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.
Who was there to put out the massive forest fires that would rage all year long, before the white man hit the shores of the USA? More soot and CO2, than that of all the factories today, combined. Soot and dust particles is what rain droplets collect on and then fall to Earth, Clouds and rain, cool the earth.
All those cars and factories 10,000 years ago made the ice sheet that covered the east coast and Midwest, disappear.
No, the magnetic north pole is not moving towards Russia.
Russia and Sweden's winter are getting colder, our summers are getting warmer.
Ice ages come and go. Forest fires are cyclical in nature. Forests are CO2 neutral. The soot release in England can be seen in the peat bogs. A soot line. See it in the peat bog see it in the snow on the peat bog back then. Clean white snow is the most light reflective surface on earth. Soot is one of the darkest. There is more science behind this one than Al Gore's load of do do. It is past time for a new ice age.
OK, we disagree, I got that part. And I don't want to argue it because I'm not an expert on climate (and I doubt you are either). But for my part, I choose to accept the conclusions of virtually every major scientific academy of nearly every industrialized country in the world, peer-reviewed, not funded by self-interested petroleum companies, that anthropogenic global warming is real. If that's not enough, I dunno what is.
So unless you've got legitimate credentials to match that, then why should I (or anyone else) accept your "opinion", "common sense", whatever? But more to the point, how is being angry, bitchy and just plain insulting to anyone who disagrees with you, supposed to make you more effective (or convincing)?
I am not providing you opinion. I am showing you the work of those you appeal to, and then showing that their claims are faulty, they do not add up.
You are appealing to authority. Taking the "administrative stance" of an issue, and honestly ignorantly researched at the point because you seem ignorant of all the current issues that have evolved concerning the field.
You claim you are ignorant of the topic and then make the assumption that I am as well. I have been following the issue for over 7 years. I have watched the issue develop, watched the arguments concerning the science while you have apparently been perusing headlines and "Offical statements from Acronym WXYZ" as your claim.
I understand why you may think they are correct, after all, they are fancy big organizations that proclaim themselves authorities, but if that is the level of your understanding, then you are out of your league coming in here and pulling the arrogantly superior stance.
We have been following the science, watching the issues, and paying attention to the areas to which are relevant. The problem with this entire issue is simply that they have been relying on people like you, who take authority at face value to push their cause. You won't dig deeper, because apparently you think that only people with PHD and published findings of "peer review" can "understand" the issue.
You would be mistaken. The fact is, many of the problems with the organizations and select scientists who are bullying their opinion, is that it isn't an issue of "complexity" as you think. The contest to them is matter of simple scientific process to which any properly educated teenager would understand and mathematics to which any science based major understands.
It isn't rocket science. In fact, to anyone with any decent scientific education, it isn't science at all.
Now normally, I would take a contest like yours and say "please provide evidence to your claim", but you have no understanding of the issue, your entire position is based on faith in those who tell you such.
I could go into major detail about the issues, but you would simply look at me glossy eyed and then immediately point to acronyms, titles, and organizations as proof. This is how you are fooled. This is how people are easily led.
so what I suggest is that you spend some time educating yourself on the issue. Read about the details of each part of the research. Then, you can come back and pick something and proclaim it valid. At that point I can show you how your position is flawed, but as it is now, there is nothing left to say as your entire position is simply "I believe" and I don't teach Sunday school, sorry.
But thanks for pointing out the broken link. And BTW, if Global Warming is part of some "global conspiracy", what's the "motivation"? 'Cuz it's gotta be a helluva good one that can get all these countries to agree (on anything!):
Money and power, what else? Think about it. Who benefits from extreme taxation and regulation? Do governments not gain more control? What about the money influx? Does a new source of tax revenue not solve issues with those thinking up new programs to spend it on? Does an administration to which specifically is in charge of the research of such issues not gain funding based on the results they provide? What about companies that base their entire purpose on trading schemes concerning the issue? What about those seeking power who use the issue to gain support? What about countries who can also use such to gain power over more powerful ones? (read the kyoto treaty and like proposals concerning the world and climate change. Some of the proposals would cripple super powers and give edge to other countries.
To think there is no incentive is to be either ignorant or devious in itself.
Money and power, what else? Think about it. Who benefits from extreme taxation and regulation? Do governments not gain more control? What about the money influx? Does a new source of tax revenue not solve issues with those thinking up new programs to spend it on? Does an administration to which specifically is in charge of the research of such issues not gain funding based on the results they provide? What about companies that base their entire purpose on trading schemes concerning the issue? What about those seeking power who use the issue to gain support? What about countries who can also use such to gain power over more powerful ones? (read the kyoto treaty and like proposals concerning the world and climate change. Some of the proposals would cripple super powers and give edge to other countries.
