Are you following this climatologist email scandal?

[Long Island RT]

You can't prove there is a God.
You can't prove there isn't one.
So why do so many people believe?

Whether global warming/climate change is happening or not, common sense tells me that burning fossil fuel is not a good thing.  We, as a society, should never rest in our effort to find better ways to improve our quality of living.  Waiting doesn't count.

[teamroth]

Why is not believing it until it's proven mean I have a torch or pitchfork?  My mind is wide open, when man made climate change is proven then I will believe it. 

I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with not believing it until you have hard facts, that can no longer be disputed.
I can understand your view completely.

I think it's reasonably well established that something is going on with the climate, but it's difficult to find good information on stuff like this.  People care more about winning the argument than what the argument is actually about, and apparently, are just fine with polluting everything with politics.

The Earth has seen worse than us humans and our V8s and our factories.  There was at least one meteor that screwed the place pretty bad a long time ago for a good long time.  I'm not saying we should trash the place, but just because modern industrialization coincides with global warming doesn't sell me on the causality.  We've had several ice ages already.  Why?  Whose to say our current climate is the right one?  Maybe, as far as the Earth is concerned, it feels normal to be covered in ice.  Or maybe not.  Perhaps the Earth has been trying to shake this ice problem for millions of years, and it's finally making some progress.

There's no way to escape the awesomeness of my viewpoint.   

I certainly agree with the awesomeness of your viewpoint...

You can't prove there is a God.
You can't prove there isn't one.
So why do so many people believe?

Whether global warming/climate change is happening or not, common sense tells me that burning fossil fuel is not a good thing.  We, as a society, should never rest in our effort to find better ways to improve our quality of living.  Waiting doesn't count.

All very good points.

[Ghoste]

Ah but with God, that is why it is called faith.  This climate change or global warming or whatever you want to call it is supposed to be based on science and fact.  Interestingly (or coincidentally?), this difference between faith and fact is the very reason so many scientists claim to have no belief in an Almighty.

[defiance]

Why is not believing it until it's proven mean I have a torch or pitchfork?  My mind is wide open, when man made climate change is proven then I will believe it. 

Not being convinced it is cool and, especially in light of the circumstances, very reasonable - As far as that goes I'll agree with you 100% right now.  But if you refer back to your own posts on the first page of this thread, you were stating that, "It doesn't exist."  Or, to quote you more fully, "I think it's perfectly logical for me to state that it doesn't exist."  That's active opposition, not simple lack of being convinced. 

As for torches and pitchforks, read the first page of this thread.  Now, to some extent, the anger is deserved - this group has done one of two things - (a) falsified data to perpetrate a massive hoax, or (b) screwed up their data and undermined the credibility of a valid scientific finding.  Either way they've screwed with humanity's future, either through carelessness or greed.  But remember that this is not the only group making claims about global warming.  Maybe all the rest of the groups are part of a large conspiracy, or maybe they're being unfairly judged because of the mistakes of this group.  I don't know, and the information out there is all skewed by people too confinced to start with to examine the evidence.

In the meantime I think the stakes are still high enough and there's still enough evidence excluding this work that the remaining work deserves a second look.

[Ghoste]

Oh make no mistake, I do actively oppose it and I very readily admit that.  There is insufficient evidence to convince me it is real but there is a very real movement afoot that is about to cost me a great deal of money.  I need to actively oppose it because the government and big business are setting up to cash in and they don't care if they use real science or junk science.
As for the group who believe in man made climate change and apparently aren't a part of this scientific conspiracy (or unintended mistake), there are also a huge group of researchers who do NOT believe in it. 

[teamroth]

I think what most of the greenies if you will, like to omit is that most CO2 and carbon emissions released in the atmosphere come from volcanic ash. There are literally volcanoes erupting every day. They don't necessarily make the news, because we can't see them: they are thousands of feet underwater in the ocean. I'm not saying we can't do something to help, but if we contribute to 10% of the carbon emissions in the world, I'd be surprised. my  

[RD]

this has been a very civil debate... i am actually impressed. my two cents is this, we have been tracking weather patterns for the last 100 years (consistently, and increasingly more efficiently with added technology).  Those who believe the earth is 4 1/2 billion years old will realize that 100 years is (drumroll):

1/45000000ths of the time its been in existence.

IF YOU CAN SCIENTIFICALLY PROVE GLOBAL WARMING / CLIMATE CHANGE BASED ON 1/45000000ths bit of evidence, then you are either arrogant, vain, both, or just a glory hound trying to sell your research to fund your lifestyle.

when they can quit speculating and provide hard evidence to this "myth", i will listen.  until then, they are all ideological crackpots trying to get others to believe in what they want in order to substantiate their research, their ego's, or their paychecks.  tis be me opinion... arrrr...it will stand, and personally, i dont care to argue why i feel this way, because you (those who are opposite in my beliefs) wont change my beliefs or even get me to the debate table without irrefutable evidence.  Ya see, those who are greenies HAVE to prove it, they NEED to.  I, on the other hand, do not have to prove anything.

