"Unequivocal Proof" Global warming real and man made

[Ishmael]

The last thing I'd like to mention is still being hotly debated, but I suspect we are still on the tail-end of the previous Ice Age.

We are actually well into the beginning of the next Ice Age.

Ishmael

 

[sexy-girl]

*snicker* Proof? I don't see any "proof".

I see a corellation, but no "proof".

The ice caps on Mars have been receding for decades. Who's dumping the CO2 up there? Could it be that the Sun has been unusually active for the past 70 years or so? (As measured and reported in many scientific papers.)

Have you bothered to research the corelation of 'Equinox Precession', 'Axial Precession', and 'Orbital Eccentricity' with the earths heating and cooling cycles and do you know where we are in those cycles today?

Do you know that the onset of Ice Ages require that there be a measurable increase in oceanic temperatures?

Has it ever occured to you that there is the possibility that it is mans contribution to the CO2 levels that might actually moderate the next Ice Age?

And if that is true, has it occured to you that the very remedies that you are proposing may be the very thing that hastens the onset of the next Ice Age. In other words, you'll be making things worse, not better?

No, I don't suppose any of that has ever occured to you. It would require that you actually do some research beyond todays fish wrapper.

Ishmael

Precesions and Solar output

Slowing the next Ice Age

the US government has been pushing bogus research like that for years ... the US government is spending billions on global warming ... but nearly all of that spending go's into attempting to research these wacky ideas that global warming is anything but man made and none of that research has ever come up with anything substantial

most of that research was trying to claim why we were having air temperature increases ... but this research is different because it deals with ocean temperatures

this news article isn't the report but assuming the reporting is true (knowing the newspaper i'm sure it is) then they're claiming theres unequivocal links between the pollution levels and sea level temperatures ... another words the percentage levels matched ... i'm sure in the UK we'll be hearing more about this in upcoming weeks ... i'm not sure you will be hearing anything about it there though

 

[John Doe]

You can't even spell it, dude.

It's a little suspicious, but it's not as bad as having a degree in English and not being able to spell it (either "mathematics" or "english").

 

[John Doe]

We are actually well into the beginning of the next Ice Age.

Ishmael

See what I mean? Hotly debated.

 

[Ishmael]

the US government has been pushing bogus research like that for years ... the US government is spending billions on global warming ... but nearly all of that spending go's into attempting to research these wacky ideas that global warming is anything but man made and none of that research has ever come up with anything substantial

most of that research was trying to claim why we were having air temperature increases ... but this research is different because it deals with ocean temperatures

this news article isn't the report but assuming the reporting is true (knowing the newspaper i'm sure it is) then they're claiming theres unequivocal links between the pollution levels and sea level temperatures ... another words the percentage levels matched ... i'm sure in the UK we'll be hearing more about this in upcoming weeks ... i'm not sure you will be hearing anything about it there though

Well that post pretty much confirms you're an idiot.

Rather than actually read the research, follow the bibliography, and be willing to critically analyze the measured data you immediately call it "bogus research" and attribute that research to the US Government. Which is hilarious in that much of the "Global Warming" chicken little scientific papers have been written and published by ---Ta Da---- US government paid researchers.

Now tell me how the US Government paid researchers managed to melt the ice caps on Mars over the past 100 years. Just to cover their ass on global warming? You know, that Global Warming that was discovered in the late 80's? Come on now, tell me how it was done.

(Hey, if you're really slick you can blame it on the CIA and beat DonkeyBrain to the punch.)

Ishmael

 

[sexy-girl]

See what I mean? Hotly debated.

only in the US and ishmael head ... the debate in the rest of the world has finished

tony blairs chief scientific adviser called it a "far greater global threat than international terrorism"

and tony blair has been saying it's going to become the biggest global issue

 

[The Mutt]

Why should we worry about Global Warming? The Rapture is coming soon. GWB's War Incorporated invades Iran, the Muslims declare a Jihad, Holy War sweeps the globe, Israel expels the Palestinians and rebuilds the temple.
Five years, tops. Repent sinners! De Lawd is a'coming!

 

[ma_guy]

the US government has been pushing bogus research like that for years ... the US government is spending billions on global warming ... but nearly all of that spending go's into attempting to research these wacky ideas that global warming is anything but man made and none of that research has ever come up with anything substantial

"bogus research"??? The basic premise of scientific research is to come up with a plausible theory to explain an observed event and then then find your "proofs". The theory gains strength by research that either supports it directly or research that disproves other possibilities. Anyone that only does research that confirms their theory without attempting to disprove other possibilities is teh one doing teh bogus research.

most of that research was trying to claim why we were having air temperature increases ... but this research is different because it deals with ocean temperatures

And the final report should be most interesting. The raw data they used was provided to them by my company.

this news article isn't the report but assuming the reporting is true (knowing the newspaper i'm sure it is) then they're claiming theres unequivocal links between the pollution levels and sea level temperatures ... another words the percentage levels matched ...

