|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: An inconvenient truth.... or lie? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 9003 From: Canada Joined: |
Using firefox I have no problem accessing the site and their climate change articles.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2127 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
While a much longer post would be required to go into the facts of global climate change, let me just point one thing out. Global warming (and not much of it) can melt large chunks of the Greenland ice mass (already happening) and that flood of colder water would then change the course of the warm water currents from the equator to the North Atlantic (inevitably) and thus drop the temperature of the entire North Atlantic sufficiently to kick Europe into a deep freeze (not a good thing).
That very thing happened not too long ago. A warm cycle, the Medieval Warm Period, was followed closely by the Little Ice Age, with the effects you describe for Europe. Near as I can tell, human activity was not shown to be a cause of either. Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3933 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
Well, so far as you have presented in this thread is commentary. I am not trying to be dense, but do you have any real news treatment of this issue or can you please lay out in your own words with reference to the text that was leaked and the problem here?
I don't care about Joe Blow pseudo-expert's opinion. I want facts. Again, not to be combative but just wanting to give you some constructive criticism, you seem to be very credulous about your sources starting with the stuff you were presenting in the hate crime thread. I am legitimately ignorant on this issue so I am not even trying to play opponent yet. But it just seems that every time I look at something you present the skeptic inside me wants to cry. Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4532 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined: |
And what would the effects of an ice age, even a moderate one, on Europe today? How many more people are living there today than there were in the Middle Ages? Are they ready to see much of their agricultural base buried under snow for most of the year? Can they all just move south somewhere? You're an anthropologist; what do you think the ripple effects on the world's demographics would be?
Look, I think that we both agree that the advent of an ice age anywhere on this planet would be a Bad Thing. The question is how much of the climate change we're seeing is anthropogenic. The evidence I've seen strongly supports a correlation between the increase in human production of greenhouse gasses and the unmistakable rise in global temperature. Does the following graph look like a correlation between industrialization and a rise in CO2 levels? And does it look like it's following the same historical cycles that you're talking about?
(source: EPA) For me, the big question is: who profits? Who's got the money? Who has a vested interest in maintaining our current dependence on carbon-based fuels? Is there really some secret power base of underfunded scientists, solar farmers and windmill owners who are out to dominate the global marketplace and rule the world? As mentioned, even if the human factor in the current climate shifts turns out to be insignificant, what do we lose by moving away from fossil fuels? So far as I can tell, we lose a dependence on a limited resource that is already in decline, we lose economic dependence on foreign countries not all of whom have warm and loving feelings toward the US, we lose a major source of additional environmental pollutants, and we lose a golden opportunity to be in the lead in developing and advancing alternative fuel resources, with all the attendant econimic benefits. Coyote, I totally respect you and find pretty much everything you say here at this forum to be spot on, but I'm sorry; I can't see any downside at all in a determined effort to get away as quickly as is socially and technologically possible from carbon-based fuels.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1962 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Hyroglypx writes: The dependency on oil, especially foreign oil, is a big problem. The US should never have been so dependent on foreign oil. That's just one more reason why we should shift away from it. The globe and it's resource belong to whoever is in a position to lay claim to it. And always has done. The notion that the U.S. is reliant "foreign" oil is illusionary. Foreign oil is as much the U.S.'s as is the oil under Texas. The manner in which ownership is exercised might vary: invasion, puppet governments, exploitation rights granted etc. but that is just detail. -
I guess the point I am trying to make in general is that special interests groups exist to subvert and to dominate. But it seems especially sinister and disgusting when it is done under the pretext of "saving the planet." There's nothing new under the sun.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4662 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
I think we can all agree that the 'Hockey stick' graphs aren't really reliable in the light of these leaks ...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DevilsAdvocate Member (Idle past 3123 days) Posts: 1548 Joined: |
I think we can all agree that the 'Hockey stick' graphs aren't really reliable in the light of these leaks ... Please elaborate otherwise you are just another internet bandwagoner regurgitating conspiracy theories. Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given. One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan "It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4532 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined: |
slevesque writes: I think we can all agree that the 'Hockey stick' graphs aren't really reliable in the light of these leaks ... No, not at all. The "hoax" exposed by the supposed leaked emails is nothing of the sort, and the "outrage" coming out of the usual media suspects is manufactured and deceptive piffle, meant only to rile up the masses. I recommend this video for a more rational perspective. (Of course, I'm also a sucker for people explaining things in calm British accents.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3313 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
Please don't make me chase you around, Buz.
Give us quotes directly from these emails that you think are damning evidence of this supposed massive fraud and we can discuss from there. All you've done so far is post links to opinions. Again, anybody can have an opinion on anything. My opinion is that christians are necessarily liars. This doesn't mean that quoting me will actually prove that christians are in fact liars. PS - It only took half a dozen posts before people got side-tracked. Stop this, people! Let's discuss the real crux of the matter, which is the supposed questionable emails themselves.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3313 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
sleveque, I'm going to post the same request I did with Buzsaw. Post quotes directly from the emails themselves and we can discuss from there. You can quote faux news' opinions all you want in a gay-hating evangelical baptist church all you want. I don't think it's too much to ask to look directly at the sources of the so-called controversy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Taz writes: Please don't make me chase you around, Buz. Hi Taz. I've been to church, out for dinner and researching different POVs on the topic. Had you been doing your own homework, you would not have sat around Christophobically stewing while someone else does your research for you.