*edit*

and if this proves anything (the researchers who lied), is that they are not the only ones fudging their results in order to obtain notoriety.  men are fallible, we do not know everything, and because of those two points, all research is subject to intense scrutiny.  HUMANS, even scientific ones, are still humans.

[mauve66]

this has been a very civil debate... i am actually impressed. my two cents is this, we have been tracking weather patterns for the last 100 years (consistently, and increasingly more efficiently with added technology).  Those who believe the earth is 4 1/2 billion years old will realize that 100 years is (drumroll):

1/45000000ths of the time its been in existence.

IF YOU CAN SCIENTIFICALLY PROVE GLOBAL WARMING / CLIMATE CHANGE BASED ON 1/45000000ths bit of evidence, then you are either arrogant, vain, both, or just a glory hound trying to sell your research to fund your lifestyle.

when they can quit speculating and provide hard evidence to this "myth", i will listen.  until then, they are all ideological crackpots trying to get others to believe in what they want in order to substantiate their research, their ego's, or their paychecks.  tis be me opinion... arrrr...it will stand, and personally, i dont care to argue why i feel this way, because you (those who are opposite in my beliefs) wont change my beliefs or even get me to the debate table without irrefutable evidence.  Ya see, those who are greenies HAVE to prove it, they NEED to.  I, on the other hand, do not have to prove anything.

*edit*

and if this proves anything (the researchers who lied), is that they are not the only ones fudging their results in order to obtain notoriety.  men are fallible, we do not know everything, and because of those two points, all research is subject to intense scrutiny.  HUMANS, even scientific ones, are still humans.

oh come on, you been talking to my wife....................

[bull]

Yes, we're all human but this was not an honest mistake. Too many people are trying to use the "I'm only human" excuse for all sorts of intentional "mistakes" these days. This was a concerted effort to hide facts that don't support an agenda. And the simple fact of the matter is the emails prove that these "scientists" are trying to support an agenda with manufactured/manipulated data. That is not just a mistake.

Say what you want about the evils of cars and other human technology, the global-warming data is and has been flawed since Apocalypto Al and his cronies got ahold of it. And now that NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies has revised its average temperature numbers, based on corrections made by Canadian researcher Steve McIntyre, these "scientists" and their cause are experiencing even more trouble. Most (as in 95%) of these so-called greenhouse gases are due to naturally-occurring water vapor. And of the remaining 5% only .28% can be traced to human activity.

http://www.climateaudit.org/

You'd think these idiots would have bragged about the results and taken credit for them rather than hide and obfuscate the truth.

[mauve66]

Yes, we're all human but this was not an honest mistake. Too many people are trying to use the "I'm only human" excuse for all sorts of intentional "mistakes" these days. This was a concerted effort to hide facts that don't support an agenda. And the simple fact of the matter is the emails prove that these "scientists" are trying to support an agenda with manufactured/manipulated data. That is not just a mistake.

Say what you want about the evils of cars and other human technology, the global-warming data is and has been flawed since Apocalypto Al and his cronies got ahold of it. And now that NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies has revised its average temperature numbers, based on corrections made by Canadian researcher Steve McIntyre, these "scientists" and their cause are experiencing even more trouble. Most (as in 95%) of these so-called greenhouse gases are due to naturally-occurring water vapor.

http://www.climateaudit.org/

You'd think these idiots would have bragged about the results and taken credit for them rather than hide and obfuscate the truth.

oh goody, lets rush into hydrogen cell production since its all "just water vapor".............................

[bull]

oh goody, lets rush into hydrogen cell production since its all "just water vapor".............................

Is there a point here?

[mauve66]

no against you , just all the people that say we should be pushing hydrogen cell cars since the result is "just water vapor"

[teamroth]

Most (as in 95%) of these so-called greenhouse gases are due to naturally-occurring water vapor. And of the remaining 5% only .28% can be traced to human activity.

This was really my point. I am in support of us doing our part to help out, but seriously .28%? That's very close to us not even being here.
The majority of the carbon that is produced is naturally occuring, this is what makes me believe that the green movement is almost solely about money.

[bull]

Most (as in 95%) of these so-called greenhouse gases are due to naturally-occurring water vapor. And of the remaining 5% only .28% can be traced to human activity.

