The Great Global Warming Swindle

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Looks to be rather intersting. I have read a few things written by some of the people on the show. If all this does, is gets the research funding evenly distributed with all researchers and not just the "human caused" researchers... I would be rather happy.

The film features an impressive roll-call of experts, including nine professors – experts in climatology, oceanography, meteorology, environmental science, biogeography and paleoclimatology – from such reputable institutions as MIT, NASA, the International Arctic Research Centre, the Institut Pasteur, the Danish National Space Center and the Universities of London, Ottawa, Jerusalem, Winnipeg, Alabama and Virginia.

[BrassFusion]

FUCK the global warming issue!! i'm sick of wondering who's paying off whom.

all i know is that it certainly won't hurt anybody if we cleaned up emissions regardless.

[Msterbeau]

FUCK the global warming issue!! i'm sick of wondering who's paying off whom.

all i know is that it certainly won't hurt anybody if we cleaned up emissions regardless.

BAM!!! My feelings exactly. We're trashing the earth faster then it can repair itself. So many people don't care at all... Out of control development, huge landfills, blah blah blah.... Our children's children are going to inherit a mess.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Did you know.. that if you were to somehow move all the humans off the face of the earth today... that in only 100 years the biosphere will have erased all trace of us in the atmosphere?

I have no problems with cutting emmisions and helping the enviroment. What I do have problems with is the bullshit that goes on. So much money is going into the CO2 side of the argument... and for all we know... it's a waste of time.

Why give up on looking for the cause... why are people trying to make it a crime to even talk that there may be something else behind it other than humans? Why are peoples creditials threatened for having thier own views?

There is very little in the way of real science going on.. al great deal of politics and ass kissing to get grants and such... but anyone that does not support the accepted consensus is somehow a criminal.

[glc]

I might be horribly wrong with this, but I think I heard a while ago that the earth has it's own counter measure in case the green house effect should collapse. I don't remember the exact details, but it had sommething to do with polar caps melting, currents changing, temperatures changing, creating a new ice age balancing the earth out. So if you are worried about the earth, don't be. It can take care of itself. I'm worried about man, and whether we'll survive the earths reaction to what we've done to it.

[Slept with ghost]

Im more worried about Manbearpig

[BrassFusion]

Did you know.. that if you were to somehow move all the humans off the face of the earth today... that in only 100 years the biosphere will have erased all trace of us in the atmosphere?

I have no problems with cutting emmisions and helping the enviroment. What I do have problems with is the bullshit that goes on. So much money is going into the CO2 side of the argument... and for all we know... it's a waste of time.

Why give up on looking for the cause... why are people trying to make it a crime to even talk that there may be something else behind it other than humans? Why are peoples creditials threatened for having thier own views?

There is very little in the way of real science going on.. al great deal of politics and ass kissing to get grants and such... but anyone that does not support the accepted consensus is somehow a criminal.

You could be right about the biosphere erasing any trace of our existence if we all left. Thing is, we're NOT going anywhere. We're still here, and we're still polluting.

I agree, the bullshit politics is lame, but why cut funding to areas of research? Just because we don't know for sure that C02 levels are the cause doesn't mean they AREN'T.

No one says it's criminal to guess that climate change has causes other than humans, but look at the facts. We've been adding all kinds of unwelcome shit to the ecosystem for hundreds of years. We've been overharvesting resources. And look at it this way- if it's NOT our fault, there's nothing we can do about it, but if it IS our fault, there IS something we can do about it. So there's no use pouring money into research that just lets us sleep with a clear conscience.

People's credentials may be threatened by their stance on the global warming issue if they form illogical conclusions that don't suggest a positive, realistic course of action. If they do that, it suggests that either A. they're poor scientists or B. they're being paid off.

There's a lot of bullshit politics, that's true, but the real studies need to go on behind the scenes like they have been. We may not see as many stories about the actual science on FOX News, but that doesn't mean nothing's happening.

I might be horribly wrong with this, but I think I heard a while ago that the earth has it's own counter measure in case the green house effect should collapse. I don't remember the exact details, but it had sommething to do with polar caps melting, currents changing, temperatures changing, creating a new ice age balancing the earth out. So if you are worried about the earth, don't be. It can take care of itself. I'm worried about man, and whether we'll survive the earths reaction to what we've done to it.