The fact that they are making claims doesn't make it true. It appears that they've attempted to address at least two alternate possibilities but that doesn't mean they ruled out all other possibilities.

i'm sure in the UK we'll be hearing more about this in upcoming weeks ... i'm not sure you will be hearing anything about it there though

I don't know why we wouldn't. This story ran on CNN's WWW page yesterday. What took the Independent so long to pick it up?

 

[John Doe]

only in the US and ishmael head ... the debate in the rest of the world has finished

tony blairs chief scientific adviser called it a "far greater global threat than international terrorism"

and tony blair has been saying it's going to become the biggest global issue

What? No, not global warming as a whole, the Ice Age thing.

 

[Eroticus_Rex]

Why should we worry about Global Warming? The Rapture is coming soon. GWB's War Incorporated invades Iran, the Muslims declare a Jihad, Holy War sweeps the globe, Israel expels the Palestinians and rebuilds the temple.
Five years, tops. Repent sinners! De Lawd is a'coming!

The chances of the Right seeing the Rapture are about the same as the Left seeing Global Warming. Pick your myth and have fun...

 

[Ishmael]

See what I mean? Hotly debated.

This is true. The geologic record is backing those that believe we're moving into the next Ice Age. This puts the "Global Warming" crowd and the naysayers in the unenviable position of having to prove we aren't.

And therein lies thier problem. The oceans are warming and CO2 concentrations are increasing. This is all true and measurable. But, as postulated by that old crackpot Velikovsky back in the early 50's and now shown from the geologic record, CO2 concentrations and oceanic warming ALWAYS occur at the onset of an Ice Age. It's the only way to get enough water vapor into the atmosphere to begin the glaciation process.

Ishmael

 

[John Doe]

"bogus research"??? The basic premise of scientific research is to come up with a plausible theory to explain an observed event and then then find your "proofs". The theory gains strength by research that either supports it directly or research that disproves other possibilities. Anyone that only does research that confirms their theory without attempting to disprove other possibilities is teh one doing teh bogus research.

Uh no, you try to disprove your own theory, not prove it. that way your bias doesn't skew the results.

 

[sexy-girl]

"bogus research"??? The basic premise of scientific research is to come up with a plausible theory to explain an observed event and then then find your "proofs". The theory gains strength by research that either supports it directly or research that disproves other possibilities. Anyone that only does research that confirms their theory without attempting to disprove other possibilities is teh one doing teh bogus research.

it's well known that the bush government has been funding research that supports their claims over climate change and global warming so they can drag there heels over actually doing anything ... but yeah i have read a lot of that research and none of it has ever been substantial anyway ... the bush government has just been using it to claim more research is needed (anotherwords we won't actually do anything)

but like i said before this has backfired now because this is US government backed research that is claiming global warming is man made and real

I don't know why we wouldn't. This story ran on CNN's WWW page yesterday. What took the Independent so long to pick it up?

i didn't know CNN had been covering it too ... which is why i asked in my first post if it had been making news in the US ... i'm glad to hear it has

 

[*******]

the US government has been pushing bogus research like that for years ... the US government is spending billions on global warming ... but nearly all of that spending go's into attempting to research these wacky ideas that global warming is anything but man made and none of that research has ever come up with anything substantial

most of that research was trying to claim why we were having air temperature increases ... but this research is different because it deals with ocean temperatures

this news article isn't the report but assuming the reporting is true (knowing the newspaper i'm sure it is) then they're claiming theres unequivocal links between the pollution levels and sea level temperatures ... another words the percentage levels matched ... i'm sure in the UK we'll be hearing more about this in upcoming weeks ... i'm not sure you will be hearing anything about it there though

Yeah and we've been moitoring ocean temperatures for what now, decades?

 

[John Doe]

This is true. The geologic record is backing those that believe we're moving into the next Ice Age. This puts the "Global Warming" crowd and the naysayers in the unenviable position of having to prove we aren't.

And therein lies thier problem. The oceans are warming and CO2 concentrations are increasing. This is all true and measurable. But, as postulated by that old crackpot Velikovsky back in the early 50's and now shown from the geologic record, CO2 concentrations and oceanic warming ALWAYS occur at the onset of an Ice Age. It's the only way to get enough water vapor into the atmosphere to begin the glaciation process.

Ishmael

I'll look into it.

 

[John Doe]

Yeah and we've been moitoring ocean temperatures for what now, decades?

Just to clarify, you're saying that because decades is a very short period of time geologically?

 

[RobDownSouth]

As predictable as clockwork, whenever the subject of "global warming" pops up, Ishmael dutifully trots out the propaganda of the "Greening Earth Society" as a rebuttal.

The "Greening Earth Society" is an "astroturf" organization that was created and funded by the Western Fuels Association (a coal mining trade group). Not surprisingly, all research produced by this organization "proves" that burning coal is actually, *gasp*, good for the environment!

