Weather Channel Founder on Global Warming - Page 3 - 600RR.net
Politics This forum is dedicated to any political subject you got in mind

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #61 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-01-2011, 11:26 PM
Moto GP Racer
 
DepPravacion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,219
Thanks: 223
Thanked 224 Times in 183 Posts
Feedback Score: 4 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by LanCo Rider View Post
Show the facts. Then I can show you facts that disprove your facts. Global warming is a lie made to cash in on the general dumb public.
You think so?
Read my quote you responded to again and I will say this:
The last ice age.
Curious to see how you will disprove the fact that global warming and cooling is evident through geological record.
I think you may have jumped to a conclusion in regard to my point.
To quote a great film, Monty python holy Grail, who are you who is so wise in the ways of science


RIP PHATTY
05/08/1980-10/19/2010
VOTE RON PAUL 2012
DepPravacion is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-03-2011, 09:21 PM Thread Starter
Mad Chemist
 
WherzRoony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Central New York State, The Hills
Posts: 5,798
Images: 57
Thanks: 37
Thanked 83 Times in 64 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheX View Post
Amazing that 12,000 years ago we were in an ICE AGE and N. America was a solid sheet of ICE. Now come on guys, fess up. Who caused that DRAMATIC warming? And the one that ended the ice age before that? One of y'all has to be responsible, this sh1t doesn't just happen...ohhhh, wait...maybe it DOES????
Maybe it's that tire based Bon-fire I have on earth day every year, but I doubt it....

I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters: Undocumented

WherzRoony is offline  
post #63 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 11:18 AM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
I've noticed that EVERY SINGLE factual post supporting global warming being impacted by humans has been ignored. No comeback, guys?

I just don't get it... it's not like Santa or God, you don't "believe" or not. I guess some people's standards for factual information varies, understandably so. One thing I wonder about is why the fact is only disputed publicly... No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.

LanCo, Roony, TheX: Any of you guys scientists?
StolenCamaro is offline  
 
post #64 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 11:32 AM
Moto GP Racer
 
LanCo Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LanCo, PA
Posts: 4,710
Thanks: 354
Thanked 225 Times in 163 Posts
Feedback Score: 8 reviews
No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with global warming?

You're joking! There have been plenty of scientists who have presented hard facts against the global warming theory! They have been demonized and cast out, of course.

Quote:
Harley-Davidson: The world's most efficient method of turning gasoline into noise without the harmful side effect of horsepower.
LanCo Rider is offline  
post #65 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 11:43 AM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
Hence why I said scientific bodies, not just any rogue scientist. The reason I stated that was because scientific bodies require consensus and agreement to make conclusions, scientists alone need only one. The advantage to scientific bodies is removal of outliers and, in most cases, adhesion to unbiased standards.

That being said, show the evidence! Dep asked to see it, too, and none ever came.

The articles I've seen so far from your side of the table have been largely emotional and not scientific. Show me a legit source! I know they're out there, too!

I hope you're not taking this personally, I'm just trying to get to the root. I'm sure we all have different views on mitigation of the change and what governments' roles should be in dealing with it, and that's understandable. I just don't see why global warming is still seen as a falsehood by some. I'm afraid attitude polarization has set in...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attitude_polarization

In any case... facts, son!
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #66 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 11:50 AM
Moto GP Racer
 
LanCo Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: LanCo, PA
Posts: 4,710
Thanks: 354
Thanked 225 Times in 163 Posts
Feedback Score: 8 reviews
I don't take this all that seriously. Especially not on a forum. What do I have to prove here?

The earth goes through heating and cooling cycles. Thank god we went through at least one heating cycle or it'd be awful chilly still in the ice age!

Quote:
Harley-Davidson: The world's most efficient method of turning gasoline into noise without the harmful side effect of horsepower.
LanCo Rider is offline  
post #67 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 12:10 PM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by LanCo Rider View Post
I don't take this all that seriously. Especially not on a forum. What do I have to prove here?