People that are only worried about the earth seem to be in the minority, and they often fall into the negative population growth/voluntary human extinction camp. Psychopaths.

And the earth is already reacting to what we've done to it. Remember the Roman Empire, and how they clear-cut the Sahara FOREST?? Yep! Now it's a big damn dust-bowl. If the Romans never destroyed that part of the earth, those in the Middle East would've had more places to build cities, spread out, get some breathing room. Instead, they're all crowded in the sand and pissed off.

Hence, 9/11.

[kellygrrrrrl]

^^ You just have it all figured out don't you Brass?

Nice spin.

[glc]

Would I be out of line if I suggested, and I mean absolutely no disrespect, that we devote a thread to "Ask Brass"? That'd be awesome!! Whenever we need profound answers, or are confused about politics, or anything at all, we could "Ask Brass", and she'd sort it all out?!

Again, I'm not being Nasty, (you know me Erin), but I reckon that'd be cool!

*runs*

*hides*

[BrassFusion]

Would I be out of line if I suggested, and I mean absolutely no disrespect, that we devote a thread to "Ask Brass"? That'd be awesome!! Whenever we need profound answers, or are confused about politics, or anything at all, we could "Ask Brass", and she'd sort it all out?!

Again, I'm not being Nasty, (you know me Erin), but I reckon that'd be cool!

*runs*

*hides*

It's been done by wiser folks. Do it if you want to, I'll answer the queries of anyone who cares enough to post them in a thread called that...

And don't think for a minute giving me my own pen would keep me from unceremoniously butting in on other topics.

/jack

[Rayne]

And the earth is already reacting to what we've done to it. Remember the Roman Empire, and how they clear-cut the Sahara FOREST?? Yep! Now it's a big damn dust-bowl. If the Romans never destroyed that part of the earth, those in the Middle East would've had more places to build cities, spread out, get some breathing room. Instead, they're all crowded in the sand and pissed off.

Hence, 9/11.

.... Can't ... stop ... laughing ...

[torn asunder]

seriously... CO2 is high, we clear-cut forests, plants use CO2...

you wanna stop global warming?? plant a fucking tree or 12 (million)

[JaneDead]

all i know is that it certainly won't hurt anybody if we cleaned up emissions regardless.

ditto

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I'm not saying that CO2 is not high.. I am not saying that we should not cut emissions... Jesus, I am like a pundit for alternative fuels like Biodiesel and Ethanol...

It's anyone who says that they don’t think humans are the cause who are getting their credentials threatened and funding cut. People who hold high level jobs.. like the heads of state sponsored Science departments are being told to either ignore their own research and embrace the Human Cause side of the issue or pack their bags.

It's ignored that Mars is showing the EXACT same pattern of higher CO2 and higher average temps.

It's ignored that at the highest levels of human CO2 output.. the average temperatures dropped.

It's ignored that fossil records for the last few million years show the Earth getting warmer and then CO2 levels rise.

Last year the reports came in on snow fall in Antarctica... and they show that every year Antarctica gets MORE snow.

This year, the report on average temperatures in Antarctica came out... and it shows that the temps are dropping there.

Every Science team on mainland Antarctica has evidence that the ice is getting THICKER.

The glaciers that are breaking off of Antarctica are on the Northern most point of the continent. The region makes up like 15% of the total coast line. BTW... Glaciers breaking off are where Icebergs come from. It happens, always has, always will.

Did you know that the Climate models used to predict Global Climate can’t replicate clouds? Or Cloud formation?

Did you know clouds are formed by sub-atomic particles from the Sun and Cosmic Rays from Super Nova? The more subatomic particles the more clouds...

Yet, the scientists that are trying to tell everyone that the Sun is putting out shitloads more than usual are being ignored.

But hey.. lets just give all the research money to the people who blame it on Humans... you know, we are so god damn powerful we can change worlds by accident.

It would be a waste of time to research every reasonable explanation. We already have an answer... and it happens to put humans right up there on a pedestal at the center of the Flat world at the center of the universe.

There is no possible way, even though a lot of damn good science says otherwise, that it could be a natural thing that we don’t have the power at all to change. Humans are the all powerful center of the Universe after all.

Pfft.

