Global Warming

[Zhukov]

I don't think you should write off global warming mainly or even partly based on the fact that ruling classes are taking advantage of the hysteria behind it; they do that with everything.

As for the science, I'm not party to comment here I suppose, since I haven't read the walls of text presented for either argument. I have, however, browsed the facts slightly, and it does look to me as if human involvement in global warming is real. But I say again, I haven't delved very far into it at all.

[Colonel Flagg]

I am at a loss as to how to respond to any individual that has completely closed their mind to other explanations, theories or arguments about any topic, be it contentious or not.

Coolie has constantly harped on how carbon trading and taxation is wrong, and that we are idiots for buying into this. Yet, I can't think of anyone who has even mentioned these issues except him. He doesn't ask, he YELLS - and when he doesn't think he's being heard, he quotes articles, blogs and searches the web for information that bolsters his narrow viewpoint.

I said it before, and I say it again here: Global climate change is factual. The causation and prediction is what is fueling this particular debate. And, contrary to what Coolie might say, I am not nor have I ever been a staunch supporter of the AGW hypothesis. (It's still a hypothesis, after all, not a theory.) Personally, I would need to see the data for myself, much like SF did.

Right after I back up my hard drive.

[TheCoolinator]

If you're saying that seasons exist and there is a cycle of cooling and warming than I agree but I must stand firm on the ground that this whole Man made Global warming stuff is nothing more than a very intricate ruse. A cynical trick played on the public using emotionally charged end-of-the-world rhetoric.

Problem, Reaction, Solution.


Ex-Climate change Scientist Speaks out on his doubts about Man Made Global Warming.

There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:

1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.

2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.

3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). Land-based temperature readings are corrupted by the "urban heat island" effect: urban areas encroaching on thermometer stations warm the micro-climate around the thermometer, due to vegetation changes, concrete, cars, houses. Satellite data is the only temperature data we can trust, but it only goes back to 1979. NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling. The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling.


4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.

The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming. Evidence consists of observations made by someone at some time that supports the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/no-smoking-hot-spot/story-e6frg73o-1111116945238

.................

Originally Posted by Zhukov

I don't think you should write off global warming mainly or even partly based on the fact that ruling classes are taking advantage of the hysteria behind it; they do that with everything.

That's fine,

I'm just glad your aware of their manipulation but this is not just taking advantage of a situation this is actually creating the situation and funding a bottom up movement to force an agenda.

[Colonel Flagg]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

If you're saying that seasons exist and there is a cycle of cooling and warming than I agree

My God, can you really be this dense?

I've only used the ignore feature once. I can't say this anymore.

[Pentegarn]

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg

My God, can you really be this dense?

I've only used the ignore feature once. I can't say this anymore.

I gotta know, who was your first?

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg

Coolie has constantly harped on how carbon trading and taxation is wrong, and that we are idiots for buying into this.
................................
He doesn't ask, he YELLS
...................................
My God, can you really be this dense? I've only used the ignore feature once. I can't say this anymore.

I don't remember calling anyone an idiot, Nor do I remember yelling, if that's even possible through this communication medium. Maybe if I used caps a lot....which I didn't. I do remember getting called names on numerous occasions though. Names like "idiot", "Conspiracy theorist", and "naive"

Either way, having a tantrum and ignoring an opposing viewpoint doesn't really help your argument out too much. Just look at the bright side. We both believe seasons exist.

[Tadao]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

I don't remember calling anyone an idiot or yelling, if that's even possible through this communication medium. Maybe if I used caps a lot....which I didn't. I do remember getting called names on numerous occasions though. Names like "idiot", "Conspiracy theorist", and "naive"

Either way, having a tantrum and ignoring an opposing viewpoint doesn't really help your argument out too much. Just look at the bright side. We both believe seasons exist.

He can now.

[Pentegarn]

Originally Posted by Tadao

He can now.

[Colonel Flagg]

Originally Posted by Tadao

He can now.

Thanks T.

Coolio, I think I was incredibly patient with you, trying to tease out of you something other than rhetoric to support your position on the AGW hypothesis. I even admitted agreeing with a portion of your argument, in the context of a larger whole. I did not go so far as to correct your scientific blunders nor your grammar (which on the whole was OK) - this would have been obstructively rude. However, you continued to ignore or misinterpret everything I wrote, in some cases modifying my words to fit your own ends. This is the height of hypocrisy, considering you are accusing individuals of manipulating data to support AGW.

I was trying to be nice. Now, all I hear is a faint buzzing sound, and all is good.

Peace to you.

CF

[The Leader]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

ignoring an opposing viewpoint doesn't really help your argument out too much.

That's kind of what you're doing though. Go back through this thread and read Supafly's and Flagg's posts and your responses. Or heck, anyone's posts and your responses. It's almost as if you didn't even read their posts.

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

That's kind of what you're doing though. Go back through this thread and read Supafly's and Flagg's posts and your responses. Or heck, anyone's posts and your responses. It's almost as if you didn't even read their posts.

Since they're all parroting the same rhetoric I really didn't need to respond to all of them individually. They pretty much got the same response I would have given them if I was speaking to them directly.

[The Leader]

Coolinator, if you are unable to debate an issue do you really think that you have any facts on your side?

