Tweet
Hi Chris - Don't you just love to see the church members go wild when someone doesn't agree with their silly desire to see the earth end?
-
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] -
Throughout this thread, Russ feels the urge to bold his comments (apparently bolded comments carry more weight than non bolded ones...) and basically lashes out at anybody who does not agree with him. Bill, on the other hand, keeps providing facts.
I was perusing Wikipedia yesterday, where there is a wealth of information on the subject (pro and con). Interestingly, there are folks who think that the UN committee is too conservative in its estimate of how much the sea levels will rise and how much hotter it'll get. Some guy claims that by 2300, when we have consumed all fossil fuels available, the temperature will be 14 degrees (F) higher and sea levels will be a few meters higher than now. Time to buy some land in Canada?Comment
-
Right Ian - you're looking more and more like a AGW cheerleader as you proceed. Dr. Pat Moore is an ecologist who studies living things and their interaction with the environment, including the effects of climate patterns on those organisms. So-called "climate scientists" come from a wide variety of disciplines. Attempting to continue to discredit a prominent scientist just because he has a different viewpoint than yours is nothing but the same leftwing politics that every other AGW cheerleader is so good at. That's the common method - there is no debate, the debate is over, and bash anybody who doesn't think so and call them "deniers".
That might work to push an agenda. But it does not further science or knowledge. And that is the problem - the climate change debate is no longer science. It is a political agenda full of people who fib, embelish and exaggerate, as you put it. And if you don't see that, carefully read that latest IPCC report. It is pretty much a joke from a scientific standpoint.off-grid in Northern Wisconsin for 14 yearsComment
-
Wow, talk about a straw man argument! I don't know anyone who wants to see the earth end and in any event, even disastrous climate change wouldn't result in that. However, if the current predictions are even in the ballpark of future reality, there will be major upheaval and cost to the world economy even in the wealthier countries. It seems to me that we should be planning for such an eventuality but we aren't even doing that. Waiting for the worst effects will be too late as CO2 stays in the atmosphere for hundreds of years so AGW will likely be with humanity for centuries.Comment
-
OK let's run with that. If fossil fuels runs out; What is the problem? It corrects itself without doing anything. A Warmer Planet means a Greener Wetter Planet. So far NONE of IPCC or any other Activist predictions have come about....... If you track of the IPCC 5 Ar's starting in 1990, they keep down grading the dire problems. Scientist are falling off the AGW wagon every day. Micheal Mann cooked the numbers and was exposed in Climate Gate.
Now here is some Satire Comic Relief from the AGW High Priest Al Bore that i snot well published. Al Bore is a investor, especially in Real Estate holdings and Carbon Tax Trading. Good ole Al Bore has bought two properties in Caliphonie most interestingly a Condo in San Francisco at the corner of St Regis between 3rd Street and Mission in the middle of the Fisherman's Wharf. He also bought a large home in Montecito Ca near LA where Hollyweird actors live on the coast. Now is not that strange a man who preaches the ocean will rise 20 feet would buy property that will be under 10 feet of water?MSEE, PEComment
-
Well, other than mass starvation, collapse of transportation, things like that. The smart approach would be to ensure that we transition to alternatives before that happens - which is beginning.
Ever been to the Mojave Desert? How about El Centro? Think making those places warmer will make them greener?A Warmer Planet means a Greener Wetter Planet.
Incorrect. Simplest example would be the 1990 IPCC assessment. Over 24 years predictions have been very close to reality.So far NONE of IPCC or any other Activist predictions have come about.......
Actually the numbers of scientists who understand AGW are increasing.Scientist are falling off the AGW wagon every day.
Comment
-
Bill - for pete's sake. Get real. There is NOBODY that understands anything about AGW. Nobody has any scientific data. What you have is a convenient correlation between a 1.53°F average global temp rise (measured) from 1880 to 2012 with the onset of the industrial revolution. This proves nothing.
