ranter

Sorry for jumping in on your exchange of views but I would like to add that having read many articals for and against man made GW there is obviously no scientific proof either way.For every egghead who says this is black there is another saying no its not its white.The govenments have jumped on this as an excuse for green taxes but that dosnt make them wrong ,then again it dosnt make them right .Confused? you bet I am ,but one thing I do know is I'll be long gone by the time we have the answer.

Akria

Hey, it's not just our subforum. No need to apologise for posting your views.

There may one day be a scientific disproof of global warming and, in fact, this is the only possible 'proof', although not the only possible answer (AGW may be true but even if it is it will never be proven; look at my previous postings elsewhere for an explanation of why).
On the other hand, despite the infowars article which YCHTT quotes (based itself on a flawed study which then goes on to make even bigger leaps of faith, the flaws and leaps being detailed elsewhere), there does exist a general scientific consensus on the issue, as Clippo has detailed elsewhere.

Ultimately, it's a scientific theory, pure and simple. It's unprovable, as are all scientific theories, and it's exploited by some for gain, but the science itself is unaffected by this and there does exist a consensus on the issue.

Although we may not all be long gone before any effects are seen (some predictions of Arctic ice yield none at all during summer by 2040), especially my generation!

__________________
http://real-democracy.co.uk | Admin and proud

The commonality of mankind:
If you prick us, do we not bleed?
If you tickle us, do we not laugh?
If you poison us, do we not die?

youcanhandlethetruth

I thought you were going to say "Holocaust denier" for a second there !

Well you can mock me and call me as many names as much as you like - it shows you're losing the argument.

The fact that you have included Wikipedia in your list of hitpieces(there are many disinfo agents of the web), discredits your refutation:

Of course there are a number of truthful entries on Wiki, but unfortunately a significant number of hitpieces and editing of articles containing real information:

FBI, CIA Scriveners Edit Wikipedia Entries
Companies and party aides cast censorious eye over Wikipedia
Time To Fight Back Against Online Disinfo Agents and Trolls

Your articles you present are nothing more than "hitpieces" used to discredit "conspiracy theories" by internet disinformation agents.
It works along the lines of, if you can't disprove something using fact, then try to discredit it using ridicule........

As for your other point, these scientists are not misled at all - many have it in their own interests to profit from the funding they receive - we all know global warming is big big business.
Like the EU, the gravy train of global warming is too good an opportunity to miss out on !

Maybe some of them may actually believe in what they are doing, though equally there are a number of scientists who don't agree with "man made" global warming.
The IPCC report included scientists against their own wishes to gain an fake "concensus".

In short - there is no consensus, even though the mainstream media including Al Gore and co, lie and say there is.....

I don't mind if you want to respond to me or not - that's up to you...
Though most people would just not respond, not say they are not going to respond.

youcanhandlethetruth

I don't dispute there is global warming but we are fooled into thinking it is "man made" and caused by Co2 emmisions when CO2 is actually good, makes things grow, and is a catalyst for life on the planet.

A mathematician realizes the is importance of understanding the difference between "correlation" and "causation", something which Al Gore "conveniently" forgot to mention in his "inconvienient lie, er sorry truth"......

I want to ask those people who beleive in "man made" global warming, why are the planets of polar icecaps of Mars are receding at several miles a year, much faster than ours and that the moons of Saturn and Jupiter are melting ?

How do we square the fact that almost every planet in our solar system is
simultaneously undergoing temperature change and volatile weather patterns ?

Top Global Warming Advocate: Jupiter & Saturn Closer To Sun Than Earth

SUV's On Jupiter?

If you can't answer it, then you have to accept that it is caused by something not on this earth(hmmm the sun maybe ?), and therefore THERE IS NO MAN MADE global warming !!

Akria

You've just shown to the world that you didn't even *look* at the links he gave!
He didn't list Wikipedia. Try again.

Also, you persist in using InfoWars and PrisonPlanet, PrisonPlanet being an offshoot of InfoWars in the first place! You're essentially using one source, and one which is heavily biased towards supporting any type of conspiracy theory, never mind just ones about global warming!

