2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

[KMAN]

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved - Telegraph

 

[editec]

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved

Happy to hear it.

Now what are we going to do about global warming?

 

[Bern80]

Happy to hear it.

Now what are we going to do about global warming?

Allow a couple of hypotheticals for moment in answering the following:

IF the global warming we are seeing is not predominantly due to man

AND

IF the notion that man made global warming is essentially the result of man counteracting or overriding natural cycles.....

Should we be doing anything about global warming?

 

[Red Dawn]

This is classic. It was only a few years ago that Bush supporters claimed there was no such thing as global warming; that we weren't in a rapid, long term warming trend.

Now they are admitting we are in a warming trend but humans have nothing to do with it.

 

[Caligirl]

Of course we should do something about climate change, the man made part is a red herring.

Important to understand the basis of it, so that we can project out - If projections continue to show cataclysmic shifts then we might be interested in working to prevent it, as a means of self-preservation.

It might even be good for the economy in the long run, given the wars and etc that could ensue over a changing arable landscape etc.

If projections show that things will swing back to where they were, then there would be less of a drive to try to respond.

As I understand it, all the projections show things continuing to warm.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Of course we should do something about climate change, the man made part is a red herring.

Important to understand the basis of it, so that we can project out - If projections continue to show cataclysmic shifts then we might be interested in working to prevent it, as a means of self-preservation.

It might even be good for the economy in the long run, given the wars and etc that could ensue over a changing arable landscape etc.

If projections show that things will swing back to where they were, then there would be less of a drive to try to respond.

As I understand it, all the projections show things continuing to warm.

We do NOT have the technology to project out to begin with. We are so ignorant on how and why and when weather and weather effects happen as to be just barely out of the stone age.

We need to learn how the Environment works. We can not predict anything past what we can observe. All the projections are simply wild ass guesses.

You can not predict 5 years from now if you do not even know what causes things to happen. Have we figured out WHY clouds form? When they will form? What kind they will be? How long they will last? When it comes to rain we GUESS based on weather patterns we can see.

Until we know enough of the variables nothing we guess at will be accurate except by pure simple luck.

As for the bullshit claim about not believing in Global warming, HORSE SHIT. There were arguments put forth that man did not cause it and also those put forth that it was just a short term cycle.

In fact the heating has been short term, it was a 1/3 of a degree in around 10 years and is not currently occurring as rapidly anymore. In fact some have stated, with evidence that there has been NO warming since around 1998.

It does sound so much better for the loons though if they claim people did not believe in a warming trend.

 

[glockmail]

Happy to hear it.

Now what are we going to do about global warming?

Build as man nuclear power plants as possible and start converting over cars/ trucks to electric and CNG.

 

[Steerpike]

Allow a couple of hypotheticals for moment in answering the following:

IF the global warming we are seeing is not predominantly due to man

AND

IF the notion that man made global warming is essentially the result of man counteracting or overriding natural cycles.....

Should we be doing anything about global warming?

One thing we should be doing, among others, is preparing for it. Whether or not there is a significant man-made contribution we should be prepared for the possibility that we cannot do anything about it. We'll need to adapt. But no one is focusing on that because people are caught up in the politicized anthropogenic aspect of it.

 

[Skeptik]

Does it really matter whether or not global climate change is due to human activity?

Can we reverse it by changing our ways?

The real answer is to be prepared for the changes that are coming, try to mitigate those changes as much as possible, and rely on science, rather than politics and wishful thinking. We won't do that, of course, since wishful thinking and politics are what drives human activities, not science, logic, or reason.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Woopdi doo! Great. Let the never ending orgy of consumption continue!! More factories! More smoke! More cars! More of everything!

Let the party continue!!

 

[glockmail]

Woopdi doo! Great. Let the never ending orgy of consumption continue!! More factories! More smoke! More cars! More of everything!

Let the party continue!!

More freedom!

 

[RetiredGySgt]

There is no compelling evidence that this is NOT just a cycle that will reverse it self and in fact has already reversed it self.

No one can predict what will be happening in 10 years much less more than that. Hell they can not predict out a year.

 

[Bern80]

This is classic. It was only a few years ago that Bush supporters claimed there was no such thing as global warming; that we weren't in a rapid, long term warming trend.

Now they are admitting we are in a warming trend but humans have nothing to do with it.

So what if some didn't believe the Earth is warming?

Isn't wiser and allowable for one to change their position in light of different evidence. As oppossed to say yourself who appears to have his head in the sand and continues to maintain one position that growing amounts of evidence indicate is not accurate?

 

[Bern80]

Woopdi doo! Great. Let the never ending orgy of consumption continue!! More factories! More smoke! More cars! More of everything!

Let the party continue!!

