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.
What better way to get yourself blackballed and have your career ruined. And in typical intolerant bullying leftist fashion, a number of scientists have apparently been treated this way for their failure to comply with the expected politically correct behavior on this topic.
One's career will not be ruined if there really is solid evidence against global warming. Hard data always wins.
If it's true that
1) CO2 does not actually absorb infrared radiation, or
2) fossil fuel combustion does not actually produce CO2, or
3) CO2 levels in the atmosphere are not actually rising, or
4) the global average temperature is not actually rising, or
5) the energy output of the sun is increasing and accounts for the observed global temperature increase
then the hard evidence should clearly say so. Anyone who discovers said evidence will become famous for disproving the whole AGW theory.
How can they compare temperatures from 100 years ago or even 50 years ago with the ones now? What about the difference in temperature measuring equipment? Do they really expect me to believe that the equipment used in 1880 could not be off by one degree from the current computers? If the difference in accuracy is only off one degree, that would mean no increase.
They have measured mercury thermometers from the late 1800's and found them to be accurate to within 0.2 degrees. A highly accurate thermometer is not a high tech device. Ice at 32 F and boiling water at 212 F are readily available benchmarks to calibrate with. Once calibrated and sealed, a good mercury thermometer is pretty much accurate forever.
They have measured mercury thermometers from the late 1800's and found them to be accurate to within 0.2 degrees. A highly accurate thermometer is not a high tech device. Ice at 32 F and boiling water at 212 F are readily available benchmarks to calibrate with. Once calibrated and sealed, a good mercury thermometer is pretty much accurate forever.
Moving from hot engine rooms to bouy for measurements for one. Then again if you were serious about knowledge you could of looked it up. Heaven forbid you peak out from that blanket of cognitive dissonance.
Won't matter because in another ten to twenty years we'll start running out of excuses. Much like the leaded gas deniers eventually the evidence will be so overwhelming action will be forced.
If you want to deny, then find another source for the warming. We should be cooling.
I agree. What I don't agree with is taxing the poor.
It's an understandable concern. It seems that our government has been bought by wealthy special interests, and naturally they will make sure that the lower and middle classes carry the burden of any policies that address global warming.
I'm of the opinion that
1) AGW is real and a serious problem, but
2) any policies enacted to address the problem would probably just enrich special interests (like solar and wind companies) while screwing over the most vulnerable citizens: rural people who need to drive long distances and poor people (who spend a large portion of their income on basic energy needs like heat).
I believe that our country is simply too corrupt to attempt to reduce CO2 emissions without screwing over the poor in the process.
Moving from hot engine rooms to bouy for measurements for one. Then again if you were serious about knowledge you could of looked it up. Heaven forbid you peak out from that blanket of cognitive dissonance.
Won't matter because in another ten to twenty years we'll start running out of excuses. Much like the leaded gas deniers eventually the evidence will be so overwhelming action will be forced.
If you want to deny, then find another source for the warming. We should be cooling.
That call for a downward adjustment; they always adjust up.
That call for a downward adjustment; they always adjust up.
Data was adjusted because people were looking for the missing heat in the oceans and until someone realized what had happened it was a mystery. There was no pause in warming. The collection method change created an unintentional issue and until it was realized, a mystery.
Anyway, as the world continues to warm we'll continue to get more data and it will get clearer and clearer. Personally I know green house gas can and does warm. Thus seeing rapid warming when our orbital variance and sun's output says we should be heading towards cooling is very alarming.
Since this coincides with dumping a bunch of green house gases in the atmosphere, well, **** seems pretty obvious we have a problem.
Naturally people just say no no no and offer no other source while sticking their head in the ground because liberals or some other stupid ad hominem. Deny it and bring another source for the rapid warming then. Not just BS "oh the earth was warmer in the past so it's ok now" drivel. Your car does 80mph normally as well, if you turn on the ignition and it suddenly is at 80mph I think everyone would agree that isn't normal. Well there are causes to warming, like GREEN HOUSE GASSES! So if you or any other denier has a better source the world is all ears.
That's the problem, everything is made political and people are generally stupid on a regular day but something political? Holy crap, religious fervor, facts be damned!
You see it in everything. Like idiots that are like "herp derp! Mars warmed as well, so lol earth warming is ok". Except it isn't true. You see people say **** like that and it sounds good to a skeptic. Makes their cognitive dissonance all nice and tight around their little brains. Except the problem is stuff like that isn't true. You have people looking at a picture from a 70's lander and a picture from the 90's and based on two pictures, done in different seasons mind you, make a determination based on global temperature of another planet.
So yeah, people are full of **** but if it fits their confirmation bias they are all over it.
The global warming debate reminds me of the leaded gas fiasco. People swore up and done and skeptics pointed to pseudo science and bull crap that the birth defects and health issues had nothing to do with the lead in the gas. You can look at the literature on both sides back then its freaking crazy what people believe and even crazier when you look back on it with the clarity of history.
I agree. What I don't agree with is taxing the poor.
We've had a carbon tax in BC since 2008 and we don't tax the poor. As a matter of fact every cent collected is returned to individuals and businesses through reduced taxes....
As a result, B.C. now has the lowest income tax rates in Canada for individuals earning up to $122,000. The general corporate income tax rate in B.C. is among the lowest in North America and the G7 nations, and since 2001, B.C.’s small business income tax rate has been reduced by 44 percent.
Nobody is adjusting the data... The satellite instruments or methods of collecting the data were found to be in error, so that error has been corrected...
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.
