More Global Cooling/Warming/Change hoax.
- Thread starter lonesomebob
- Start date
Dave, I am very animal friendly and conscious of their plight. It is however, too easy to simply show a Polar Bear walking on firm, muddy ground and then compare it to a photo of one on an Ice Pack. Bingo, Climate change. Film an Iceberg breaking up. Bingo, Climate Change.
I have not seen evidence of any of 'us' 'right-winged haters' declaring a lack of sympathy for animals. I wish the folks like you, would make your arguments a little less accusational and disrespectful.
Why do the views of the more left-leaning, always approach this as a matter of fact? Happy to quote one scientist, whist ignoring another. Always their scientists correct apparently? Ask the scientists themselves, from both sides and I will wager all 'true' scientists, studying for only the sake of the study, the pursuit of knowledge, will agree that the facts are 'yet to be discovered'.
It is all ideas at this stage. Nothing more. You may favour one argument, but please, stop dismissing the other.
I for one, do not state that man made climate change does not exist. I happen to think that it doesn't' exist to the extent we are led to believe, IF at all.
From that stand point, I object most strongly to being charged (mainly through the introduction of ever more (new) taxes), more and more of my already heavily taxed income, to support changes imposed by governments to support and introduce new industries that serve no proven purpose, other than to support the positions of countless politicians, eager to hitch their wagon to any star they believe will get them re-elected.
The saddest thing of all, is that we allow this to reinforce the polarisation of people into the left or right camps and support the whole circle of rubbish.
I and many other old white guys here, often state agreement to changing our ways, to be cleaner and less blind to our impacts on the Earth. Yet because we refute the bogus, un-proven statements on 'man made global climate change', we are labelled mad, eccentric, blind, angry, old, white, animal haters all.
My biggest issue in a nutshell, is the lefty folk who all, to a man, seem to, by default, take the position of the righteous. Well-meaning, spiritually more aware and over-all better in general because we care. Any who challenge their views are therefore heathen, animal abusing, planet destroying selfish bastards.
PS. I hope at least some who read this have a laugh
No graphs were hurt in this ramble. Tis just the ranting's of a maniac. But they are my ranting's.
I have not seen evidence of any of 'us' 'right-winged haters' declaring a lack of sympathy for animals. I wish the folks like you, would make your arguments a little less accusational and disrespectful.
Why do the views of the more left-leaning, always approach this as a matter of fact? Happy to quote one scientist, whist ignoring another. Always their scientists correct apparently? Ask the scientists themselves, from both sides and I will wager all 'true' scientists, studying for only the sake of the study, the pursuit of knowledge, will agree that the facts are 'yet to be discovered'.
It is all ideas at this stage. Nothing more. You may favour one argument, but please, stop dismissing the other.
I for one, do not state that man made climate change does not exist. I happen to think that it doesn't' exist to the extent we are led to believe, IF at all.
From that stand point, I object most strongly to being charged (mainly through the introduction of ever more (new) taxes), more and more of my already heavily taxed income, to support changes imposed by governments to support and introduce new industries that serve no proven purpose, other than to support the positions of countless politicians, eager to hitch their wagon to any star they believe will get them re-elected.
The saddest thing of all, is that we allow this to reinforce the polarisation of people into the left or right camps and support the whole circle of rubbish.
I and many other old white guys here, often state agreement to changing our ways, to be cleaner and less blind to our impacts on the Earth. Yet because we refute the bogus, un-proven statements on 'man made global climate change', we are labelled mad, eccentric, blind, angry, old, white, animal haters all.
My biggest issue in a nutshell, is the lefty folk who all, to a man, seem to, by default, take the position of the righteous. Well-meaning, spiritually more aware and over-all better in general because we care. Any who challenge their views are therefore heathen, animal abusing, planet destroying selfish bastards.
PS. I hope at least some who read this have a laugh
No graphs were hurt in this ramble. Tis just the ranting's of a maniac. But they are my ranting's.
One other thing, before I combust.
When the left demonstrate out of the way towns and villages that no one has ever heard of and state how they used to be warmer, or colder, or frozen or idyllic, they seem to feel again that the changes shown MUST be caused by man made global warming.
OK. So what about all those ancient civilisations that are now buried beneath tons of sand and rock, or submerged by oceans, hundreds or even thousands of years ago? Who warmed or cooled the Planet then? Aliens? Carbon filth exhausted from interplanetary jet engines? Or was it hitherto unknown forms of industrialised sheep and goat herding?