Regarding consensus:
Logicalscience.com - The Consensus On Global Warming/Climate Change: From Science to Industry & Religion
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change -- Oreskes 306 (5702): 1686 -- Science

Oxygen is good; it allows us to breathe. Water is good, too.
Try having too much of either at once.

Just because something is good in mild quantities it doesn't follow that one can't have too much.

I have a keen interest in mathematics and am quite competent in most areas of it (apart from trigonometry, which I detest with a passion), as you might have picked up from some posts I have made in the past.
Don't try to imply that I don't then understand the difference between correlation and causation.

Climatologists suggest that it appears to be the case that CO2 is causing warming using a combination of statistical analysis and basic physical/chemical properties of carbon dioxide and various other gases, these properties being that they absorb and re-radiate certain types of EM radiation, particularly IR.
Skeptics, on the other hand, have often claimed proof, yes, proof, that global warming is due to the Sun by producing graphs showing a correlation of temperature with solar activity.
Not only does that show that the ones with a lack of understanding of statistical concepts (such as the correlation != causation one) are more often the skeptics, but it has also been shown that no correlation at all exists beyond about 1970, and it was a weakening correlation even prior to that.

The albedo of Mars has been shown to be shrinking. As for the others, I would imagine the same sort of thing.
Oh, and it's not Solar System wide. Uranus is cooling.
If it were down to the Sun then we would expect it to be Solar System wide.

Also, the idea of the Sun being the cause just doesn't agree with the data. Solar activity has on average gone down over the past 30 years. Even accounting for time lag due to thermal inertia we should be seeing a cooling by now, which we haven't. Face it: the Sun is most likely not a cause, and certainly not the primary one even if it is still contributing somehow.

And, to steal one of your kind's favourite arguments, you have a closed mind. The fact that you stated, stated with certainty and no admittance that you might be wrong, that man-made global warming does not exist proves that.
Hypocrite.

No reputable climatologist has ever stated that man-made global warming is certain or even the only cause of the recent warming.

__________________
http://real-democracy.co.uk | Admin and proud

The commonality of mankind:
If you prick us, do we not bleed?
If you tickle us, do we not laugh?
If you poison us, do we not die?

Besoeker

It did?
......

youcanhandlethetruth

Firstly I admit I did make a mistake - because it was called "RC Wiki" and it looked very much the same as Wikipedia, so I assumed it was.
But anyhow I did read it, and still stand by my argument that you can always find hit-pieces, that attept to discredit something, but they don't always discredit the facts....

I'm not going to get into an argument about "conspiracy theories" - don't believe what you don't want to believe.....
If I am guilty of looking at one source(which incidentally I will show to be untrue) then you are guilty of not being closed-minded by not looking at that source because of your pre-conceived ideas about "conspiracy theories".
Just understand you should not accept somethings credibility on the basis of whether the source is mainstream and seems "credible" - I'm afraid THAT is closed minded !

I wasn't implying anything about your knowledge of mathematics because I don't even know you. I was just making the point that in science correlation does not necessarily mean causation. So please don't take it personally.

You criticize infowars.com and prisonplanet.com but these sites simply refer to articles in the mainstream media - so actually I AM relying on many sources and your argument fails there I'm afraid...

In an example, here are 2 infowars pieces that refer to a Reuters and a National Geographic article(see?) that refers to your claims on Mars.

Red planet heating up
Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says

I am not a climatologist(yes maybe you can out-science me with scientific terms) but I notice it says "fluctuating solar radiation is kicking up dust and winds that may be melting the planet's southern polar ice cap, scientists said on Wednesday."

Is that not the sun ?

To give credit to the theory of "man made" global warming I do see it says
"On earth, carbon dioxide traps infrared radiation which can affect global climate. This a phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect. Fossil fuel emissions add to the problem."

However the articles also state that carbon dioxide accounts for a very small percentage of the earths atmosphere ?

You say "The albedo of Mars has been shown to be shrinking. As for the others, I would imagine the same sort of thing.
Oh, and it's not Solar System wide. Uranus is cooling.
If it were down to the Sun then we would expect it to be Solar System wide."

