RE: Global warming- do you know the truth?

RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/1/2008 11:14:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 Conserving for conserving's sake? What is that? It means conserving because it is the right thing to do, not because someone scares me into doing it by lying to me. quote: In that case, maybe we should also accuse meteorologists of "scare tactics" when they track and predict an imminent hurricane or tornado, or maybe geologists are guilty of scare tactics when they attempt to predict major earthquakes, and vulcanologists are just trying to scare everybody when they monitor a "dormant" volcano and attempt to predict its eruption, etc. What are scientists supposed to do with all of the data that indicates global warming: sit on the information for fear of offending right-wingers? Actually the data only shows that for a short period of time we warmed slightly which has happened over and again for the entire history of the earth. Currently we are actually cooling. the vostock ice cores show times when the Earth experienced warming that occurred much faster than anything we are seeing now. And to answer your question yes i do accuse some meteorologists of scare tactics. Since rita and Katrina every year they have tried to scare us with dire tales of imminent horribly powerful storms (well to be fair William Gray didn't, might want to check his comments on GW) and there has been very little to back their fear mongering. We were told by the global warming crowd that the hurricane seasons would get progressively worse and yet they have calmed, just as gray said they would. Have you never seen the videos of the meteorologists leaning into a "storm" that turns out to be little more than a thunderstorm while telling us how bad it is going to get?

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/1/2008 11:27:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ Actually the data only shows that for a short period of time we warmed slightly which has happened over and again for the entire history of the earth. The entire history of the earth is irrelevant to whether or not it is currently warming. quote: Currently we are actually cooling. Data, please? quote: We were told by the global warming crowd that the hurricane seasons would get progressively worse and yet they have calmed Overall, hurricane and tropical storm activity has increased, at least in the North Atlantic, over the last 150 years-- especially the last twenty.

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 7:22:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 The entire history of the earth is irrelevant to whether or not it is currently warming. The entire history is only irrelevant if you are attempting to make the short period of warming that we experienced into something to fear while pushing an agenda. If you are intrested in an objective study of the cyclical nature of the Earths climate then the history is very much relevant. quote: Overall, hurricane and tropical storm activity has increased, at least in the North Atlantic, over the last 150 years-- especially the last twenty. Actually activity has continued to follow the same cyclical nature that it always has. And the fact is that the last two seasons have been duds. But I guess a current trend of cooling and a current trend of mild hurricane seasons are as irrelevant as is the entire history of the climate.

Lizahana -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 7:52:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 2monkeysmom How much do you really know about global warming? Take the test and find out if you know the fact or the hype. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html Wow - a chief engineer for the West Virginia Office of Miner’s Safety somehow has the credentials to give a quiz about earth's climate?! LOL! Why is he giving a test on climate change? Peace and God bless,

mapachito13 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 8:55:29 AM)
This chart linked to below are CO2 levels that have been determined through ice core drillings in Antartica and according to the verbage in the report have been seen at other unnamed locations aroung the planet. As you can see there are 4 times in the past 400,000 years where CO2 levels were the same or slightly higher than today (year 0). You can also see the cyclical nature of the change over a LONG Period of time. So since the industrial revolution is only 150 years old where did all this CO2 come from. Man still overstating his power over the earth, methinks? CO2 levels for the past 600K years Can anybody go ask a dinosaur how hot it was back then?[:D] BTW, am looking for uncertainty in test measurements for ice core samples and they only give time uncertainties (Error = 200 years over a 1500 year period - 10% error!!!). Why aren't they also including uncertainties for temperature? Will keep digging.