This view is widely rejected by most legitimate scientists.

 

[ma_guy]

Uh no, you try to disprove your own theory, not prove it. that way your bias doesn't skew the results.

Anyone that proposes a theory and doesn't run a few experiments to find out if their theory holds true in at least one case before running expirements to attempt to rule out other possibile explanations is an idiot and wasting their time.

"...experimental tests may lead either to the confirmation of the hypothesis, or to the ruling out of the hypothesis..."

 

[Ishmael]

only in the US and ishmael head ... the debate in the rest of the world has finished

tony blairs chief scientific adviser called it a "far greater global threat than international terrorism"

and tony blair has been saying it's going to become the biggest global issue

*chuckle* You don't get it, do you?

The issue isn't whether there is warming taking place. That issue is NOT subject for debate.

The issue IS whether (1.) it's primary causation is the activities of man and (2.) whether we can do anything about it (refer back to (1.)).

As has been shown in just one of the links I've provided, there is no PROOF that mans activities are the causal effect. If man is NOT the primary agent here then it's highly probable that there isn't a damn thing we can do about it anyway.

There is a scenario, perfectly backed by scientific research, that tells us the very remedies the "Global Warming" crowd are bleating about are the very worst steps we could take.

There is also a scenario, also back by research and the geologic record, that tells us "Global Warming" is to be embraced as a change for the better. Two growing seasons annually on those lands near the Artic Circle would go a long way to feeding the world.

The fact of the matter is that this "Global Warming" is seen as a catastrophe only by knee jerk reactionaries who fear change. I see it as something that will provide a challenge to my grandchildren. Keep them from becoming smug and lazy little shits who spend far too much time worrying about things of little consequence.

Ishmael

 

[John Doe]

Anyone that proposes a theory and doesn't run a few experiments to find out if their theory holds true in at least one case before running expirements to attempt to rule out other possibile explanations is an idiot and wasting their time.

"...experimental tests may lead either to the confirmation of the hypothesis, or to the ruling out of the hypothesis..."

What did I say that suggested one should not run experiments to test the hypothesis?

By the way, what you quoted says nothing about only trying to prove a hypothesis. It mentions confirming or ruling it out, both.

 

[*******]

Yes Stup.

And Antarctican Ice-Core measurements don't impress me much either when one considers that the Little Ice Age that gripped Europe in Shakespeare's time was a localized Ice Age that didn't affect China.




Throb, Einstein used physics and math to develop his theory which was later established through the experimentation of others...

 

[RobDownSouth]

Anyone that proposes a theory and doesn't run a few experiments to find out if their theory holds true in at least one case before running expirements to attempt to rule out other possibile explanations is an idiot and wasting their time.

[/URL]

By your specious definition, Albert Einstein was an "idiot" because he proposed his Theory of Relativity without whippin' up a batch of experiments to prove his theory (which is, of course, the bedrock of quantum physics research today).

Ma_guy....classic wingnut in denial.

 

[ma_guy]

it's well known that the bush government has been funding research that supports their claims over climate change and global warming so they can drag there heels over actually doing anything ... but yeah i have read a lot of that research and none of it has ever been substantial anyway ... the bush government has just been using it to claim more research is needed (anotherwords we won't actually do anything)

but like i said before this has backfired now because this is US government backed research that is claiming global warming is man made and real

Do some research of your own. Look at the US funded Global Warming research over the last 20 years and compare the number of reports funded and released during the Clinton administration that either support or argue against Global warming as a man-made issue vs. the number of reports during the Bush administration. I think you'd be surprised.

You can blame it on Bush all you'd like but the numbers don't support your conclusion.

 

[Ishmael]

As predictable as clockwork, whenever the subject of "global warming" pops up, Ishmael dutifully trots out the propaganda of the "Greening Earth Society" as a rebuttal.

The "Greening Earth Society" is an "astroturf" organization that was created and funded by the Western Fuels Association (a coal mining trade group). Not surprisingly, all research produced by this organization "proves" that burning coal is actually, *gasp*, good for the environment!

This view is widely rejected by most legitimate scientists.

LMAO No they aren't "rejected by most legitimate scientists." Only by those that reject their conclussions. (Obvioulsy the group you belong to Rob "the idiot" Troll.)

Their measured data has been challenged by NO ONE. Only the conclussions that they have drawn from those measurements.

And you're still left with the problem of the melting Martian ice caps.

Ishmael

 

[John Doe]

By your specious definition, Albert Einstein was an "idiot" because he proposed his Theory of Relativity without whippin' up a batch of experiments to prove his theory (which is, of course, the bedrock of quantum physics research today).

Ma_guy....classic wingnut in denial.

funny you should say that. If I'm not mistaken I have approximately the same I.Q. Einstein did, give or take a few points. One can make of that what one will.

Although, I.Q. tests are continually being adjusted so that 100 is always the average, so who knows if it's at all comparable.