Anti Global Warming: Rational edition

[99.vikram]

Well, well.

It sounds plausible, even probable.

Now I have always believed in global warming, but it strikes me as odd that the places where the industrial revolution took place actually cooled a little rather than heating up a couple of centuries back. So why is it that the earth's atmosphere seems to have become a lot more sensitive this past century?

Of course, this is just another theory and it must be discussed on it's own merits. More than anything, we have to destroy the image of a consensus on global warming. Scientists have to remember that questions must be answered and then the answers questioned, until there are no questions left.

Something to think about at any rate. :frog:

 

[Krynn72]

So why is it that the earth's atmosphere seems to have become a lot more sensitive this past century?

Maybe because we have better equipment and watch it more. Same as with why kids are so violent nowadays... not because they ARE more violent, but because we see it more often now (thanks to tv and internets).

Of course, I just pulled that out of my ass, and i have no evidence for the statement.

 

[bbson john]

So this is periodic and normal?

 

[Krynn72]

I dont think its enough data to say either way.

 

[bbson john]

I dont think its enough data to say either way.

Ya, but we'd better not bet. Let's cut down greenhouse gas emission. Either way the abnormally large greenhouse gas emission does no good.

 

[Krynn72]

Agreed.

 

[lame-o]

Those statistics could have been provided by the global warming society and thus might be fake!

And lol at the people who think this "cutting down" business is going to work, most countries can't get along with each other for more than a few decades without breaking into some kind of war and now they want EVERYONE IN THE WORLD TO JOIN THE CAUSE. Bullshit.

 

[99.vikram]

And lol at the people who think this "cutting down" business is going to work, most countries can't get along with each other for more than a few decades without breaking into some kind of war and now they want EVERYONE IN THE WORLD TO JOIN THE CAUSE. Bullshit.

People control governments. If people can be convinced that global warming is a real threat to their lives, emissions can be cut down. Companies have already moved to less damaging technology, governments are also starting to care.

 

[lame-o]

That may be true.

 

[Fliko]

People control governments.

What?

 

[Acepilotf14]

What, did you think governments were run by some kind of metahuman?
Oh wait.

 

[Solaris]

Are you a climatologist?
No?

Then you're in no way qualified to question what they say.

I'd be pissed off if some layman had the arrogance to question a proof of mime; if they had no understanding of mathematics.

 

[99.vikram]

I'd be pissed off if some layman had the arrogance to question a proof of mime; if they had no understanding of mathematics.

That's a great thought, but when the repercussions affect laymen, the expert opinion has to verified by independent parties.

 

[Acepilotf14]

Or, say, how 'bout we go on a road trip to see some glaciers?
Eh?

 

[Solaris]

That's a great thought, but when the repercussions affect laymen, the expert opinion has to verified by independent parties.

Not by people like me and you who have no understanding of the topic.

 

[Dynasty]

Oh for god sake!

Global warming IS HAPPENING, ***king get over yourselves.

It was happening before we came along, we're just speeding up the process.

No i cant find evidence because you dont need evidence on something that is just logically correct.

Evidence on THIS subject is only required by people that are too ***king lazy to do anything about it. 'Errr, why should i change my lifestyle', its people with that kind of attitude that need to be gotten rid of if the human race is to live on.

Bit vague and...kinda relates back to Hitler ways yeah but if thats what we need...

 

[Solaris]

Oh for god sake!

Global warming IS HAPPENING, ***king get over yourselves.

It was happening before we came along, we're just speeding up the process.

No i cant find evidence because you dont need evidence on something that is just logically correct.

Evidence on THIS subject is only required by people that are too ***king lazy to do anything about it. 'Errr, why should i change my lifestyle', its people with that kind of attitude that need to be gotten rid of if the human race is to live on.

Bit vague and...kinda relates back to Hitler ways yeah but if thats what we need...

Worst. Post. Ever.

 

[repiV]

Oh for god sake!

Global warming IS HAPPENING, ***king get over yourselves.

It was happening before we came along, we're just speeding up the process.

No i cant find evidence because you dont need evidence on something that is just logically correct.

