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 is no longer a question of belief or opinion, it is a fact. The evidence of global warming, and its links to human activity, has been established by research and experimentation results collected by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) based on over seven million observations of temperature, salinity and other variables in the world’s oceans; and that has definitively ruled out natural climate variations due solar activity, volcanic eruptions, photosynthesis, etc. as the cause of measurable increase in ocean temperature, which has risen 0.9F in just the past 40 years. (The same findings were made in a long-range study in Britain.) Even the Pentagon acknowledges the fact of global warming and the threat of climate change on national security interests. See Peter Schwartz and Doug Randall, "An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security" (October 2003). In face of the scientific evidence, which has been independently verified, to say that there is any doubt about it is no longer tenable.
But of course, another appeal to authority that is alleged to harbor but true fact.
And in this case, we are now ask to believe the opinion of an organization that is massively politically influenced and was also, to say the least, responsible for America's Challenger and Columbia disasters.
I did. I must have missed their algorithm or equation that ties their hypothesis to the failure of the aggregate global temperature data after 1997 to reflect any global warming.
I believe I also missed their analysis that proves their "missing" algorithm or equation truly ties to the actual global temperature data after 1997.
I did. I must have missed their algorithm or equation that ties their hypothesis to the failure of the aggregate global temperature data after 1997 to reflect any global warming.
I believe I also missed their analysis that proves their "missing" algorithm or equation truly ties to the actual global temperature data after 1997.
Where's the beef?
Did anyone ever claim that warming would be constant, year after year warming? I doubt it; that defies the historical record too extremely. Maybe someday, like 1.2 billion years from now, when the sun begins to "die". Anyway, the general trend over the past century is clearly upwards. As a side note, I can't believe my articles were deleted, as they were the best thing posted in this thread, with apologies to post 45 and RogersParkGuy's link, which I assume was ignored by the OP. I don't need to explain the articles' relevance given that they speak for themselves, assuming the OP lets them do so. The debate is not a real debate; to the extent that any discussion is occurring here, it's multifaceted and nuanced given all the variables involved.
The existent climate models are subject to continuing fine-tuning. No one has yet computed a "theory of everything" for climate science. It's way more complicated than that. You are welcome to study the relevant variables earnestly, or you can keep repeating the same questions to the non-experts who populate this forum. As a side note, the El Nino/La Nina fluctuations climate help account for short-term peaks and valleys, and some are predicting the hottest year on record due to the possibility of 2014 being an el nino year. These things are probabilistic, just like the day-to-day weather forecast and indeed everything in the universe. So prepare for some instant gratification...or near-future gratification. As if these developments related to an unstable climate can truly be termed "gratification".
Wudge, where's your beef? Where's your alternate explanation that explains the mountains of facts about what is observably happening right now? Go ahead, we'll wait. Please advance an explanation that ties together umpteen different observable phenomena but has as its cause something other than what the rest of the world knows is happening.
At this point, after 35 or 40 years of direct observation, YOU are the one making the Extraordinary Claim. And Extraordinary Claims demand Extraordinary Evidence. I know it must feel awful to be so profoundly wrong and on the other side of insurmountable science and massive amounts of data that have led the sharpest experts in the field to the conclusion staring us in the face. You don't want to feel that we've made a mess of things, that you've been wrong for a long time, that there will have to be some intense and painful changes made both to prepare for what is already happening and to try and prevent an even greater catastrophe. I get it. Some people much prefer comforting lies to discomfiting truths.
I'll make it easy. Please give your explanation as to why Northern Hemisphere ice averaged, at its nadir, 7.3 Million Square Kilometres in the 1980s, 6.6 Million Square Kilometres in the 1990s, 5.5 Million Square Kilometres in the 2000s, and so far 4.1 Million Square Kilometres in the 2010s (including the all-time low of 3.3 Million Square Kilometres in 2012). We already know what is happening, what continues to happen, what shows no sign of abating. Now YOU tell us why.
If you make the Extraordinary Claim, you have to support it. We think the earth is a sphere, and there are a lot of scientists behind that idea too, so if you want to make the claim that it is actually flat, then YOU are making the Extraordinary Claim and it is you who must support that claim.
Also, please throw in where you see this whole sea ice thing going in the rest of the 2010s, the 2020s, the 2030s, etc. Tell us why we shouldn't do anything to prepare for it. Tell us why we shouldn't care (as you stated earlier) and why we shouldn't make changes to try to prevent much more of it in the future. And I'd also like to hear how it is that after decades of intense industrialization (not to mention centuries of agriculture and negative terraforming), human activities have not had one iota of impact on the natural Greenhouse Effect, because that is the most Extraordinary Claim of all.