Taz writes: Give us quotes directly from these emails that you think are damning evidence of this supposed massive fraud and we can discuss from there. All you've done so far is post links to opinions. Again, anybody can have an opinion on anything. My opinion is that christians are necessarily liars. This doesn't mean that quoting me will actually prove that christians are in fact liars. LOL on hijacking this thread to promote your Christian fobia. This has nothing to do with Christianity and Christians perse. If you want to see the emails, don't go to Christian sites The links are all over the web, primarily on secularist sites, including The Wall Street Journal . There's a couple of samples on this site and if you wish you can click on the site and download the whole huge batch of them. Few objective cites out there on the www are denying that the hijacked 1000 plus emails exist or that many are not incriminating in nature. So cool your heels, Google global warming email scandal and go figure for yourself. If you can refute the data already cited, go for it. The thread eagerly awaits some sound (I say 'sound') substantive refutations. Btw, Taz, did you read me above where Christian Buz is calling for relatively soon to come end time global warming? Most are not denying climate change which could result in ultimate global warming. That's definitely both Biblical and scientific. The scandal has mostly to do cooking the books/data so as to falsly highly over-rate implication of man made carbon dioxide etc.
Wall Street Journal writes:
The scientific community is buzzing over thousands of emails and documents -- posted on the Internet last week after being hacked from a prominent climate-change research center -- that some say raise ethical questions about a group of scientists who contend humans are responsible for global warming. The correspondence between dozens of climate-change researchers, including many in the U.S., illustrates bitter feelings among those who believe human activities cause global warming toward rivals who argue that the link between humans and climate change remains uncertain.......... .Some emails also refer to efforts by scientists who believe man is causing global warming to exclude contrary views from important scientific publications. "This is horrible," said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is mentioned negatively in the emails. "This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn't questionable practice, this is unethical." In all, more than 1,000 emails and more than 2,000 other documents were stolen Thursday from the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia University in the U.K. The identity of the hackers isn't certain, but the files were posted on a Russian file-sharing server late Thursday, and university officials confirmed over the weekend that their computer had been attacked and said the documents appeared to be genuine. "The selective publication of some stolen emails and other papers taken out of context is mischievous and cannot be considered a genuine attempt to engage with this issue in a responsible way," the university said. Most climate scientists today argue that the earth's temperature is rising, and nearly all of those agree that human activity is likely to be a prime or at least significant cause. But a vocal minority dispute one or both of those views. A partial review of the hacked material suggests there was an effort at East Anglia, which houses an important center of global climate research, to shut out dissenters and their points of view. In the emails, which date to 1996, researchers in the U.S. and the U.K. repeatedly take issue with climate research at odds with their own findings. In some cases, they discuss ways to rebut what they call "disinformation" using new articles in scientific journals or popular Web sites. The emails include discussions of apparent efforts to make sure that reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations group that monitors climate science, include their own views and exclude others. In addition, emails show that climate scientists declined to make their data available to scientists whose views they disagreed with. In one email, Benjamin Santer from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif., wrote to the director of the climate-study center that he was "tempted to beat" up Mr. Michaels. Mr. Santer couldn't be reached for comment Sunday. ..... Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics' research was unwelcome: We "will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" ......... John Christy, a scientist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville attacked in the emails for asking that an IPCC report include dissenting viewpoints, said, "It's disconcerting to realize that legislative actions this nation is preparing to take, and which will cost trillions of dollars, are based upon a view of climate that has not been completely scientifically tested." Embolding mine for emphasis. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ZenMonkey Member (Idle past 4532 days) Posts: 428 From: Portland, OR USA Joined: |
Fine, Buz. Now please go look up the emails themselves, not what someone else is saying about them. There is a difference. What do the emails themselves say, and in what context?
Oh, and it wouldn't hurt to view the video I linked to at Message 23.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taz Member (Idle past 3313 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: |
You're the one accusing the entire scientific community of massive fraud. You present the evidence. Show us quotes directly from the emails and discuss about them, not what someone else says about them.
Buzsaw writes:
Christians are liars. Go google it and see for yourself. See? I can play this game, too.
So cool your heels, Google global warming email scandal and go figure for yourself.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
ZenMonkey writes: Fine, Buz. Now please go look up the emails themselves, not what someone else is saying about them. There is a difference. What do the emails themselves say, and in what context?Oh, and it wouldn't hurt to view the video I linked to at Message 23. Hi Zen. I viewed the email this afternoon. Like some of you, the video was more abour bashing the messengers who did the research and reported pertinent news than about substantive refutation of the message they aired. It appears that neither you or Taz read my last message carefully enough to notice that I said you could simply click on the WSJ link which I provided and read two samplings of the emails word for word or that you could download the whole cabootle of them if you wanted to read all 1000 plus of them hacked. If you folks choose to disbelieve the reportings of the WSJ, the London Times, London Telegraph and other tabloids, that's your perrogative. I've cited some stuff which you can choose to reject or accept as reliable. I'm not going to spend a lot of time arguing about whether these journalists are objective or not who have reported on it. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Taz, I've cited the data, including a sampling of actual emails from mainline secularist tabloids. How do you deduce that into concluding that Christians are liars and what does personally attacking Christian members of this board have to do with this topic?
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024