Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!!
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 31 of 944 (749821)
02-09-2015 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by marc9000
02-08-2015 8:42 PM


Re: Sorry, there was no "pause" in global warming ...
marc9000 writes:
Except for 31,000 scientists ?
While God may have put a limit on how knowledgeable people might be, it seems that there is no limit on how ignorant the Christian Cult of Ignorance can be.
Climate Change deniers are at best willfully ignorant but far too often simply con men. Whether or not climate change is human caused, the fact is that the human caused components are the only ones we have any reasonable hope of effecting over the short term.
You have to be dumber than a red brick to not see that.
Fortunately most folk around the world are not dumber than a red brick and so even if the pitiful example of humanity that make up the Christian Right and Conservative party in the US stick their heads in the sand and try to ignore the issue, the rest of the world will not and they will be better prepared to minimize the disasters for their people.
If necessary the rest of the world will finally kick the US's ass and force it to get real or just write it off as another failed experiment and go on with their lives.
Edited by jar, : rally appalin spallin

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by marc9000, posted 02-08-2015 8:42 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(3)
Message 32 of 944 (749827)
02-09-2015 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by marc9000
02-08-2015 8:32 PM


I didn't specify which end was doing the exhaling! Seriously, it was you, earlier, who made the distinction between biological versus technological sources of carbon dioxide. If biological carbon dioxide is doing any sizable contribution to global warming...
You are not being honest. You said exhaling carbon dioxide. That means breathing and not farting. And has been explained to you, biological carbon dioxide generate by humans is not a factor and won't be unless we learn to ingest fossil fuel. Human beings actually remove carbon from the atmosphere over their lifetime unless we cremate their bodies at death. Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
You see plants convert CO2 (from the atmosphere) and water to food, which is eaten by animals. We eat the plants and animals. When we generate energy from said food, we exhale CO2 back into the atmosphere. But some of that carbon gets converted into body mass, so we keep more CO2 than we take in. Get it?
But mere human existence does!
Well, no. That's the point.
But if you are conceding the point that human activity (other than breathing) raises CO2 levels, that would be a welcome acknowledgement. As long as those activities are either avoidable, or have substitutes, those activities can be considered for modification. Breathing, fortunately is not one of those issues.
Living, breathing
Wrong breathing is not an issue.
burning things to keep warm, driving even the tiniest compact cars
Yes, which is why reducing or finding substitutes for some of those things is something to be considered. There are alternative ways to keep warm and to power automobiles.
allowing rich global warming activist billionaires to fly jets
Surely, this is among one of the more idiotic reasons to ignore a problem.
Razd took one, and copy/pasted a whole bunch of rabbit trails to try to draw me into years worth of dances that the scientific community has come up with
I think that is what is called a rebuttal.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by marc9000, posted 02-08-2015 8:32 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by marc9000, posted 02-10-2015 7:14 PM NoNukes has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 33 of 944 (749835)
02-09-2015 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by marc9000
02-08-2015 8:42 PM


Re: Sorry, there was no "pause" in global warming ...
Except for 31,000 scientists ?
quote:
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs
And how many of them are climate scientists?
quote:
Qualifications of Signers
The following outline gives a more detailed analysis of the signers' educations.
Atmosphere, Earth, & Environment (3,805)
1. Atmosphere (579)
I) Atmospheric Science (112)
II) Climatology (39)
III) Meteorology (343)
IV) Astronomy (59)
V) Astrophysics (26)

