1. Attachments are working again! Check out this thread for more details and to report any other bugs.

Man Based Global Warming....

Discussion in 'Environmental Discussion' started by dbermanmd, Dec 22, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,191
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    While I remain uncertain about whether AGW is real or not I do NOT believe there's some grand conspiracy to manipulate people or to extract tax dollars.

    Further, while I'm sorely disappointed to see the e-mails suggesting that data may have been manipulated and withheld, the fact that a few scientists may have manipulated some data does not necessarily mean that AGW is not real. I think it leaves us a bit more uncertain than before and it'll take a LOT more to prove to people and convince them that it's real going forward.

    If one set of scientists faked data about Cancer treatment it doesn't mean that all cancer treatment is bad or wrong. One set of scientists may have manipulated and withheld data on AGW, but that does not prove that AGW doesn't exist.
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. drees

    drees Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2007
    1,782
    247
    0
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Vehicle:
    2008 Prius
    I thought we already discussed that short time periods != climate. US != world so this chart also does not prove or disprove AGW.

    It is well proven that CO2, methane, ozone, and water vapor are greenhouse gases. CO2 being anthropogenic and having risen significantly because of anthropogenic activity is a major target as a result.

    Again, it's easily proven using physics and chemistry to show that the greenhouse effect of CO2 contributes between 9 and 26% of the total green house effect. Now take into consideration that atmostpheric CO2 levels have increased from 280ppm to 390ppm in 250 years. Unless there is some other significant factor cooling the globe at approximately the same rate as the increase in CO2 is warming the globe, average temperatures across the globe will rise.

    You just confirmed AGW. Historically, other external forces caused the initial global warming, but even then, the full extent of the warming can not be explained by those forces alone - CO2 was responsible for it.

    Right now, humans have caused CO2 to rise sharply and now temperature is following. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Humans are release billions of years worth of CO2 in a few short years causing huge increases in atmospheric CO2. Air temperatures are rising. Ocean temperatures are rising. ICE is melting. We continue to spew CO2 into the atmosphere at an ever increasing rate. What else is there to know?
     
  3. patsparks

    patsparks An Aussie perspective

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    10,664
    567
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide South Australia
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    You are wasting key strokes, may as well tell it to a brick wall. If you debate some people they will acuse you of baiting and being condercending. I give up, for a doctor to be outwitted by a highschool dropout, it's pitiful really. I already put up this argument, I'm still waiting for the answer. I doubt it will be forthcoming.

    ufourya said: -
    1. To allow an enquiry to take place, then he will resume his work, as he has done nothing wrong.
    2. Yes, you should.
     
  4. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    .... and yet we have 40-50 years of cooling in that 250 years, and cooling for the last 11 years :)
     
  5. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Your new method of arguing is pretty interesting. It seems to go like this:

    1. You make an argument ("denialist = religion")
    2. I destroy your argument
    3. You read my destruction of your argument (you just showed you read it in what I'm quoting of yours)
    4. You pretend you won some imaginary argument with me without replying to my post
    5. ????
    6. Fail!

    You got destroyed. You couldn't outwit a gnat.
     
  6. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,191
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    So the fact that the planet has warmed "only" 80% of the last 250 years is proof that GW is false?
     
  7. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    50 + 12 = 65. 65/250 = 26%. We both took biostats and know 26% is significant. And that's not even the total amount of cooling, those are just two of the lengthy spans of cooling. And those are just trends, it doesn't mean the other 74% is a straight uphill warming.

    Go back a few pages, AGWers admitted themselves cooling periods (spans) of greater than 40 years would disprove AGW. Specifically the posts involving TimBikes.
     
  8. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Wow.

    *EVERYONE* should read the PDF on that website. Fantastic reading.

    If you are a AGW or a denialist, whatever, you should read that PDF. It's time for the world to get their fingers out of their ears and get down to the facts.
     
  9. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,191
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    It's anti-AGW propaganda...it's like saying everyone should watch Michael Moore movies to make informed decisions about the gov't.
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Wait! Are you saying people in Cuba don't really get better healthcare than we do? (kidding!)
     
  11. DaveFDEMS

    DaveFDEMS New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2009
    97
    12
    0
    Location:
    WI
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Model:
    N/A
    :flypig::flypig::flypig::flypig: I really need to upload that smiley to the org.
     
  12. malorn

    malorn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    4,281
    59
    0
    Location:
    "Somewhere in Flyover Country"
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Doc this seems more like the leading cancer research center(only 3 or 4 in total)in the world were faking the data, the cancer research center with all the political and social connections.
     
  13. malorn

    malorn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    4,281
    59
    0
    Location:
    "Somewhere in Flyover Country"
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    I read it last night, is there a question in anyones mind now? Hoax, scandal, ponzi scheme, Bernie madoff............how about jail time?
     
  14. malorn

    malorn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    4,281
    59
    0
    Location:
    "Somewhere in Flyover Country"
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Doesn't the scandal make the UN IPCC look like propaganda?
     
  15. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,191
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Understood, it still does not, necessarily, undermine all the GW data...or even all of that center's data. It calls it all into question-certainly-but is not, in itself, proof that GW/AGW is wrong.

    It DOES make the job of other scientists much much harder and it may delay necessary efforts to stop AGW if it is, ultimately, found to be scientific fact.
     
  16. malorn

    malorn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    4,281
    59
    0
    Location:
    "Somewhere in Flyover Country"
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Probably what it means, if it turns out that AGW was real we will be in BIG trouble, the AGW movement is on the ropes.
    At one time I was in the AGW camp, I quit believing when I found out the raw data was "classified" Using the cancer research analogy, would publicly funded cancer research ever be kept secret?
     
  17. efusco

    efusco Moderator Emeritus
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    19,891
    1,191
    9
    Location:
    Nixa, MO
    Vehicle:
    2004 Prius
    Model:
    N/A
    Again, that it's kept secret is wrong and bad, but must NOT be assumed to be proof to the contrary...that is a logical mistake even if it's a practical truth.
     
  18. malorn

    malorn Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    4,281
    59
    0
    Location:
    "Somewhere in Flyover Country"
    Vehicle:
    Other Non-Hybrid
    Agreed.
     
  19. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    Good point.

    efusco, it's like malorn said. The leading cancer research center in the world. Pretend they are testing a single cure for every type of cancer in the world (ha we wish!). They are doing double blind randomized trials. Then as they are following up with their results they report that every single person is without cancer.

    So you say "Holy crap it's the most amazing thing ever! Let's see the data!" And they go "Well, we deleted it. But trust us, everyone did not have cancer."

    And then their database gets hacked, and you see emails that say "Oh man, this poor bastard has glioblastoma multiforme, let's use the nature trick to hide his cancer in our results", and "oh man, all these people with cancer, let's keep them from getting in our study! we will revise what cancer means if they try!"

    It just looks really suspicious!
     
  20. radioprius1

    radioprius1 Climate Conspirisist

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    1,355
    155
    0
    Location:
    Iceland
    Vehicle:
    2010 Prius
    Model:
    II
    The problem is no one can verify their data. All their original data is gone. The only data they have is their modified, doctored data.

    And nothing has ever proved AGW. Ever. We can not prove that humans are accelerating global warming.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.