Read "State of Fear". It's fiction, but it asks a lot of interesting questions.
And for those who are saying global warming is real, where is your evidence? Can anyone making such claims actually link to some real data that proves anything?
And for those who are saying global warming is real, where is your evidence? Can anyone making such claims actually link to some real data that proves anything?
What about that picture of that one polar bear that was on the last cube of ice?? That's science :roll:
You know, summaries like this are meant for general consumption? Have you ever read one?
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_SPM.pdf
http://www.gtp89.dial.pipex.com/spm.pdf
General consumption by who? That is barely readable by me, I doubt the general population as a whole could understand half of that.
I'm just asking for some simple evidence, like a chart showing average temperature over 200 years gradually increasing to prove global warming. like this one:
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_200_yrs.html
Oh wait. That shows the highest temperatures occurring 200 years ago, and the temperature now is actually cooler than it was back then (by less than .5 degree C, but still).
There is a ton of conjecture and theory and NO REAL EVIDENCE of global warming. Yes, our environment is changing, but there is no evidence to link that change to anything humans have done. The earth goes through cycles.
moshquerade
No Lifer
- Nov 1, 2001
- 61,504
- 12
- 56
Have you actually seen this yourself?
You do know there are icebergs being created all the time, and there have been throughout history right?
Furthermore, the IPCC is using primarily post-1970 data.. of course it will appear much warmer now than the 70's when there was an obvious cooling trend
Disprove it? While the scale makes it look like a huge temperature increase, if you actually look at it and see what it really is showing, the temperature difference between 1000 years ago and "2004" is .2 degree C. I'm quaking in fear, what if the temperature raises by another .2 degrees in another 1000 years?! We might be up to a whole degree higher 5000 years from now!
Oh man it doesn't affect temperature-sensitive organisms! You're so right!
Just because we can barely notice macroscopic temperature changes doesn't mean you're qualified in induce that therefore nothing can notice the difference. Coral fucking reefs[1]. You guys are just as bad as the creationists. "Global warming isn't a big problem, it's only a few degrees eh I don't notice that".
Also, acceleration is different than velocity. If it keeps going up at the current velocity, it may get hot fast, but if it keeps accelerating at the rate it is now, it'll get hotter faster.
[1] P.W.Glynn "Coral Reef Bleaching: Ecological Perspectives" Earth and Environmental Science. Vol 12:1 March 1993.
Kudos for responding to the stupid argument and not the people who have valid points.
See: smokeyjoe
A few degrees? Talk about a massive over-exaggeration. It's a .2 degree increase over one THOUSAND years. That isn't degrees, that isn't even one degree, do you understand what a decimal point means? The temperature is already varying by over a degree, so if the poor little coral reefs are so sensitive that .2 degree change is going to kill them it's amazing they survived the massive 1 degree C temperature swings during other periods in the last 2000 years, not to mention the local temperature variation which is probably 10+ degrees C even in tropical locations.
That is a big "if". If it turns out to actually occur, then I'll care. Until then, it's just speculation.
First of all, linking to a PDF that is 18 pages long is not a valid argument. This isn't the legal realm, you don't just dump work on other people and make them read it all. Cite specific points. I could just as easily dump a 100 page paper on you and make you read the whole thing.
All I see in that is an economics [teacher/student/???] complaining about how the data the IPCC gathered was gathered under questionable methodology. The main argument seems to be that we're just coming out of a ice age, so therefore it should be heating up.
While that's valid to an extent, the science behind greenhouse gasses has been proven. Unless you want to disprove it, of course. I'd be open to any references that disprove radiation scattering. More heat-trapping CO2 = more heat. Even if we don't see the effects, we will.
Easy. Who was checking global temps back past say, oh...1900? Cavemen? Romans? Crusaders? The Dutch?
Fact of the matter is, the last few years, the temperature is trending DOWN. It's short term, but unless that changes, the long-term trend will soon follow.
Now, I'm all for cleaning up emissions and what not, but don't sit there and tell me that man is causing the temps to rise OR fall. Just can't happen.
You seem ignorant of the fact that you don't have to directly observe something to quantify it's effects.
Back up your claims.
Of course, you're totally right. Man cannot cause temperatures to rise or fall. It just can't happen.
Here is another interesting article.
http://steveu.com/blog/2008/09...earths-climate_01.html
"the period between 1940 and 2000 marked the most active sunspot cycles in over 1,000 years. So, maybe ? just maybe ? those active sunspot cycles had something to do with the run up in temperatures the Earth experienced during that period"
http://steveu.com/blog/2008/09...earths-climate_01.html
"the period between 1940 and 2000 marked the most active sunspot cycles in over 1,000 years. So, maybe ? just maybe ? those active sunspot cycles had something to do with the run up in temperatures the Earth experienced during that period"
Leafy, the last few years, the temps are trending downward. Look it up. I'm not going to do your homework for you. Google is incredibly easy to use.
And yes, Man is not causing temperatures GLOBALLY to do anything. I said it "can't" happen, but maybe that was a bit too strong. Set off all the nuclear warheads in existence and THAT might affect the global temperature......briefly. Then it would go right back to normal.
And I realize that estimates of things in the past can be made, but I do question how accurate they truly were. They are ESTIMATES, based on THEORIES, which are based on factual evidence. Not quite the same as having thousands and thousands of weather stations and satellites all around the world like we do today.
Just a bit over 20 years ago, many of these same scientists said we were heading into another ice age. Now they say it's heating up. They were wrong then. Odds are overwhelming that they are wrong now.
And yes, Man is not causing temperatures GLOBALLY to do anything. I said it "can't" happen, but maybe that was a bit too strong. Set off all the nuclear warheads in existence and THAT might affect the global temperature......briefly. Then it would go right back to normal.
And I realize that estimates of things in the past can be made, but I do question how accurate they truly were. They are ESTIMATES, based on THEORIES, which are based on factual evidence. Not quite the same as having thousands and thousands of weather stations and satellites all around the world like we do today.
Just a bit over 20 years ago, many of these same scientists said we were heading into another ice age. Now they say it's heating up. They were wrong then. Odds are overwhelming that they are wrong now.
Exactly. The Sun is burning hotter, the last 60 years according to THIS article, and many others
What....does anyone truly think that makes no difference?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
-
Facebook
Twitter