Wudge, where's your beef? Where's your alternate explanation that explains the mountains of facts about what is observably happening right now? Go ahead, we'll wait. Please advance an explanation that ties together umpteen different observable phenomena but has as its cause something other than what the rest of the world knows is happening.
At this point, after 35 or 40 years of direct observation, YOU are the one making the Extraordinary Claim. And Extraordinary Claims demand Extraordinary Evidence. I know it must feel awful to be so profoundly wrong and on the other side of insurmountable science and massive amounts of data that have led the sharpest experts in the field to the conclusion staring us in the face. You don't want to feel that we've made a mess of things, that you've been wrong for a long time, that there will have to be some intense and painful changes made both to prepare for what is already happening and to try and prevent an even greater catastrophe. I get it. Some people much prefer comforting lies to discomfiting truths.
I'll make it easy. Please give your explanation as to why Northern Hemisphere ice averaged, at its nadir, 7.3 Million Square Kilometres in the 1980s, 6.6 Million Square Kilometres in the 1990s, 5.5 Million Square Kilometres in the 2000s, and so far 4.1 Million Square Kilometres in the 2010s (including the all-time low of 3.3 Million Square Kilometres in 2012). We already know what is happening, what continues to happen, what shows no sign of abating. Now YOU tell us why.
If you make the Extraordinary Claim, you have to support it. We think the earth is a sphere, and there are a lot of scientists behind that idea too, so if you want to make the claim that it is actually flat, then YOU are making the Extraordinary Claim and it is you who must support that claim.
Also, please throw in where you see this whole sea ice thing going in the rest of the 2010s, the 2020s, the 2030s, etc. Tell us why we shouldn't do anything to prepare for it. Tell us why we shouldn't care (as you stated earlier) and why we shouldn't make changes to try to prevent much more of it in the future. And I'd also like to hear how it is that after decades of intense industrialization (not to mention centuries of agriculture and negative terraforming), human activities have not had one iota of impact on the natural Greenhouse Effect, because that is the most Extraordinary Claim of all.
Thank you.
As regards asking me questions. I previously explained in a reply to you that asking me questions is neither evidence nor proof of the alleged man-made global warming.
Moreover, I've also explained in this thread that the burden of proof rests with those who have a theory and need to prove it. It does not rest with those who are assessing the evidence and/or arguments -- think: prosecutor with a theory of a crime and jurors evaluating what is presented as evidence. Color me an evidence assessor.
I've also noted that I do not believe in Puff the Magic Dragon or the Loch Ness Monster or Bigfoot, because of similar insufficient evidence to warrant such a belief in all cases. And just as I would not help a prosecutor make their case, I have no desire to try to make your case for you.
You are making an Extraordinary Claim. You are ignoring all the evidence in the world (and all over this thread). You are ignoring consensus opinion. You are saying the earth is flat. You are failing to advance any alternative explanations or support your Extraordinary Claims. Sorry man, this is 2014. The burden of proof lies squarely on your shoulders. I know it's rough. I feel your pain.
You are ignoring the obvious…
Those 97% percent of climate scientists in this "consensus" of yours, receive funding to study global warming. Funding that is predicated on global warming being a serious problem that demands attention, further study and... further funding.
Meanwhile, skeptical studies or any studies which run counter to the alarmism, are rarely funded and if they are, rarely published. Not because they lack scientific merit, but because they run counter to the alarmist dogma and because politics and activism have crept into science.
I must have said this at least 25 times on this site.
1998 was an El Nino year, therefore warmer than others and an anomaly.
In the grand overall scheme of things, the Earth is warming,
If you start in 1999, you will see a warming trend.
If you start in 1899, you will see a warming trend.
You are making an Extraordinary Claim. You are ignoring all the evidence in the world (and all over this thread). You are ignoring consensus opinion. You are saying the earth is flat. You are failing to advance any alternative explanations or support your Extraordinary Claims. Sorry man, this is 2014. The burden of proof lies squarely on your shoulders. I know it's rough. I feel your pain.
Global warming is certainly not my theory. Nor have I bought into believing it to be true, because of insufficient evidence.
As regards my allegedly making an extraordinary claim, I have no idea what you are talking about.
Moreover, I would say that your position that I have to disprove another person's claim is about as extraordinary as it gets. Your notion there is akin to Bertrand Russell's claim that a teapot orbits the sun in the region between Earth and Mars. Moderator cut: Against forum guidelines
Orbit as you will.
Last edited by Oldhag1; 06-21-2014 at 05:08 PM..
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.