The earth goes through heating and cooling cycles. Thank god we went through at least one heating cycle or it'd be awful chilly still in the ice age!
Good to hear, man. Lots of people do take things to heart though, however stupidly, and I just want to avoid that.

True, Earth does go through cooling and heating cycles. Furthermore, the Earth has adapted to these changes quite well over the course of time. The issue is the rate of change and discrepancy from the norm. It's changing much faster now, and is no longer on a sustainable course to which Earth can really adapt.
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #68 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 12:25 PM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
One thing I gotta say:

This entire thread was based off an essay by a man with a journalism undergrad degree who worked for The Weather Channel for 1 year and has otherwise been an on-camera personality for his entire career.

He has no background in science whatsoever.
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #69 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 01:15 PM
World Superbike Racer
 
Gashuffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chicago Burbs
Posts: 1,718
Thanks: 96
Thanked 93 Times in 87 Posts
Feedback Score: 5 reviews
The only thing I can't get over is that we base our past information about how the earth was, and how fast it changed by carbon dating of soil samples and cores and such right? But it's never a number like 1,535,324 years ago. Its always a huge, broad number like 2,000,000 years. And how long have we actually been taking data on the climate? Less than 100 years? How can we possibly know that the climate hasn't done this exact thing between 1,322,409 and 1,322,509 years ago?

Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime.
Gashuffer is offline  
post #70 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 02:02 PM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gashuffer View Post
The only thing I can't get over is that we base our past information about how the earth was, and how fast it changed by carbon dating of soil samples and cores and such right? But it's never a number like 1,535,324 years ago. Its always a huge, broad number like 2,000,000 years. And how long have we actually been taking data on the climate? Less than 100 years? How can we possibly know that the climate hasn't done this exact thing between 1,322,409 and 1,322,509 years ago?
Good call... I'm not sure. I'd imagine there'd be some sort of geological evidence of such rapid change, but I really don't know.
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #71 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-09-2011, 02:30 PM
World Superbike Racer
 
Gashuffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chicago Burbs
Posts: 1,718
Thanks: 96
Thanked 93 Times in 87 Posts
Feedback Score: 5 reviews
I just think it is what it is. If CO2 is so bad for the earth, outlaw it. Taxing it doesn't mean it's bad. Taxing it just means you see dollar signs. Lets just start taxing Methamphetamines then. We know for sure those do harm when used inappropriately.

My view on really any politics is pretty shitty. My whole life, the politicians have fouled up. So why should we even believe any of this bogus information that is sent our way. For or against global warming. Science organizations are run by the Gov, wether it is funding or board members having worked priviously at the agency or w/e. The Gov seems to have their hands in everything, therefore creating a bias in everything they do.

Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime.
Gashuffer is offline  
post #72 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-11-2011, 03:20 PM Thread Starter
Mad Chemist
 
WherzRoony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Central New York State, The Hills
Posts: 5,798
Images: 57
Thanks: 37
Thanked 83 Times in 64 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gashuffer View Post
Science organizations are run by the Gov, wether it is funding or board members having worked priviously at the agency or w/e. The Gov seems to have their hands in everything, therefore creating a bias in everything they do.
And this is why those supposedly un-biased (Scientific Bodies) are all for believing and reporting that global warming is caused by a gas that makes up 0.12% of the atmosphere. The government is writing them HUGE grant checks to perform further studies on the effects of CO2 and global climate change. It's the scientists that aren't collecting their paycheck from uncle sam that are dissenting because their views aren't biased by government grants.

But, Here are a few dissenting scientists:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...global_warming

Also, I'm an industrial chemist.

I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters: Undocumented

WherzRoony is offline  
post #73 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-11-2011, 03:39 PM
Moto GP Racer
 
DepPravacion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 7,219
Thanks: 223
Thanked 224 Times in 183 Posts
Feedback Score: 4 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by LanCo Rider View Post
I don't take this all that seriously. Especially not on a forum. What do I have to prove here?