So, only 39 are climatologists ... Surprised they don't list astrologists ...
So let me correct that for you:
Except for 31,000 people that claim to have some scientific background?
The card signed is an example: PhD in Physics ... which does not automatically make him any kind of expert in climate science ... IF the science in question is NOT in the field that a scientist has studied and worked in, then he is no more knowledgeable than the average person.
This is the same logical fallacy of appeal to authority that AIG or the Discover Institute makes in their list of "scientists" who deny evolution.
I wonder how many climate scientists name Steve are convinced that global warming is occurring ...
quote:
Creationists draw up these lists to try to convince the public that evolution is somehow being rejected by scientists, that it is a "theory in crisis." Not everyone realizes that this claim is unfounded. NCSE has been asked numerous times to compile a list of thousands of scientists affirming the validity of the theory of evolution. Although we easily could have done so, we have resisted. We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!
Project Steve pokes fun at this practice and, because "Steves" are only about 1% of scientists, it also makes the point that tens of thousands of scientists support evolution. And it honors the late Stephen Jay Gould, evolutionary biologist, NCSE supporter, and friend.
The number of climate scientists on record as dissenting or skeptical of global climate change is on the order of 3% of scientists working in the field.
Notice the wickedly precise and cogent reason for the denial ...
... The global warming scare is only a few decades old, unlike evolution, which has had about 100 years to politically strengthen itself. Evolution is pretty advanced in finding ways to rationalize its failures. Global warming advocates have a long way to go to rationalize their failures.
Your paranoid conspiracy delusion is showing again. The science is strengthened by facts supporting it and a failure on the part of skeptics, deniers and disbelievers to demonstrate that the science is wrong.
More cherry-picking of a temporary variation on a long term trend ...
quote:
Arctic Sea Ice
Arctic sea ice extent was the third lowest for the month of January. Ice extent remained lower than average in the Bering Sea and Sea of Okhotsk, while ice in the Barents Sea was near average. Antarctic sea ice extent declined rapidly in late January, but remains high.
This below-average Arctic extent is mainly a result of lower-than-average extent in the Bering Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk. On the Atlantic side, Barents Sea ice extent is near average. This is in sharp contrast to the general pattern seen since 2004 of below average extent in this region, but above average extent in the Bering Sea. Ice extent is also near average in the East Greenland Sea, Baffin Bay and the Labrador Sea.
January 2015 compared to previous years
Figure 3. Monthly January ice extent for
1979 to 2015 shows a decline of 3.2% per
decade relative to the 1981 to 2010 average.
Arctic sea ice extent for January was the third lowest in the satellite record. Through 2015, the linear rate of decline for January extent over the satellite record is 3.2% per decade.
Also see Update Your Browser | Facebook
for a video showing time lapse satellite data.
Climate change is not constant for any single area on the globe, the pattern or areas affected change from year to year because ... it is climate, a variable system.
You have to look at the long term trends for any specific area, rather than pick out a recent variation on that trend, as that is like quote mining of what people are saying, misrepresenting the actual trend.
The other problem with sea ice is that it is heavily influenced by the amount of fresh water on the surface near the poles. It isn't glacial ice, but the fresh water can result from melting glacial ice, and as fresh water floats on salt water more sea ice could be result from more summer melting of the glacial ice.
Additionally, the tundra is thawing to unprecedented levels, which also means ancient CO2 and methane are being released into the atmosphere.

Study Says Melting Permafrost Emitting More Carbon Than Tundra Can Offset

Frozen Alaska
Arctic Tundra is Being Lost As Far North Quickly Warms
Note some of this is old news ...
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by marc9000, posted 02-08-2015 8:42 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 34 of 944 (749843)
02-09-2015 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by marc9000
02-08-2015 8:32 PM


The Wikipedia link I referred to earlier claimed a close comparison to the several thousand (or several million) dinosaurs fart machines to 7 billion human fart machines.
I don't know if you simply lack understanding or if you are just throwing out stuff to see what sticks. The phrasing used in the wiki article was 'humanity's current methane release' which means not just methane from man's digestive system, said amount being insignificant, but also methane generated from biomass decomposition in land fills, during manufacturing, drilling, fracking, mining, mishandling from natural gas transit systems, etc. In short, methane from all man-made activity.
If you were actually serious about wanting to throw more of the blame on methane, then what changes is the human activities that we ought to be looking at and maybe doing something about. But both CO2 and methane are issues.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Je Suis Charlie
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by marc9000, posted 02-08-2015 8:32 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 35 of 944 (749875)
02-09-2015 8:43 PM