Evidence on THIS subject is only required by people that are too ***king lazy to do anything about it. 'Errr, why should i change my lifestyle', its people with that kind of attitude that need to be gotten rid of if the human race is to live on.

Bit vague and...kinda relates back to Hitler ways yeah but if thats what we need...

Last time I checked, we live in a (supposedly) free society. You can't demand that people change their lifestyles, and that we self-destruct our economy, because "it's just logically correct". If you want to live without electricity and machines, you go ahead - if other people agree with you, they'll follow. That's what democracy is all about.
90% of the global warming movement is comprised of clueless screeching harpies, alarmist nonsense and hypocrites - and more often than not, it's just used as an excuse to assrape easy target groups with extortionate taxes. You'll have to do a lot ****ing better than that to convince people.

The political bullshit of global warming - from a typically leftist publication of all places

 

[99.vikram]

Global warming IS HAPPENING, ***king get over yourselves.

It was happening before we came along, we're just speeding up the process.

Read the link provided in the OP, retard. Or if you are too lazy:
LINK LINK LINK LINK LINK LINK

No i cant find evidence because you dont need evidence on something that is just logically correct.

Stop drinking lighter fluid. FYI, asking questions is what smart people do.

Bit vague and...kinda relates back to Hitler ways yeah but if thats what we need...

Reductio ad Hitlerum - the most stupid of all logical fallacies. :hmph:

 

[bbson john]

If you want to live without electricity and machines...

OMG. Antiglobal-warming campaigns ain't thing like this.


Putting taxes and penalty are the only ways to slow people down from polluting the environment. I can't see another way. After all, we cannot let human race being exterminated because of a group of ignorant citizens. But you are right on 90% of conservation campaigns are political shit.

LINK LINK LINK LINK LINK LINK[/URL]

Read.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
Wikipedia is a reliable source when the data in it has a source.

 

[theotherguy]

IPCC and almost all reputable climatology organizations disagree with this editorial, ( with the exception of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists).

 

[Gray Fox]

Well, well.

It sounds plausible, even probable.

Now I have always believed in global warming, but it strikes me as odd that the places where the industrial revolution took place actually cooled a little rather than heating up a couple of centuries back. So why is it that the earth's atmosphere seems to have become a lot more sensitive this past century?

Of course, this is just another theory and it must be discussed on it's own merits. More than anything, we have to destroy the image of a consensus on global warming. Scientists have to remember that questions must be answered and then the answers questioned, until there are no questions left.

Something to think about at any rate. :frog:

That because back then the large particles released by the industry where letting less sun trough. These particles were toxic and highly environmentally damaging, hence factories had to use filters which filtered the large particles out while not filtering CO2 and other greenhouse gasses.

In any case there is largely a consensus among scientist that we are accelerating global warming. I see no reason why one article, by a right wing site without clear sources proofs otherwise.

Oh and nice cartoons about Mccain.

edit: and pretty much any scientist knows that the sun has the most influence on our temperature, thats not an argument to discard the effect of greenhouse gases.

 

[theotherguy]

edit: and pretty much any scientist knows that the sun has the most influence on our temperature, thats not an argument to discard the effect of greenhouse gases.

That isn't true. On the current timescale, changes in solar energy account for under 5 percent of global climate forcing. Greenhouse gasses account for about 95 percent of global climate forcing, and anthropogenic sources make up the majority of greenhouse gasses. This is why Venus is so hot, even though it is within the "Goldilocks zone", and why Mars is so cold. If either planet had an atmosphere like Earth's, temperatures would not be so unbearable.

Solar energy is the biggest player on a grand scale, but not in a centuries scale. Solar cycles take tens of thousands of years to complete.

 

[bbson john]

Scientists have come up with a consensus recently (de facto no more than 3 months ago) that global warming is almost certainly due to human activity. "Almost certain" is defined as above 95% true. I don't think it is worth risking for the 5% since the primary stakes are the survival of the entire human race.

 

[theotherguy]

Scientists have come up with a consensus recently (de facto no more than 3 months ago) that global warming is almost certain due to human activity. "Almost certain" is defined as above 95% true. I don't think it is worth risking for the 5% since the primary stakes are the survival of the entire human race.

