole issue because "climate is always changing" and "you can't predict the weather" is incredibly naive, lazy and irresponsible.

Now go actually watch the video in the OP to see how the whole denial movement is the one that is "cult-like", how much IT is based on complete and utter BS, and how much YOU are the one being brainwashed by it.

reply to post by mc_squared


Is it just humans that add to GHG's

Originally posted by mc_squared
reply to post by grey580

 

But if you're going to make a counter-argument you need to not only come up with a separate explanation that accounts for the observed warming

Oh I liked this bit... the thing is if the deniers had the budgets available to them that the greedy governments have to pay scientists to make up stats to fit their tax raising plans, then I'm sure they would prove their case.

Originally posted by bigyin
Oh I liked this bit... the thing is if the deniers had the budgets available to them that the greedy governments have to pay scientists to make up stats to fit their tax raising plans, then I'm sure they would prove their case.

They do: it's called the backing of the fossil fuel industry, not to mention all the other corporate right wing "think tanks" whose backer's profits are threatened by people actually caring about the planet they live on.

And no humans are not the only cause of GHG's - there are many natural processes that also produce them. But funny thing about those natural processes is that nature itself has this amazing thing called "balance" that tends to cancel them out - for example the way all the CO2 that's exhaled by every breathing organism on this planet is basically perfectly matched by plant photosynthesis.

But humans have evolved to a point where they posess the ability to transcend this balance and are now completely f---ing with it. Nature can't keep up which is why GHG's are accumulating in the atmosphere. Global Warming doesn't even have that much to do with the warming itself as it does with the rate of warming. This is why the problem is so potentially scary and why it's so urgent.

Please take some time to actually educate yourself about the issues instead of immediately writing it all off as a scam just because there's money involved.

Cap & Trade is an unfortunate side effect of anti-global warming measures that even most environmentalists have a problem with. But it's the way the cookie crumbles. Dangling the carrot of economic opportunity in this greedy world is the only way to get people off their lazy asses to actually do something about the problems we face.

reply to post by mc_squared



I don't need educating. I have listened to experts telling me sea levels will rise for the past 40 years.

They havn't risen at all, so thats a lie.

The same lie Gordon Brown repeated in Copenhagen when he said many countries would disappear because of rising sea levels. Which countries are those and when is this to take place ?

Thing is some expert scientists tell me the UK will become mediteranean in climate while others tell me it will return to an ice age..... which is it please ?

Another expert on ats said recently the gulf stream would shift south because of melting ice making the atlantic less salty. However if the gulf stream did move south then presumable we would get colder and the ice would return, thus making the atlantic more salty and the gulf stream would move north again.... all a crock of sh1t

reply to post by AllexxisF1


Oh please be quiet lol
Does anyone really care how much of a play on words you can make out of "Manmade Global Warming"?? No. Why do people waste their time with these stupid threads about ten times a day? And why am I even bothering to reply!

Im a supposed "Denier" (Kinda fits in with the whole stigma surround the holocaust denier doesn't it.. being demonized for not trusting the story completely) but I obviously know about Climate change & our impact on nature but the point I push is that 90% of the crap surrounding "Manmade Global Warming" is blown out of proportion to serve political, corporate and globalized agenda needs.

You're the blind one for not being able to see this & the one playing the political game.

Thanks for playing

Originally posted by bigyin
What does it matter where my opinions come from. They are mine and thats that.

btw What do you class as good science ?

This is going to be a little off topic but this comment on opinion is interesting. I think a lot of people seem to have this 'opinion' that they have a right to their 'opinion' on a subject regardless of whether that 'opinion' is based on anything factual. Opinions are usually based on emotional responses not facts.

Opinion are fine, but if they're not based on anything factual then your opinion is worthless, however much you're attached to it.

So yes it very much matter where you're opinion comes from.

As far as good science, well it's not based on opinions for a start. None of you have the facts, if you did then you wouldn't have an 'opinion' and you wouldn't be arguing this.

BTW we have known since the industrial revolution that our industrial activities effect our climate. Where do you think smog comes from, and do you really think it would not have a larger effect over more time? Average temps have risen by a half degree every year since the IR. I think the 'man's not responsible crowd' is just in denial, it's the typical 'it's not my fault' thinking. To ignore and deny our effect on the climate is stupid.

Just because some might be taking this event and using it to their own advantage does not mean it's not really happening. Yes what they are doing maybe a scam, but don't be stupid to dismiss the science because some people are taking advantage for their own agenda.

Al Gore did not invent global warming, his just saw a way to take advantage of it. Very rarely are things completely made up, they are just used by people for their own gains, much like most of us do in daily life to get on.

Global warming also doesn't mean we will have high temps all the time, global warming causes extreme weather, cold and hot. This 'it can't be true cause it's a scam and it's cold' shows you really don't understand, and you're just seeing it in black and white. I don't think we're completely to blame but to deny our effect is stupid, we have to have control over what we put into our air, if we completely deny this has an effect then we'll have no laws preventing polluting our environment.

reply to post by melatonin


No I'm sorry. we aren't talking about predictions with the mmgw camp.
They are telling us that mmgw is real. they are saying that it's man that's causing this. And that we need to stop what we are doing other wise we are going to destroy the planet.

Now, if you are making predictions then you're no much better than the weatherman that's forecasting partly cloudy skies with a 20% chance of rain.

You are relying on statistical data from the past to predict the future. You can't do that with weather. Weather is unpredictable.

By your line of reasoning since we have so much data on hurricanes then we should be able to predict their path. But the truth of the matter is that we can't. Even with computer models.

And yes I understand that local weather and climate are not the same thing. But it's still weather on a global scale over time. And like I said I am highly skeptical when people come out and say that they can predict the weather with certainty.

Originally posted by Dermo
being demonized for not trusting the story completely) but I obviously know about Climate change & our impact on nature but the point I push is that 90% of the crap surrounding "Manmade Global Warming" is blown out of proportion to serve political, corporate and globalized agenda needs.

So you admit 10% of it is true? Yet you deny it 100%?

You're right though, but doesn't that 10% mean we should be ignoring the scam, but looking at the real man made effects, that 10%?

Gotta wade through the BS to get to the truth, not take a black and white approach and ignore everything and take the opposite view just to have an opinion.

Have you ever thought that the real scam might be to convince you that man made warming is a scam? Capitalists would love that. Make it appear we are concerned about what we are doing while creating an atmosphere of distrust in what we're saying, so people are pushed to take the opposite view. They win that way don't they? If people are convinced that whatever we do has no effect on our planet then no one will question them dumping their toxic waste into our air, and oceans in order to produce more crap we don't need?

[edit on 1/11/2010 by ANOK]

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by melatonin

 

No I'm sorry. we aren't talking about predictions with the mmgw camp.

They are telling us that mmgw is real. they are saying that it's man that's causing this. And that we need to stop what we are doing other wise we are going to destroy the planet.

They do both actually. Science is based on theory-driven prediction, and the science is telling us very strongly that humans are influencing climate.

Now, if you are making predictions then you're no much better than the weatherman that's forecasting partly cloudy skies with a 20% chance of rain.

You are relying on statistical data from the past to predict the future. You can't do that with weather. Weather is unpredictable.

But climate science isn't predicting specific weather events. It's predicting/projecting climate trends.

By your line of reasoning since we have so much data on hurricanes then we should be able to predict their path. But the truth of the matter is that we can't. Even with computer models.

Hurricanes aren't really like climate. But I will bet you that more hurricanes will lie in hurricane season (jun to nov) than in the rest of year (dec to may) for the next 5 years. Wanna bet?

And yes I understand that local weather and climate are not the same thing. But it's still weather on a global scale over time. And like I said I am highly skeptical when people come out and say that they can predict the weather with certainty.

There's that strawman again!

Weather is what you get. Climate is what you expect long-term. One is based on short-term outcomes, the other is based on long-term behaviour.

I would have great certainty that in the next five years we'll get more snow in the UK in winter than in summer. Wanna bet on that?

[edit on 11-1-2010 by melatonin]

Now all we have to do is wait for the government to CREATE a global weather catastraphy to blame on MMGW. Like maybe bombing a fault line.... usuing harp to steer hurricanes...... or just purposefully shuttting off water to people.

There are so many things that can be done to lead the masses in a delusion.

How much co2 is created when a comet enters the atmosphere?

How much co2 is created by a volcanic eruption?

How long does it take for an enviromental factor such as co2 to affect plant growth?

Everything we do PALES in comparison to the HORRIBLE enviromental situations the planet was in before..... and will be in the future. Soon planet life will be GOBBLING up the extra co2 and we will all have incresed food production.

That is.... unless the TPTB decide to kill a few million people to afford an extra man sevant for house work.

reply to post by mc_squared

MMGW at it's most fundamental root has nothing to do with trying to "predict the weather".

It has to do with simple arithmetic.

We KNOW with 100% certainty greenhouse gases trap heat.

We KNOW with 100% we are putting them into our atmosphere and they are accumulating thanks to us.

And we KNOW with 100% certainty that 1 + 1 = 2.

That's the big scary complicated "science" for you in a nutshell.

I get this. And this is not in dispute. And I'm in agreement that we all need to put less waste into the environment so that we can help preserve the planet.

And I am not denying anything. I am skeptical. And I'm trying to explain to you why I am skeptical. IMO I dont' think we know enough about climate change to give a definitive answer that, man is 100% the cause of the heating up of the planet.

Here are the facts that have convinced me that (manmade) global warming is false.

1) Average global temperatures have not set a new high since 1998 and have shown a clear downward trend since 2007.

2) Analysis of ice core samples used to generate the data used by Al Gore in his Inconvenient Truth movie, consistently show that temperature changes ALWAYS precede changes in CO2 by an average of 700 YEARS. That means that rising temperatures are causing rising CO2 not the other way around. The most likely explanation for this long lag is the time it takes changing average ocean temperatures to shift the oceans from being net CO2 absorber to a net CO2 emitter. Ie. The air heats up or cools down faster than the oceans and therefore average air temperature will change direction first.

3) NASA has confirmed that every other planet in our solar system is getting warmer so there must be a more systemic cause.

4)North Pole ice cap is once again growing on a year over year basis as are some glaciers.

5)While large ice flows are indeed breaking off Antarctica, the average depth of ice on the land portion of Antarctica continues to grow.

6)Ocean levels have continued to rise at a modest 3mm(1/8th of an inch) per year as they have over the last century.

7) The world was considerably warmer approx. 1000 years ago. Greenland as called that when Vikings established permanent settlements there because large areas near the coast were ice free for most of the year. Those settlements had to be abandoned when global temperatures declined and grazing/farming land turned to permafrost.

Climate change computer models are just plain bad science Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Originally posted by grey580
IMO I dont' think we know enough about climate change to give a definitive answer that, man is 100% the cause of the heating up of the planet.

No one is saying man is 100% to blame. Why do people take such extreme positions, black or white, we're 100% to blame or 0% to blame.

How about we're 10% to blame as admitted by Dermo? Isn't that enough? Shouldn't we do something to stop our 10% contribution instead of keep screaming it's not our fault?