The earth goes through heating and cooling cycles. Thank god we went through at least one heating cycle or it'd be awful chilly still in the ice age!
So now you're agreeing with me? That's exactly my point...
global warming is just as real as global cooling- be it man caused or not is not as important as the fact that it's happening.

Now what I will argue is simply pollution, that's only man made and that's a fact.

Species r going extinct at a rate that is shown to b accelerating, that's a sign. Coral reefs r dying... Another clue... There r many things that suggest big changes.

In the last couple hundred years world population has exploded- close to 7 billion people right now, before industrial revolution world pop was consistently at about 1-1.5 billion, now with almost 5x the number of ppl we r impacting our surroundings to a factor of that growth.

The fact you don't take it seriously will not keep you exempt from the repercussions.

The American dream- the world is ours for the taking... Working out pretty good.

In poker, going All-In works everytime... Except for the last time


RIP PHATTY
05/08/1980-10/19/2010
VOTE RON PAUL 2012
DepPravacion is offline  
post #74 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-12-2011, 01:23 AM
World Superbike Racer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Windsor, ON
Posts: 2,003
Thanks: 19
Thanked 69 Times in 42 Posts
Feedback Score: 2 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by StolenCamaro View Post
True, Earth does go through cooling and heating cycles. Furthermore, the Earth has adapted to these changes quite well over the course of time. The issue is the rate of change and discrepancy from the norm. It's changing much faster now, and is no longer on a sustainable course to which Earth can really adapt.
Uhm, earth doesn't have to adapt to sh*t. It's the lifeforms on earth that need to adapt. Earth will still be around if the temperature rises 400 degrees... We humans and most other forms of life probably won't.

The rate of change we're talking about is 1 Fahrenheit per 100 years, I see a change of ~30 - 40 F in a single day many times a year. So earth will suck in 2500+ years, alright, I'll mark that down on my calendar.

The sad reality is that the amount we really know about the earth's climate is MUCH smaller than what we don't know. We have a hard time getting an accurate 10 day forecast much less predicting what the earth is going to behave in a 100 years from now.

I'm all for minimizing our impact on earth where possible, but [man made] global warming is a really bad joke. I'm glad that it has been dying out as of late.

Last edited by pbeaul; 08-12-2011 at 01:26 AM.
pbeaul is offline  
post #75 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-12-2011, 10:32 AM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbeaul View Post
Uhm, earth doesn't have to adapt to sh*t. It's the lifeforms on earth that need to adapt. Earth will still be around if the temperature rises 400 degrees... We humans and most other forms of life probably won't.

The rate of change we're talking about is 1 Fahrenheit per 100 years, I see a change of ~30 - 40 F in a single day many times a year. So earth will suck in 2500+ years, alright, I'll mark that down on my calendar.

The sad reality is that the amount we really know about the earth's climate is MUCH smaller than what we don't know. We have a hard time getting an accurate 10 day forecast much less predicting what the earth is going to behave in a 100 years from now.

I'm all for minimizing our impact on earth where possible, but [man made] global warming is a really bad joke. I'm glad that it has been dying out as of late.

I didn't realize cataphoric resolution was necessary to clarify that I was using Earth as a metonymy...

10 day forecasts and 2,500 year extrapolations are apples and oranges; meteorology versus climatology. They address different things. Trying to capture and analyze all of the variables involved in predicting the exact amount of rain to fall, exactly where it will fall, and exactly when is literally a scientific impossibility, based purely off of the presence of random variables. Longer term prediction eliminates the daily variance and focuses on the composite changes of the climate.

That being said, why look 2,500 years ahead? Try 20. 50. Changes are already happening now.

The "sad" reality is that we know far less about everything than we know about anything. Omniscience is a bitch...

