Global Warming Scientists Trapped in Antarctic Ice

[IGBT]

only a matter of time before the eco-KOOKS try to spin their way out of their shipStuck with liberal climate mythology and global warming Hobbit tales all backed up with computer games.

 

[bshole]

This unbelievable cold is being blamed on global warming. Notice the key word... "could". Whenever weather happens, these guys come out any say global warming "may" be the cause. Is that really science or just idle speculation? Hell I could say it could be Santa Clause and have as much credibility.

But not only does the cold spell not disprove climate change, it may well be that global warming could be making the occasional bout of extreme cold weather in the U.S. even more likely.

http://science.time.com/2014/01/06/climate-change-driving-cold-weather/

 

[werepossum]

This unbelievable cold is being blamed on global warming. Notice the key word... "could". Whenever weather happens, these guys come out any say global warming "may" be the cause. Is that really science or just idle speculation? Hell I could say it could be Santa Clause and have as much credibility.



http://science.time.com/2014/01/06/climate-change-driving-cold-weather/

CAGW is the very best kind of theory, for literally everything proves it.

Of course, that does not necessarily mean it's wrong, it just means it is being pushed dishonestly.

 

[ralfy]

About an independent study funded by skeptics:

"Bombshell: Koch-Funded Study Finds ‘Global Warming Is Real’, ‘On The High End’ And ‘Essentially All’ Due To Carbon Pollution"

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...-and-essentially-all-due-to-carbon-pollution/

 

[LunarRay]

only a matter of time before the eco-KOOKS try to spin their way out of their shipStuck with liberal climate mythology and global warming Hobbit tales all backed up with computer games.

Do you interpret the data differently than the experts who say global warming is occurring? Or perhaps you are only accepting the word of proclaimed authority in science where there are no authorities ... only experts... who for some reason proclaim otherwise than the vast majority of the experts in the field?

 

[brycejones]

only a matter of time before the eco-KOOKS try to spin their way out of their shipStuck with liberal climate mythology and global warming Hobbit tales all backed up with computer games.

You've been on a roll lately......are you attempting to compete for the title of resident nut?

 

[Bowfinger]

From the horse's mouth

http://www.theguardian.com/science/...ntarctic-expedition-was-worth-it-chris-turney

Thanks for posting this, very interesting. It's a valuable alternative to all the nutter disinformation sources cluttering this thread, each trying to outdo the others in outlandish and ignorant accusations and distortions.

 

[TerryMathews]

Thanks for posting this, very interesting. It's a valuable alternative to all the nutter disinformation sources cluttering this thread, each trying to outdo the others in outlandish and ignorant accusations and distortions.

You should be able to appreciate the irony however.

Think of it as the counterpart to a social conservative getting caught propositioning in the men's room.

Doesn't prove anything really but makes you chuckle.

 

[Bowfinger]

CAGW is the very best kind of theory, for literally everything proves it.

Of course, that does not necessarily mean it's wrong, it just means it is being pushed dishonestly.

It's another good example of the fallacy of arguing with anecdotes instead of data. You might consider this the next time you're inclined to argue your "life experience" trumps actual data.

 

[Bowfinger]

You should be able to appreciate the irony however.

Think of it as the counterpart to a social conservative getting caught propositioning in the men's room.

Doesn't prove anything really but makes you chuckle.

Yes, I absolutely see the humor in the story. But that humor was dampened a bit by realizing the usual ignoramuses would misrepresent it to support their climate change denial. And they have. They cannot grasp that this story is merely ironic, and instead think it actually proves them right.

 

[kage69]

You've been on a roll lately......are you attempting to compete for the title of resident nut?

Nah, pretty sure that's the standard M.O. for IGBTroll. If he or she has ever contributed something of worth to a thread instead of the usual partisan diarrhea that's spewed about, I haven't seen it.

I doubt this one has the tenacity or the patience needed to unseat the likes of Incorrupatroll, IMO anyway...

 

[TerryMathews]

Yes, I absolutely see the humor in the story. But that humor was dampened a bit by realizing the usual ignoramuses would misrepresent it to support their climate change denial. And they have. They cannot grasp that this story is merely ironic, and instead think it actually proves them right.

My personal opinion is that it is an area worth studying but for the most part the science surrounding it is still in its infancy. Anyone, on either side, who makes a definitive statement about global warming is full of shit. We are still developing the tools to study the environment, in order to collect meaningful data to draw theories from.

Fun fact: at one point in time, when the science was still new, doctors claimed that all ulcers were caused by stress. Newer techniques for studying microbiology have shown us that a significant portion of ulcers are actually caused by bacteria.

Point being, we dont have the knowledge about global warming yet to know if that's the case. Just like the ulcers, there could be a cause that we currently lack the technology to observe.

 

[fskimospy]

My personal opinion is that it is an area worth studying but for the most part the science surrounding it is still in its infancy. Anyone, on either side, who makes a definitive statement about global warming is full of shit. We are still developing the tools to study the environment, in order to collect meaningful data to draw theories from.

Fun fact: at one point in time, when the science was still new, doctors claimed that all ulcers were caused by stress. Newer techniques for studying microbiology have shown us that a significant portion of ulcers are actually caused by bacteria.

Point being, we dont have the knowledge about global warming yet to know if that's the case. Just like the ulcers, there could be a cause that we currently lack the technology to observe.

This is not a good argument. If you're saying that we should ignore science now because science has been wrong at some point in the past that means we can basically never know anything.

The evidence for AGW is simply overwhelming; the argument that we just don't know just isn't supported by the data. Can you tell me another field of science where if 97% of experts agree something is happening that you are inclined to say that 'we just can't know'?

 

[TerryMathews]

This is not a good argument. If you're saying that we should ignore science now because science has been wrong at some point in the past that means we can basically never know anything.

The evidence for AGW is simply overwhelming; the argument that we just don't know just isn't supported by the data. Can you tell me another field of science where if 97% of experts agree something is happening that you are inclined to say that 'we just can't know'?

Please highlight the part for me where I said to ignore it.

Dont put words in my mouth.

Also to your 97%: I chose ulcers for a reason.

 

[Jaskalas]

This unbelievable cold is being blamed on global warming. Notice the key word... "could". Whenever weather happens, these guys come out any say global warming "may" be the cause. Is that really science or just idle speculation? Hell I could say it could be Santa Clause and have as much credibility.

http://science.time.com/2014/01/06/climate-change-driving-cold-weather/

CAGW is the very best kind of theory, for literally everything proves it.

Of course, that does not necessarily mean it's wrong, it just means it is being pushed dishonestly.

It IS horribly wrong.
Ask them why / how AGW causes record cold. "Missing Ice" they reply.

Does the Arctic look like open water to you?

 

[bshole]

This is not a good argument. If you're saying that we should ignore science now because science has been wrong at some point in the past that means we can basically never know anything.

The evidence for AGW is simply overwhelming; the argument that we just don't know just isn't supported by the data. Can you tell me another field of science where if 97% of experts agree something is happening that you are inclined to say that 'we just can't know'?

Speaking of ignoring the science.... the science says that AGW policies are contributing to death and starvation today!! This isn't theoretical suffering in the future, this is suffering we have created today to avoid the theoretical future suffering. It is a sick and twisted thought process that creates suffering on a mass scale to avoid potential suffering in the future.

Four years on, the true impact of biofuels is clear to all. By incentivising land owners to replace food crops with fuel crops, the EU’s quota has reduced food production in areas of the world where poor communities were already at risk of hunger.

Food prices have rocketed, land grabs are on the rise, and hunger has worsened in areas of the developing world as agricultural land is used to fuel European cars.

As well as increasing hunger the current policy on biofuels will lead to higher rather than lower greenhouse emissions.

Biofuel growth leads to deforestation and when these “indirect” land-use changes are taken into account, they lead to no real carbon emission savings.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/worl...starving-people-in-developing-world-1.1633379

 

[fskimospy]

Please highlight the part for me where I said to ignore it.

Dont put words in my mouth.

Also to your 97%: I chose ulcers for a reason.

It doesn't matter if you chose ulcers for a reason. Nobody has ever argued that science is infallible, simply that it is the best understanding we have. In this case that understanding is backed up by an enormous amount of quantitative evidence. (unlike the case for ulcers, btw).

Saying 'we just don't know' is an excuse for inaction despite overwhelming evidence. That's close enough to ignoring for me.

 

[Jaskalas]

About an independent study funded by skeptics:

"Bombshell: Koch-Funded Study Finds ‘Global Warming Is Real’, ‘On The High End’ And ‘Essentially All’ Due To Carbon Pollution"

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/20...-and-essentially-all-due-to-carbon-pollution/

Richard Muller has always been a Warmist, but at least he tries to be an honest one by dispelling such scientific atrocities such as the hockey stick. He does appear to want to fight with real data sets and not imaginary ones, I'll give him credit for that.

As for the "study", all it does is attempt to verify the temperature record. That is all. Were you ever willing to concede that those were in dispute? No? Then you crow about nothing.

You have shown us that a Warmist believes we've warmed 0.7C. Big !@#$ deal.

 

[Daverino]

Y'know I woke up this morning and I hadn't evolved from yesterday. Obviously this means that evolution is not true.

 

[TerryMathews]

It doesn't matter if you chose ulcers for a reason. Nobody has ever argued that science is infallible, simply that it is the best understanding we have. In this case that understanding is backed up by an enormous amount of quantitative evidence. (unlike the case for ulcers, btw).

Saying 'we just don't know' is an excuse for inaction despite overwhelming evidence. That's close enough to ignoring for me.

And again, highlight where I said we should do nothing. You're arguing with what you wish I said. Please stop.

 

[Munky]

This is not a good argument. If you're saying that we should ignore science now because science has been wrong at some point in the past that means we can basically never know anything.

The evidence for AGW is simply overwhelming; the argument that we just don't know just isn't supported by the data. Can you tell me another field of science where if 97% of experts agree something is happening that you are inclined to say that 'we just can't know'?

Name me another field of science that relies on credentialist consensus pandering to make up for its failed predictions, but insists that the "science is settled."

 

[fskimospy]

And again, highlight where I said we should do nothing. You're arguing with what you wish I said. Please stop.

What you wrote sounds an awful lot like a recipe for doing nothing. Please tell me what you think we should do.

 

[bshole]

What you wrote sounds an awful lot like a recipe for doing nothing. Please tell me what you think we should do.

I dunno, maybe kill off 6 billion humans? That should "save" the planet.

 

[TerryMathews]

What you wrote sounds an awful lot like a recipe for doing nothing. Please tell me what you think we should do.

I do think we should act on the best science of the time, but we should temper our policies against how little we really know about how the ecosystem works.

For example, we know that solar winds seem to have an effect on our planet but as of yet there isnt a good model to explain how that effect works.

We shouldn't be doing things that harm people today over what the effect we think it might have in the future will be.

 

[fskimospy]

I do think we should act on the best science of the time, but we should temper our policies against how little we really know about how the ecosystem works.

For example, we know that solar winds seem to have an effect on our planet but as of yet there isnt a good model to explain how that effect works.

There is in fact research on the effects of cosmic rays and the solar wind on climate. Guess what? The research shows they aren't a significant driver of climate change.

We shouldn't be doing things that harm people today over what the effect we think it might have in the future will be.

Almost anything we do today to mitigate global warming will have costs, and will therefore harm people today. As I correctly suspected before, this is an argument to do nothing.