This was really my point. I am in support of us doing our part to help out, but seriously .28%? That's very close to us not even being here.
The majority of the carbon that is produced is naturally occuring, this is what makes me believe that the green movement is almost solely about money.

I happen to think it's more about power than it is money but many enterprising people know how to make money on just about anything. For example:

The green possie says it wants everyone to recycle paper, plastic, etc. so now we have two big trucks lumbering around our town puking diesel smoke out instead of one. One picks up garbage the other picks up recyclables. More money being made by waste management companies, more resources being used.

The green possie hates gasoline and wants everyone to drive rechargable electric and hybrid vehicles such as the Prius which uses nickel cadmium batteries. The nickel must be strip mined and processed in three global locations (more fuel being burned) and cannot be recycled safely. More money being made by auto makers, more coal-burning eletricity being generated, more harm to the environment.

[RD]

I happen to think it's more about power than it is money but many enterprising people know how to make money on just about anything. For example:

The green possie says it wants everyone to recycle paper, plastic, etc. so now we have two big trucks lumbering around our town puking diesel smoke out instead of one. One picks up garbage the other picks up recyclables. More money being made by waste management companies, more resources being used.

The green possie hates gasoline and wants everyone to drive rechargable electric and hybrid vehicles such as the Prius which uses nickel cadmium batteries. The nickel must be strip mined and processed in three global locations (more fuel being burned) and cannot be recycled safely. More money being made by auto makers, more coal-burning eletricity being generated, more harm to the environment.

bull i agree with you 100% percent.  the greenies only dig so far as to make them look spotless and provide their self-righteous indigation a means of ammunition to further tread on those that are not like them so as to make themselves appear blameless, faultless, and inherently better than everyone else.

i say, kick their ass and shove a lump of coal up it too.

[Mike DC]

                   

I think the earth can, does, will, and always has, changed a hell of a lot faster than we give it credit for.  

As RD basically said above - we finally start measuring & recording the conditions on the planet in the late 1800s.  And then after the first 100 years, we declare than any recorded change over that time is because we phucked the planet up?  That dog don't hunt.


----------------------------------------------



We just don't know shit IMHO.  

We don't know what the earth's climate is doing on its own.
We don't know if our emissions are making a measurable long-term impact.  
We don't know if this possible impact of ours is for, or against, the way would should be trying to make the climate change for our own preservation.


No clear knowledge or reliable prediction methods + masses of people want to shift the balance of power/money to change things anyway = these masses of people have their own selfish motivations.  

 

[sunfire69]

Ok...I'm impressed....you guys are having one hellofa discussion......and after reading them it sounds like most of you are on the same sheet of music...maybe just different verses, and different keys but saying the same thing....
I remember the first earth day I was in the 8th grade.....then scientists said we were headed for a new ice age because of what man was doing.....that we should turn to the sea for food because the sea could feed the world with an endless supply of fish......well we know how just those two examples turned out......
I think man has had an impact on the planet......how much ...I don't know...and I don't think science knows either.....as said earlier....we have only looked at 100 years....not much time .......should we take heed and make some changes.....I think so......but I think they need to be thought out.....and realistic....
I also wonder...since we have no "great evil" to fear......no "ailen invasion" on the horizon...are the powers that be trying to find a greater evil for us to all band together and fight.....just throwing another kink in the chain...very good thread ....
Jerry

[LeadfootBob]

Being a hopeless cynic, this whole affair just confirms old suspicions. This doesn't prove or disprove anything, but obviously plenty of people take global warming as a perfect excuse to make money. Or to just shame us into obedience. "How DARE you eat meat/drive around in a 30 year old car/wear those clothes made from blah blah. ?"

Conventional capitalism has supposedly taken it in the shorts (wait 30 years and see how that one turns out...) and the businessmen are just trying to grab a chunk of the fresh new markets that they MUST invent in order to sell new junk to the public. Hey, why build something durable when you can sell 'em with one tenth of the lifespan for half the price? All you do is "recycle" once the thing wears out, because every single gram can be recovered and used again! 

As for the electric cars, all we do is move the energy expenditure around in the chain. Does it make ANY difference to the net total if your new electric car is fueled with juice out of a coal-burning power plant? Even the new hydrogen cell cars have a problem with this equation, producing the hydrogen is just too demanding to make it a viable solution (Not that this won't improve). It seems once the responsibility is gone from the end user, the whole problem disappears...


Jerry: The commies are dead n' gone, terrorism is just not "trés chic" any longer after a few good invasions, what else is there to blame? 

(opinions as usual)

[defiance]

I just wish both sides would drop their absolute conviction that their side is right so we could actually figure out the truth.  The consequences of being wrong EITHER WAY are too great to let this be decided by O'Reilly vs. Gore.

