Thread: Global Warming

Published today by the New Scientist

http://environment.newscientist.com/.../earth/dn11462

"26 most common climate myths and misconceptions"

US 'opposes' G8 climate proposals

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6694227.stm


*edit*
btw, I'm not sure if I should be worried or relieved that there's been no comments after the New Scientist article, here....

Originally Posted by Ynot

Published today by the New Scientist

http://environment.newscientist.com/.../earth/dn11462

"26 most common climate myths and misconceptions"

Hey, great article, thanks for posting that. Goes in my favorites folder.

This "war on science" lately is really saddening, how a bunch of idiots can spew out pseudo-scientific crap, and people believe it and start reinforcing the mudslide of crap and lies. : /

Not something new, but lately I see it a lot in both anti-global-warming and in anti-evolution camps. Just outright false statements passed on as facts. <=/

Neruo, check out this mudslide...

http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of...ming-consensus

Read the credentials. Those are not exactly fruit salads the police found talking to walls in the French Quarter.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Neruo, check out this mudslide...

http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of...ming-consensus

Read the credentials. Those are not exactly fruit salads the police found talking to walls in the French Quarter.

Barely. There are a few good scientist opposing far-fetched theories about global warming. What you fail to see is that people criticizing some flaws in the bullcrap out there about global warming, doesn't mean those people don't realize we, mankind, actually do have an increasingly growing impact on nature and climate.

At least to me, this man doesn't sound like he doesn't believe in the same global warming I suspect is real:

"The increase in the CO2 content of the atmosphere is an observed fact and mankind is most certainly responsible. In the long term, this increase will without doubt become harmful, but its exact role in the climate is less clear. Various parameters appear more important than CO2. Consider the water cycle and formation of various types of clouds, and the complex effects of industrial or agricultural dust. Or fluctuations of the intensity of the solar radiation on annual and century scale, which seem better correlated with heating effects than the variations of CO2 content."

What this "answers.com" page does, is put a few random quotes of a few scientists together, what just proves that not everything that is said is true. It by no length means that all of global warming is made up.

Besides that, I don't see any form of refusal about the new pole caps expectations. As in: The shit (ice) is melting badly, and despite the reason, we (lol the Netherlands) are getting pretty Wet in the near future, like in 50 years I read in some article.

Just because a few scientists disagree on a few points on the global warming theory, you call it all bogus. Can't you see the thousands of scientists that Do see a certain risk in global warming? What you are doing is like what creationists are doing, saying evolution is nonsense because a certain part of it is argued upon by 'respected' scientists.

Still, not wasting oil, gas and other natural resources, and not burning and polluting the shit out of everything Has no down sides. Not on economical (in the medium-/long-run), not on public health, not on anything. I don't see your reasons for having such a hostile stance, a "Oh No, I heard to was bullcrap so we shouldn't pay attention to it at all"-attitude towards such a serious topic. Do you really need that SUV to finish your ego or something?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...ng+documentary

i found this documentary interesting.

Neruo, I didn't call anything bogus. This is an issue where I don't have my mind made up because I admittedly don't know enough about it to take a side. I am just pointing out important things to consider, such as the fact that "global cooling" was the big panic of the 1970's and the list I posted of lots of scientists from major universities who specifically came forward together to say that humans are not causing global warming. I do believe that too many people are acting hysterical about global warming because it is, in many cases, just one more way to have fun dressing up and playing liberal. I really wish those people would take the world more seriously than they do.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Neruo, I didn't call anything bogus. This is an issue where I don't have my mind made up because I admittedly don't know enough about it to take a side. I am just pointing out important things to consider, such as the fact that "global cooling" was the big panic of the 1970's and the list I posted of lots of scientists from major universities who specifically came forward together to say that humans are not causing global warming. I do believe that too many people are acting hysterical about global warming because it is, in many cases, just one more way to have fun dressing up and playing liberal. I really wish those people would take the world more seriously than they do.

What really, REALLY annoys me, is this. You don't believe in global warming, not because you looked at the facts, or not because you just have that feeling, you don't believe in global warming because someone told you it is a strictly liberal thing, and oh my, you can't but hate those silly hippies. (at least you certainly bring it forward like that).

Global warming has Nothing to do with liberals, liberals talk more about it.

-

It doesn't really change anything. Lets look at 3 cases:

A) We are fucking up the environment with pollution, and meanwhile we somewhat contribute to global warming, something that is certainly going to screw us in the ass with climate changes that will cause a lot of death and problems (especially to shit-poor Africa, some of ociania and as one of the few western countries: the Netherlands).

B) We are fucking up the environment with pollution, and meanwhile we completely, 100% caused global warming, something that is certainly going to screw us in the ass with climate changes that will cause a lot of death and problems (especially to shit-poor Africa, some of ociania and as one of the few western countries: the Netherlands).

C) We are fucking up the environment with pollution, and meanwhile, completely, 100% unrelated, though natural (extremely-long term) fluxuations there is this thing called global warming, some thing is certainly going to screw us in the ass with climate changes that will cause a lot of death and problems (especially to shit-poor Africa, some of ociania and as one of the few western countries: the Netherlands ).

I think it is A. You say you do to. You however, like sadly enough the Bush administration and such act like it is D.

D) Pollution? Nahhh. Nothing wrong with what we are doing now, so we keep on doing it.

-

Anyhow.

Doesn't really matter what you think. The only thing I hope is that pollution -and Climate change- will be dangerous to the economy before it is extremely dangerous to the world, because that is the Only way people will get their head out of their ass. Mone-y Mone-y Mone-y..

Quite.

-

Besides that.

What do you think of these claims I heard about certain oil/coal/stufflikethat companies that pay scientists to oppose global warming? It wouldn't be something surprising, or New for that matter.