Also,

People's credentials may be threatened by their stance on the global warming issue if they form illogical conclusions that don't suggest a positive, realistic course of action. If they do that, it suggests that either A. they're poor scientists or B. they're being paid off.

Excuse me? Not everything has a positive and/or realistic course of action. Nor is it always a researchers job to find one. For one, Realistic is relative as all hell. Just look at your cell phone and then think of what President Taft would of thought of it... Not in his realm of realistic.

Oh and...

The Sahara is over 2 million years old. Or is it 2.5 million? and it’s on the African continent, not in the Middle East.

Stop, you are embarrassing yourself.

Remember the Dust Bowl? Dorothy, the Lion and all those people… We did cause that one… then we fixed it. Small scale. Well within our level of realistic.

You must watch a lot of Fox News.. you talk about it so much. You really should start watching some other sources.

[Blackmail]

The reason why some people who are skeptical is because cutting emissions on cars (for instance) costs alot of money and hurts revenue of car companies, people can lose jobs in a tight industry.

The Wall Street Journal ran a big article on this and how much the green people are hurting companies and jobs. I would link to it but the WSJ does not have their articles online. They interviewed alot of skeptics of global warming. One such skeptic is Bjorn Lomborg, who I've seen on TV quite a bit and I have no idea who is right and wrong in this but he seems to "win" the debates he has had with the global warming people. From a purely statiscal standpoint, the global warming people have gotten aot of predictions wrong over the past 20 years and Lomborg has been able to exploit that.

But I am no climatologist.

[BrassFusion]

Holy shit, Mark, I wasn't kidding at ALL. For serious.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Maybe you shouldn't. Maybe some people care about this little blue ball far more than they have words to express it. Maybe some people would like the politics taken out of this issue and the real science brought to the fore. Maybe we should stop doing things like say... blaming Global Warming for thier not being enough hookers, (yes, there is a whore house out there doing this) and pull our collective head out of our collective ass.

Maybe we should all shut the fuck up already. Put every dollar we can and every good mind into an energy efficiant way to get Hydrogen fuel. Then do everythign we can to Force Biodisiel and Ethanol to be the main fuel sorces until we get Hydrogen in place. All the time be working on whats really going on and if there is anything at all we can do or if we are just fucked and need to kiss our asses good bye.

[BrassFusion]

You can't just take politics out of any issue, in a republic. If we were an autocracy, then yeah, but we can't afford the tradeoffs. Since you don't have any way to prove that your way is the best, or only way to solve problems related to climate change (human inspired or not), there WILL be politics.

And debating in a forum isn't going to change the world, either.

[torn asunder]

And debating in a forum isn't going to change the world, either.

every instance of change begins with an idea - perhaps the idea will begin with a debate in a forum, and someone in a position to do something about it will see it, and act!!

(what!?!? it *could* happen!?!?)

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

You can minimize it though.

What exactly do you have against researching all possible causes?

You realize thats the stance you have taken? You want us to give up investigating the cause and focus on a problem that may or may not be the cause.

The great consensus isn't that Humans are the cause.. the consensus is that we might be the cause. There is not one actual scientific report that absolutly claims humans are the cause. That whole argument can boil down to...

The average temps have risen.

CO2 Levels have risen.

Humans create a great deal of CO2

We must be the cause.

Thats logical.. but logic is just as mutable as statistics. You can make it say anything you want if you tweak it enough.

Logic also says that you should still be looking at what other things can be causing a problem.

Common damn sense says that.

look.. think of it as a wet spot on your floor. You look for where the water is coming from... right above it you find a wet wet spot on the ceiling. Yesterday.. the bathtub upstairs over flowed. So, you think, thats most likely the cause... it will dry out.

Or do you double check that a pipe isn't leaking or a sink running with the plug in?

and hun... we are talking about it. It doesn;t matter where we are talking... people are reading it and forming opinions... looking things up to check it out... and maybe.. come election day... soemthing one of us here said clicks in thier brain and they vote Yes on an Ethanol plan.

Talking about things always matters.

btw

My way is the Scientific way. Look at all possibilitys. Rule out the impossible and what ever is left, no matter how improbable, well, that most likely it.

You will never convince me that going with the first thing that pops into your head and ignoring everything else is the proper way to do science.

[BrassFusion]

Global warming is totally real. I defy anyone to open his or her window and say otherwise.