[bakerhillpins]

I just wish both sides would drop their absolute conviction that their side is right so we could actually figure out the truth.  The consequences of being wrong EITHER WAY are too great to let this be decided by O'Reilly vs. Gore.

Well put. 

[0X01B8]

Climate research is more than just reading through 100 years of old Farmer's almanacs.  I don't know where this 100 years of data thing comes from but it's just plain wrong.  Researchers do things like drill cores into 3500 meters of ice and from that they can determine CO2 levels back 400,000 years.  Shit like that.  Here's an article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Physical_evidence_for_climatic_change

Here's another link.  It's very much less sciencey, but I'm putting it here for contrast.

http://conservapedia.com/Global_warming

That one guy really screwed his colleagues that do honest research.  People like these typically spend their entire careers doing arcane research on shit we can't comprehend, and now people are going to be less likely to listen to what they have to say.  It's a shame.  With every big problem, disaster, or screw-up, there's always at least a couple guys trying like Hell to warn us all about it.  Check out Independence Day, Jurassic Park, the Titanic, the space shuttle Challenger, the sub-prime crisis, blah, blah, blah.  These guys might be kooks, but I'll listen to what they have to say, at least until I can shout at them, with some certainty, "You're full of shit!"

I'm also bugged that people appear to have such disdain for scientists and researchers as a group.  Back in the day, Einstein was world famous and could get laid in almost any country on the planet.  That's how much people looked up to scientists!  But that was before politics poisoned everything.  Today, David Hasselhoff is world famous, and he doesn't have a fucking theory on anything, much less time and space.  All I know is that the castaways on Gilligan's Island wouldn't have survived a week without the Professor.  Think about it.   

[Mike DC]

  
The ice coring data is not as much of a sure-thing as they tend to make it sound though.  

It's sort of like mito-DNA replication errors when they do genetic studies on human evolution.  If they make even a tiny miscalculation on the rates of some process that happens over time, then it throws their whole pile of data off entirely.  





As for the Hoff, I will say this for him - he sure knows how to get drunk & eat a cheeseburger. 

[bull]

I just wish both sides would drop their absolute conviction that their side is right so we could actually figure out the truth.  The consequences of being wrong EITHER WAY are too great to let this be decided by O'Reilly vs. Gore.

I'm not seeing that as the case. Most people are ok with the concept of conservation but think it's silly to say humans are killing the planet. To me this sounds like middle ground.

[defiance]

Climate research is more than just reading through 100 years of old Farmer's almanacs.  I don't know where this 100 years of data thing comes from but it's just plain wrong.  Researchers do things like drill cores into 3500 meters of ice and from that they can determine CO2 levels back 400,000 years.  Shit like that.  Here's an article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change#Physical_evidence_for_climatic_change

Here's another link.  It's very much less sciencey, but I'm putting it here for contrast.

http://conservapedia.com/Global_warming

That one guy really screwed his colleagues that do honest research.  People like these typically spend their entire careers doing arcane research on shit we can't comprehend, and now people are going to be less likely to listen to what they have to say.  It's a shame.  With every big problem, disaster, or screw-up, there's always at least a couple guys trying like Hell to warn us all about it.  Check out Independence Day, Jurassic Park, the Titanic, the space shuttle Challenger, the sub-prime crisis, blah, blah, blah.  These guys might be kooks, but I'll listen to what they have to say, at least until I can shout at them, with some certainty, "You're full of shit!"

I'm also bugged that people appear to have such disdain for scientists and researchers as a group.  Back in the day, Einstein was world famous and could get laid in almost any country on the planet.  That's how much people looked up to scientists!  But that was before politics poisoned everything.  Today, David Hasselhoff is world famous, and he doesn't have a fucking theory on anything, much less time and space.  All I know is that the castaways on Gilligan's Island wouldn't have survived a week without the Professor.  Think about it.   

LOL - I generally agree with much of what you said (not all, but no biggie), but I have to make a little fun anyway - you cited wikipedia and movies as most of your sources!

[bull]

Climate research is more than just reading through 100 years of old Farmer's almanacs.  I don't know where this 100 years of data thing comes from but it's just plain wrong.  Researchers do things like drill cores into 3500 meters of ice and from that they can determine CO2 levels back 400,000 years. 

Speaking of ice cores, a small number of tree core samples in Siberia is one way Keith Briffa, the UN's lead scientist for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, gathered his flawed average temperature data. He took hundreds of samples and then cherry-picked the ones that "proved" what he wanted them to say. In fact, one thing the whole of this tree core data proved was that there was a warming period during medieval times prior to the "Little Ice Age" but Briffa tried to suppress that info. And more of the IPCC's credibility got reduced and recycled.