Global warming or not?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by TGS

I too believe that much of the science is, if not exactly crap, then at least questionable. But I don't see how this ranting proves that its crap - which is what you undertook to do

Aha! I think you caught the deception!

[TGS]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Aha! I think you caught the deception!

Too deep for me

[happy_terd]

Originally Posted by TGS

I too believe that much of the science is, if not exactly crap, then at least questionable. But I don't see how this ranting proves that its crap - which is what you undertook to do

Mentioning Al Gore's name with global warming is sort of proof enough that it is one big pile of crap.

Al Gore is a jackass.

[Bilbo1967]

Originally Posted by recluse

Thank you. I shall.
Al Gore is a mental defective.
He believes that the world is ending because of capitalism.
Other mental defectives believe him.
Through bribery and threats, they forced the facts to fit their agenda.
If George W. Bush had started this, you would have laughed it off.
Climate change is natural. Species extinction is natural.
The population explosion is not.
Nature will correct.
PROVE ME WRONG

Ah, you are clearly using a definition of 'proof' that I'm not aware of.

[happy_terd]

I think Recluse makes a good point.

Originally Posted by happy_terd

Mentioning Al Gore's name with global warming is sort of proof enough that it is one big pile of crap.

Al Gore is a jackass.

[WT Sharpe]

The whole global warming "debate" comes down to climatologists vs. Fox talking points provided courtesy of Big Oil.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

The whole global warming "debate" comes down to climatologists vs. Fox talking points provided courtesy of Big Oil.

And is should not be being "played out" in the media....that's not science.

And what about String Theory that's just big corporations pushing their agendas to get government money to build LHC type devices!

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

And is should not be being "played out" in the media....that's not science.

And what about String Theory that's just big corporations pushing their agendas to get government money to build LHC type devices!

Not really a good comparison, my friend. Even the most stanch defenders of String Theory will readily admit that they still have no experimental data to back up their theory (even though it is, as the physicists like to say, a most elegant theory).

Global warming, on the other hand, has tons of experimental data to back it up from a vast array of disciplines. Evidence includes direct surface temperature analysis, analysis of boreholes, sea level rise, satellite data, permafrost melting, etc., etc., etc., etc.

The opposition has Inhofe.

The jury is still out on String Theory.

A global consensus of scientists has already reached a verdict on Climate Change.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Not really a good comparison, my friend. Even the most stanch defenders of String Theory will readily admit that they still have no experimental data to back up their theory (even though it is, as the physicists like to say, a most elegant theory).

Global warming, on the other hand, has tons of experimental data to back it up from a vast array of disciplines. Evidence includes direct surface temperature analysis, analysis of boreholes, sea level rise, satellite data, permafrost melting, etc., etc., etc., etc.

The opposition has Inhofe.

The jury is still out on String Theory.

A global consensus of scientists has already reached a verdict on Climate Change.

Truth in that, but all I was really getting at is trying to do science in the media instead of in the lab.

You are right about the data though in both cases.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Truth in that, but all I was really getting at is trying to do science in the media instead of in the lab.

You are right about the data though in both cases.

The tactics of the global warming deniers and young-earth creationists are similar. Both like to nit-pick and find anomalies, then point to them as “proof” of the falsity of evolution/global warming.

I believe one of the reasons so many people in our country have been taken in by the denial movement is that the findings of the climatologists are reported in peer-reviewed journals such as Nature, while the rebuttals of the deniers are reported on Fox News and printed in Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal. Most of the public are exposed to television, and many entrepreneurs regularly read Murdoch's Wall Street Journal; but few Americans ever read Nature. Then there’s the money trail. The deniers are always harping on grant money that scientists receive for promising research; but all the grant money in the world isn’t a hill of beans when contrasted against the deep pockets of moneyed interests such as Exxon.

[happy_terd]

They said the same thing about acid rain in the 80s.

[Sparrow]

Al Gore and/or Fox news don't really factor into the debate outside the US.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

Al Gore and/or Fox news don't really factor into the debate outside the US.

As well they shouldn't.

[dsvick]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

I believe one of the reasons so many people in our country have been taken in by the denial movement is that the findings of the climatologists are reported in peer-reviewed journals such as Nature, while the rebuttals of the deniers are reported on Fox News and printed in Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal.

It is also much more palatable to believe the person that is telling you that everything is ok and it's not your fault as opposed to the person that says you have to make large changes in your lifestyle to stop/prevent something from happening that you really can't notice yet anyway.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by happy_terd

They said the same thing about acid rain in the 80s.

The Clean Air Act has been a remarkable remarkable success story in the United States in terms of reducing the acid content of rain in this country. According to the Wikipedia article, "Overall, the Program's cap and trade program has been successful in achieving its goals. Since the 1990s, SO2 emissions have dropped 40%, and according to the Pacific Research Institute, acid rain levels have dropped 65% since 1976."

Portions of Europe and Asia still have considerable problems with acid rain. You can thank good governmental regulations in the U.S. for saving you from the problems they are encountering.

In this country, the threat didn't materialize not because the scientists were wrong; the threat didn't materialize because the scientists were listened to by a Congress who in 1980 passed the Acid Deposition Act, and in 1990 passed a series of amendments to the Clean Air Act.