[Colonel Flagg]

Wow. This thread tightened up nicely all of a sudden.

[Pentegarn]

You do realize he can't see your reply right? That's how ignore works

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by Pentegarn

You do realize he can't see your reply right? That's how ignore works

I know,

I just wanted to point out how silly it is to ignore someone over a debate.

[Supafly345]

I just caught up on everything. Jesus christ, I have been patient and giving him the benefit of the doubt so far, foolishly thinking that he was open minded and just didn't understand. But there is a complete lack of willingness to change his mind. He mentions someone else ignoring him, but I have been completely ignored, either that or he is completely unable to comprehend legitimate debate. I feel like I am talking to an arrogant idiot version of myself from high school. This thread isn't an adult debate, its a plea for rational thought opposed to stonewalling.

"Ignorance begets confidence more than it does understanding"

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by Supafly345

I just caught up on everything. Jesus christ, I have been patient and giving him the benefit of the doubt so far, foolishly thinking that he was open minded and just didn't understand. But there is a complete lack of willingness to change his mind. He mentions someone else ignoring him, but I have been completely ignored, either that or he is completely unable to comprehend legitimate debate. I feel like I am talking to an arrogant idiot version of myself from high school. This thread isn't an adult debate, its a plea for rational thought opposed to stonewalling.

"Ignorance begets confidence more than it does understanding"

I did respond to you. I actually used one of your quotes to help my argument along. You said that both political parties have the same Cap and Trade bill. Not only is that a smoking gun but it gives validity to what I have been saying all along.

The whole entire Global warming mythos is to push through a wall street agenda.

Speculators and hedgefunds what to buy and sell Carbon credits and the oligarchs on top want free Carbon Tax money to go from the people and be directed into their coffers. Just imagine billions of dollars paid at the pump and your maintenance payments going to some unaccountable, unelected, aristocrat in the United Nations.

Pisses me off I can tell you that much.

[Blasted Child]

So right here we have a cooling and warming cycle that mankind has absolutely nothing to do with. We affect only 6% of the climate. 6%

Do you find this statement a bit paradoxal, Coolinator? In the same sentence you make two opposite claims.
If you pulled that 6% figure out of anything apart from your behind, it's still an alarming percentage. Consider how very little warming it takes to lay waste to entire coastal areas, owing to ice melting. One could argue that mother earth has been through worse, and that a few degrees up and down isn't much in the big picture, but we're talking very fragile human societies here; island nations that simply can't afford moving and have nowhere to go. Maybe the entire biosphere isn't at risk, but poor people certainly are.

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by Blasted Child

Do you find this statement a bit paradoxal, Coolinator? In the same sentence you make two opposite claims.
If you pulled that 6% figure out of anything apart from your behind, it's still an alarming percentage.

The first part of that statement was directed towards the Sun and Volcanic activity (Non-man made). The second part was the percentage of human activity as a whole and I didn't specify how we affected the environment. Compared to the amount that 1 volcano or a sun cycle heavy in sun spots could do it's completely negligable.

Originally Posted by Blasted Child

Consider how very little warming it takes to lay waste to entire coastal areas, owing to ice melting.

When has Global Warming ever destroyed anything? I can't find one natural disaster that was ever linked to global warming.

Originally Posted by Blasted Child

One could argue that mother earth has been through worse, and that a few degrees up and down isn't much in the big picture, but we're talking very fragile human societies here; island nations that simply can't afford moving and have nowhere to go. Maybe the entire biosphere isn't at risk, but poor people certainly are.

That's all very melodramatic and all but its not proven it will do this. Don't think emotionally. Ask yourself who is telling you all these gloom and doom stories? Where are these ideas manifesting from?

Please, read the articles that I posted, see what's really going on. The world is not going to come to an end because Al Gore and Company say it is. I understand that there is pollution but their solutions will not change a thing.

[Colonel Flagg]

Originally Posted by Blasted Child

If you pulled that 6% figure out of anything apart from your behind, it's still an alarming percentage.

BC, I don't think even he knows what he's going to say next. If this is true than it is a potent argument FOR the validity of the AGW hypothesis.

Wait for it ....

[VaporTrailx1]

CO2 = bad

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by VaporTrailx1

CO2 = bad

I agree.

Anyone else find it silly that they had to change the name of the movement from Global Warming to Climate change just in case the weather got cooler.....now they can blame it on CO2 no matter what the temperature is.

In the documentary "Out Foxed" you see where the phrase Climate Change came from. A right wing public relation firm made it up.

[Tadao]

Not just the poor, if the currents change all the rich people will be fucked as well.

[The Leader]

Not if they can afford to buy their own island and... Oh.

[The Leader]

Parroting the same rhetoric? You have not debated with them. You have not disproved what they post. All you have done is link to articles which have already been pointed out to be either misleading, biased, or to contain faulty information. Where are the studies that show that global warming is not occurring? Where is the data that supports your side of the argument? Can you post a link to a actual study or scholarly article which backs up your case that global warming is not occurring.

To clarify something else, I think that everyone agrees with you that people like Al Gore are exploiting the fear of global warming and all of that jazz so please don't discuss motivations that exist to fabricate global warming. What I am asking for is actual data that has been gathered that supports your argument.