At the end of the day, I still think mankind is guilty until proven innocent. When the victim is Earth, due process shouldn't apply.
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #76 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-21-2011, 10:06 PM
Knee Dragger
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 115
Thanks: 0
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by wu_dot_com View Post
i dont know, that is a grate entertainment article but its bias and lack of real evidence. global warming is real, climate shift is real, and human factor in this epidemic is real. the polar ice cap is melting, the Ozone hole is getting bigger and bigger, the CO level within the sea is increasing. each of those factors are significant enough to not be ignore. the natural habitat and micro ecosystems are destroy because of human expansion. here is an example. amphibians like frogs are sensitive to minor climate change, since they dont have the warm blood to adjust body temperatures, the same with sea animals, sometimes 1 degrees can be live for death. if one species die, their prey flourish while their predator suffer. this imbalance will cause the micro system to be less diverse, and when a eco system is less diverse, the chances of every species survivability also decrease. base on examining the data for dinosaurs extinction, you can see how species diversity is a cause of the ultimate extinction. the same prinical of the butterfly effect can be apply to this situation.
This sounds like it was copy pasted from an Al Gore website, sure the climate shifts, but it shifts both ways. That's what caused the dark ages in England. But, global warming, sorry its a marketing ploy.

08 Black/Silver 1000rr

05 Repsol 600rr - stolen
jared872 is offline  
post #77 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-22-2011, 10:26 AM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by jared872 View Post
This sounds like it was copy pasted from an Al Gore website, sure the climate shifts, but it shifts both ways. That's what caused the dark ages in England. But, global warming, sorry its a marketing ploy.
It's been said a million times, but I'm saying it again...

Show some scientifically relevant facts here. "It caused the dark ages in England." That's your argument? Then back it up! Cite sources!

...because the dark ages was a time of cultural and economic deterioration. Climate shift caused that? I'm pretty sure it was actually caused by the decline of the Roman Empire. Literacy, networks, and infrastructures went to hell after all the Roman institutions fell.

If you're referring to the historical not-worth-noticing agricultural failure that affected few years of the collective dark ages, then I quote to you this:

"Although definitive evidence for such a catastrophic eruption has not been discovered, the possibility deserves a full-scale field study, Wohletz said, in part because of the potential impact on the world if another such catastrophe happens."

Ken Wohletz was the scientist who proposed the theory. This is the only thing even remotely resembling evidence I could find.

Show us some numbers about this marketing scam, hey?
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #78 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-25-2011, 03:32 PM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbeaul View Post
Uhm, earth doesn't have to adapt to sh*t. It's the lifeforms on earth that need to adapt. Earth will still be around if the temperature rises 400 degrees... We humans and most other forms of life probably won't.

The rate of change we're talking about is 1 Fahrenheit per 100 years, I see a change of ~30 - 40 F in a single day many times a year. So earth will suck in 2500+ years, alright, I'll mark that down on my calendar.

The sad reality is that the amount we really know about the earth's climate is MUCH smaller than what we don't know. We have a hard time getting an accurate 10 day forecast much less predicting what the earth is going to behave in a 100 years from now.

I'm all for minimizing our impact on earth where possible, but [man made] global warming is a really bad joke. I'm glad that it has been dying out as of late.
Honestly, I respect the hell out of this, regardless of the global warming issue. I hope other dissenters to the theory hold similar points of view...

Global warming is addressed on a woldwide scale, but individual minimazition of impact is HUGE and everyone can do it.
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #79 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-25-2011, 03:39 PM
BDT
Moto GP Racer
 
BDT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 3,365
Thanks: 21
Thanked 80 Times in 71 Posts
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by StolenCamaro View Post
Honestly, I respect the hell out of this, regardless of the global warming issue. I hope other dissenters to the theory hold similar points of view...

Global warming is addressed on a woldwide scale, but individual minimazition of impact is HUGE and everyone can do it.
I don't really believe in the global warming being caused by human theory but I certainly do my best to keep pollution and garbage to a minimum. I'm a recycling Nazi, bike to work, conserve power and do my best to minimize my impact everywhere else.

