Global Warming

Weekend Pundit · 06-23-2006, 06:19 PM

I saw reports about the "warmest in 2000 years" claim. One of the TV reports showed the so-called hockey stick chart, showing greatly increased temperatures over the last 100 years or so. The only problem with that chart is that it is a fraud. It was never reviewed by the rest of the climatological community, the algoritm was never released or subjected to a Monte Carlo analysis, and the media and the It's-All-The-Fault-Of-The-Evil-Humans Club seized upon it to 'prove' that human caused global climate change is fact.

It is not. It is still a theory with a lot of holes in it.

Frankly, I am more inclined to believe the solar output theory of climate change. There's a hell of a lot more evidence that the sun is the major driver of climate change and not homo sapiens.

ITD · 06-23-2006, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Weekend Pundit

I saw reports about the "warmest in 2000 years" claim. One of the TV reports showed the so-called hockey stick chart, showing greatly increased temperatures over the last 100 years or so. The only problem with that chart is that it is a fraud. It was never reviewed by the rest of the climatological community, the algoritm was never released or subjected to a Monte Carlo analysis, and the media and the It's-All-The-Fault-Of-The-Evil-Humans Club seized upon it to 'prove' that human caused global climate change is fact.

It is not. It is still a theory with a lot of holes in it.

Frankly, I am more inclined to believe the solar output theory of climate change. There's a hell of a lot more evidence that the sun is the major driver of climate change and not homo sapiens.

Whoa WP,

Been there done that, don't know what your getting yourself into, but I am one of the few here that agrees with you.

Airwaves · 06-23-2006, 09:23 PM

Okay Weekend Pundit,

So, you are a scientist that has reseached this, perhaps you are a member of the National Academy of Sciences that made its report to Congress this week and you have an opposing point of view?

If you are a scientist then speak up and show us your credentials and show how the National Acacemy of Sciences is wrong.

If you are just another lamb being lead to slaughter, well... I guess you don't need to know what real scientists believe now do you? All you have to do is believe what the politiians tell you to believe.

Don't worry, after you're dead your kids will be left to sort things out.

After all, I quoted that bastion of liberalism, the Boston Herald!

Dave R · 06-24-2006, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

Okay Weekend Pundit,

So, you are a scientist that has reseached this, perhaps you are a member of the National Academy of Sciences that made its report to Congress this week and you have an opposing point of view?

If you are a scientist then speak up and show us your credentials and show how the National Acacemy of Sciences is wrong.

If you are just another lamb being lead to slaughter, well... I guess you don't need to know what real scientists believe now do you? All you have to do is believe what the politiians tell you to believe.

Don't worry, after you're dead your kids will be left to sort things out.

After all, I quoted that bastion of liberalism, the Boston Herald!

I'm interested in your credentials as a scientist. I have none but I tend to take any reports made by them with a grain of salt. Often, scientists have a specific goal in mind when the research begins, and having such, clouds their judgement.

As an interesting parable, one could say that you have found a study that says exactly what you already believed and have used it as a confirmation that you were right all along. Why not start digging for papers that oppose your own views and really broaden your mind?

FWIW, I think global warming is probably happening but somehow I doubt a miniscule increase in carbon dioxide is gonna cause it. We are talking about a change from .002% to .0035% (worst case) CO2 in the atmosphere. It's such a tiny amount in the whole scheme of things.

What if this CO2 increase helped plants grow and decreased world hunger?

06-23-2006, 06:19 PM	#1
Weekend Pundit Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Gilford Posts: 347 Thanks: 26 Thanked 69 Times in 42 Posts	Oh, Jeez.... I saw reports about the "warmest in 2000 years" claim. One of the TV reports showed the so-called hockey stick chart, showing greatly increased temperatures over the last 100 years or so. The only problem with that chart is that it is a fraud. It was never reviewed by the rest of the climatological community, the algoritm was never released or subjected to a Monte Carlo analysis, and the media and the It's-All-The-Fault-Of-The-Evil-Humans Club seized upon it to 'prove' that human caused global climate change is fact. It is not. It is still a theory with a lot of holes in it. Frankly, I am more inclined to believe the solar output theory of climate change. There's a hell of a lot more evidence that the sun is the major driver of climate change and not homo sapiens.

06-23-2006, 09:23 PM	#3
Airwaves Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: I'm right here! Posts: 1,153 Thanks: 9 Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts	Okay Weekend Pundit, So, you are a scientist that has reseached this, perhaps you are a member of the National Academy of Sciences that made its report to Congress this week and you have an opposing point of view? If you are a scientist then speak up and show us your credentials and show how the National Acacemy of Sciences is wrong. If you are just another lamb being lead to slaughter, well... I guess you don't need to know what real scientists believe now do you? All you have to do is believe what the politiians tell you to believe. Don't worry, after you're dead your kids will be left to sort things out. After all, I quoted that bastion of liberalism, the Boston Herald!