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 9:00:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lizahana quote: ORIGINAL: 2monkeysmom How much do you really know about global warming? Take the test and find out if you know the fact or the hype. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html Wow - a chief engineer for the West Virginia Office of Miner’s Safety somehow has the credentials to give a quiz about earth's climate?! LOL! Why is he giving a test on climate change? Peace and God bless, At least as an engineer he is trained in the sciences unlike the current spokespeople for global warming. I think i would rather have an engineer than an ex VP or a hollywood idiot speaking for me on matters which require at least a modicum of understanding of science.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 9:37:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ The entire history is only irrelevant if you are attempting to make the short period of warming that we experienced into something to fear while pushing an agenda. Okay, then let me put it this way: how is it relevant? quote: If you are intrested in an objective study of the cyclical nature of the Earths climate then the history is very much relevant. The kind of hard data that indicates the current trend only goes back 153 years. Before that time, hard data is scarce indeed. quote: Actually activity has continued to follow the same cyclical nature that it always has. This is incorrect. quote: And the fact is that the last two seasons have been duds. Not exactly. The point is that if you factor in every year since about 1855, you will see an upward trend in hurricane and tropical storm activity in the North Atlantic especially. Ever since 1995, the upward trend has been quite dramatic. A couple of lesser years doesn't change the trend. quote: But I guess a current trend of cooling and a current trend of mild hurricane seasons are as irrelevant as is the entire history of the climate. 1. You have yet to indicate any source concerning the cooling trend. 2. We don't have the entire history of climate, not hard data, anyway.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 9:42:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ At least as an engineer he is trained in the sciences unlike the current spokespeople for global warming. Uhm . . . an engineer is trained in engineering, nothing more; hence the title. The people tracking global warming are all specialists in fields that actually relate to global warming. quote: I think i would rather have an engineer than an ex VP or a hollywood idiot speaking for me on matters which require at least a modicum of understanding of science. I have always found it funny that it is always engineers who champion other kook sciences like creationism.

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 9:50:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ The entire history is only irrelevant if you are attempting to make the short period of warming that we experienced into something to fear while pushing an agenda. Okay, then let me put it this way: how is it relevant? quote: If you are intrested in an objective study of the cyclical nature of the Earths climate then the history is very much relevant. The kind of hard data that indicates the current trend only goes back 153 years. Before that time, hard data is scarce indeed. quote: Actually activity has continued to follow the same cyclical nature that it always has. This is incorrect. quote: And the fact is that the last two seasons have been duds. Not exactly. The point is that if you factor in every year since about 1855, you will see an upward trend in hurricane and tropical storm activity in the North Atlantic especially. Ever since 1995, the upward trend has been quite dramatic. A couple of lesser years doesn't change the trend. quote: But I guess a current trend of cooling and a current trend of mild hurricane seasons are as irrelevant as is the entire history of the climate. 1. You have yet to indicate any source concerning the cooling trend. 2. We don't have the entire history of climate, not hard data, anyway. The overall history of climate is relevant because it shows that the current trend is not an anomaly, if it is not an anomaly then it isn't necessarily the fault of Man. If you don't like the fact that the hurricane seasons are continuing to follow the same cyclical nature take it up with william gray. The couple of years counts in the same way that your 153 years count in the overall scheme of things, if you don't like it that isn't my problem.

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 9:56:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 Uhm . . . an engineer is trained in engineering, nothing more; hence the title. The people tracking global warming are all specialists in fields that actually relate to global warming. Actually engineers are quite well rounded in training in the various sciences. Engineering is a scientific field which can not exist outside of knowledge of the other sciences. The majority of those out there that are touting global warming are not climatologists. There are economists on the IPCC for instance who are asked to review the scientific "findings". quote: I have always found it funny that it is always engineers who champion other kook sciences like creationism. Nice ad hominem attack that is not rooted in any fact. If you would like to be proven wrong come on down for a visit and i will introduce you to as many engineers that would prove your assumption incorrect as you would care to meet. In the company that i work for I interact with literally hundreds of engineers frequently and many dozens weekly and you couldn't be farther off the mark.

kernsfamily -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 10:16:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 2monkeysmom How much do you really know about global warming? Take the test and find out if you know the fact or the hype. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html Realistically.....does ANYONE really know "THE TRUTH" regarding this phenomenon? (that is, if it even exists).... no. they're all "educated" guesses, at best. Of course, the "guesses" are subject to "political expediency", as well.

