U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-11-2008, 08:37 PM
 
Location: state of enlightenment
2,391 posts, read 4,666,723 times
Reputation: 2435

Advertisements

Low on the Hog

The Fake Global Warming "Debate"

Despite overwhelming scientific agreement about the facts of global warming (it's happening, it's happening faster than we expected and accelerating geometrically, and it's caused or worsened by human activity), certain vested interests still argue it's a concocted phenomenon. Like proponents of intelligent design, the position is political, not scientific, and the political aim is to place fake counterpoints in news reports to create the appearance of controversy. All to slow the reaction away from burning fossil fuels and other carbon-producing energy sources.

I prefer not to give the arguments face time here, but you can scan through them in a couple of places. The Cato institute has an energy industry hack named Patrick J. Michaels, who has parlayed oil and coal money into a cottage industry attacking global warming. His articles are here. Another is Richard Courtney, editor for a coal trading industry magazine, who is a "greenhouse skeptic." He has no background in science, but does have a very good reason to resist changes to the carbon-producing energy grid. Read a sample of his self-serving "science" here. The Heartland Institute is another group devoted to "common sense environmentalism" (aka environmental destruction). They don't even bother to come up with fake arguments--they just baldly lie.

And so on.

For anyone who wonders what the truth is (which is probably no one reading this blog), the facts are actually unequivocal:

The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Program, the IPCC is charged with evaluating the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action. In its most recent assessment, the IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities: "Human activities . . . are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents . . . that absorb or scatter radiant energy. . . . [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations."

The IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. A National Academy of Sciences report begins unequivocally: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise." The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and it answers yes. Others agree. The American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have all issued statements concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling.

The "controversy" is a political one. Oil and coal producers and their political patrons (many of the most powerful of whom run the US) are unsurprisingly opposed to the science not because it's bad science, but because it's bad for their bank accounts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-11-2008, 08:45 PM
 
17,542 posts, read 19,712,218 times
Reputation: 7293
Wow... we should believe all this because... "they" say so... there is a reason why global warming due to CO2 emission has NOT been proven.... its because it has NOT been proven, regardless of how much bunk science you want to put up...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2008, 09:25 PM
 
Location: state of enlightenment
2,391 posts, read 4,666,723 times
Reputation: 2435
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
Wow... we should believe all this because... "they" say so... there is a reason why global warming due to CO2 emission has NOT been proven.... its because it has NOT been proven, regardless of how much bunk science you want to put up...
And we should stake the future of civilization on the fact that some corporate puppet denialists go around spreading this "controversy"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 12:00 AM
 
2,765 posts, read 6,499,293 times
Reputation: 1448
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
Wow... we should believe all this because... "they" say so... there is a reason why global warming due to CO2 emission has NOT been proven.... its because it has NOT been proven, regardless of how much bunk science you want to put up...
Agreed.

Some people believe anything they hear, if Al Gore says so it must be true, if it was featured on The Today Show it must be true, please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 12:01 AM
 
2,765 posts, read 6,499,293 times
Reputation: 1448
Quote:
Originally Posted by geos View Post
And we should stake the future of civilization on the fact that some corporate puppet denialists go around spreading this "controversy"?
We should protect the environment because it's the right thing to do, not because of some phony theory that scares people into doing so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 05:50 AM
 
Location: Columbia, SC
1,860 posts, read 4,433,286 times
Reputation: 775
Quote:
Originally Posted by j760 View Post
We should protect the environment because it's the right thing to do, not because of some phony theory that scares people into doing so.
Exactly, and regardless of the effect on 'global warming' one can't dispute the poorer air quality caused by all the CO2 emissions that have led to increases in asthma and respiratory diseases/deaths in the past 30-40 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 07:00 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,505 posts, read 51,238,770 times
Reputation: 24606
Buckeyes in SC - good point but technically the respiratory effects of air pollution are principally caused by the crap that comes along with the CO2. Stuff like particulates, acid gasses, hydrocarbons and just plain soot.

The essence of our concern with global climate change is the concern that we (the entire human race and the rest of the living creatures) have only one inhabitable planet to use. We are now damaging the habitability of our nest with our economic and industrial activities by our incessant, excessive and unnecessary use of fossil, principally carbon based, fuels. Damaging our nest is not a new phenomenon because people have been doing this for millennia but most of the time were able to move on to the next greener pasture. Well we have run out of greener pastures.

Now we have to spend the time, energy and money, including lost profits for the carbon fuel industries, to keep our pastures green and our only nest clean. There are technological methods available to maintain our high tech civilization and to spread this prosperity to the rest of humanity. IMHO they are not being developed because they would threaten the investments in existing dirty energy and the power of the politicians protecting the investors. They have made their prosperity more important than the future health or prosperity of the rest of humanity. They are in effect stealing from everyone and I believe should be prosecuted for their theft of the future.

I base my “belief” in global climate change not on the preaching of Albert Gore or hysteria over the fate of the arctic bears but on 40 years of observation and study of the topic. The atmosphere is getting warmer faster than expected and the ramifications of that warming are not completey foreseeable. Environmentally we are dancing in the dark in a minefield. Some people would, for their personal and corporate profit, prefer we were blindfolded as well. Please remember these people can use their personal wealth to avoid most of the dire consequences of a warming globe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 07:21 AM
 
17,542 posts, read 19,712,218 times
Reputation: 7293
Quote:
Originally Posted by geos View Post
And we should stake the future of civilization on the fact that some corporate puppet denialists go around spreading this "controversy"?
You mean like Al Gore? I agree, I wish he leave already...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 03:28 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in northern Alabama
17,751 posts, read 53,891,961 times
Reputation: 30011
Point 1. If the underground coal fires in China were put out, it would be the same as taking every single car and light truck in the U.S. off the road. Is anyone promoting the idea? Be prepared for deafening silence, since there is no way to make a buck out of it.

Point 2. Google the Centralia PA coal fire and find the same situation in the U.S., whre resolution would be a lot more convenient. Again, no interest because there is no money to be made.

Point 3. The data itself. Take a good long look at:
Home

Odd sites

You'll find that at least part of the correlation of higher temperatures can be traced to the boxes used to house the equipment. The original spec called for the boxes to be whitewashed, which has a particular thermal footprint, and now a lot of them have been painted with latex paint, which has a hotter footprint.

Point 4. The north pole did not melt to open water this summer and drop all the instrumentation there into the ocean, as some global warming experts expected. Read the panic here: Exclusive: Scientists warn that there may be no ice at North Pole this summer - Climate Change, Environment - The Independent

There is some open water, but not a complete melting. See for yourself here:

North Pole WebCam Looks plenty cold to me.

The fish eye of the sky (look at the edges for a panorama of the ice and open spots):

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/latest/noaa3.jpg (broken link)

The recent years cited for global warming were years of high sunspot activity. Hmmm.

For some real info on the north pole that isn't caught up in the hype: The Top of the World
He points out something I had long forgotten, like the forgotten fact that the submarine Skate surfaced at the north pole in 1959!

Point 5. Remember that the man preserved in the Alps ice was dressed for temperate weather when he was frozen eons ago. Could it possibly be that the glaciation wasn't as great back then as it has been recently?

Point 6. Albedo. Look it up. Think of the color of roads and cities. Think of what areas are most likely to have weather monitoring stations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2008, 03:50 PM
 
955 posts, read 1,952,722 times
Reputation: 401
Quote:
Originally Posted by geos View Post
And we should stake the future of civilization on the fact that some corporate puppet denialists go around spreading this "controversy"?
Let's assume that you are correct. Exactly what is your plan to "save" civilization? Do you believe that there are actions that someone in, say, New York or Los Angeles can do to stop what is going on world wide?

I'm all for places that allow you to hang your clothes on a line and hunt and grow food locally to eliminate transportation costs and the associated carbon footprint.

I'm all for eliminating air travel.

I'm all for forcing people to relocate from congested and dangerous areas prone to flooding and earthquakes to eliminate the massive energy use while saving and rebuilding those areas.

Will you sign the pledge that some believers would not?

What is your plan? And are you willing to live in the resulting world that it causes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:22 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top