And that can be a bit misleading.

When they say they have a 95 percent certainty, it means they have a huge margin of error. If you look at the graph I posted, you can see that the margin of error is ENORMOUS on "net anthropogenic forcing". But the thing is, even if solar irradiation was at the absolute top of the margin of error, and net anthropogenic forcing was at the bottom of its massive margin of error, it would still account for most of the global climate forcing.

 

[Gray Fox]

That isn't true. On the current timescale, changes in solar energy account for under 5 percent of global climate forcing. Greenhouse gasses account for about 95 percent of global climate forcing, and anthropogenic sources make up the majority of greenhouse gasses. This is why Venus is so hot, even though it is within the "Goldilocks zone", and why Mars is so cold. If either planet had an atmosphere like Earth's, temperatures would not be so unbearable.

Solar energy is the biggest player on a grand scale, but not in a centuries scale. Solar cycles take tens of thousands of years to complete.

I was referring to the fact that he sun and the heat it radiates drive our whole climate.

 

[theotherguy]

I was referring to the fact that he sun and the heat it radiates drive our whole climate.

Now that is true.

 

[TechnoHippyChic]

I'd be pissed off if some layman had the arrogance to question a proof of mime.

Proof.

But yeah, I saw some scientist saying that even if we cut all CO2 emissions now, average temps would still rise a degree or more by 2100. And that won't happen. There will be millions more human virii vying for their slice of the industrialized pie, each wanting their own SUV. China and India are bringing a new coal plant online every week or two.

Is it getting hot in here? Someone turn down the AC...

 

[repiV]

OMG. Antiglobal-warming campaigns ain't thing like this.

Putting taxes and penalty are the only ways to slow people down from polluting the environment. I can't see another way. After all, we cannot let human race being exterminated because of a group of ignorant citizens. But you are right on 90% of conservation campaigns are political shit.

Human race being exterminated? Gimme a break. More alarmist nonsense. What exactly qualifies you and others to label people who don't tow the line as "ignorant citizens" is beyond me, just because you've lapped up every line of shit the media's fed you doesn't make you informed.
Why would I take seriously a cause that's championed by liars and hypocrites, people who cherry-pick facts that support their argument and ignore ones that don't, all the while claiming "it's not a political issue, it's a scientific one!"
That has millions of brainless lapdogs saying "OMGZ CUT UR CARBON FOOTPRINT DOOD" without having any idea what the **** they're talking about.
Not to mention that the political "measures" involved are in all cases grossly uninformed and misdirected, clearly nothing more than a smokescreen to get extra tax revenue. The actual reality is that the Toyota Prius is one of the most environmentally unfriendly vehicles on the road, worse than a Jeep - because the manufacturing involved in the production of the fuel cells is very polluting.
Fuelling a vehicle is almost insignificant compared to manufacturing it, emissions-wise - if these people were genuinely interested in the environment, they would encourage people to keep their cars for 20 years, and encourage manufacturers to move towards a production model of longevity. So long as people change their vehicles on a yearly basis, anything else on the subject is just hot air. Obviously it's much more profitable to rob people blind at the pump.
Not to mention that private transport is a minor factor in the big picture compared to heating and powering buildings, but how much press does that get? No, it's much easier to pick on the guy with the big car.
It's just another excuse to control people and rob them blind, nothing else. If the issue deserved to be taken seriously, there wouldn't be a need to lie, sensationalise and distort the facts at every single juncture.
Everyone needs a doomsday scare nowadays - global warming sounds more plausible than biblical Armageddon.

 

[repiV]

[citation fucking needed]

We've been back and forth over this shit more than enough times. I've already linked to an article referencing the massive distortions made by the media. Do your own damn research, it's not exactly hard to find out.

 

[Sulkdodds]

If the issue deserved to be taken seriously, there wouldn't be a need to lie, sensationalise and distort the facts at every single juncture.

I agreed with most of that post apart from this part.

It is an issue deserving to be taken seriously, and it is a problem.
It's still lied about.
That's worse.

 

[repiV]

I agreed with most of that post apart from this part.

It is an issue deserving to be taken seriously, and it is a problem.
It's still lied about.
That's worse.