HBD hasn't checked in yet, so I'll wait another day or two before I have more questions, and probably a summary. But here are a few questions that I've asked that haven't been addressed yet, very basic ones that any honest global warming advocate should be able to easily answer;
Message 9 I take it you don't drive a car or ride a bus much. What fuel is used to heat your home? Is there anything YOU can do personally to combat global warming?
a similar one;
Message 15 How guilty do you think YOU are about global warming?
But the following one is the most important one;
Message 25 What is the difference between climate change and global warming?
This one I haven't asked yet, but after watching the o/p vid again, it comes to mind;, At the 1;01 point, Muller says that his findings come as a "wonderful surprise", at the 1:38 point, the upswing in temperatures is a "nice curve", and at about the 2:00 mark he's so happy about global warming he looks like he would if he was about to get laid! What is it about what is considered a worldwide problem that makes some people so HAPPY?
Edited by marc9000, : typo

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by glowby, posted 02-12-2015 5:46 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 36 of 944 (749876)
02-09-2015 9:30 PM


Just up on FB, case closed!
quote:
It's a Hoax, Folks - Soapbox 2/9/15
When Al Gore released his An Inconvenient Truth movie a few years ago he opened up a can of worms that crawl the earth to this day.
Let me preface this column by first of all admitting that I don't believe in man made global warming, that the temperature of this and every other planet is controlled by the hand of the Creator and that it is arrogant for man to think he could assume that role for either bad or good purposes.
I do not deny that the earth warms and cools but that is a natural occurrence that has taken place since the earth was created and will continue as long as the world exists.
My source, The Holy Bible "As long as the earth endures, seed time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease." — Genesis 8:22.
Thus has it been and thus shall it ever be as long as earth endures and though man can certainly contribute to making the earth a better place to live he will never be able to bring the global temperature up or down by as much as one degree, greenhouse gases and other factors notwithstanding.
Now the name of the problem has been changed from global warming to climate change, an innocuous title that can be stretched in either direction to accommodate a record snowfall or a record heat wave and any of the numerous natural geological anomalies can be incorporated into the catch all "climate change".
For over one hundred years the global warming, global cooling, climate change crowd have vacillated several times between global heat that would melt the polar ice caps and global freezing which would bring on a new ice age.
Please don't take my word for this or any of the rest of the information I use in this column, as it is easily accessible, just do some research on your own.
First of all, global warming, climate change or whatever the nom du jour, has little to do with the weather on Planet Earth and almost everything to do with scaring the heck out of the population so they will be willing to allow global bureaucracies and enforcement agencies to be created to deal with it, all at our expense naturally.
So who do they come after? Why the most ecologically compliant nations who just happen to be the most prosperous nations on earth, all but ignoring the real offenders of China, Russia, India, practically all of the oil rich Middle East, the destitute nations of Africa, where almost continual war has created deforestation causing dust bowls, and unmanageable refugee problems.
They show you heart-tugging pictures of struggling polar bears floating around on little ice Islands, never telling you that this is normal behavior for polar bears which are capable of swimming 75 to 100 miles and go wherever the food is, never stymied by open water.
They tell you that it's "settled science" knowing full well that two out of the three imminent, world class scientists at the recent Mombasa conference disputed the "settled science".
They don't tell you that the Global Historical Climate Network, a U.S. Government entity, has been adjusting the temperature findings to reflect a warming trend. Proven by Paul Homewood, who recorded the actual temperatures in several locations and found them to reflect different numbers than the ones reported by the GHCN.
They want you to forget about the leaked emails from the UK’s University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit which show that these climate researchers were conspiring to adjust temperatures up and down in their findings to support the claims of man made warming.
In a perfect world and an administration that was motivated by truly serving the American public rather than trying to gain more power would have exposed this and punished the guilty parties.
And folks, that's what this whole thing is about, globalization, income redistribution and centralization of power, control over every aspect of public and personal life, a scare tactic, predicated on a lie and promoted by the same people who assured you that "there's not a smidgen of corruption at the IRS", that "you can keep your own doctor period", that ISIS was a JV team".
The theory so soundly endorsed by Al Gore and his ilk is falling apart and you aren't likely to read about it in the New York Times or see a CBS special on the subject, so if you want the truth just start digging around for yourself.
Check the history of the movement, check all of the latest findings and consider what the politicians pushing this hoax have to gain and what you and your kids and grandkids have to lose.
It will be a sobering experience.
What do you think?
Pray for our troops and the peace of Jerusalem.
God Bless America
Charlie Daniels