I mean, why wouldn't you? Even if its not for global warming, it keeps your air quality cleaner and we won't need to increase the number of garbage dumps, power plants, etc.
BDT is offline  
post #80 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-25-2011, 04:24 PM
World Superbike Racer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Windsor, ON
Posts: 2,003
Thanks: 19
Thanked 69 Times in 42 Posts
Feedback Score: 2 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by BDT View Post
I don't really believe in the global warming being caused by human theory but I certainly do my best to keep pollution and garbage to a minimum. I'm a recycling Nazi, bike to work, conserve power and do my best to minimize my impact everywhere else.

I mean, why wouldn't you? Even if its not for global warming, it keeps your air quality cleaner and we won't need to increase the number of garbage dumps, power plants, etc.
Yea, I'm still not convinced... Are humans f^cking up the earth, yea definitely. But when you look at it in the grand scheme of things and a single decent volcanic eruption puts out like 10x more CO2 than a years worth of human activity... Or the fact that the CO2 humanity produces is approximately 3% of what is produced annually by the earth itself. Or the fact that CO2 makes up such a small percentage of the green house contributing gases (such as water vapor, etc) you can't help but feel that something is being missed and that things can't be nearly as catastrophic as they make it sound.

I'm personally just so sick of the political activism surrounding global warming/cooling. I just want scientists to accurately record the trends and open up their research to criticism. Stop perpetrating the perception that it's an absolute certainty when they all know it isn't.

I just want sound science to prevail, not doom/gloom we have to do this now or else bullsh*t.
pbeaul is offline  
post #81 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-25-2011, 04:36 PM
BDT
Moto GP Racer
 
BDT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 3,365
Thanks: 21
Thanked 80 Times in 71 Posts
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by pbeaul View Post
Yea, I'm still not convinced... Are humans f^cking up the earth, yea definitely. But when you look at it in the grand scheme of things and a single decent volcanic eruption puts out like 10x more CO2 than a years worth of human activity... Or the fact that the CO2 humanity produces is approximately 3% of what is produced annually by the earth itself. Or the fact that CO2 makes up such a small percentage of the green house contributing gases (such as water vapor, etc) you can't help but feel that something is being missed and that things can't be nearly as catastrophic as they make it sound.

I'm personally just so sick of the political activism surrounding global warming/cooling. I just want scientists to accurately record the trends and open up their research to criticism. Stop perpetrating the perception that it's an absolute certainty when they all know it isn't.

I just want sound science to prevail, not doom/gloom we have to do this now or else bullsh*t.
I agree 100%.

I do my best to minimize my footprint because it's good for the environment and the community as a whole, not because of global warming.....oops, I mean climate change.
BDT is offline  
post #82 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-30-2011, 09:29 AM Thread Starter
Mad Chemist
 
WherzRoony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Central New York State, The Hills
Posts: 5,798
Images: 57
Thanks: 37
Thanked 83 Times in 64 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
It's the SUN and COSMIC RAYS!

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/2...nt/#more-45850

Some reactions to the CLOUD experiment
Posted on August 25, 2011 by Anthony Watts

CERN Finds “Significant” Cosmic Ray Cloud Effect

Best known for its studies of the fundamental constituents of matter, the CERN particle-physics laboratory in Geneva is now also being used to study the climate. Researchers in the CLOUD collaboration have released the first results from their experiment designed to mimic conditions in the Earth’s atmosphere. By firing beams of particles from the lab’s Proton Synchrotron accelerator into a gas-filled chamber, they have discovered that cosmic rays could have a role to play in climate by enhancing the production of potentially cloud-seeding aerosols. –Physics World, 24 August 2011

If Henrik Svensmark is right, then we are going down the wrong path of taking all these expensive measures to cut carbon emissions; if he is right, we could carry on with carbon emissions as normal.–Terry Sloan, BBC News 3 April 2008