bob97 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 10:27:13 AM)
Who is man anyway? If we decided today that he hole in the Ozone was to small could we make it bigger? Only in our dreams…but we sure could spend a lot of money and mess up the complete social structure trying. God controls the strings of this planet…He formed it and He maintains it and we are not God. [8D] Bob

mapachito13 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 10:35:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kernsfamily quote: ORIGINAL: 2monkeysmom How much do you really know about global warming? Take the test and find out if you know the fact or the hype. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html Realistically.....does ANYONE really know "THE TRUTH" regarding this phenomenon? (that is, if it even exists).... no. they're all "educated" guesses, at best. Of course, the "guesses" are subject to "political expediency", as well. I remember that the ozone hole was the big chicken little focus 15 years ago until it started to get smaller all by itself..... Don't hear much about ozone holes anymore! Now its CO2 concentrations. CO2 still only accounts for less than 0.04% (< 0.0004) of our atmosphere. Water vapor is the main culprit in holding in the heat. Ever notice it stays warmer at night when it's cloudy?

mapachito13 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 10:42:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ At least as an engineer he is trained in the sciences unlike the current spokespeople for global warming. Uhm . . . an engineer is trained in engineering, nothing more; hence the title. The people tracking global warming are all specialists in fields that actually relate to global warming. quote: I think i would rather have an engineer than an ex VP or a hollywood idiot speaking for me on matters which require at least a modicum of understanding of science. I have always found it funny that it is always engineers who champion other kook sciences like creationism. Please train your scientific mind to the CO2 data in Post # 30 and explain why in the last 400K years CO2 concentrations were as high (or higher) as they are today. Were the dinosaurs driving cars? Gives new meaning to the term fossil fuels![:D] BTW, I know that dinosaurs dispappeared 65 million years ago so don't focus on the joke. Focus on the data!!

bob97 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 10:43:49 AM)
quote: Now its CO2 concentrations. CO2 still only accounts for less than 0.04% (< 0.0004) of our atmosphere. Water vapor is the main culprit in holding in the heat. Ever notice it stays warmer at night when it's cloudy? Yes but we are going to freeze to death in the dark attempting to reduce that CO2 level down to a lower level. Then 20 years from now we'll decide that wasn't the problem in the first place. Bob

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 10:51:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ The overall history of climate is relevant because it shows that the current trend is not an anomaly, if it is not an anomaly then it isn't necessarily the fault of Man. Whether or not it is an anomaly is irrelevant. Whether or not it is happening is all that matters. And no one is saying that it's our "fault." We are contributing to the trend with the indelible impact we have made on the environment. Why are right-wingers so afraid of this simple fact? quote: If you don't like the fact that the hurricane seasons are continuing to follow the same cyclical nature take it up with william gray. It's not a question of what I like or dislike. And William Gray does not deny that hurricane activity has increased in the North Atlantic. He would be foolish to do so. quote: The couple of years counts in the same way that your 153 years count in the overall scheme of things, if you don't like it that isn't my problem. Again, it isn't personal sentiment. An upward trend can fluctuate and still be an upward trend. Now, if the lull in hurricane activity continues for the next few decades, then we'll have something to talk about.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 10:58:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ Actually engineers are quite well rounded in training in the various sciences. Engineering is a scientific field which can not exist outside of knowledge of the other sciences. . . . Other basic sciences like math, physics, and mechanics; not specific sciences like climatology or biology. quote: The majority of those out there that are touting global warming are not climatologists. The ones gathering and organizing the data are. quote: Nice ad hominem attack that is not rooted in any fact. Wrong. I have seen many creationist pundits with engineering degrees and simple Phds. quote: If you would like to be proven wrong come on down for a visit and i will introduce you to as many engineers that would prove your assumption incorrect as you would care to meet. No thanks. Give me a group of reputable climatologists and geologists who can scientifically repudiate global warming and maybe I'll catch the next bus.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 11:07:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mapachito13 Please train your scientific mind to the CO2 data in Post # 30 and explain why in the last 400K years CO2 concentrations were as high (or higher) as they are today. "Scientific mind?" Gee, thanks, but I just read the data . . . Let's see, in the last 400,000 years CO2 levels have fluctuated with the glacial/interglacial fluctuations of the most recent ice age. Current levels are above anything believed to have been in the last 650,000 years.

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 12:51:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ The overall history of climate is relevant because it shows that the current trend is not an anomaly, if it is not an anomaly then it isn't necessarily the fault of Man. Whether or not it is an anomaly is irrelevant. Whether or not it is happening is all that matters. And no one is saying that it's our "fault." We are contributing to the trend with the indelible impact we have made on the environment. Why are right-wingers so afraid of this simple fact? quote: If you don't like the fact that the hurricane seasons are continuing to follow the same cyclical nature take it up with william gray. It's not a question of what I like or dislike. And William Gray does not deny that hurricane activity has increased in the North Atlantic. He would be foolish to do so. quote: The couple of years counts in the same way that your 153 years count in the overall scheme of things, if you don't like it that isn't my problem. Again, it isn't personal sentiment. An upward trend can fluctuate and still be an upward trend. Now, if the lull in hurricane activity continues for the next few decades, then we'll have something to talk about. Whether or not it is an anomaly is important, it is important to the utmost since if it has happened in the past numerous times without running away and ending all life then we have no reason to assume that it won't self regulate again. The problem is that a self regulating climate doesn't sell carbon credits. If you think no one is saying it is our fault then you have turned a blind eye to all of the attempts at regulating human activity based on our effects on the global climate. So you can claim that a mere 153 years out of the entire history of the earth is all that is important (convenieint since it ignores that we started our way out of an ice age around that time) but for me to claim that 2 years out of a couple hundred is not meaningful. If we applied your logic to Global climate change then we would have to say that the 153 years of data we have is not enough to make a decision but since you choose to champion global warming you will pick which insignificant data you feel is meaningful.

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 12:53:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ Actually engineers are quite well rounded in training in the various sciences. Engineering is a scientific field which can not exist outside of knowledge of the other sciences. . . . Other basic sciences like math, physics, and mechanics; not specific sciences like climatology or biology. quote: The majority of those out there that are touting global warming are not climatologists. The ones gathering and organizing the data are. quote: Nice ad hominem attack that is not rooted in any fact. Wrong. I have seen many creationist pundits with engineering degrees and simple Phds. quote: If you would like to be proven wrong come on down for a visit and i will introduce you to as many engineers that would prove your assumption incorrect as you would care to meet. No thanks. Give me a group of reputable climatologists and geologists who can scientifically repudiate global warming and maybe I'll catch the next bus. You do realize that climatology is based on the basic sciences don't you (thermodynamics/physics/etc), you do realize that engineers are scientists don't you? Maybe they aren't climate scientists but they are scientists and therefore i would far sooner accept their assessment of scientific data than i would al gore or leo decaprios assessment.

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 12:56:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 quote: ORIGINAL: mapachito13 Please train your scientific mind to the CO2 data in Post # 30 and explain why in the last 400K years CO2 concentrations were as high (or higher) as they are today. "Scientific mind?" Gee, thanks, but I just read the data . . . Let's see, in the last 400,000 years CO2 levels have fluctuated with the glacial/interglacial fluctuations of the most recent ice age. Current levels are above anything believed to have been in the last 650,000 years. well it is obvious that you don't read the data, you read the filtered accounts of the data that fit your mold (as evidenced by your link) Mapachito referred to actual measured data which shows that the current levels of CO2 are not the highest they have ever been and that the other times it was before the invention of SUVs.

GroupW -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 1:04:27 PM)
JJP- Would love to see the competing data. 1dblthnk's numbers are consistent with what I've seen, but you never know what's right until you see all the info. I'm a banker, not a climatologist so still trying to learn about this when I can and form a rational opinion. Also, isn't part of the issue not only the level of CO2 in the atmosphere but also the rate of change in the level of CO2? If the rate of change is outside what we estimate as a normal probability band, isn't there a higher risk of associated man made climate change?

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 3:36:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GroupW JJP- Would love to see the competing data. 1dblthnk's numbers are consistent with what I've seen, but you never know what's right until you see all the info. I'm a banker, not a climatologist so still trying to learn about this when I can and form a rational opinion. Also, isn't part of the issue not only the level of CO2 in the atmosphere but also the rate of change in the level of CO2? If the rate of change is outside what we estimate as a normal probability band, isn't there a higher risk of associated man made climate change? Where are these numbers that dblthnk supposedly presented that are consistent with what you've seen. All he did was say that for the past 153 years the temperature rose and that hurricanes have gotten worse. He provided not data to back his claims, he is parroting what he has been spoon fed. Look at post #30 to see the data presented by mapachito or you can look at the vostock ice cores both of which show that we have undergone periods where the co2 and temperature have increased as they have now and sometimes at a much greater pace. Want to see that this is not the hottest the world has ever been nor the most CO2 check this out. Then if one wishes to think objectively and logically they can just stop and realize that at one point in time there were areas in the northern reaches of Russia that were grassy plains where now only Ice exists. There were times when glaciers dipped into the southern US and they melted pre-SUV. The climate does change and while we should conserve it is not because we are the cause of global warming. It is because we are called to be good stewards of creation.

1dblthnk02 -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 4:11:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: _jjp_ Whether or not it is an anomaly is important, it is important to the utmost since if it has happened in the past numerous times without running away and ending all life then we have no reason to assume that it won't self regulate again. Look, even if it was an imminent ice age we were looking at instead of global warming, the point remains that we should prepare for it, and look into what part we may play in it. quote: If you think no one is saying it is our fault then you have turned a blind eye to all of the attempts at regulating human activity based on our effects on the global climate. Industrial pollution is a reality, and it has been a reality ever since the Industrial Age began. The cumulative effects of industrial pollution, automobile emissions, deforestation, and a whole host of other man-made problems are mounting at the same time that CO2 levels are at an all-time high (within the last 650,000 years) and the temperature of the planet is rising. Cries of "It's your fault!" is actually the right-wing answer to the problem: it's the liberal media's fault, it's the liberal Democrat's fault, it's all just a big lie . . . quote: So you can claim that a mere 153 years out of the entire history of the earth is all that is important . . . Because precise data began about that time. quote: but for me to claim that 2 years out of a couple hundred is not meaningful. Do the math, _jjp_: does two years really warrant an invalidation of a 153 year trend? Two years accounts for only @ 1% of the entire trend. quote: If we applied your logic to Global climate change then we would have to say that the 153 years of data we have is not enough to make a decision There is no decision to be made. 153 years of data indicates a global warming trend, period.

_jjp_ -> RE: Global warming- do you know the truth? (5/2/2008 4:38:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: 1dblthnk02 Look, even if it was an imminent ice age we were looking at instead of global warming, the point remains that we should prepare for it, and look into what part we may play in it. And the problem is not a single person has offered a solution to prepare, they continue to lay blame and attempt to regulate our actions but not one actually addresses preparing. quote: Industrial pollution is a reality, and it has been a reality ever since the Industrial Age began. The cumulative effects of industrial pollution, automobile emissions, deforestation, and a whole host of other man-made problems are mounting at the same time that CO2 levels are at an all-time high (within the last 650,000 years) and the temperature of the planet is rising. Cries of "It's your fault!" is actually the right-wing answer to the problem: it's the liberal media's fault, it's the liberal Democrat's fault, it's all just a big lie . . . We aren't talking about industrial pollution, we are talking about the fact that there are those out there who are using the Global warming scare to attempt to push their agendas on individuals. quote: Do the math, _jjp_: does two years really warrant an invalidation of a 153 year trend? Two years accounts for only @ 1% of the entire trend. Two years no more ivalidates the entire trend than does your 153 year trend invalidate the entire history of cyclical climate. That was my entire point. quote: There is no decision to be made. 153 years of data indicates a global warming trend, period. Compared to what, compared to the ice age that we began to climb out of 150 years ago so any semi-literate, semi-logical human being would expect that warming would have happened. Further more anyone who was interested in the truth would be able to see that the current warming trend is not an anomaly and as such instead of trying to legislate the actions of people and blaming car makers we should be looking at the effects of the NATURAL cycle and coming up with solutions for life in that cycle.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI