Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #2281  
Old 23.11.2018, 19:55
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Some reading for beginners. First the IPCC 5th assessment. 800 authors. Wikipedia summary

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC...essment_Report

This piece from sceptical science gives a nice overview of scientific opinion

https://www.skepticalscience.com/glo...termediate.htm

The early sceptics posts in this thread got all excited about the short warming pause in the 2000s. That is well and truely past now.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #2282  
Old 23.11.2018, 22:39
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: CH-IT-AR
Posts: 90
Groaned at 47 Times in 25 Posts
Thanked 81 Times in 50 Posts
Brianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthy
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
That's 5 scientists, out of how many reputable climate scientists worldwide?
These are only a few. That been said, don't fool yourself with the "97% of the scientists agree that...." fallacy.

Quote:
View Post
When you say there are many as a basis for your logic, I'd question how that stands up to the consensus among the scientific community. The guys above, if they are knowledgeable about the topic, are in a small minority. I'm not saying a minority in general, I mean a minority among scientists that understand and research climate change. But its worth bearing in mind, the likes of the UN climate change panel and NASA acknowledge this minority when they say they're 95% sure, i.e. 5% disagree.
I had a quick look about Lindzen and his views are disputed- the section below is taken from wikipedia and you can chase down the references if you like
"This claim was criticized by climatologist Gavin Schmidt, Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, who notes the more generally-accepted understanding of the effects of the Iris effect and cites empirical cases where large and relatively rapid changes in the climate such as El Niño events, the Ultra Plinian eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991, and recent trends in global temperature and water vapor levels to show that, as predicted in the generally-accepted view, water vapor increases as the temperature increases, and decreases as temperatures decrease"
Note that the "95% vs 5%" is very debatable by itself. First, many "scientists" in the 95% are not physicists or astronomers specialized in atmosphere, but "ecologists", biologists, environmentalists, etc, who have no clue on physics.

Second, since the "magnificent scientist" Al Gore received the Nobel Prize, together with the IPCC, it's a taboo in the academic world to question man-made global warming. Many young scientists are afraid to come forward and then see their research funding been cut or be ostracized by the the academic community (e.g. not have their papers published). Respected and almost retired scientists such as Giaever or Lindzen have nothing to lose, nobody is going to take away their awards, but for younger scientists it's not easy.

By the way the "5%", as you say, is not denying the climate is changing. What they are disputing is the idea that human activity is strong enough to influence it. The sun activity, the oceans, etc., can cause a ridiculously larger influence to climate change than the CO2 produced.

Also, don't forget: CO2 is the gas of life, thanks to it we have food.

Quote:
View Post
Are you saying that the media and politicians in Europe violently suppress people that contribute to global warming? I'm sure I'm misinterpreting what you wrote because that would be nonsense.
Nonsense are the italics.

Quote:
View Post
Regarding seen/read/heard only the mainstream; that's not true. I have heard some of the arguments against man-made global warming and they just don't stand up.
As I mentioned above, it's difficult to publish or question anything about the IPCC findings in the great media. "Violently" was a language figure, obviously. Copernicus was violently, literally in this case, attacked by the "97%"of his time when he said the the sun, and not the Earth, was the center of the universe.

Quote:
So 5 is many? ROFL

And how many of those are actually climate scientists? Maximum 1. 2 physicists , 1 meteorologist (not the same thing btw) 1 geographer and just 1 atmospheric physicists.

Oh and the last one does believe in warming, just doubts the scope.

Now shall I produce a list of the 100s or 1000s that strongly support the theory?
Perhaps you are ignorant on how it works, but nobody "graduates" as climate scientists. You can come from Physics, meteorology, Astronomy, Chemistry, etc., and then you specialize through a MS, PhD, and further research on atmosphere physics.

Last edited by Brianzoeu; 23.11.2018 at 22:49.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Brianzoeu for this useful post:
  #2283  
Old 23.11.2018, 22:43
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: CH-IT-AR
Posts: 90
Groaned at 47 Times in 25 Posts
Thanked 81 Times in 50 Posts
Brianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthy
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
Here's one who seems to know what he's on about...
Well, tell him that we had an "Ice Age" and that the Romans faced very hot times. A graph showing average 1.0 degree variation during 136 years don't prove it was caused by human activity.
Reply With Quote
  #2284  
Old 23.11.2018, 23:48
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Many young scientists are afraid to come forward and then see their research funding been cut or be ostracized by the the academic community (e.g. not have their papers published).
Do you really not realise what total bullshit that is? How much cash the oil industry and mining industry pump into the tiny number of deniers to make sure their message us shouted as loudly as possible?

Quote:
View Post
As I mentioned above, it's difficult to publish or question anything about the IPCC findings in the great media. "Violently" was a language figure, obviously. Copernicus was violently, literally in this case, attacked by the "97%"of his time when he said the the sun, and not the Earth, was the center of the universe.
Nice analogy. Trouble is Copernicus WAS supported by the limited science of his day. It was the oil companies and politicians of his day (the church) that were against.