[sinmantyx]

Oh gosh! A global warming debate opened up while I wasn't looking?

OK everybody here it is:

There are two effects of pollution: global warming and global cooling.

Global cooling has been a large factor in the past because we were putting out more particulate (dust, smoke and what-not) pollution into the air. This is why about 30 years ago everyone was worried about global cooling.

We have decreased the amount of particulate pollution (go us) but there is still a tremendous amount of green house gas emissions (not just carbon dioxide, however, generally carbon dioxide is used as a referent so green house gas emissions are sometimes reported in "carbon dioxide equivalents") and we are still recovering slowly from rapid deforestation. So, currently, it seems that Global warming is winning.

Natural effects of global climate change can be much more profound than man-made ones. The "little ice age" was most likely the result of a very large volcanic eruption. The earth has natural cycles of warming and cooling. This is one reason that archaeologists have tons of fun digging up "lost civilizations". Unless we know how to adapt to climate change, we're screwed regardless.

The biosphere is so complex it is basically impossible to create any simulation that is 100% accurate. As many know, a group of scientists got together and created a very strong report whose bottom line was that they are 90% sure that humans are significantly contributing to climate change. (Go here)

It would make sense then...unless we want to release tons of particulate pollution back into the air and give everyone on Earth emphysema or wait for Yellowstone to blow-up, that we change our energy economy. This will spell disaster for companies that cannot adapt and provide great opportunities for those that can.

To protect the status quo, there is a concerted effort to discredit current research. If you peruse publications of the science mainstream, you will see that the current presidential administration is (with very few exceptions) universally hated by the scientific community. You will find hundreds of articles concerning censorship, presidential appointees from the private sector having profound conflicts of interest, experts in the EPA and other organizations resigning in disgust, and active campaigns by the administration to subvert and discredit scientific research that doesn't fit with their political agenda. Scientists (of all parties) have HATED this president WAY before it was "cool". Go here. (Even though the link I gave you is a political organization, anecdotally I've come to this conclusion both working at a Department of Energy funded National Laboratory and working in academia.)

The idea that global-warming deniers are somehow being treated unfairly by political forces is the most bizarre spin I have heard in a while. They certainly may be treated harshly by their peers, but that is what "peer review" is all about. It is also conceivable that due to power shifts in the government, that the aforementioned political appointees are being slowly but surely cleansed from the landscape. I'm sure they'll do just fine; the last offer I saw was $10,000 for an anti-human impact paper. The money was put up by a lobbying firm with ties to who?! You guessed it! Go here.

This issue is very polarizing. I don't doubt that a few scientists that honestly disagree with the findings of practically everyone else, may be having a hard time. However, if you really want to know who to trust think on this: Why the fuck would 3000 climatologists from 113 countries be making this shit up?

The analogy I used to try to convince my ditto-head father (bless his heart) was that it is similiar to a bunch of people standing around looking at a house starting to burn. You are curious and go up to the house and notice that a bunch of people are throwing fuel on it. You think they are crazy, so you ask them, "Shouldn't you stop throwing fuel on the fire? Won't that make the fire burn faster?" They reply, "The fire wasn't our fault. It burns naturally...so piss off." It would almost be funny if people weren't living in the house.

Sorry...I get a bit worked up. I do think that one reason that it is easy to get confused about climate change is that it *is* very complex. Global warming does NOT mean that every place on Earth will get warmer. It's not as simple as melting ice with a hairdryer in your freezer. Many of the *specifics* are scientifically controversial; however, the general concept and outlook is widely accepted. Every time someone uses a "record low" as evidence against global warming, I want to bash my head against a very hard rock.

If you really want to know about this, go to SCIENCE magazines; don't go to political sources. Scientific American, Nature, and National Geographic, etc...are generally good sources. If you really want a right to your opinion and put me in my place, start reading peer reviewed journals. If you are basing your entire opinion on what some random Ph.D. said on a talk show...you may wish to re-evaluate.

[sinmantyx]

btw...

higher average temp = more evaporation = more snow

[BrassFusion]

I was actually being sarcastic with my last post, but...

VERY NICE.

[sinmantyx]

I aim to please! I missed you all...I haven't lurked around on this board for a long time. Nobody will see me at the clubs for a while either...cause I'm pregnant!

So, no-one worry about global climate change...my kid will take care of it.