To think there is no incentive is to be either ignorant or devious in itself.
Can you ever engage in this topic without diving down the rabbithole of radical partisan politics?
Stick to the science if you must engage, and ask yourself whether a ONE month tick toward normal is really what you want to hang your hat on as irrefutabel evidence that all the vast science in dozens of fields from around the world is somehow wrong.
Come on. You're above all this political mumbo-jumbo.
Can you ever engage in this topic without diving down the rabbithole of radical partisan politics?
Stick to the science if you must engage, and ask yourself whether a ONE month tick toward normal is really what you want to hang your hat on as irrefutabel evidence that all the vast science in dozens of fields from around the world is somehow wrong.
Come on. You're above all this political mumbo-jumbo.
It's more than a one month tick toward normal. It illustrates that just like virtually every other "disaster" they foresee, its just not happening.
Whether its sea level rise, arctic ice disappearing, rain forest disaster, glaciers disappearing, catastrophic warming/cooling - its not happening.
When will those AGW believers hold the doomsayers accountable for their faulty predictions?
In case you haven't noticed, the whole house of cards is collapsing around the them.
It's more than a one month tick toward normal. It illustrates that just like virtually every other "disaster" they foresee, its just not happening.
Whether its sea level rise, arctic ice disappearing, rain forest disaster, glaciers disappearing, catastrophic warming/cooling - its not happening.
When will those AGW believers hold the doomsayers accountable for their faulty predictions?
In case you haven't noticed, the whole house of cards is collapsing around the them.
Actually, I follow it pretty closely and it's not collapsing at all. A few radicals ran with that email issue, but beyond that I'm not sure you realize how much evidence is out there in many different disciplines that shows patterns reflective of warming.
And, yes, water levels are rising as well.
Quote:
Sea level is rising along most of the U.S. coast, and around the world. In the last century, sea level rose 5 to 6 inches more than the global average along the Mid-Atlantic and Gulf Coasts, because coastal lands there are subsiding.
But, then, you were trying to suggest the snow storms in the South and Mid-Atlantic this winter were evidence against global warming, when in fact they were just another symptom of it.
So, it's hard to have a rational discussion with someone who has such an agenda of political vengeance. This really has nothing to do with politics.
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,480,195 times
Reputation: 6671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly
....it's hard to have a rational discussion with someone who has such an agenda of political vengeance. This really has nothing to do with politics.
Yeah, and I think the tragic thing is that while the U.S. stays mired in these childish ideological distractions, the rest of the developed world is jumping on board and profiting from all the emerging "green" opportunities. If we keep this kind of nonsense up, we're eventually gonna find ourselves too far "behind the curve" to catch up to Europe and Asia, who are already investing in key technologies, manufacturing and patents. That's one "profit motive" I'd be happy to support!
What? We have had plenty of green energy boondoggles, just look at ethanol.
ND and a few other states are investing heavily in wind energy. We are getting more green, slowly, but that is the way it should be done. The rush that is perpetuated by the global warming alarmists is disturbing and in some cases is driven by nothing but their own personal gain.
We need to take our time and figure out what alternative sources of energy are worthwhile and can survive without large subsides from the government.
If we keep this kind of nonsense up, we're eventually gonna find ourselves too far "behind the curve" to catch up to Europe and Asia, who are already investing in key technologies, manufacturing and patents. That's one "profit motive" I'd be happy to support!
What profit? They'd all fail without massive government subsidies. There is no profit. That would be why China is putting up a new coal plant every two weeks. Ten they can build them with cheap energy and send them over here so we pay driving even more business overseas.
Countries like Spain heavily investing in renewables have only done so with government subsidies. They've also allowed the power companies to run up massive deficits. You can start by researching the "feed in tariff" .
What profit? They'd all fail without massive government subsidies. There is no profit. That would be why China is putting up a new coal plant every two weeks. Ten they can build them with cheap energy and send them over here so we pay driving even more business overseas.
Countries like Spain heavily investing in renewables have only done so with government subsidies. They've also allowed the power companies to run up massive deficits. You can start by researching the "feed in tariff" .
I believe you're confusing oil (requiring massive government subsidies including military presence) with renewable energy. Renewables have a paltry percentage of the public investment oil and coal do.
All new industries require some sort of public investment to create infrastructure that all share and no individual company will for the bill for, so in that sense we need government investment.
I realize you have a vested self interest in the carbdon economy, but come on. The rest of the world is blowing us away with renewable energy economies and we're dragging our knuckles out of self-righteous pride.
Have you ever seen a vision of the futrure in which oil and coal were the fuel of the space fleet?
Come on. Stop fighting it and start building a new economy!
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.