Henrik Svensmark welcomes the new results, claiming that they confirm research carried out by his own group, including a study published earlier this year showing how an electron beam enhanced production of clusters inside a cloud chamber. He acknowledges that the link between cosmic rays and cloud formation will not be proved until aerosols that are large enough to act as condensation surfaces are studied in the lab, but believes that his group has already found strong evidence for the link in the form of significant negative correlations between cloud cover and solar storms. Physics World, 24 August 2011

CERN’s CLOUD experiment is designed to study the formation of clouds and the idea that Cosmic Rays may have an influence. The take-home message from this research is that we just don’t understand clouds in anything other than hand-waving terms. We also understand the effects of aerosols even less. The other things to come out of it are that trace constituencies in the atmosphere seem to have a big effect on cloud formation, and that Cosmic rays also have an effect, a “significant” one according to CERN. –David Whitehouse, The Observatory, 25 August 2011

I have asked the CERN colleagues to present the results clearly, but not to interpret them. That would go immediately into the highly political arena of the climate change debate. One has to make clear that cosmic radiation is only one of many parameters. –Rolf-Dieter Heuer, Director General of CERN, Welt Online 15 July 2011

Although they never said so, the High Priests of the Inconvenient Truth – in such temples as NASA-GISS, Penn State and the University of East Anglia – always knew that Svensmark’s cosmic ray hypothesis was the principal threat to their sketchy and poorly modelled notions of self-amplifying action of greenhouse gases. In telling how the obviously large influences of the Sun in previous centuries and millennia could be explained, and in applying the same mechanism to the 20th warming, Svensmark put the alarmist predictions at risk – and with them the billions of dollars flowing from anxious governments into the global warming enterprise. –-Nigel Calder, 24 August 2011

Jasper Kirkby is a superb scientist, but he has been a lousy politician. In 1998, anticipating he’d be leading a path-breaking experiment into the sun’s role in global warming, he made the mistake of stating that the sun and cosmic rays “will probably be able to account for somewhere between a half and the whole of the increase in the Earth’s temperature that we have seen in the last century.” Global warming, he theorized, may be part of a natural cycle in the Earth’s temperature. Dr. Kirkby was immediately condemned by climate scientists for minimizing the role of human beings in global warming. Stories in the media disparaged Dr. Kirkby by citing scientists who feared oil-industry lobbyists would use his statements to discredit the greenhouse effect. And the funding approval for Dr. Kirkby’s path-breaking experiment — seemingly a sure thing when he first announced his proposal– was put on ice. –Lawrence Solomon, National Post, 23 Feb 2007

I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters: Undocumented

WherzRoony is offline  
post #83 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-30-2011, 09:56 AM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
Cool story man!

Now that we've seen reactions to this study, how about we see the study, eh? These mean nothing. When I looked for study results, I found only one scientific journal's response:

"At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it's a very important first step."

Anyone can post links to personal reactions; what matters is the material they're reacting to!
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #84 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-30-2011, 10:49 AM Thread Starter
Mad Chemist
 
WherzRoony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Central New York State, The Hills
Posts: 5,798
Images: 57
Thanks: 37
Thanked 83 Times in 64 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by StolenCamaro View Post
Cool story man!

Now that we've seen reactions to this study, how about we see the study, eh? These mean nothing. When I looked for study results, I found only one scientific journal's response:

"At the moment, it actually says nothing about a possible cosmic-ray effect on clouds and climate, but it's a very important first step."