Quote:
View Post
Perhaps you are ignorant on how it works, but nobody "graduates" as climate scientists. You can come from Physics, meteorology, Astronomy, Chemistry, etc., and then you specialize through a MS, PhD, and further research on atmosphere physics.
Somewhat true. Trouble is only one of your massive list of 5 actually did that. The other 4 haven't.
Reply With Quote
  #2285  
Old 23.11.2018, 23:50
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Oh and from my earlier link:

Quote:
with most of our studies finding 97% consensus among publishing climate scientists
Reply With Quote
  #2286  
Old 26.11.2018, 13:39
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: CH-IT-AR
Posts: 90
Groaned at 47 Times in 25 Posts
Thanked 81 Times in 50 Posts
Brianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthy
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
Do you really not realise what total bullshit that is? How much cash the oil industry and mining industry pump into the tiny number of deniers to make sure their message us shouted as loudly as possible?
The "deniers" are not in tiny numbers, on the contrary. Unfortunately this subject became almost a fundamentalist dogma.

Quote:
Nice analogy. Trouble is Copernicus WAS supported by the limited science of his day. It was the oil companies and politicians of his day (the church) that were against.
Well, the science knowledge available today cannot prove that CO2 produced by human activity is causing global warming, in fact it's the other way around: rising in global temperatures that cause the oceans to release CO2.

The economic and political interests behind this craziness are very similar to the fake issue of CFC gases damaging the ozone layer in the 80's.

Quote:
Somewhat true. Trouble is only one of your massive list of 5 actually did that. The other 4 haven't.
Again, just a few are able to come forward and reveal this scam. Google about the 2007 scandal of the IPCC, many respected scientists disbanded after it.

This list is more extensive but cover just a few scientists:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...global_warming
Reply With Quote
  #2287  
Old 26.11.2018, 14:10
Chemmie's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Zurich
Posts: 4,141
Groaned at 33 Times in 29 Posts
Thanked 4,935 Times in 2,231 Posts
Chemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond reputeChemmie has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Like any modern day socio-political topic, I feels like the majority of the argument is an 'us-vs-them' fight.


It's definitely not a simple black and white as a fight against 'the evil deniers'.


In my experience there are my different types of deniers and similarly different levels of logical backing.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank Chemmie for this useful post:
  #2288  
Old 26.11.2018, 14:40
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
The "deniers" are not in tiny numbers, on the contrary. Unfortunately this subject became almost a fundamentalist dogma.
The fundamentalist dogma here comes only from the denier side

Quote:
View Post
This list is more extensive but cover just a few scientists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...global_warming
Well only 25 from that list appear on this list of published climate scientists. There's 260-odd names on the list so less than 10%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ate_scientists


Quote:
View Post
Well, the science knowledge available today cannot prove that CO2 produced by human activity is causing global warming, in fact it's the other way around: rising in global temperatures that cause the oceans to release CO2.
Wrong again as ever. Climate models do that this into account, it is one of a number of negative feedback loops that theory predicts and are sadly now coming into play - methane released by melting permafrost is another as is reduced alibedo from melting sea ice. Perhaps you would explain why the oceans are warming so significantly so as to release so much dissolved gas

Quote:
View Post
Again, just a few are able to come forward and reveal this scam. Google about the 2007 scandal of the IPCC, many respected scientists disbanded after it.
Who "disbanded"? Do you mean they left the IPCC? Which doesn't have a membership as such in the first place. Do you mean they stopped publishing for it (they didn't)?

I presume you're talking about the Himalaya glacier mistake. One paper amongst many and certainly a mistake but hardly a scandal.

How about "Climategate"? A real and much more fundamental scandal in the other direction.

Quote:
View Post
The economic and political interests behind this craziness are very similar to the fake issue of CFC gases damaging the ozone layer in the 80's.
If you weren't laughable before* you certainly are now. There is no longer any remaining conflict on this issue, even the US Republicans actually understand that.

*you were btw
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #2289  
Old 26.11.2018, 14:52
Ouchboy's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Baden
Posts: 3,289
Groaned at 48 Times in 43 Posts
Thanked 5,530 Times in 2,118 Posts
Ouchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post

The economic and political interests behind this craziness are very similar to the fake issue of CFC gases damaging the ozone layer in the 80's.