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by herebedragons, posted 02-09-2015 10:18 PM marc9000 has replied
 Message 39 by subbie, posted 02-09-2015 10:53 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(1)
Message 37 of 944 (749877)
02-09-2015 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by marc9000
02-08-2015 8:11 PM


Sorry marc, really busy. I shouldn't even be on here right now... I have more important things I should be focused on. So I will just address a couple of things real quick.
I wonder why Richard Muller didn't mention methane in the vid in the o/p? At the end of the vid, he seemed pretty adamant that carbon dioxide was IT.
Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas molecule for molecule, but the amounts are small compared to CO2. CO2 is the predominate greenhouse gas - that is it is the gas that is having the largest greenhouse effect overall.
What is the difference between climate change and global warming? The two terms seem to be used interchangeably.
Yea, the terms are used kind of interchangeably. Climate change is actually the more accurate description. As some one pointed out (RAZD I think) that on a global scale, temperature is rising but some areas are actually cooling. The reason that climate change is a better descriptor is that what we are seeing is a shifting in climatic conditions on a global scale.
So you admit that it is ethics, politics, and NOT SCIENCE?
No. Science is neutral in regard to ethics and politics. Science identified a problem. How we as humans respond to that problem is dependent on ethics and politics. So there is the science of climate change and the politics and ethics of climate change.
What have YOU done personally? Is there anything in your lifestyle that's going to change to help address it?
I have installed a 96% efficiency furnace which cut my natural gas usage by about 30%. I keep my thermostat at 64F when we are not home and 68F when we are home. I plan to continue to improve the energy efficiency of my house. Although our situation is such that we must have 2 cars, both of our cars are as small as we can get away with.
I have only a couple incandescent bulbs left in my house (because they can't be replace with CFLs), and I am slowly converting those to LEDs (which are still quite expensive). I recycle everything I can, including composting. I plan to install rain barrels this summer to reduce my usage of municipal water.
I know that's not a whole heck of a lot, but its what I can do at this time.
One more degree? Two? What is the projection? Numbers please.
Estimates vary, but even 2 degrees is a significant change on an annual, global scale (remember we are talking about degrees Celsius). Try the following charts as a more extreme projection - that is if we continue to increase global CO2 production at the current rate (not maintain the current levels but maintain the current growth rate).
These projections suggest that January temperatures will rise 11oC in some areas (the Arctic mostly) by 2050. That's huge!!!
Now, I think we need to be careful about "doom-and-gloom" projections. But it seems really clear that we need to adjust our course.
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by marc9000, posted 02-08-2015 8:11 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by marc9000, posted 02-10-2015 7:39 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 857 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 38 of 944 (749878)
02-09-2015 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by marc9000
02-09-2015 9:30 PM


Oh how I hate it when people get their science from Facebook. I don't think I have seen a scientifically accurate meme yet!!!
One quote in this really bothers me
quote:
that the temperature of this and every other planet is controlled by the hand of the Creator and that it is arrogant for man to think he could assume that role for either bad or good purposes.
This is the height of ignorance. Let me put this in a different light. Would it be okay for me to pour dry-cleaning fluid (perchlorate) on the ground behind my business? Would it be okay to pour my used cutting oils from my manufacturing facility into the local river? Would it be okay for me to dump mine tailings from my coal mine in your residential area?
NO?
But I think that the health of this planet is controlled by the hand of the Creator and it is arrogant of man to think that he is powerful enough to pollute God's green earth.
How would that go over??
This FB post is the poster child of climate change ignorance. How can you possibly think that this writer made a case against global warming??
HBD

Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca
"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.
Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by marc9000, posted 02-09-2015 9:30 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by marc9000, posted 02-10-2015 8:40 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(1)
Message 39 of 944 (749888)
02-09-2015 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by marc9000
02-09-2015 9:30 PM


There are two possibilities, either you believe this screed or you don't. If you believe it, you are so immune to the effects of evidence and reason that nothing anyone can say will affect you in any way. If you don't believe it, you're just trolling. Either way there's no point in engaging you further.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by marc9000, posted 02-09-2015 9:30 PM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 40 of 944 (749978)
02-10-2015 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by NoNukes
02-09-2015 10:45 AM


Get it?
I've pretty well got it, thanks. What I've been searching for, and what you've somewhat explained, is what the scientific community expects to target to combat global warming. (or climate change, whichever it is this week)
Apparently, the extermination of 2 or 3 billion human beings isn't on the radar, so that's a relief. But other than breathing, walking, farting, just about every other human activity could be subject for future scientific investigation, to see if it will be permitted, or simply licensed, regulated, or restricted.
marc9000 writes:
allowing rich global warming activist billionaires to fly jets
Surely, this is among one of the more idiotic reasons to ignore a problem.
Idiotic? Questioning corruption, and uneven application of rules?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by NoNukes, posted 02-09-2015 10:45 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by NoNukes, posted 02-11-2015 7:22 PM marc9000 has replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 41 of 944 (749979)
02-10-2015 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by herebedragons
02-09-2015 10:08 PM


Sorry marc, really busy. I shouldn't even be on here right now... I have more important things I should be focused on. So I will just address a couple of things real quick.
Time is not a problem, take the time you need. I do appreciate responses without personal attacks.
marc9000 writes:
What is the difference between climate change and global warming? The two terms seem to be used interchangeably.
Yea, the terms are used kind of interchangeably. Climate change is actually the more accurate description. As some one pointed out (RAZD I think) that on a global scale, temperature is rising but some areas are actually cooling. The reason that climate change is a better descriptor is that what we are seeing is a shifting in climatic conditions on a global scale.
It's logical to view that with suspicion, as many people do, because at first, warming was suspected on a global scale. That was how the hoax got started. When some cooling trends were discovered, a hasty change had to be invented to keep the hoax going. (Yes, I use the term "hoax" now, as I easily find new information. Explanations to follow.
No. Science is neutral in regard to ethics and politics. Science identified a problem. How we as humans respond to that problem is dependent on ethics and politics. So there is the science of climate change and the politics and ethics of climate change.
I can go along with that, but I think you still confuse science with the activities of scientists. More detail to follow.
I have installed a 96% efficiency furnace which cut my natural gas usage by about 30%. I keep my thermostat at 64F when we are not home and 68F when we are home. I plan to continue to improve the energy efficiency of my house. Although our situation is such that we must have 2 cars, both of our cars are as small as we can get away with.
I have only a couple incandescent bulbs left in my house (because they can't be replace with CFLs), and I am slowly converting those to LEDs (which are still quite expensive). I recycle everything I can, including composting. I plan to install rain barrels this summer to reduce my usage of municipal water.
I know that's not a whole heck of a lot, but its what I can do at this time.
I think the U.S. government is already well on the way to mandating most of that stuff. The mandates will continue, hopefully they won't come so fast that you WON'T be able to do them. Would you like to see all methane releasing landfills be taken over and run by government? Will you be able to pay THAT bill? Have you ever sat in line in a auto emissions testing lane?
These projections suggest that January temperatures will rise 11oC in some areas (the Arctic mostly) by 2050. That's huge!!!
Projections are not testable, falsifiable science. Aren't you glad no decisions were made concerning the projections that entire polar icecaps would be melted by 2013, etc.?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by herebedragons, posted 02-09-2015 10:08 PM herebedragons has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by frako, posted 02-11-2015 6:11 AM marc9000 has not replied

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1509
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 42 of 944 (749985)
02-10-2015 8:40 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by herebedragons
02-09-2015 10:18 PM