Anyone can post links to personal reactions; what matters is the material they're reacting to!
Click on the link to the actual story. It has links to the study and it's findings.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/2...nt/#more-45850

I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters: Undocumented

WherzRoony is offline  
post #85 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-30-2011, 10:53 AM
AMA Supersport Racer
 
StolenCamaro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 531
Thanks: 17
Thanked 48 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 3 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by WherzRoony View Post
Click on the link to the actual story. It has links to the study and it's findings.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/08/2...nt/#more-45850
Touche! I'll check it out
StolenCamaro is offline  
post #86 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-30-2011, 08:56 PM
Knee Dragger
 
OskyATL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 172
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
tl : dr

I had a mild interest a few years ago... from what I've found there is global warming...why there is global warming can be numerous causes. the problem with this whole debate is the fact that both sides of the political spectrum have so much to gain/lose from public opinion. so much so that what you read can be false and just made up. I saw a few snipets saying CO2 doesn't cause global warming, may be true. but, many of the other things that we do may have the potential to cause something like global warming...but even then all the stuff that has to be considered with that raises more questions on it's long term impact.

al gore is a whore. if there is "man made" global warming he'd be the one to kill any real political push by falsifying information and being just a real ******* prick.

the earth has had ice ages without colossal volcanoes or impacts, the other side of the coin is quite possible as well. the science as far as I know, is still out. but real science should be what's leading in the media not political bias on both parts...
OskyATL is offline  
post #87 of 118 (permalink) Old 08-31-2011, 09:37 AM Thread Starter
Mad Chemist
 
WherzRoony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Central New York State, The Hills
Posts: 5,798
Images: 57
Thanks: 37
Thanked 83 Times in 64 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
My Theory on CO2 in the atmosphere.

There is tons of CO2 dissolved in the ocean and in rocks, the ground, etc. As the temperature goes up, this CO2 is released from the oceans and this is the reason for higher CO2 levels, not man. This also explains why the increase in CO2 occurs after the temp rises. Look at the graphs of CO2 levels and temp over time.

Solubility of CO2 in water at specific temps:



I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters: Undocumented

WherzRoony is offline  
post #88 of 118 (permalink) Old 03-29-2013, 09:09 PM Thread Starter
Mad Chemist
 
WherzRoony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Central New York State, The Hills
Posts: 5,798
Images: 57
Thanks: 37
Thanked 83 Times in 64 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Twenty-year hiatus in rising temperatures has climate scientists puzzled

"The global temperature standstill shows that climate models are diverging from observations," says David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

"If we have not passed it already, we are on the threshold of global observations becoming incompatible with the consensus theory of climate change," he says.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news...-1226609140980

I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters: Undocumented

WherzRoony is offline  
post #89 of 118 (permalink) Old 03-29-2013, 11:38 PM
World Superbike Racer
 
AF4iK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,365
Thanks: 71
Thanked 271 Times in 232 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
It's funny. I was never convinced about global warming and suspected there were ulterior motives behind it. I fully acknowledge climate change (duh!) but global warming simply isn't something we can say is occurring with any degree of certainty based on the tiny available slice of historical climate data. This just seems common sense to me for a system as large and as old as the Earth.

Yet 99% of people I told this to only a few years ago responded with "oh... you're one of those!" and similar remarks. Today, it seems a lot of people have come around to being more skeptical (as they should) or flipping 180 and hopping on the anti-climate-change bandwagon (which I think is equally idiotic).

I like this quote from the article (Revelle): "My own personal belief is that we should wait another 10 or 20 years to really be convinced that the greenhouse effect is going to be important for human beings, in both positive and negative ways." He added, "…we should be careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming becomes clearer."
AF4iK is offline  
post #90 of 118 (permalink) Old 04-04-2013, 07:35 PM Thread Starter
Mad Chemist
 
WherzRoony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Central New York State, The Hills
Posts: 5,798
Images: 57
Thanks: 37
Thanked 83 Times in 64 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
It gets even better, The people that published that famous hockey stick graph were full of ****:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive...ost-mortem.php

Having been caught, Marcott and his colleagues have now recanted. On Easter Sunday, they published online responses to “FAQs” that included this stunner:

[The] 20th-century portion of our paleotemperature stack is not statistically robust, cannot be considered representative of global temperature changes, and therefore is not the basis of any of our conclusions.

I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Voters: Undocumented

WherzRoony is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the 600RR.net forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome