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.
We know birds fly and lay eggs, yet people still study birds.
The OP's idea that any field of scientific study will be complete when one specific question is finally answered demonstrates an utter lack of understanding of the purposes and methods of science. Quite frankly, anyone who would ask the question posed by the original post has established beyond any doubt that he or she is incapable of carrying on a discussion of scientific subjects.
I understand science just fine, probably better than you do. I just happen to think that modern science has been largely corrupted by politics, greed, activism and dogma. We keep talking about science as the ideal, textbook definition of what science is SUPPOSED to be about. I think it's naive to think that is what is being conducted.
The problem is that your argument "we understand something yet we continue to study it" has one major flaw, the alarmism that is being presented. If we take the alarmism, the consensus and the conclusions at face value (I don't) but if we did, we wouldn't have the LUXURY of more ice core studies or field trips to the arctic for the purpose of advancing our academic understanding of the subject.
If I were an AGW believer, I would expect 100% of our federal budget and effort to be going towards alternate energy and mitigating the damage.
But we don't do that, do we? We've been hearing for years, if not decades now about how dire the situation is , how we need to act fast or it may be too late and every single year it's the same thing. We get a new batch of alarmist studies that repeat what was offered in the past.
The simple fact of the matter is there is an entire cottage industry built around climate alarmism, people make their living from it, become wealthy from it and build careers on it.
We don't engage in it for the pie in the sky academic idealism of studying something like birds and eggs to advance our understanding, we engage in it because it billions of dollars, careers and reputations are riding on it.
I see, the people who stand to profit from their views on global warming are the scientists pulling down those huge academic salaries, not the oil companies, coal companies, car companies, owners of oceanside resorts, airline and cruise companies, and just about every other segment of the economy that benefits from ignoring global warming.
I see, the people who stand to profit from their views on global warming are the scientists pulling down those huge academic salaries, not the oil companies, coal companies, car companies, owners of oceanside resorts, airline and cruise companies, and just about every other segment of the economy that benefits from ignoring global warming.
You have it all figured out, don't you?
Yeah, you caught me! I guess you are right and there is no money or fortunes to be made in global warming alarmism. It's just those darn greedy oil companies and evil capitalists who are out to make a buck.
Sarcasm aside.. there is greed, activism, politics and corruption on BOTH sides of this issue. To assume otherwise is hopelessly naive.
We continue to study climate change because we need to monitor results and measure the magnitude of change and decree
If we don't we can't "measure" the change and develop adequate solutions to address the problem. Knowing there is a problem isn't the end of funding and research, it's only the start point.
You Republicans know this. If we leave Iraq after mission accomplished what would happen?
If a hurricane we know is coming and we don't keep looking to see the wind speed, how can we know how many people to evacuate or what emergency relief spending will be essential in the aftermath? Knowing that there is a hurricane is not enough.
Same with global warming? Think of it as the mother of all natural disasters, but a slow one that takes decades. We need to fund more if we see there is a problem, not less.
For those CPA Accountants out there who have studied Audit procedures, you folks know if it is demonstrated a company has adequate controls over financial security, anti-fraud, segregation of duties, this is not the end of devoting money into internal control assessing, it's only the beginning.
In fact, if there were no organized system of company controls, ironically it is then that you would not even address them. You would go straight to looking at the numbers and scrutinizing account by account.
This is a similar concept with global warming. We see a relationship, now because of this, we need to test it. Otherwise, we would be assured it's a waste of time and resources to monitor it.
We continue to study climate change because we need to monitor results and measure the magnitude of change and decree
If we don't we can't "measure" the change and develop adequate solutions to address the problem. Knowing there is a problem isn't the end of funding and research, it's only the start point.
You Republicans know this. If we leave Iraq after mission accomplished what would happen?
If a hurricane we know is coming and we don't keep looking to see the wind speed, how can we know how many people to evacuate or what emergency relief spending will be essential in the aftermath? Knowing that there is a hurricane is not enough.
Same with global warming? Think of it as the mother of all natural disasters, but a slow one that takes decades. We need to fund more if we see there is a problem, not less.
For those CPA Accountants out there who have studied Audit procedures, you folks know if it is demonstrated a company has adequate controls over financial security, anti-fraud, segregation of duties, this is not the end of devoting money into internal control assessing, it's only the beginning.
In fact, if there were no organized system of company controls, ironically it is then that you would not even address them. You would go straight to looking at the numbers and scrutinizing account by account.
This is a similar concept with global warming. We see a relationship, now because of this, we need to test it. Otherwise, we would be assured it's a waste of time and resources to monitor it.
Skeptics are not always republicans, I'm not.
Some of us believe that your reasoning is the ideal reason why would continue to study this but not the reality. The reality is that the science has become contaminated with politics, activism, dogma and greed.
That's why we have study after study, year after year that essentially say the same things…"It's worse than we thought and we have to act fast"
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.
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.