Oh how I hate it when people get their science from Facebook.
What Daniels wrote was not science, and not intended to be taken as science. Let's run through it all;
quote:
When Al Gore released his An Inconvenient Truth movie a few years ago he opened up a can of worms that crawl the earth to this day.
Let me preface this column by first of all admitting that I don't believe in man made global warming, that the temperature of this and every other planet is controlled by the hand of the Creator and that it is arrogant for man to think he could assume that role for either bad or good purposes.
I do not deny that the earth warms and cools but that is a natural occurrence that has taken place since the earth was created and will continue as long as the world exists.
My source, The Holy Bible "As long as the earth endures, seed time and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease." — Genesis 8:22.
Thus has it been and thus shall it ever be as long as earth endures and though man can certainly contribute to making the earth a better place to live he will never be able to bring the global temperature up or down by as much as one degree, greenhouse gases and other factors notwithstanding.
Scientists beliefs, from a naturalist perspective, about what they can do, isn't science. It's a naturalistic worldview.
quote:
Now the name of the problem has been changed from global warming to climate change, an innocuous title that can be stretched in either direction to accommodate a record snowfall or a record heat wave and any of the numerous natural geological anomalies can be incorporated into the catch all "climate change".
For over one hundred years the global warming, global cooling, climate change crowd have vacillated several times between global heat that would melt the polar ice caps and global freezing which would bring on a new ice age.
That's not science, and not intended to be taken as science. It's an opinion on what the scientific community has done, a very logical questioning of what its motives might be.
quote:
Please don't take my word for this or any of the rest of the information I use in this column, as it is easily accessible, just do some research on your own.
You disregard this as some kind of uninformed science? Try this experiment for me - type "climategate" into a google search. It's been kept as quiet as possible in the news media, but you've probably heard of it. It involved, among other things, intercepted emails exposing FRAUD in the scientific community. Now I realize that you'll find lots of links on the first google page, most of them downplaying it as no big deal. In many of those links, you'll find the word "STOLEN" as a way to somehow nullify what those emails showed. Now type the words "Wedge Document" into a search. It was STOLEN in exactly the same way as those emails. But you don't find the word "stolen" do you? "Leaked" is the word you'll most likely find. It's not science, when people notice the double standards, the hypocrisy
quote:
First of all, global warming, climate change or whatever the nom du jour, has little to do with the weather on Planet Earth and almost everything to do with scaring the heck out of the population so they will be willing to allow global bureaucracies and enforcement agencies to be created to deal with it, all at our expense naturally.
It's not science to realize that the temperature in the midwest U.S., where I live, varies by about 110 degrees F. in any one year. (extremes of about 10 below, to 100 above.) Claims about the catastrophes that will happen in a degree or two of temperature change aren't considered science, when it's taken into consideration that the scientific community has falsified some data, as has been proven.
quote:
So who do they come after? Why the most ecologically compliant nations who just happen to be the most prosperous nations on earth, all but ignoring the real offenders of China, Russia, India, practically all of the oil rich Middle East, the destitute nations of Africa, where almost continual war has created deforestation causing dust bowls, and unmanageable refugee problems.
They show you heart-tugging pictures of struggling polar bears floating around on little ice Islands, never telling you that this is normal behavior for polar bears which are capable of swimming 75 to 100 miles and go wherever the food is, never stymied by open water.
They tell you that it's "settled science" knowing full well that two out of the three imminent, world class scientists at the recent Mombasa conference disputed the "settled science".
It's not science, and not intended to be taken as science, to question the motives of the scientific community.
quote:
They don't tell you that the Global Historical Climate Network, a U.S. Government entity, has been adjusting the temperature findings to reflect a warming trend. Proven by Paul Homewood, who recorded the actual temperatures in several locations and found them to reflect different numbers than the ones reported by the GHCN.
A very recent article with more detail of that is here.
quote:
They tell you that it's "settled science" knowing full well that two out of the three imminent, world class scientists at the recent Mombasa conference disputed the "settled science".
They want you to forget about the leaked emails from the UK’s University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit which show that these climate researchers were conspiring to adjust temperatures up and down in their findings to support the claims of man made warming.
In a perfect world and an administration that was motivated by truly serving the American public rather than trying to gain more power would have exposed this and punished the guilty parties.
And folks, that's what this whole thing is about, globalization, income redistribution and centralization of power, control over every aspect of public and personal life, a scare tactic, predicated on a lie and promoted by the same people who assured you that "there's not a smidgen of corruption at the IRS", that "you can keep your own doctor period", that ISIS was a JV team".
The theory so soundly endorsed by Al Gore and his ilk is falling apart and you aren't likely to read about it in the New York Times or see a CBS special on the subject, so if you want the truth just start digging around for yourself.
Check the history of the movement, check all of the latest findings and consider what the politicians pushing this hoax have to gain and what you and your kids and grandkids have to lose.
Why would you think he was attempting to be a scientist, by warning about actions of the scientific community?
quote:
that the temperature of this and every other planet is controlled by the hand of the Creator and that it is arrogant for man to think he could assume that role for either bad or good purposes.
This is the height of ignorance. Let me put this in a different light. Would it be okay for me to pour dry-cleaning fluid (perchlorate) on the ground behind my business? Would it be okay to pour my used cutting oils from my manufacturing facility into the local river? Would it be okay for me to dump mine tailings from my coal mine in your residential area?
NO?
No! There is a world of difference in local pollution versus controlling the temperature of the planet!
But I think that the health of this planet is controlled by the hand of the Creator and it is arrogant of man to think that he is powerful enough to pollute God's green earth.
Was that supposed to be a quote of what he said? HE DIDN'T SAY THAT.
quote:
I don't believe in man made global warming, that the temperature of this and every other planet is controlled by the hand of the Creator and that it is arrogant for man to think he could assume that role for either bad or good purposes.
and;
quote:
though man can certainly contribute to making the earth a better place to live he will never be able to bring the global temperature up or down by as much as one degree, greenhouse gases and other factors notwithstanding.
How would that go over??
Depends if someone dishonestly misquotes him.
This FB post is the poster child of climate change ignorance. How can you possibly think that this writer made a case against global warming??
All one has to do is follow his suggestions for research, and it becomes clearer and clearer that the global warming hoax has already been BUSTED more than the Piltdown man hoax.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by herebedragons, posted 02-09-2015 10:18 PM herebedragons has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by glowby, posted 02-12-2015 8:46 PM marc9000 has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 43 of 944 (750000)
02-11-2015 6:11 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by marc9000
02-10-2015 7:39 PM


