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.
Of course credentialed scientists can be corrupt. But you need to SHOW that they are corrupt, not just claim they're corrupt because they don't agree with you.
Now google the names of the authors and see if you uncover any political ties, any suspicious funding, etc. I've done it-- there's nothing.
If AGW were being supported only by a small, vocal minority (like 'skepticism'/denialism is), then it might seems suspicious... but if you go onto science or nature and look for articles that support AGW, you'll find that most of the authors aren't well known at all outside of their own fields. You can NOT say the same for skeptics-- they are almost always notorious and have almost always been proven to accept money from oil companies, Heartland, etc... OR they're politically motivated, like Roy Spencer.
I agree... that's why I always link to articles in Scientific American, NASA, National Geographic, science, nature, etc. These are all credible scientific publications with NO political bias.
On the other hand, most of the threads started on this board link to denier blogs, WSJ opinion columns, right wing news like Daily Mail, etc. Or they link to NASA and don't realize that what they're posting doesn't contradict AGW... usually because they don't understand the difference between climate and weather, don't understand that the 'pause' doesn't mean cooling or that warming has stopped, have missed some important piece of information that changes how the information is understood, etc.
Instead of just claiming this, post a link... or start a thread.
It sounds like you're upset because people don't just automatically agree with you.
How do you know?
Per capita, China and India emit far less than the US. Americans can more easily afford to emit less CO2, because it is a case of people using too much dirty energy on a daily basis... as well as too much energy in general. You have to think about how many people are in the country, not just how much the country consumes.
The US can afford to switch from coal and oil heating to natural gas as there is plenty of natural gas in the US. The US also has the money to better afford solar, wind, etc. It's more reasonable to expect a wealthy, industrialized country to make improvements than countries where the majority are living in absolute poverty making $5/day or whatever.
If you had travelled beyond your own borders a few times (and actually paid attention to your surroundings), you would realize that the rest of the world doesn't live like your average American.
If the US were to reduce it's per capita consumption of energy to that of China and India, the effect would only be that of stopping the INCREASE in CO2, not a decrease in total output, because those countries are not going to stop. In other words, any man made climate change is going to happen no matter how much you tax spoiled Americans.
The other thing is, extreme environmentalists hate natural gas as well. The simple fact is that people on that edge of the political fence will not be happy until we all are living in solar powered microhouses eating tofu, and every person from Mexico has taken up residency in the United States, which is why the alarmism about AGW raises questions not only from the far right, but from moderates like me.
I live in NY. It was 1 degree this morning. You will never be able to heat houses here with solar or wind. Until we develop nuclear fusion or something, you will have to burn something to keep people from freezing to death.
You do realize that your brutal winters may be the result of shifting weather patterns due to global warming? Global warming does not mean every spot on the globe gets warmer. It means that on average the temperature is going up. It could do down where you are but up more somewhere else to average going up. Global warming may not help your problem.
When NASA, NOOA, IPCC etc... put out reports and statements that there "has been a pause in net global climate temps" for about 19 years, it means the global temperature is NOT going up.
This was from Feb 2013, two years ago, so the 17 year pause, is now a 19 year pause.
The UN’s climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri, has acknowledged a 17-year pause in global temperature rises, confirmed recently by Britain’s Met Office, but said it would need to last “30 to 40 years at least” to break the long-term global warming trend. Dr Pachauri, the chairman of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said that open discussion about controversial science and politically incorrect views was an essential part of tackling climate change.
IF the claims made by the doom and gloom alarmists are actually true, WHY is nothing being done to alleviate the inevitable results of global warming?
WHY are there no seawalls being built to hold back the rising sea levels?
{snip}
WHY?
Why indeed. the sea levels have been steadily rising for over 10,000 years man-made global warming did not cause it, and nothing we can do will prevent the seas from continuing to rise.
Why indeed. the sea levels have been steadily rising for over 10,000 years man-made global warming did not cause it, and nothing we can do will prevent the seas from continuing to rise.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. We will look back to the election of Barack Obama to the presidency in 2008 and realize, as He said, this was the moment the oceans stopped rising.
What more could we possibly need to do? Haven't we suffered enough already?
If you actually spent a very small amount of time reading the links, you would have more to contribute to these discussions than mindless repetition and insults.
Start with the kiddie links and see if the lights go on.
If not, let the grownups be.
I spent a large amount of time reading biased links and giving out hearty belly laughs.
The contortions you warmers go through to get your failed message across is vastly entertaining.
First it was AGW, when that was rightly ridiculed, it was renamed to climate change. We all know the climate changes whether we want it to or not and the fact that man is the prime cause is completely wrong. Next we now have the term climate disruption. Once again, the warmers blame people and start beating their apocalyptic drum.
You can't pay for entertainment like this.
So I will continue to burn my garbage, fight any climate tax tooth and nail and drive and fly what I please.
And whats even funnier, there is not a damn thing you can do about it.
Produce the studies from sources that don't involve right-wing blogs, etc... and then we can talk.
and there in lies the rub doesnt it? someone produces a study that refutes your beliefs and it becomes a right wing blog that you can then ignore and ridicule. or if it s a real paper then it isnt peer reviewed and thus can also be ignored.
Quote:
Try the latter.
in other words you are so arrogant that you think man can control the climate? or has a huge effect on the climate? that is one of the problems with alarmists, they think man has a huge effect on everything when it is negative, but when it is positive then man has a small effect.
Quote:
Okay, sure... I'll just personally go over to China and demand, in English, that they lower their emissions. That will definitely change things!
would you? i am sure they would listen to you, after all you are some kind of expert on the subject right?
Quote:
Everyone could stand to cut their emissions... it's a logical fallacy to claim that only the worst emitter needs to do something about it while everyone else just sits back and pretends to be innocent.
and again therein lies the rub doesnt it? as i said if you were to actually check the protocols of the various climate treaty negotiations, the reality is that only europe and the US have to cut their carbon emissions, china, india, russia, and the rest of the developing and under developed world gets a complete pass from the treaties.
and this isnt new. remember the montreal protocols where the refrigerant R12 was "banned" from production? well that only applied to the US and europe. R12 is still being produced in india and other countries. we just cant import it to the US. and at the time of the ban that was put in place, the only manufacturer of R12 was dupont, and they held all the patents on the refrigerant. and doesnt it strike you as suspect when you find that the reason dupont pushed for a ban on R12 is because their patents on that refrigerant were running out(finally), and that dupont had its replacement already in production, namely R134a?
you have to look deeper than the surface when you are going to ferret out the real reason why governments do things.
Quote:
If you aren't, then why are you saying these things?
you probably meant that as an insult, thats fine you can say what you want i have broad shoulders. but to set the record straight(again) i am 56 and college educated. one thing i have learned over the years is to see through the bull crap and hysteria and look for the truth.
I wonder:
Is it at all possible that the "man caused warming" is the only thing that is keeping the world out of another ice age?
think about it...
Yes, I have wondered the same thing for a couple of years now..... Interglacial periods last from 15,000 to 20,000 years and we are 15,000 years into the present one.
Yup, global warming for you guys is now weather events. I remember when you guys used to claim "weather is not climate," now it is.
No it's not...My post was to illustrate to the deniers whining about the weather in the northeast that because it is cold where they live, does not mean that it's cold everywhere.
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.
Global warming does not mean every spot on the globe gets warmer. It means that on average the temperature is going up. It could do down where you are but up more somewhere else to average going up. Global warming may not help your problem.