When the left demonstrate out of the way towns and villages that no one has ever heard of and state how they used to be warmer, or colder, or frozen or idyllic, they seem to feel again that the changes shown MUST be caused by man made global warming.
OK. So what about all those ancient civilisations that are now buried beneath tons of sand and rock, or submerged by oceans, hundreds or even thousands of years ago? Who warmed or cooled the Planet then? Aliens? Carbon filth exhausted from interplanetary jet engines? Or was it hitherto unknown forms of industrialised sheep and goat herding?
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
There is much conflicting data, the cause and effect of human activity is still being evaluated.
Anyone why says they absoulutly know one way or the other are just fooling themselves.
A partial list of dilusional people who are absolutly positive that they know what is happening................
Larry, Pete, Al, Mark, Keith and Mr Fechter and Al Gore
These are people who have made up their minds, they absolutly, positively know how they want "reality" to be, they refuse to hear anything that does not agree with their view.
Listening to anything these people say is a fools game!
Anyone why says they absoulutly know one way or the other are just fooling themselves.
A partial list of dilusional people who are absolutly positive that they know what is happening................
Larry, Pete, Al, Mark, Keith and Mr Fechter and Al Gore
These are people who have made up their minds, they absolutly, positively know how they want "reality" to be, they refuse to hear anything that does not agree with their view.
Listening to anything these people say is a fools game!
Last edited:
IF man made global cooling/warming/change is caused by man, isn't it time that the left start cracking down on the pearl of their philosophical wet dreams, namely China?
China smog emergency shuts city of 11 million people
China smog emergency shuts city of 11 million people
But, of course, Jim Craik isn't on that list, is he...even though, based on his constant supportive dissertations on the subject, logic dictates he should be at the very top of it.
I only just noticed your signature line Keith and spat my beer everywhere! Before anyone says it's too early to be drinking, let me state for the record, I have been up since 4am. It's late!
Nothing to explain Mark. Beer o'clock is a floating point in time.
The UK and the UN say that hasn't been the case for 15 years:
Earth Hasn't Warmed in 15 years, UN Climate Change Report Says - One News Page
United Kingdom Meteorology Office declares Earth hasn't warmed in 15 years
The TRUTH is the earth has heated and cooled since the day it appeared. It will continue to do so and it will make its corrections whenever it sees fit based on its OWN environmental measurements and 'surveys'.
Jim Craik
Lifetime Supporter
Thats right Mark, we can destroy nothing but ourselves and............
The Dodo Bird
Tasmanian Tiger
Passenger Pidgeon
Great Auk
Quagga
Falkland Wolf
Zanzabar Leopard
Caribbean Monk Seal
Carolina Parakeet
African Bear
Toolache Wallaby
Sea Mink
Bubal Heartbeast
Steller's Sea Cow.............................
All hunted to extinction!
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
I think you should go back and re- read some of your own posts Jim before you start calling us delusional.
Of course it is good to see that you are now saying that there is much conflicting data and you are not sure anymore. It appears that some of our arguments at last seem to be getting through to you....that and calling us names, a sure sign of losing the debate.
If you no longer wish listen to anything we say put us on ignore. I can show you how to do that thanks to Keith.
“The planet stopped warming 15 years ago…” This is one of the major misconceptions the popular press and skeptics seem to pick up on. The truth is, it hasn't stopped. Thanks in large part to the record-setting El Niño of 1997–98, the year 1998 was the warmest year globally in the 20th century. While it is true that since 2001 the global trend has been relatively flat, temperatures continue to run warmer than in previous decades. The global average from 2000–09 exceeds the average for 1990–99, which in turn was warmer than 1980–89. And the average for the past three years (2010–12) tops the 2000–09 average. For continental USA, 2012 was the warmest since records began. This, of course, is all global surface temperatures. Ocean temperatures have shown no such corresponding plateau and continue to warm. Sure, the planet has warmed and cooled before, and by much larger degrees. What is alarming now is that the rate of change is far greater than at any time in the past that we can ascertain.
For the record, I have never seen Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and have no intention of seeing it. I form my opinions from reading peer reviewed papers published by my colleagues in the scientific community.
Mark – yes, there are scientists who doubt man made climate change, and rightly so. Science should always doubt. That is why there is a peer review process. However, the number of papers published in support of man made climate change outnumber those against by around nine to one. Why is that? It certainly isn’t just because that is where the money is.
The should be asking the questions:
1. Have the oceans continued to warm at a pretty much constant rate over the past 20 years? The answer is yes.
2. Is the specific heat capacity of water much higher than that of the air? Once again, yes.
3. Do the oceans play a significant role in determining climate? Yes.
I will leave you to connect the dots.