Have you ever sat in line in a auto emissions testing lane?
Well yes i have to do it every year now since my car is a bit older no biggie.
Climategate
Really bro you still stuck on that there was no fraud or cover up the just used actual measurements and not tree rings to determine the temperature from the 1950 onwards cause we fucked up the world so much by then they dint correlate anymore.
But none of that matters we are to late to change anything the world is going to shit as we speak, At the rate we would haveto cut emissions to make a dent we would be killing people because we would haveto deny them food, power, heat, ... But still less would die then if we do nothing. We already barely produce enough food for the whole world all we need is say one massive drought in America the worlds leading supplier of grain 30% and a whole bunch of the world is starving. OR a colapse of the oceans food chain as the oceans are getting more accidic by taking one more and more co2 plankton soon wont be able to survive wrecking the whole food chain. Oceans are the main source of food for many countries ....
Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by marc9000, posted 02-10-2015 7:39 PM marc9000 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by ringo, posted 02-11-2015 12:03 PM frako has replied
 Message 46 by RAZD, posted 02-11-2015 3:30 PM frako has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 44 of 944 (750029)
02-11-2015 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by frako
02-11-2015 6:11 AM


frako writes:
... my car is a bit older....
Are you still driving that 1980 Yugo?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by frako, posted 02-11-2015 6:11 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by frako, posted 02-11-2015 1:15 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(4)
Message 45 of 944 (750049)
02-11-2015 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by ringo
02-11-2015 12:03 PM


2007 VW Passat comfortline 105 hp TDI
Dont mock the Yugo it has rear window warming to keep your hands warm when you are pushing it during winter.
I was involved in an accident when i was a kid my grandfather drove the best car ever built a VW Golf 2 the other guy was driving a Yugo arguably one of the worst cars ever built, you could see the engine of the yugo and the VW dint have a scratch on it.
Edited by frako, : No reason given.
Edited by frako, : No reason given.
Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by ringo, posted 02-11-2015 12:03 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024