In my previous post I said that if people cannot say why other planets in the solar system are heating up, then they should accept that man made global warming is not true. That is not the same as saying man made global warming is not true.
May I ask you - do you have any articles/proof to back up your claims of "I would imagine the same sort of thing." and that "Uranus is cooling" ?

Because I've just found an article that claims "The Whole Solar System is Undergoing Global Warming"
The Whole Solar System is Undergoing Global Warming., page 1

So you see, I'm trying to keep open minded about global warming.

Surely you can't say that because you "imagine the same sort of thing" that that is proof it is happening surely ?

Also, even if we accept that Uranus is cooling(and I wait for your proof of that), your claim that "If it were down to the Sun then we would expect it to be Solar System wide."
This may not be true if there is something else we don't know about that is causing Uranus to cool ?

I am not saying that the sun IS the cause necessarily, but there are enough questions to cast doubt over the fact that Co2 is the primary reason for global warming.

If you can persuade me "man made" global warming IS actually true, then I'm all ears...
Over to you.......

youcanhandlethetruth

Firstly I admit I did make a mistake - because it was called "RC Wiki" and it looked very much the same as Wikipedia, so I assumed it was.
But anyhow I did read it, and still stand by my argument that you can always find hit-pieces, that attept to discredit something, but they don't always discredit the facts....

I'm not going to get into an argument about "conspiracy theories" - don't believe what you don't want to believe.....
If I am guilty of looking at one source(which incidentally I will show to be untrue) then you are guilty of being closed-minded by not looking at that source because of your pre-conceived ideas about "conspiracy theories".
Just understand you should not accept somethings credibility on the basis of whether the source is mainstream and seems "credible" - I'm afraid THAT is closed minded !

I wasn't implying anything about your knowledge of mathematics because I don't even know you. I was just making the point that in science correlation does not necessarily mean causation. So please don't take it personally.

You criticize infowars.com and prisonplanet.com but these sites simply refer to articles in the mainstream media - so actually I AM relying on many sources and your argument fails there I'm afraid...

In an example, here are 2 infowars pieces that refer to a Reuters and a National Geographic article(see?) that refers to your claims on Mars.

Red planet heating up
Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says

I am not a climatologist(yes maybe you can out-science me with scientific terms) but I notice it says "fluctuating solar radiation is kicking up dust and winds that may be melting the planet's southern polar ice cap, scientists said on Wednesday."

Is that not the sun ?

To give credit to the theory of "man made" global warming I do see it says
"On earth, carbon dioxide traps infrared radiation which can affect global climate. This a phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect. Fossil fuel emissions add to the problem."

However the articles also state that carbon dioxide accounts for a very small percentage of the earths atmosphere ?

You say "The albedo of Mars has been shown to be shrinking. As for the others, I would imagine the same sort of thing.
Oh, and it's not Solar System wide. Uranus is cooling.
If it were down to the Sun then we would expect it to be Solar System wide."

In my previous post I said that if people cannot say why other planets in the solar system are heating up, then they should accept that man made global warming is not true. That is not the same as saying man made global warming is not true.
May I ask you - do you have any articles/proof to back up your claims of "I would imagine the same sort of thing." and that "Uranus is cooling" ?

Because I've just found an article that claims "The Whole Solar System is Undergoing Global Warming"
The Whole Solar System is Undergoing Global Warming., page 1

So you see, I'm trying to keep open minded about global warming.

Surely you can't say that because you "imagine the same sort of thing" that that is proof it is happening surely ?

Also, even if we accept that Uranus is cooling(and I wait for your proof of that), your claim that "If it were down to the Sun then we would expect it to be Solar System wide."
This may not be true if there is something else we don't know about that is causing Uranus to cool ?

I am not saying that the sun IS the cause necessarily, but there are enough questions to cast doubt over the fact that Co2 is the primary reason for global warming.

If you can persuade me "man made" global warming IS actually true, then I'm all ears...
Over to you.......

Besoeker

Two in a row?

youcanhandlethetruth

One in a row. And a grain of sand in the desert hollow man..............