Global Warming:Real or Fake?

[Reach]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

wasn't enough evidence to prove ANYTHING, just evidence in the favor of human activity having close to no effect on Global Warming.

Also, there are thousands of scientists who agree that Global Warming is a natural phenomenon and that humans have close to no effect on it. So because thousands of scientists agree with that side, do you agree with them to?

Uh yea, I'd have to say maybe before you try poking fun at me you do some research. It's almost a straight concensus across the board with scientists that the global warming trend we've seen recently is entirely our fault. There is only one scientific association that rejects the claims, and very few individual scientists.

This debate is so ridiculous. The whole point is, his claims about CO2 not influencing temperature are completely unfounded.

There isn't even a debate here really. There are several contributers to recent global warming, but manmade greenhouse gas is the driver. The only things any scientists are actually debating is the effects and what to do about it. The debate has been over for a long time, the IPCC makes it very clear.

Talisman, for a reply to the IPCC work, please watch the aforementioned documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle

Why are people still referencing this? This documentary is full of false information. They faked data and tried to pass it off as legit science, used flat out lies and generally relied on information that is from the 1980's and such to base their arguments. No wonder you are so rock solid on that water vapor crap.

I'm sorry but the authors of the documentary lied to you and there was a big controversy over it, with tons of backlash and numerous refutes to just about everything the documentary said. Go look them up.

[MrsJoshuaOlds]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

It's almost a straight concensus across the board with scientists that the global warming trend we've seen recently is entirely our fault.

The earth goes through cycles. In the 1800s, there were heat waves, much like there are now.
Plus, don't forget that in the 1970s, Time Magazine reported on global cooling, and how it was all our fault.
Don't Al Gore and all the others say this goes back to, what, the 1700s? 1800s? Somewhere in there.

I don't care. I think the whole thing is just a farce, really.

[madmatt621]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Nothing in science is real, only whether it matches up against the proof.

Global warming is supported by the vast majority of climate specialists and geologists. With a small number dissenting.

Dissent is good, because science is a debate, not a set of facts.

The real problem with proof is this.
1. The world climate changes by itself anyway and this process is not understood.
2. The time scale is long so it is not easily observed.
3. The computer models have limits imposed on them by the computing power of today (they can't even get tomorrow's weather forecast right, what can they say about the whole world in 20 years time).

In favor of it being right.
1. There is a recognized mechanism for global warming. (it is not just that we can see the weather getting warmer, but we can explain it and model it).
2. The data supports the model.

Now lets do a little risk analysis.

If it is wrong and we do nothing, nothing happens
If it is wrong and we do something, nothing happens
If it is right and we do nothing, we all die.
If it is right and we do somethng, we have a fighting change.

[Wlfwnd91]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

I'm all in favor for cleaning the air, the water, saving forests, etc. etc., and I want to help the environment as much as I can. I am by no means saying that we should keep pumping pollution into our lakes or our earth in any way shape or form. I live in the Chicago area, and I'd love to be able to go to Lake Michigan and see the lake bottom like if you go to the Caribbean. From what I've seen and what I heard, I simply chose to believe that Global Warming is a natural thing and isn't a danger to us as of right now, but we can't predict the future of weather/climate, and that's been proven. There's evidence to prove both sides, and whether any of this evidence is legit or not is hard to tell, cause it's an extremely popular topic of debate, and people (especially those in power) enjoy messing with the data they have to make people believe what they want. So, I don't know, and no one does. There's only so much we know and ever will.

EDIT: Natural thing not caused by us either

[talisman]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Time Magazine reported on global cooling, and how it was all our fault.

In that case, the press blew a few studies out of proportion. The scientific community never seriously considered the possibility of global cooling.

[Nezeru]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

OK, time to ignore talisman, as he's just providing misinformation.

Seriously, all you are doing is assuming that the overwhelming majority of scientists agree with you without doing research. Several 'authors' of the aforementioned IPCC work did not agree with the conclusions at all. You make these blanket statements like

In that case, the press blew a few studies out of proportion. The scientific community never seriously considered the possibility of global cooling.

which is clearly not true. Many leading scientists in the late 60's and early 70's believed not only that global cooling was possible, but that it was imminent and that we were headed for another ice age.

If you can't wrap your mind around that, try this one on for size: The world was, at two points in the Holocene era, several degrees warmer than it is today. And guess what? We still had land. Sea levels weren't too much higher. And people thrived just fine during the Medieval Warm Period.

[talisman]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Show me the ratio of IPCC authors who disagreed with the conclusion that humans have a greater than 90% of being a principal cause of global warming to those who don't.

I'm not assuming that the overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree with me, I'm agreeing with the overwhelming majority of climate scientists. I went to the web of knowledge just now and browsed around could not locate a single research article published in a major scientific journal in the last few years which called into question the anthropogenic nature of climate change.

also, a lazyman's quote of wikipedia: "Although there was a cooling trend then, it should be realised that climate scientists were perfectly well aware that predictions based on this trend were not possible - because the trend was poorly studied and not understood (for example see reference[8]). However in the popular press the possibility of cooling was reported generally without the caveats present in the scientific reports."

(reference 8 - Mason, B. J.. QJRMS, 1976, p 473 (Symons Memorial Lecture). Was an imminent Ice Age predicted in the '70's? No. Retrieved on November 17, 2005.)

[Jpshadsy]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Guess What!!!

Screw Global warming


I support Earth's Menopause!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[devonin]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Guess what!!!

That nonsense has no place being in CT.

[Nezeru]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Talisman, please check out Lomborg's The Skeptical Environmentalist.

[talisman]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Does that have the ratio I asked for in it? I kinda doubt it, seeing as it was published 6 years ago and the latest IPCC report came out 5 months ago.

[FaintScent]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

I'd say real
The weather is so messup these days.

[Wlfwnd91]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Does that have the ratio I asked for in it? I kinda doubt it, seeing as it was published 6 years ago and the latest IPCC report came out 5 months ago.

The IPCC seems to have you on a collar at their nut sack, I must say talisman. Everything you've said is "The IPCC this, and the IPCC that. Oh well the IPCC said this!" Do you have ANY other source of information at all? They teach you in the early grades of school to check multiple sources, because one may be wrong. What you're doing is basically following a religion. Believing everything without questioning. Are you a Christian? Yes, I'm going somewhere with that question that has good place here.

[Nezeru]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

Wlfwnd91 beat me to it. =(

[talisman]

Re: Global Warming:Real or Fake?

The IPCC is the most recent and most comprehensive evaluation of all the science on global warming. It's a perfectly valid source.

It's been endorsed by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the US National Academy of Science, Joint Science Academies, the American Meteorological Society, and many other institutions. The only scientific institution publicly disagreeing with this consensus is the American Association of Petroleum Geologists (I wonder why...), and even they admit they are reconsidering their position because "the current policy statement is not supported by a significant number of our members and prospective members."

Hell, look at the Oreskes, 2004 review. 928 studies between 1993 and 2003 dealing with climate change were looked at, and not one challenged the consensus view.

all of this is on the wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

Additionally, nezeru, you still haven't told me which contributing IPCC authors disagree with the consensus view that humans have a greater than 90% chance of being the primary cause of climate change. If you say that some disagree with this, then I want to know who. Otherwise you were just making it up.

Edit: oh and I'm nonreligious.