Well yes, it deserves to be taken seriously, but when virtually every claim made is grossly exaggerated, all the "anti-global warming" policies are based on outright lies, and a man wins a Nobel Peace Prize for putting out a "documentary" that contains NINE scientific errors, it makes you wonder what these people have to hide.
It's abundantly clear that the majority of people talk about global warming because it's cool and trendy, rather than because they have any actual knowledge on the subject. Not too dissimilar from clueless college students who whine on about the evils of capitalism and how awesome Che was over a Grande Latte from Starbucks. People desperately want to believe that the end of the world is nigh, I can't for the life of me figure out why. But it really is like a religion.
We had the wettest summer in recorded British history last year, and the spring months were generally warmer.

 

[ericms]

It's something for them to get behind. All those ridiculous kids need something to fixate themselves on; something against the status quo (for the sake of it). They want nothing more than a welfare state from cradle to grave.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

I was under the impression satellite temperature data has been misread (intentional or unintentionally is not known) and there has been less than 1 degree change in the last 100 years, the highest recorded temps being around the 2nd century quarter.

Just last week we have been experiencing record cold weathers. Something like 20 F below the other night, and as low as 70 below in rural Alaskan areas.

 

[repiV]

It's something for them to get behind. All those ridiculous kids need something to fixate themselves on; something against the status quo (for the sake of it). They want nothing more than a welfare state from cradle to grave.

The cult of global warming?

I was under the impression satellite temperature data has been misread (intentional or unintentionally is not known) and there has been less than 1 degree change in the last 100 years, the highest recorded temps being around the 2nd century quarter.

Just last week we have been experiencing record cold weathers. Something like 20 F below the other night, and as low as 70 below in rural Alaskan areas.

I've read similar things - such as that the global average temperature for January 2008 is actually lower than the averages from 1901-2003, but I'm too lazy to sort the fact from the fiction in these cases.
One thing is for sure though - some parts of the world are actually getting markedly colder.

 

[NeptuneUK]

The governments tend to manipulate the people rather than the other way around.
The governments aren't responding to people scared of global warming...

They make the people afraid of global warming which they can use to sway voters and public support for their actions.

 

[repiV]

The governments tend to manipulate the people rather than the other way around.
The governments aren't responding to people scared of global warming...

They make the people afraid of global warming which they can use to sway voters and public support for their actions.

Oh, absolutely. It's always the way.

Like when they couldn't figure out how to solve real gun crime, so they banned and confiscated legally held handguns instead, despite virtually all gun crime being committed with unlicensed weapons.
And ten years later, when that had the opposite effect to which they intended, they thought they'd spread lies and misinformation about imitation firearms too, so they could ban them and then look good.
Following the whole thing, it was entirely obvious that the ministers responsible for pushing this shit through didn't give a damn about anything except finding ways to support their prejudices and pushing it through at all costs.
I hate this country.

 

[bbson john]

Human race being exterminated? Gimme a break. More alarmist nonsense. What exactly qualifies you and others to label people who don't tow the line as "ignorant citizens" is beyond me, just because you've lapped up every line of shit the media's fed you doesn't make you informed.
Why would I take seriously a cause that's championed by liars and hypocrites, people who cherry-pick facts that support their argument and ignore ones that don't, all the while claiming "it's not a political issue, it's a scientific one!"
That has millions of brainless lapdogs saying "OMGZ CUT UR CARBON FOOTPRINT DOOD" without having any idea what the **** they're talking about.
Not to mention that the political "measures" involved are in all cases grossly uninformed and misdirected, clearly nothing more than a smokescreen to get extra tax revenue. The actual reality is that the Toyota Prius is one of the most environmentally unfriendly vehicles on the road, worse than a Jeep - because the manufacturing involved in the production of the fuel cells is very polluting.
Fuelling a vehicle is almost insignificant compared to manufacturing it, emissions-wise - if these people were genuinely interested in the environment, they would encourage people to keep their cars for 20 years, and encourage manufacturers to move towards a production model of longevity. So long as people change their vehicles on a yearly basis, anything else on the subject is just hot air. Obviously it's much more profitable to rob people blind at the pump.
Not to mention that private transport is a minor factor in the big picture compared to heating and powering buildings, but how much press does that get? No, it's much easier to pick on the guy with the big car.
It's just another excuse to control people and rob them blind, nothing else. If the issue deserved to be taken seriously, there wouldn't be a need to lie, sensationalise and distort the facts at every single juncture.

