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.
Lots of fundamentalist Christians have advanced degrees in theology (Th.D.) but you dismiss pretty much everything they have to say. Seems to me like you're picking and choosing your standards as fits the occasion.
Lots of Christians no longer deny climate change, furthermore, many of those who ave advanced degrees in theology are less educated than I am on the subject, and I do not consider myself educated on climate change by any means. However, I know enough to agree with the consensus that climate change is being influenced by man made activity.
The debate about whether or not the climate is changing has been over for years, there is undeniable proof the earths avg. temperature is rising.
There are few people who claim there isn't a "climate change" occuring.
We do, after all, live on a dynamic, living planet, a planet with her own cyclic patterns of climate.
However, there are plenty of sane, rational people who remain unconvinced that the human race is the cause of this rather natural phenomina, the "global warming" that lefties USED to call "climate change".
And we remain thoroughly unconvinced that any form of "Cap and Trade" system is going to "Save the Planet".
I fully support and endorse rational environmental protection legislation, but please, let's keep it sane? Running about like Chicken Little only serves to destroy the message of environmental protection and conservation.
Its the right wing deniers who run around like Chicken Little in denying the claims of climate change scientists. Furthermore, those who study the issue know this: There is a "tipping point" where a radical change of mans contribution towards climate change cannot reverse its course. This fact alone lends urgency to this issue.
Its the right wing deniers who run around like Chicken Little in denying the claims of climate change scientists. Furthermore, those who study the issue know this: There is a "tipping point" where a radical change of mans contribution towards climate change cannot reverse its course. This fact alone lends urgency to this issue.
And the clinical research and trials that show some man-made climate change?
Really, that's all I ask for.
So far only opinions have been offered, by either side of the issue.
All I ask for is simple scientific metholodgy, tests to prove we are effecting the climate to such a degree, hypothesis and repeatable successful tests to illustrate exactly how, and if we are indeed, effecting the climate.
And the clinical research and trials that show some man-made climate change?
Really, that's all I ask for.
So far only opinions have been offered, by either side of the issue.
All I ask for is simple scientific metholodgy, tests to prove we are effecting the climate to such a degree, hypothesis and repeatable successful tests to illustrate exactly how, and if we are indeed, effecting the climate.
Maybe this will help.
Met Office: Fact 3: The current climate change is not just part of a natural cycle (http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climatechange/guide/bigpicture/fact3.html - broken link)
I've attached an image.
That page claims that the increase in co2 coincides with the industrial revolution.
b-b-b-b-b-b-ut scientists agree. Theys smarter dan us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny
They most assuredly are smarter than the vast majority of climate change skeptics, most who have no scientific backgrounds
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Lots of fundamentalist Christians have advanced degrees in theology (Th.D.) but you dismiss pretty much everything they have to say. Seems to me like you're picking and choosing your standards as fits the occasion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny
Lots of Christians no longer deny climate change, furthermore, many of those who ave advanced degrees in theology are less educated than I am on the subject, and I do not consider myself educated on climate change by any means. However, I know enough to agree with the consensus that climate change is being influenced by man made activity.
The debate about whether or not the climate is changing has been over for years, there is undeniable proof the earths avg. temperature is rising.
I was hoping you would follow a single train of thought as the thread progressed. My apologies for not being more clear. The point I'm making is that you place so much trust in people who stand to benefit financially from the "existence" of a global crisis because they have advanced degrees, yet you routinely dismiss "end-timers" who also have advanced degrees. What makes you so much smarter than the rest of us that you could judge between the two groups? Are you a climatologist/theologian?
Yet they lack good empirical evidence, and suggest that a "consensus" is adequate as said evidence.
Coming from someone who exists in this group, that's just plain rubbish.
You don't seem to understand that it's not about consensus. It's about compiling enough scientific evidence to turn a hypothesis into a theory. That's what is happening and why people are concerned about the significant evidence that we are playing a relatively significant role in climate change.
People who say we're too insignificant a species have obviously never looked at satellite pictures of the earth at night.
As an above poster stated, people who reference Al Gore in their argument clearly have no scientific grounding in climate change and first heard of it when Gore popularized it. It's been a very high priority issue since the 1980s.
So scientist who agree man is causing global warming, errr, climate change (but it's always changing) are sane rational scientist. And the other group of scientist who say the increase in temperature is due to increased solar activity are right wing nutjobs who are crazy and stupid, even though they also have university degrees.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly
You don't seem to understand that it's not about consensus. It's about compiling enough scientific evidence to turn a hypothesis into a theory. That's what is happening and why people are concerned about the significant evidence that we are playing a relatively significant role in climate change.
People who say we're too insignificant a species have obviously never looked at satellite pictures of the earth at night.
As an above poster stated, people who reference Al Gore in their argument clearly have no scientific grounding in climate change and first heard of it when Gore popularized it. It's been a very high priority issue since the 1980s.
So scientist who agree man is causing global warming, errr, climate change (but it's always changing)
Started as greenhouse effect.
Quote:
The first theory of global warming came in 1824 when French mathematician Jean Baptiste Joseph Fourier discovered that the Earth's temperature was slowly increasing. Fourier argued that the earth's atmosphere traps solar radiation and reflects it back toward the earth.
In the late 19th century Fourier's theory was labeled the "greenhouse effect" when Nobel Laureate Svante Arrhenius coined the term to explain how carbon dioxide traps heat in the Earth's atmosphere.
In 1975, Dr. Broecker inadvertently coined the phrase global warming when he published a paper titled: “Climate Change: Are we on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?”
The term climate change was adopted to lessen confusion. "Global Warming" was confusing to some people because they thought that the theory stated that the term meant that we faced a danger of every place on earth becoming warmer every year.
And the clinical research and trials that show some man-made climate change?
Really, that's all I ask for.
So far only opinions have been offered, by either side of the issue.
All I ask for is simple scientific metholodgy, tests to prove we are effecting the climate to such a degree, hypothesis and repeatable successful tests to illustrate exactly how, and if we are indeed, effecting the climate.
Here is a good place for you to get started. Climate change encompasses a whole host of reasons that are leading to increased temperatures. Not only the burning of fossil fuels but also deforestation, the methane from factory farms, as well as a "positive feedback" consequence to warmer temps., such as disappearing arctic ice giving rise to bogs that now have less albedo than the ice that once covered it, absorbing much more heat than was once reflected.
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.
