• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is Global Warming the most misunderstood topic in politics?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JSt0rm said:
Yes of course. I won't play into your fallacy so you must say screw you.
Click to expand...

Like so many other supporters of the politics and money involved in the whole Global Warming industry you want to shut up critics and skeptics. We won't shut up about the science.
You are the one trying to silence opposition.
 
monovillage said:
Like so many other supporters of the politics and money involved in the whole Global Warming industry you want to shut up critics and skeptics. We won't shut up about the science.
You are the one trying to silence opposition.
Click to expand...

I'm not stopping you.

Be an idiot. Their certainly isn't a law against it.


I do find it interesting you slam science with one hand and then cherry pick science that reinforces your preconcieved notions of science and global warming. So which is it? Science is bad and fake or only the science you don't like is bad and fake?

This is why you are a idiot. You aren't open to whatever the science brings.
 
JSt0rm said:
I'm not stopping you.

Be an idiot. Their certainly isn't a law against it.


I do find it interesting you slam science with one hand and then cherry pick science that reinforces your preconcieved notions of science and global warming. So which is it? Science is bad and fake or only the science you don't like is bad and fake?

This is why you are a idiot. You aren't open to whatever the science brings.
Click to expand...

Remarking that science can be the victim of policy, politics and money isn't slamming science, it's being accurate about reality. Science that is subject to the scientific method is what I believe in, not trendy politically inspired faux science.
 
monovillage said:
Remarking that science can be the victim of policy, politics and money isn't slamming science, it's being accurate about reality. Science that is subject to the scientific method is what I believe in, not trendy politically inspired faux science.
Click to expand...

Thats nice. So then I expect you will come around at some point to see things in ways you never thought you would.
 
JSt0rm said:
Thats nice. So then I expect you will come around at some point to see things in ways you never thought you would.
Click to expand...

It's always possible, but in regards to catastrophic anthropogenic global warming it sure hasn't happened yet. I'll let you know if it does.
 
monovillage said:
It's always possible, but in regards to catastrophic anthropogenic global warming it sure hasn't happened yet. I'll let you know if it does.
Click to expand...

Lol. It's easy to be a contrarion who simply contradicts every stance other people make. You haven't stated your position yet - seems all you care to do is explain how others are wrong.
 
2012 Global Warming Report Card

Pretty much sums up the 'its worse than we thought' crowd.

The massive bulk of evidence indicates that nothing is wrong, and that Hansen, Mann and the rest of the hockey team are not being honest with us.

  • Temperatures are below Hansen’s zero emissions after 2000 Scenario C
  • Global temperatures are declining this century
  • Sea level has been declining for several years, and is lower now than it was in 2003
  • Arctic ice extent and area is the highest for the date since 2005
  • Temperatures in western Greenland last year were the coldest since 1996
  • Temperatures in Antarctica have been declining for 30 years
  • Antarctic ice has been increasing for 30 years
  • Winter snow extent is increasing, and has been near record highs in recent years
  • Temperatures in Texas show no increase since 1895
  • Drought in Australia is at historic lows
  • Drought in the US is well below the mean
  • Severe tornadoes are on the decline in the US
  • US hurricane strikes are on the decline
  • Intense hurricanes are on the decline
  • Polar Bear​​ populations have tripled
  • Yellowstone Grizzly Bear populations have tripled
  • USHCN raw thermometer data shows that the US has been cooling since 1895
Let’s put this scam to bed in 2012. It has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with money and politics.
Click to expand...
Besides, if you are a cult follower of the IPCC, then do us ALL a favor and actually listen to them.

"If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment."
Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Nov. 2007

So there you have it, case closed. You failed, the time for fighting 'climate change' is over.
 
What seems to me to be most lacking in the debate is a failure to notice that although the science can be back and forth on this issue depending on which scientist you read, no one seems to take the argument further.
Assuming that human behavior is having a significant effect on the earths climate, what time frame are we talking. Another area of greatly different findings. Some extremists are willing to say 50 years, some a hundred and some a thousand. And many seem to insist without any basis that I have read that at this time any damage done will be irreparrable.
As if that isnt enough to diswaid serious concern, the remedies that seem to be pushed have no evidence to suggest the result will be as intended. The classic example was the culling of the wolf in Yellowstone. The park service in the 1800's noted a slow decline in the number of elk in Yellowstone, so they hunted the wolf so aggressively they eliminated them from the park. The following years resulted in huge surge in population that lead to famine and disease. Then the park service decided that they would have to hunt the elk to manage the herd.
My point is beyond the debate regarding the human component of climate change, the ecological movement has completely jumped the gun on mechanisms for remedy and urgency. This has actually disrupted any moderate thoughts on minimizing impact.
I actually read that a person drinking one bottle of bottled water per day creates more CO2 than an SUV driver. I will have to look up the numbers but this kind of thing makes you wonder about the falicies of media attention.
 
mattpegher said:
What seems to me to be most lacking in the debate is a failure to notice that although the science can be back and forth on this issue depending on which scientist you read, no one seems to take the argument further.
Assuming that human behavior is having a significant effect on the earths climate, what time frame are we talking. Another area of greatly different findings. Some extremists are willing to say 50 years, some a hundred and some a thousand. And many seem to insist without any basis that I have read that at this time any damage done will be irreparrable.
As if that isnt enough to diswaid serious concern, the remedies that seem to be pushed have no evidence to suggest the result will be as intended. The classic example was the culling of the wolf in Yellowstone. The park service in the 1800's noted a slow decline in the number of elk in Yellowstone, so they hunted the wolf so aggressively they eliminated them from the park. The following years resulted in huge surge in population that lead to famine and disease. Then the park service decided that they would have to hunt the elk to manage the herd.
My point is beyond the debate regarding the human component of climate change, the ecological movement has completely jumped the gun on mechanisms for remedy and urgency. This has actually disrupted any moderate thoughts on minimizing impact.
I actually read that a person drinking one bottle of bottled water per day creates more CO2 than an SUV driver. I will have to look up the numbers but this kind of thing makes you wonder about the falicies of media attention.
Click to expand...


the eco-KOOKS and their willing accomplices will use voodoo science and white coat frauds to promote the hoax. They have a blinded and blinkered following that believe anything they say and propose. They want to formulate public policy based on a hoax/fraud and institutionalize the endless fraudulent and cherry picked "evidence" to assure tax payer funded grants so they can study nothing endlessly and get paid. The eco-KOOKS want welfare disguised as research and they want the tax payer to shut the fusk up and pay for it and comply with their goofy hoaxed based demands.
 
janas19 said:
Lol. It's easy to be a contrarion who simply contradicts every stance other people make. You haven't stated your position yet - seems all you care to do is explain how others are wrong.
Click to expand...

Good point. There is global warming going on, some percentage of it is caused by anthropogenic forces, most of it is natural variability. Global climate models are not evidence. If you can't follow the scientific method to prove it, it hasn't been proven.

Politics and policy along with politically motivated funding has done serious damage to the credibility of climate scientists in particular and all scientists in general.

Here's a good article about NSF funding.

http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.c...ing-earth-system-models-a-mixed-set-of-goals/
 
Jaskalas, there are some many falsehoods on your 'Report Card' list. Quickly off the top of my head are recorded decreases of surface sea ice in the Arctic, ignoring temperature increases and decreasing sea ice in the western Antarctic, a belief of decreasing or less ferocious Atlantic hurricanes (dumbing down to you for only selecting what involves the USA), polar bear populations having trippled (all such populations, or is that against a dishonest selection?), etc., .,etc..

I do not currently have the immediate time to refute many of those points with validated data, nor do I feel it would progress discussion.

You are evidently an ignorant idealouge, who will toss up shit, hope it to stick, while ignoring those who accurately refute it. Evidence to condemn you as such is from your proclamation against current agriculture in Greenland and challenging any to one prove you wrong. You ignored the rebuttal and prove to treat this discussion as your echo chamber. :thumbsdown:

You and others are not present for learning.
 
Last edited:
Whiskey16 said:
Jaskalas, there are some many falsehoods on your 'Report Card' list. Quickly off the top of my head are recorded decreases of surface sea ice in the Arctic, ignoring temperature increases and decreasing sea ice in the western Antarctic, a belief of decreasing or less ferocious Atlantic hurricanes (dumbing down to you for only selecting what involves the USA), polar bear populations having trippled (all such populations, or is that against a dishonest selection?), etc., .,etc..

I do not currently have the immediate time to refute many of those points with validated data, nor do I feel it would progress discussion.

You are evidently an ignorant idealouge, who will toss up shit, hope it to stick, while ignoring those who accurately refute it. Evidence to condemn you as such is from your proclamation against current agriculture in Greenland and challenging any to one prove you wrong. You ignored the rebuttal and prove to treat this discussion as your echo chamber. :thumbsdown:

You and others are not present for learning.
Click to expand...

Everything I saw in Jaskalas list was accurate. If you don't know the difference between a polar bear and a grizzly bear you're the one that needs to do a little more school work. The most i'll grant you is that most of the report card is extremely specific (arctic sea ice extent/area for the date since 2005 for example), but then you inject bullshit about West Antarctica when the list specifies all of the continent, not just the western portion.
 
JSt0rm said:
This really sums it up. People have belief systems and science better not rattle them or else science is bad. We have seen this since the dawn of science.
Click to expand...

You're the one that needs more education on the subject, would you like some links or a book list ?
 
monovillage said:
Good point. There is global warming going on, some percentage of it is caused by anthropogenic forces, most of it is natural variability. Global climate models are not evidence. If you can't follow the scientific method to prove it, it hasn't been proven.

Politics and policy along with politically motivated funding has done serious damage to the credibility of climate scientists in particular and all scientists in general.

Here's a good article about NSF funding.

http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.c...ing-earth-system-models-a-mixed-set-of-goals/
Click to expand...

You're not telling me anything new. Science is based upon physical laws, but sometimes the humans interpreting those laws are prone to error. Does this mean we call into question science itself? No. That would be a sad day indeed to see any reasonable man doing that. The fact of the matter is, science has proven global warming exists, which you agree upon. The only thing that is really questioned is the cause, which will come out sooner or later and squash all the "the world is flat" nincompoops like yourself.
 
monovillage said:
If you don't know the difference between a polar bear and a grizzly bear you're the one that needs to do a little more school work.
Click to expand...
Eat crow:
- Polar Bear populations have tripled
- Yellowstone Grizzly Bear populations have tripled
Click to expand...
:\ monovillage, you fail at reading comprehension and of distinguishing between Polar and Grizzly bears.
 
5 years ago they would all argue that there is no global warming. Now they argue what is the cause. 5 years from now they will argue that man made global warming is good.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top