First of all:

Vehicle pollution is insignificant? No.

I assume your point on the production of fuel cells is correct. Production of fuel cells does lead to serious pollution, but that does not mean we have to stop developing fuel cells and put them into use. Say, several cows in a farm of Canada contracted mad-cow disease. Should we kill all the cattle in Canada and stop growing cattle forever? Of course not. This saying applies to fuel cell as well. If manufacturing fuel cells causes pollution, governments should monitor the manufacturer more carefully and search for a clean way to produce fuel cells. Rather than just saying fuel cell is somewhat a conspiracy.

Everyone needs a doomsday scare nowadays - global warming sounds more plausible than biblical Armageddon.

People desperately want to believe that the end of the world is nigh, I can't for the life of me figure out why. But it really is like a religion.

Is greenhouse effect just another version of biblical doom?

What global warming can cause ultimately? Raise of water level spells the destruction of coastal cities. Of course this is a minor effect. Shutdown of thermohaline circulation, quite a cool down of northern Europe. Probably it won't be as bad as the one in movie, I admitted. What is more troublesome is that, first, extreme weather occurs more frequently. Strong hurricanes, abnormal distribution of precipitation. On the one hand towns are destroyed by flood and gust, or stranded under heavy snowfall. Believe it or not, a lot of island countries are being toppled by weather. On the other hand, agriculture-based countries suffer from drought. Since the rainfall shifts as the Earth warms up, the what used to be farm will dry up. This causes a global food crisis. Moreover, diseases spread under the universally warmer temperature. Epidemic leads to a global health crisis. Most of the lifeforms are incapable of accustoming to the fast changing weather. Species go extinct. Other than that we are saddening by the loss of biodiversity, a practical problem is the disruption of food chain, loss of bio-mass. i.e. an even more serious food crisis.

We do have technology to sustain some of the men, but not for every one of us. A lot of people have to die for this, perhaps billions of us.

Well yes, it deserves to be taken seriously, but when virtually every claim made is grossly exaggerated, all the "anti-global warming" policies are based on outright lies, and a man wins a Nobel Peace Prize for putting out a "documentary" that contains NINE scientific errors, it makes you wonder what these people have to hide.
It's abundantly clear that the majority of people talk about global warming because it's cool and trendy, rather than because they have any actual knowledge on the subject. Not too dissimilar from clueless college students who whine on about the evils of capitalism and how awesome Che was over a Grande Latte from Starbucks.

That "all of the anti-global warming policies are based on outright lies" is one of the most obvious lie ever. The nobel peace prize is given to Al Gore because he made people more aware of environmental protection. It doesn't matter whether his scientific statements are complete correct. In fact, as you said, there are 9 mistakes in his writing. But those error is not critical enough to stagger the conclusion: global warming is anthropogenic and has to be stopped. The reason why the peace prize was given to Al Gore is not because he did any precise, outstanding scientific research. The prize was bestowed upon him because he successfully raise public awareness about global warming. The so-called 9 scientific errors are irrelevant.

We had the wettest summer in recorded British history last year, and the spring months were generally warmer.

Fool. Hong Kong got a coldest Chinese New Year too. Does this means global warming does not exist? No. Global warming is a long-term trend. Singular data means nothing. The global weather turns extreme is a general fact.



To conclude, it's abundantly clear that the people talk about anti-anti-globalwarming because it's cool and antisocial, rather than because they have any actual knowledge on the subject. It is the same reason why area 51 UFO theory and 911 skepticism always have their supporters.

 

[_Z_Ryuken]

Nice chart, now factor in natural emissions of these gases and we'll have useful data.

There is also not much evidence to support claims of the weather becoming more extreme. The past three years have been quite calm, far as I can recall.

 

[bbson john]

Extreme weather is a prediction, which is highly likely if the average global temperature keep going up.