Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8942 total)
30 online now:
AZPaul3, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Tanypteryx (3 members, 27 visitors)
Newest Member: LaLa dawn
Post Volume: Total: 863,836 Year: 18,872/19,786 Month: 1,292/1,705 Week: 98/446 Day: 98/64 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Global warming - fact or conspiracy?
Ragged
Member (Idle past 1842 days)
Posts: 47
From: Purgatory
Joined: 10-26-2005


Message 1 of 111 (323686)
06-20-2006 1:06 AM


I've heard a theory that Global Warming was made up by the government for some evil purpose....

Hmm....I lookedit up on Wikipedei (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming) and it looked real to me, but than someone posted this link http://www.crichton-official.com/fear/ to this book called State of Fear. I haven't actually read the book, just that forward by the author. Has anyone read it?

Until now I have been 99% that global warming was a real problem, but now I just don't know what to believe anymore. To me this forum is a very reliable source of info, much better than some website.

Looking forward to reading your replies. Thanks.


Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by mick, posted 06-20-2006 5:31 AM Ragged has not yet responded
 Message 8 by rgb, posted 06-20-2006 1:16 PM Ragged has not yet responded
 Message 9 by PaulK, posted 06-20-2006 1:25 PM Ragged has not yet responded
 Message 10 by Larni, posted 06-20-2006 2:28 PM Ragged has not yet responded
 Message 18 by LudoRephaim, posted 06-21-2006 11:41 AM Ragged has not yet responded
 Message 20 by EZscience, posted 06-21-2006 3:27 PM Ragged has not yet responded
 Message 34 by johnfolton, posted 06-23-2006 2:55 AM Ragged has not yet responded
 Message 55 by kuresu, posted 06-23-2006 10:05 PM Ragged has not yet responded
 Message 70 by LudoRephaim, posted 06-24-2006 4:26 PM Ragged has not yet responded

    
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 111 (323691)
06-20-2006 1:28 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
AdminNWR
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 111 (323693)
06-20-2006 1:35 AM


Previous thread
We had an earlier thread on a similar topic:
Global Warming... fact, fiction, or a little of both?

People might want to glance over that earlier thread before posting here.


To comment on moderation procedures or respond to admin messages:
  • Discussion of moderation procedures
  • Comments on promotions of Proposed New Topics
  • Thread Reopen Requests
  • Great Debate proposals

  • Replies to this message:
     Message 5 by Ragged, posted 06-20-2006 9:12 AM AdminNWR has not yet responded

      
    mick
    Member (Idle past 3275 days)
    Posts: 913
    Joined: 02-17-2005


    Message 4 of 111 (323737)
    06-20-2006 5:31 AM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Ragged
    06-20-2006 1:06 AM


    ragged writes:

    I've heard a theory that Global Warming was made up by the government for some evil purpose....
    Hmm....I lookedit up on Wikipedei (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming) and it looked real to me, but than someone posted this link http://www.crichton-official.com/fear/ to this book called State of Fear. I haven't actually read the book, just that forward by the author. Has anyone read it?

    Until now I have been 99% that global warming was a real problem, but now I just don't know what to believe anymore. To me this forum is a very reliable source of info, much better than some website.

    Looking forward to reading your replies. Thanks.

    If you are interested in climate change, why not read a book about climatology? I'm curious to know why you couldn't be bothered, and instead just surfed around on the web. Laziness? Stupidity? I mean, Crichton is a rightwing sci-fi author for god's sake. Do you really think he is in any way a good source of information?

    Mick

    Edited by mick, : No reason given.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Ragged, posted 06-20-2006 1:06 AM Ragged has not yet responded

      
    Ragged
    Member (Idle past 1842 days)
    Posts: 47
    From: Purgatory
    Joined: 10-26-2005


    Message 5 of 111 (323802)
    06-20-2006 9:12 AM
    Reply to: Message 3 by AdminNWR
    06-20-2006 1:35 AM


    Re: Previous thread
    Dang it....