To prove it you have to supply solar insolation data from at least the last 100,000 years thru several heating and cooling cycles of the planet, CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere for that same period of time, and measured reflected heat back to outer space for that same time period. That is the scientific method, buddy. If you don't have that data you certainly are not applying science, and drawing any conclusions using vague correlations is nothing but blowing smoke.
The bottom line is that the human race is only in the information gathering and observation stage. Mankind as a whole does not have the technology or knowledge to accurately determine what you claim at this time. And anybody that claims they can make such a correlation with any degree of accuracy is from the group of people who fib, embellish and exaggerate, as Ian referred to.off-grid in Northern Wisconsin for 14 yearsComment
-
Poor Reverend Bill is so stuck on his belief in the Holy Church of Global Warming that anything less than the end of life as we know it will be a great disappointment to him.[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Comment
-
LOL! I sense extreme enthusiasm, let's put it that way.........
For folks interested in reading Dr. Patrick Moore's testimony before the Senate panel, and his request for entry into the record of one chapter of his book dealing with climate change issues, the official Congressional Record is here:
It is interesting to see people in this thread attempt to discredit a renowed scientist that has been in this business before the "climate scientists" in IPCC were in diapers. And based on some BS forged documents on a blogger's website, no less. This clearly shows that the internet is primarily responsible for spreading the FUD and political agenda of AGW, not peer-reviewed science.
Anyway, enjoy the read and see if you can discredit it somehow. I'm sure the cheerleaders will come up with a way and it will be on all the AGW Cheerleader Blogs on the internet.off-grid in Northern Wisconsin for 14 yearsComment
-
This is the argument from incredulity - "I do not understand it, therefore no one does."
We have ice core records, instrumental temperature records, insolation records, CO2 concentration records, actual measurements of the amounts of CO2 we are exhausting etc etc. Again, "I do not understand the data" does not equate to "there is no data."Nobody has any scientific data.
And you have the scientific experiments that prove that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. And precise measurements of its concentration in the atmosphere. You have records that show it is increasing, and you have very simple math to demonstrate that we are the cause of that increase.What you have is a convenient correlation between a 1.53°F average global temp rise (measured) from 1880 to 2012 with the onset of the industrial revolution. This proves nothing.
Again, arguments from ignorance are generally a mistake. I'd study up on the scientific method, and learn a bit how scientists can research the evolution of mammals, plate tectonics, mountain formation etc without having "data from at least the last 100,000 years."To prove it you have to supply solar insolation data from at least the last 100,000 years thru several heating and cooling cycles of the planet, CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere for that same period of time, and measured reflected heat back to outer space for that same time period. That is the scientific method, buddy.
Look, I realize that you've bought the right wing denier angle hook, line and sinker. But in my opinion it's worth looking behind the politics and the hyperbole and looking at the real science. You might be surprised at what you find.
And we will be forever. However, that does not mean we know nothing about things that happened in the past.The bottom line is that the human race is only in the information gathering and observation stage.Comment
-
When do we move from information hunting and gathering to information farming?The bottom line is that the human race is only in the information gathering and observation stage.SunnyBoy 3000 US, 18 BP Solar 175B panels.Comment
-
Dr Moore's testimony is very interesting. Thanks for posting the link.LOL! I sense extreme enthusiasm, let's put it that way.........
For folks interested in reading Dr. Patrick Moore's testimony before the Senate panel, and his request for entry into the record of one chapter of his book dealing with climate change issues, the official Congressional Record is here:
It is interesting to see people in this thread attempt to discredit a renowed scientist that has been in this business before the "climate scientists" in IPCC were in diapers. And based on some BS forged documents on a blogger's website, no less. This clearly shows that the internet is primarily responsible for spreading the FUD and political agenda of AGW, not peer-reviewed science.
Anyway, enjoy the read and see if you can discredit it somehow. I'm sure the cheerleaders will come up with a way and it will be on all the AGW Cheerleader Blogs on the internet.Comment
Comment