Who knew such an argument could be falwed in so many ways in so few words.

Should we let an inaccuracy stand in hopes that a lie will ultimately lead to a greater good?

Why would disproving a theory automatically constitute a reversion to old consumption habits?

 

[Bern80]

One thing we should be doing, among others, is preparing for it. Whether or not there is a significant man-made contribution we should be prepared for the possibility that we cannot do anything about it. We'll need to adapt. But no one is focusing on that because people are caught up in the politicized anthropogenic aspect of it.

True, that's essentially what I'm getting at. The proponents of the man made theory are essentially arguing that man has been such an influence on the environment that we have 'unnnaturally' altered the Earth and it's climate cycles. Now evidence is indicating that what we are seeing may very well be 'natural'. So if it's natural how should we prepare? It would seem that if you were of the postion that man is unnaturally altering earth's cycle that you would thus be for earth maintaining a natural cycle and thus oppossed to some man made intervention to, say, cool the earth. it would seem that it would be our duty to adapt to earth's natural cycles, not make the earth adapt to us.

If we are going to adapt we need to think big picture. Relatively speaking we know the Earth has been warmer than this. Not a lot warmer relatively speaking mind you, but warmer. We also know the Earth has been an awful lot colder. We know that where I am sitting right now at one point was under a mile of ice. Worst case scenario for warming is that it might get 5 degrees celsius warmer. Big picture what should we be more concerned about? 5 Degrees or prolonged freezing temperatures under a mile of ice?

 

[sealybobo]

2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved - Telegraph

Newt Gingrich debated John Kerry on global warming, realizing that the flat-earth views of the right wing could not hold up in a real debate. When confronted with the views of the right, Gingrich admitted that Senator Inhofe and others who have been obstructing solutions on global warming are wrong, and that this is an urgent problem. Why are they denying? Because they know that going green will require more regulations and it will cost companies $.

This is what I mean about the GOP not being intellectually honest with us. We all know they are lying/wrong about everything.

Here is another example. The economy. How long did the GOP SWEAR that the economy was doing great? We told them wages were going down, unemployment was going up, inflation, healthcare costs, etc. And they kept pointing to two things, the stock market and corporate profits.

As long as the stock market is doing well and corporate profits are up, the GOP doesn't care about the other economic indicators.

 

[sealybobo]

Does it really matter whether or not global climate change is due to human activity?

Can we reverse it by changing our ways?

The real answer is to be prepared for the changes that are coming, try to mitigate those changes as much as possible, and rely on science, rather than politics and wishful thinking. We won't do that, of course, since wishful thinking and politics are what drives human activities, not science, logic, or reason.

Yes we can reverse it. Do you ever watch discovery channel? They have these long tubes that go from the bottom of the ocean to the surface. And I guess they bring up something from the bottom of the ocean that releases into the air and fixes the ozone. I'm not a scientist so I really can't talk intelligently about this. And it's only in the beginning/experimental stages. But so far it looks very promising. Imagine having tubes like this all around the globe and they clean up the air, fix the ozone.

I can't even remember exactly what they do. They either clean up the smog or fix the ozone.

My point is, yes we can do a lot to clean up the earth.

Have you seen this? I would love to get the government contract to clean up the Pacific.

The sorry fact is that the amount of plastic in the sea - by weight - is now several times greater than the amount of plankton. Lou also mentions that scientists have discovered a three-million tonne mass of plastic debris the size of Texas floating in the North Pacific. It forms a giant floating island of plastic.

There are some facts you hear which leave a hard lump in your stomach. That’s one of them.

Marine biologist Charles Moore says that unrecycled plastic waste has created an environmental hazard threatening marine life in the central Pacific.

The plastic outweighs surface zooplankton in the area by a factor of 6-1. Plastic pollution negatively effects trillions upon trillions of ocean inhabitants and ultimately humans,' the marine biologist warned.

Let me guess. Republicans don't think this is governments responsibility either.

 

[Skeptik]

So what if some didn't believe the Earth is warming?

Isn't wiser and allowable for one to change their position in light of different evidence. As oppossed to say yourself who appears to have his head in the sand and continues to maintain one position that growing amounts of evidence indicate is not accurate?

It is indeed wiser to change one's position in light of different evidence. Such a change is, in fact, the basis for modern science.

Continuing to maintain one position despite facts is a political position.

 

[sealybobo]

It is indeed wiser to change one's position in light of different evidence. Such a change is, in fact, the basis for modern science.

Continuing to maintain one position despite facts is a political position.

Remember Steven Colbert said about Bush, "He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday."

 

[Skeptik]

Remember Steven Colbert said about Bush, "He believes the same thing Wednesday that he believed on Monday, no matter what happened Tuesday."

I missed that one, but it is an accurate observation.