    I searched for global warming using the search engine, but that thread did not come up... wouldn't you know.

    Sorry.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 3 by AdminNWR, posted 06-20-2006 1:35 AM AdminNWR has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 6 by Buzsaw, posted 06-20-2006 10:44 AM Ragged has not yet responded
     Message 7 by jmrozi1, posted 06-20-2006 1:15 PM Ragged has not yet responded

        
    Buzsaw
    Inactive Member


    Message 6 of 111 (323822)
    06-20-2006 10:44 AM
    Reply to: Message 5 by Ragged
    06-20-2006 9:12 AM


    Re: Previous thread
    Hi Ragged. Welcome to EvC. Being heavily into Bible prophecy and understanding that global warming is a significant factor relative to things prophesied for the end of the age times and the advent of a new millenial climate at the 2nd messianic advent of Christ, the prophetic aspects of global warming is of significant interest to me. Would the Biblical prophecies of global warming be acceptable for discussion and debate in this thread? If so would you edit into your op a statement to that effect so as to make this topically acceptable?


    BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 5 by Ragged, posted 06-20-2006 9:12 AM Ragged has not yet responded

      
    jmrozi1
    Member (Idle past 4182 days)
    Posts: 79
    From: Maryland
    Joined: 12-09-2005


    Message 7 of 111 (323879)
    06-20-2006 1:15 PM
    Reply to: Message 5 by Ragged
    06-20-2006 9:12 AM


    Re: Previous thread
    I did a report on this very subject last year, and figured I'd note a few things:
    (1) Technological progression has lead to an unnatural increase in the emissions of greenhouse gasses (carbon dioxide, fossil fuel emissions, etc.) that lead to a greater temperature than what would exist without human intervention.
    (2) If these emissions remain constant, there will eventually be an equilibrium temperature that is reached which is higher than what is natural.
    (3) Even the most extreme (but reasonable) estimations of the impact of human intervention would make our contribution to global warming relatively insignificant to natural global climatic cycles.

    The point is that we are contributing to global warming, but our impact is minimal. This seems to be the theme of the previous thread (that is, when the posts are relevant) and is what you’ll find if you read Scientific American or watch the Science channel, so I'm not sure how much people would agree to some sort of government conspiracy. If you want more of a controversy, I'd take Buzsaw's approach.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 5 by Ragged, posted 06-20-2006 9:12 AM Ragged has not yet responded

        
    rgb
    Inactive Member


    Message 8 of 111 (323883)
    06-20-2006 1:16 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Ragged
    06-20-2006 1:06 AM


    Ragged, there is no doubt in anyone's mind that global warming is real. There are plenty of recorded data on the rate of recession of the arctic ice sheets and glaciers. NASA itself admits of the dramatic decreases in the total ice mass in the northern regions. We have lost some 40% or so of the northern ice cap.

    What the debate is about is what is causing the effect, whether it's manmade or something else. The scientific community, for now, seems to be split on the issue.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Ragged, posted 06-20-2006 1:06 AM Ragged has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 28 by riVeRraT, posted 06-22-2006 10:13 PM rgb has responded

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 15449
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.9


    Message 9 of 111 (323892)
    06-20-2006 1:25 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Ragged
    06-20-2006 1:06 AM


    If there is any sort of government conspiracy about global warming in the US, it is a conspiracy to try to cover it up.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Ragged, posted 06-20-2006 1:06 AM Ragged has not yet responded

        
    Larni
    Member
    Posts: 3990
    From: Liverpool
    Joined: 09-16-2005


    Message 10 of 111 (323935)
    06-20-2006 2:28 PM
    Reply to: Message 1 by Ragged
    06-20-2006 1:06 AM


    This is from:

    http://www.pacifica.org/programs/fsrn/fsrn_060602.html

    RECORD HIGH FOR GREENHOUSE GASES
    Carbon dioxide emissions have reached an all-time high, according to new data from the U.N. Climate Secretariat in Bonn, Germany. The United States, responsible for the overwhelming majority of greenhouse gas emissions, has broken a new record by releasing just over 7 billion tons of greenhouse gases in one year.

