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.
The science is sound. But idiots, on both sides, misrepresent it.
That statement is completely false. The science is not "sound" and that is the problem. However, academic departments are running scared on this issue, as they fear being cut off from funding if they dare take a stand against this lunacy. What legitimate theory has it's main "support" in theoretically flawed modeling which has been shown to be completely false. Those models suggested our coasts would be under water and we would be starving now. Now would any sane person return to such models to make further assumptions?
The methods and stats on these AGW papers are all over the place- it is like science by elementary school children. Who in their right mind compares sets of temp data using two entirely different methods to measure temps?
The statistical analysis is where the most absurd "massaging" of the data occurs, such that one could create whatever results you want, independent of the actual data. AGW is an academic embarrassment, but one that will be rarely challenged, as academic departments fear being cut off from the AGW gravy train.
In science, you have theories and facts. And theories never become facts, no matter how much evidence you have. Facts are just single observable events whereas theories are set of assumptions and rules that strive to predict new observable events from previous ones.
In other words, this thread is a fail on the basic essence of science itself.
Nope the broad consensus is that MAN is causing this climate change.
And that is how humans operate. with or without science, religion or law... consensus.
When the whole of humanity agrees on something, those who dissent must provide the proof, not those who agree. You don't have to like it, i am sure there were many folk who were correct but deemed wrong because they could not prove the earth orbited the sun..
Today humanity says YOUR view is not only the outlier but one which imperils mankind. Why it is ONLY the extreme right wing of the USA that struggles to accept reality is beyond me. But i think it is the ungodly union of the republican party with religious zealots that is the underlying problem.
FAITH based political parties that gain power run the risk of becoming oppressive and genocidal
science is not egotistical.. and saying "man made" is egotistical
the climate has changed 2 dozen times...all naturally
the last full glacial period ended around 16000 years ago..we have been warming since in this interglacial period
science proves that
why do the fascist "cant tax enough" liberals deny science
Null hypothesis = temperatures and their variations are completely random and have no correlation whatsoever with rising CO2 levels caused by man's emissions
5 sigma result = statistical analysis of all temperature records and CO2 levels show they are very nearly perfectly correlated. We can say with 99.99994% accuracy that man-made climate change is happening, that man's CO2 emissions are warming the planet.
It isn't the "opposite of science." It's the precise and proper application of science. You might want to consider adjusting your politics accordingly.
the last interglacial period peaked with global average temps being around 75'f... and co2 was MUCH, MUCH higher, and trailed the warming... science has already proved that..which "nulls" the man made theory
the last interglacial period peaked with global average temps being around 75'f...
No. Temps peaked only a few degrees higher than the current 58 degrees.
Quote:
and co2 was MUCH, MUCH higher, and trailed the warming...
No. CO2 levels were lower than today. According to pollen stratigraphic correlations the CO2 record covers the first c. 7400 years of the Eemian, as palaeobotanically defined in northwestern Europe. The first c. 3000 years of the reconstruction are characterised by centennial to millennial CO2 variability in the interval 250–290 ppmv, while the remaining part of the record is generally more stable with slightly higher values (290–300 ppmv).
Quote:
science has already proved that..which "nulls" the man made theory
Huh? Even if what you say were true, which it isn't, how would it rule out human caused climate change today?
science is not egotistical.. and saying "man made" is egotistical
the climate has changed 2 dozen times...all naturally
the last full glacial period ended around 16000 years ago..we have been warming since in this interglacial period
science proves that
why do the fascist "cant tax enough" liberals deny science
They deny science AND economics. NY Governor Cuomo learned that the hard way when NY drove higher income earners out of state by taxing them more, and more, and more. I have no idea why liberals deny both, but they sure make themselves look foolish by doing so. /SMH
Maybe you don't care about your kids and grandkids and the kind of world they will inherit, but I do.
"]Maybe you don't care about your kids and grandkids"
We should make decisions based on FACTS, NOT EMOTIONS!
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.