what? there was a nobel prize awarded to that peer reviewed research.
Reply With Quote
  #2290  
Old 26.11.2018, 17:57
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SG
Posts: 8,929
Groaned at 466 Times in 349 Posts
Thanked 11,856 Times in 6,168 Posts
Urs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
The economic and political interests behind this craziness are very similar to the fake issue of CFC gases damaging the ozone layer in the 80's.
Which part of that was fake?
Reply With Quote
  #2291  
Old 27.11.2018, 12:22
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: CH-IT-AR
Posts: 90
Groaned at 47 Times in 25 Posts
Thanked 81 Times in 50 Posts
Brianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthy
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
what? there was a nobel prize awarded to that peer reviewed research.
Quote:
View Post
Which part of that was fake?
https://worldcyclesinstitute.com/the-ozone-scam/
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users groan at Brianzoeu for this post:
  #2292  
Old 27.11.2018, 12:23
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: CH-IT-AR
Posts: 90
Groaned at 47 Times in 25 Posts
Thanked 81 Times in 50 Posts
Brianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthy
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Reply With Quote
This user groans at Brianzoeu for this post:
  #2293  
Old 27.11.2018, 12:26
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Wow! The article states that UV-B is harmless. That's out of date for starters.
Reply With Quote
  #2294  
Old 27.11.2018, 12:46
Blueangel's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Küsnacht, Switzerland
Posts: 4,004
Groaned at 113 Times in 101 Posts
Thanked 10,747 Times in 4,739 Posts
Blueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
Wow! The article states that UV-B is harmless. That's out of date for starters.
If you want a proper giggle, just Google map the address of the World Cycles Institute, which is given as 2034 21 Ave SW, Calgary, AB T2T 0N7, Canada on their website. I can only wonder whether it's run from the spare bedroom or basement.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank Blueangel for this useful post:
  #2295  
Old 27.11.2018, 13:22
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: CH-IT-AR
Posts: 90
Groaned at 47 Times in 25 Posts
Thanked 81 Times in 50 Posts
Brianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthyBrianzoeu is considered unworthy
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
The fundamentalist dogma here comes only from the denier side


Well only 25 from that list appear on this list of published climate scientists. There's 260-odd names on the list so less than 10%. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ate_scientists



Wrong again as ever. Climate models do that this into account, it is one of a number of negative feedback loops that theory predicts and are sadly now coming into play - methane released by melting permafrost is another as is reduced alibedo from melting sea ice. Perhaps you would explain why the oceans are warming so significantly so as to release so much dissolved gas


Who "disbanded"? Do you mean they left the IPCC? Which doesn't have a membership as such in the first place. Do you mean they stopped publishing for it (they didn't)?

I presume you're talking about the Himalaya glacier mistake. One paper amongst many and certainly a mistake but hardly a scandal.

How about "Climategate"? A real and much more fundamental scandal in the other direction.


If you weren't laughable before* you certainly are now. There is no longer any remaining conflict on this issue, even the US Republicans actually understand that.

*you were btw
You can get a good idea here:

Reply With Quote
The following 2 users groan at Brianzoeu for this post:
  #2296  
Old 27.11.2018, 13:53
Ouchboy's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Baden
Posts: 3,289
Groaned at 48 Times in 43 Posts
Thanked 5,530 Times in 2,118 Posts
Ouchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond reputeOuchboy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?



a webpage from a marketing executive with a bachelor in arts vs peer reviewed research .


seems legit...
Reply With Quote
The following 4 users would like to thank Ouchboy for this useful post:
  #2297  
Old 27.11.2018, 13:54
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SG
Posts: 8,929
Groaned at 466 Times in 349 Posts
Thanked 11,856 Times in 6,168 Posts
Urs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

According to the article freons can't possibly rise because they're heavier than oxygen. Ok, let's take for a fact that they're heavier, I can't be arsed to check. Given that oxygen is a gas like any other, the underlying logic is that no athmospheric gas that is heavier than another athmospheric gas can rise above that other gas.

By that logic the athmosphere, which consists of 80% nigrogen plus 20% oxygen (plus some trace gases including CO2), wouldn't be a homogenous mixture of nitrogen and oxygen as scientific researchers found out. Instead it would be layered, with the heavier of the two, nitrogen I believe, at the bottom. Therefore at sea level the athmosphere would consist of 100% nitrogen, and somewhere further up it would consist of 100% oxygen. Throw in some thin layers for the other components.

What a huge pile of horsemanure.

Use your brains, man. Really.
Reply With Quote
The following 6 users would like to thank Urs Max for this useful post:
  #2298  
Old 27.11.2018, 14:45
krlock3's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 3,074
Groaned at 47 Times in 34 Posts
Thanked 2,369 Times in 1,126 Posts
krlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond reputekrlock3 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

I've travelled quite extensively to different parts of the world. In the end, it's really not that big.

For me it's common sense that all the crap we pump out into the atmosphere is going to have an effect - when I look at any busy road in my town and extrapolate that up, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to other roads in my town, to other towns in my region, to the next region and so on to a country basis... I mean, what utter fool thinks that these things are self regulated by the soul of our planet.
__________________
krlock3.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank krlock3 for this useful post:
  #2299  
Old 27.11.2018, 14:47
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Use your brains, man. Really.
You see your mistake?

He'll be on to vaccinations next. You see.
Reply With Quote
  #2300  
Old 27.11.2018, 14:51
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Perhaps you are ignorant on how it works, but nobody "graduates" as climate scientists. You can come from Physics, meteorology, Astronomy, Chemistry, etc., and then you specialize through a MS, PhD, and further research on atmosphere physics.
Actually it is yet again you who is ignorant.

http://www.iac.ethz.ch/edu/bachelor.html

Plus associated masters and post grad stuff of course.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
climate change, climategate, co2, global warming




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 15:07.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0