    Seems pretty clear that billions of tonnes of green house gases are getting dumped in the atmosphere.

    I can honestly say I do not know any one who doubts we are having an effect on the state of climate out side of the Bush Administration.

    If you want to learn and help, go to:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/hottopics/climatechange/

    You can put your computer to good use when it is idle.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 1 by Ragged, posted 06-20-2006 1:06 AM Ragged has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 11 by subbie, posted 06-20-2006 3:54 PM Larni has responded

        
    subbie
    Member (Idle past 33 days)
    Posts: 3509
    Joined: 02-26-2006


    Message 11 of 111 (323970)
    06-20-2006 3:54 PM
    Reply to: Message 10 by Larni
    06-20-2006 2:28 PM


    Here are several who doubt...
    PBS did a Frontline/NOVA program discussing the issue. You can find a website summarizing the episode here.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/

    Following the various links there, you can find a list of scientists who sit on both sides of the question. Perhaps you can link all of the scientists who doubt the human connection to the Bush administration in some way, but I kind of doubt it.


    Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 10 by Larni, posted 06-20-2006 2:28 PM Larni has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 12 by Omnivorous, posted 06-20-2006 4:28 PM subbie has responded
     Message 17 by Larni, posted 06-21-2006 5:04 AM subbie has not yet responded

      
    Omnivorous
    Member (Idle past 1256 days)
    Posts: 3808
    From: Adirondackia
    Joined: 07-21-2005


    Message 12 of 111 (323981)
    06-20-2006 4:28 PM
    Reply to: Message 11 by subbie
    06-20-2006 3:54 PM


    Doubters
    Following the various links there, you can find a list of scientists who sit on both sides of the question. Perhaps you can link all of the scientists who doubt the human connection to the Bush administration in some way, but I kind of doubt it.

    I, too, doubt there is any "human connection to the Bush administration."

    That said, I suspect one could more likely connect doubting scientists to industry-funded research and think tanks: think cigarettes. In addition, there are a few scientists who, like opponents of evolutionary theory, have erected new goalposts each time new data confirmatory of global warming is presented. In any case, the media inclination to list equal numbers of "experts" on every side of an issue fails to reflect the overwhelming consensus on this issue.

    By the way, IIRC, the Bush White House has conceded that human activity is having an effect on "global climate change" (lilke "Osama" or "Mission Accomplished," global warming is verboten terminology there).

    Their fall-back position, as I understand it, is that current science cannot distinguish between human-driven change and natural cyclic change, and, in any case, there are no profits or votes to be gained by sacrificing current political capital to long-term problems.

    I disagree, of course, but my expectation of proof provides me no comfort, cold or hot.


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 11 by subbie, posted 06-20-2006 3:54 PM subbie has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 13 by subbie, posted 06-20-2006 5:13 PM Omnivorous has responded
     Message 21 by ThingsChange, posted 06-21-2006 10:12 PM Omnivorous has not yet responded

        
    subbie
    Member (Idle past 33 days)
    Posts: 3509
    Joined: 02-26-2006


    Message 13 of 111 (324003)
    06-20-2006 5:13 PM
    Reply to: Message 12 by Omnivorous
    06-20-2006 4:28 PM


    Re: Doubters
    I don't doubt for a second that there is a human connection to the Bush administration. Only humans could screw things up as badly as dumbya and his band of boobs has done.

    I would point out that simply "connecting doubting scientists to industry-funded research," if in fact that can be done, is nothing more than the ad hominem fallacy. Moreover, it's also possible that they receive industry funding because they have come to conclusions that the industries like, but they come to the conclusions before they received any funding.

    I'm not advocating any particular position. It's far outside my field of expertise and I certainly haven't looked into it enough to understand the science behind it. However, it is apparent that many scientists on both sides of the issue act a great deal like people more motivated by ideology than by science.


    Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 12 by Omnivorous, posted 06-20-2006 4:28 PM Omnivorous has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 14 by Omnivorous, posted 06-20-2006 9:03 PM subbie has not yet responded

      
    Omnivorous
    Member (Idle past 1256 days)
    Posts: 3808
    From: Adirondackia
    Joined: 07-21-2005


    Message 14 of 111 (324117)
    06-20-2006 9:03 PM
    Reply to: Message 13 by subbie
    06-20-2006 5:13 PM


    Re: Doubters
    I don't doubt for a second that there is a human connection to the Bush administration. Only humans could screw things up as badly as dumbya and his band of boobs has done.

    :)

    I would point out that simply "connecting doubting scientists to industry-funded research," if in fact that can be done, is nothing more than the ad hominem fallacy.

    Simply connecting anything to any other thing would likely be fallacious, but in major areas of science and policy contention, it pays to follow the money.

    The corporate and governmental corruption of science is deep and pervasive; pharmaceutical companies fund studies that are suppressed or selectively released and send prescribing MDs on junkets; tobacco companies bought scientists by the bale; scientists submit papers without divulging financial stakes in the research. Science is a major nexus of power and wealth, so of course corruption and self-interested bias occur within it, just like politics and relgion.

    Moreover, it's also possible that they receive industry funding because they have come to conclusions that the industries like, but they come to the conclusions before they received any funding.

    Yes, the money can find the researcher before the researcher finds the money.

    On the government side, the Bush administration attempts to suppress gov't. funded science which undermines their policies while protesting that not enough "good science" has been done, attempting to gag NASA scientists and substituting political calculation for objective evaluation of everything from medications to anti-AIDS strategies.

    They have squandered billions on their market-ideology obsessions, privatizing security and disaster relief with little to show for it; their market method of trading mercury polluting credits--mercury polluting credits!--would allow increased mercury emissions in some of the already most contaminated areas.

    They're not just dumb. They're wrong.

    When one sees a dwindling number of scientists supporting a position against which evidence is mounting high, it is not a fallacy to wonder who is paying for these persistently skeptical voices. I would lend more weight to research into, say, the biological effects of fumes from refining Product X if the grant didn't come from Product X, Inc. or its manufacturers organization--or from Senator Zippy who earmarked the funds because Product X, Inc., donated to his PAC.

    It would be a fallacy to assume that any of the skeptics are stooges and hacks, but to suspect it is not.

    However, it is apparent that many scientists on both sides of the issue act a great deal like people more motivated by ideology than by science.

    I don't see it that way, of course :)

    True, there is passion on all sides.

    But I think many people believe our governments are failing to act on a real global threat due to head-in-the-sand ignorance, good old-fashioned greed, and an ideology of exploitation.

    That belief, and a passionate involvement in trying to face that threat, might seem ideological to some, but it smells rational to me.

    Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.

    Edited by Omnivorous, : changed for which to against which: confused the antecedent!


    This message is a reply to:
     Message 13 by subbie, posted 06-20-2006 5:13 PM subbie has not yet responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 15 by MangyTiger, posted 06-20-2006 9:18 PM Omnivorous has responded

        
    MangyTiger
    Member (Idle past 4642 days)
    Posts: 989
    From: Leicester, UK
    Joined: 07-30-2004


    Message 15 of 111 (324122)
    06-20-2006 9:18 PM
    Reply to: Message 14 by Omnivorous
    06-20-2006 9:03 PM


    Re: Doubters
    trading mercury polluting credits

    I hadn't heard of this one before...

    Just when you think the ideas couldn't get any dumber :(


    Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 14 by Omnivorous, posted 06-20-2006 9:03 PM Omnivorous has responded

    Replies to this message:
     Message 16 by Omnivorous, posted 06-20-2006 9:27 PM MangyTiger has not yet responded

        
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.0 Beta
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019