Aliens Cause Global Warming

[DrPizza]

marked for later...

 

[mercanucaribe]

Historical examples of non-consensus being correct does not mean that current non-consensus scientific findings are more correct than the consensus... Or maybe I'm missing something.

Despite what real science says, articles like this tend to gain a foothold simply because we as humans love to hear "it's not so bad" or "don't worry that's all hype". And even better if it says "consensus means nothing. non-consensus is truth". It's brilliant psychologically... To paint the scientific community as the badmen and yourself (or those you sympathize with) as the Galileo, using a few isolated historical examples known to everyone.

And I agree with Hardcore about the weather example. Predicting the weather, which is the result of a myriad of variables in a few days and predicting the EFFECTS of a continuous action, adding greenhouse gasses to the atmosphere, are completely different things. A better analogy is to say that IF x and x happens, it will rain. While we cannot predict that x and x will happen or that humans will continue pumping greenhouse gases into the air, we can say that IF things continue as they are, the atmosphere will warm further.

 

[silverpig]

The main point is that people take bad science to be science and the truth. Scientific predictions are fine, actually they are needed. The issue he has is that there are a lot of predictions that are taken to be absolute models of what WILL happen. Most people accept nuclear winter as a fact should we have a nuclear war. The truth is it is a prediction based on a lot of things we don't know. However people take this prediction (and others like it) to be hard fact which is wrong.

 

[mercanucaribe]

Also, Crichton implies that because people of 1900 could not predict the problems of 2005, we cannot predict the problems of 2100, claiming that they would have predicted that we would not have enough horses. Well, they might have also predicted accurately that we would not have sufficient food, health care, or housing. It is not logical to assume that we should not worry about the future because things will be different. Someone in 1200 AD would be making pretty accurate predictions for 1300AD based on his own world and previous history. I'd like to err on the safe side.

 

[clamum]

I think his idea of a research institute is damn good.

 

[raildogg]

global warming is misleading

it actually should be climate change, since thats more accurate

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: raildogg
global warming is misleading

it actually should be climate change, since thats more accurate

:roll: "Climate change" is a political marketing phrase invented solely by the master political marketing genius Frank Luntz, who works only for the Republican party. Way to show off your brainwashing 😛


On topic, I agree completely with Crichton and have been saying much the same thing for years. Anyone else ever notice that you can watch any type of astromony documentary any more and they don't push on you the fear that the world will end someday billions of years in the future? I mean... O M G, there are evil super black holes in the center of every galaxy coming to eat us! And watch out for the hole in the ozone and other bits of the sky that are going to fall!
Seriously, the only science these days seems to be bad science. Apocalyptic science. The science of bullsh!t. Bad religion falsely disguised as legitimate science. And I thank Crichton for calling attention to this problem.

 

[flxnimprtmscl]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: DurocShark
I love that he stated clearly what I've thought for a long time...

:thumbsup: to Crichton.

Another :thumbsup:

Make that three :thumbsup:

 

[ElFenix]

damn, that was a read

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: KeithP

Eat me. I skimmed through about 1/4 of it and I didn't see anything enlightening about it.

LOL...well then, I am sure you got the gist of it and are certainly entitled to give your informed opinion. :roll:

As far the essay/article....

Originally posted by: DurocShark
I love that he stated clearly what I've thought for a long time...

:thumbsup: to Crichton.

Well, I'll just have to read through the rest of it tomorrow...:roll: Eat mex2!!! 😛

 

[So]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
My cat's breath smells like catfood. Thus aliens are causing global warming.

Please take this stuff elsewhere. If you would take the time out of your day oread the speech, you would see how objective and insightful it really is.

Most educated and objective people probably have what he said in the back of their minds, and it is quite enlightening to see it spelled out.

Eat me. I skimmed through about 1/4 of it and I didn't see anything enlightening about it.

Enjoy your religion.

 

[DanTMWTMP]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Hardcore

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Hardcore


And isn't it interesting how he left out REAL effects of pollution on the environment that CAN be measured right now... like the big hole in the ozone over Australia.

Here's a clue:

The "ozone hole" has always been there. It has been observed getting bigger, then smaller, then bigger again. It's size has never directly correlated with any human activity.

Um it was largest in the late 70s and early 80s, because that was when CFC and other pollutions were the highest. Then in the late 90s it had shrink a bit, because CFCs and other pollutions were reduced. Sounds like a correlation to me.

The reason for a thin or no ozone layer over the South Pole is obvious: Ozone is created by the sun hitting our atmosphere. For months in the winter, no sun hits the South Pole, thus no ozone is produced. Also, time lapse maps of the layer show the "hole" grow in the winter, and shrink in the summer.

So? That doesn't mean there isn't an effect on it. Measurements of the south pole shows that there are more concentration of CFC and such gases there. It's because the air currents dump more of it south.

That all falls apart when you realize the WORLD WIDE usage of CFCs did NOT fall, but rose as the third world started using refrigeration, and were not banned from using CFCs.

The fact is, the sun makes plenty of ozone and there is no proof that CFCs destroy it faster than it is created. It's FUD based on skewed projections. Much like the article in the OP describes.

This is what happens when "scientists" with an agenda set out to prove a preconceived notion.

i thought it takes like 10+ yrs or so for CFC to reach the outer layer of the atmosphere? 😕
i know it takes decades...heard it on disc. channel. they must be right.. right?

 

[everman]

That was a really great read.
Science should not be about consensus and politics. It must be objective and open to any and all critisism.