To ignore these questions is to ignore the very large elephant in the very small room….
Oh, and by the way, I do not consider myself left leaning, and I do think George Carlin is right – the planet will carry on long after we have gone. The question is, how comfortable do we wish to make what future we have left here.
For the record, I have never seen Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” and have no intention of seeing it. I form my opinions from reading peer reviewed papers published by my colleagues in the scientific community.
Mark – yes, there are scientists who doubt man made climate change, and rightly so. Science should always doubt. That is why there is a peer review process. However, the number of papers published in support of man made climate change outnumber those against by around nine to one. Why is that? It certainly isn’t just because that is where the money is.
The should be asking the questions:
1. Have the oceans continued to warm at a pretty much constant rate over the past 20 years? The answer is yes.
2. Is the specific heat capacity of water much higher than that of the air? Once again, yes.
3. Do the oceans play a significant role in determining climate? Yes.
I will leave you to connect the dots.
To ignore these questions is to ignore the very large elephant in the very small room….
Oh, and by the way, I do not consider myself left leaning, and I do think George Carlin is right – the planet will carry on long after we have gone. The question is, how comfortable do we wish to make what future we have left here.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Brian, good post. I'm a non-scientist but fascinated by this stuff. It irks me to no end that it is become politicized, with "believers" being identified as "liberal" and "doubters" "conservative." This is science, not politics and it should be viewed as such.
I've read a fair amount and find most of the "for" studies to be longer term and bigger picture, with the "antis" trying to find short term explanations that on the whole don't hold water. But there is good science and thought on both sides. So I generally break down people's positions on this to four groups:
1. Think that global warming is some sort of world conspiracy between liberals and the world's scientists, primarily (for reasons unknown) to distribute wealth from rich countries to the poor. Unfortunately, we have lots of these types on this board.
2. Have valid scientific doubts about whether man is causing warming and have generally reserved judgment pending more evidence. Believe in basic efforts to head off warming but drastic measures should be reserved for later. Have a few of these folks on this board, and this is of course a valid position to take at this point.
3. Have doubts but generally see the evidence as favoring the conclusion of most of the world scientists that man is warming the planet, and that this will have enough effect on humans that we need to do something about it. We have a few of these folks as well.
4. Alarmists. I don't see anyone like that here.
2 and 3 can have a reasonable debate. 1 and 4 obviously cannot.
I've read a fair amount and find most of the "for" studies to be longer term and bigger picture, with the "antis" trying to find short term explanations that on the whole don't hold water. But there is good science and thought on both sides. So I generally break down people's positions on this to four groups:
1. Think that global warming is some sort of world conspiracy between liberals and the world's scientists, primarily (for reasons unknown) to distribute wealth from rich countries to the poor. Unfortunately, we have lots of these types on this board.
2. Have valid scientific doubts about whether man is causing warming and have generally reserved judgment pending more evidence. Believe in basic efforts to head off warming but drastic measures should be reserved for later. Have a few of these folks on this board, and this is of course a valid position to take at this point.
3. Have doubts but generally see the evidence as favoring the conclusion of most of the world scientists that man is warming the planet, and that this will have enough effect on humans that we need to do something about it. We have a few of these folks as well.
4. Alarmists. I don't see anyone like that here.
2 and 3 can have a reasonable debate. 1 and 4 obviously cannot.
Gee, wonder if we could have saved dinosaurs if we'd only had liberals back then. :~(
Brian: Your post ^ illustrates what I've long contended, and that is; no matter what group of ant-warming 'scientists' may discover that seems to DISPROVE the pro-warming postulations, the 'pro-warmers' will a-l-w-a-y-s find something somewhere that they can point to and say, "Oh, YEAH? Well, what about THIS?" And when that's shot down in flames, they'll find something ELSE to tout.
It'll never end.
One thing we do know FOR SURE: From the get-go, a buncha 'warming' data/stats/measurements originally used to launch the red flares and red flags were jury rigged in favor of the 'warmers'" position. IOW - A TOTAL FRAUD.
'Start with garbage 'facts' you end up with garbage 'conclusions'. 'No brainer...
It'll never end.
One thing we do know FOR SURE: From the get-go, a buncha 'warming' data/stats/measurements originally used to launch the red flares and red flags were jury rigged in favor of the 'warmers'" position. IOW - A TOTAL FRAUD.
'Start with garbage 'facts' you end up with garbage 'conclusions'. 'No brainer...
