Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1541  
Old 15.10.2013, 10:57
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,568
Groaned at 472 Times in 405 Posts
Thanked 19,378 Times in 10,229 Posts
marton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Maybe I misunderstood your point.

I thought you said that people who came asking legitimate questions, with hypotheses, research and evidence to support them, are "treated like heretics".

This is utter tripe.

Now, if you're saying the people who come without hypotheses, research and evidence, trying to argue that because understanding is not 100% perfect then the whole idea is null and void, or using other fallacies and irrelevant conspiracies as a reason to ignore the science are ignored or ridiculed, then you need to expand a bit on why they shouldn't be.
For example, I quoted a paper that observed the surface temperature over the last 4,000 years was sometimes higher than today.
One response to this was to say some of the scientists who published this paper were also expert reviewers of AGW papers.

So confirmed the credibility of these authors.

This paper meets your requirement "asking legitimate questions, with hypotheses, research and evidence to support them".

For me the open point from this paper is; if we did see higher temperatures over the last 4,000 years then what were the effects & how does that compare with the effects forecast by some in the AGW community?

Last edited by marton; 15.10.2013 at 11:05. Reason: Changed context as I realised I was addressing the wrong poster!
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank marton for this useful post:
  #1542  
Old 15.10.2013, 11:11
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
For me the open point from this paper is; if we did see higher temperatures over the last 4,000 years then what were the effects & how does that compare with the effects forecast by some in the AGW community?
I do not have access to the entire thing, but presumably you do. Does it not make any mention of the impacts in Greenland of higher temperatures ?

Perhaps you can also demonstrate how the authors of said paper have been "treated like heretics" ?
Reply With Quote
  #1543  
Old 15.10.2013, 11:30
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Did you mean "scientism" as something other than an ad hominem against the fundamental basis of our only working model of reality ?
No ad hominem. I merely point out how incompletely science understands the climate of our planet, the massive assumptions therein, and further, your dogmatic adherence to this woefully incomplete model that often contradicts itself.

Quote:
View Post
It's not a matter of forgetting it, simply a rejection of the implication that all belief systems are equal.
I never claimed all belief systems were equal, just (quite easily) pointed out that AGW/ACC was probably one of the most flawed...

Quote:
View Post
Has the consensus of the vast majority of subject matter experts escaped your notice ?
Then why can't you cite at least one?
Reply With Quote
  #1544  
Old 15.10.2013, 11:44
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
No ad hominem. I merely point out how incompletely science understands the climate of our planet, the massive assumptions therein, and further, your dogmatic adherence to this woefully incomplete model that often contradicts itself.
What contradiction ?

Are you arguing because the understanding is incomplete, what is understood should not be used ?

Quote:
I never claimed all belief systems were equal, just (quite easily) pointed out that AGW/ACC was probably one of the most flawed...
Oh, rubbish. You would struggle to find a field of research in human history that has been subject to more widespread and aggressive scrutiny than climate science, yet its fundamentals remain unchallenged in any meaningful sense and, as I said previously, its denigrators are largely confined to "god of the gaps" arguments and other fallacies.

Quote:
Then why can't you cite at least one?
Because whenever sources are cited you dismiss them.

You could start with the IPCC.
Reply With Quote
  #1545  
Old 15.10.2013, 12:00
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
What contradiction ?

Are you arguing because the understanding is incomplete, what is understood should not be used ?
I never said this either. I've pointed out obvious contradictions in this belief that the planet is getting warmer, yet the data points to a trend towards a new ice age, regardless of what humans do on the planet. I've pointed out the contradiction between the premise that CO2 emissions are the most dangerous GHG (greenhouse gas) and the primary driver of climate change and the data that points to an external factor, like solar weather having a much more significant impact on Earth's climate. I've pointed out how what is "understood" stems from incomplete data and heavily extrapolated methodology, but you've ignored it, again and again.

From polar bears to melting ice, the climate debate is rife with beliefs that aren't supported by the data.


Quote:
View Post
Oh, rubbish. You would struggle to find a field of research in human history that has been subject to more widespread and aggressive scrutiny than climate science, yet its fundamentals remain unchallenged in any meaningful sense and, as I said previously, its denigrators are largely confined to "god of the gaps" arguments and other fallacies.

Again and again, I've shown how these "fundamentals" are fundamentally flawed, and you've ignored it. This is why I point out that you are so emotionally tied to your scientismic dogma.


Quote:
View Post
Because whenever sources are cited you dismiss them.

You could start with the IPCC.
What, skeptical science? That's the ONLY source you've cited. I've given numerous sources, linking directly to them to make it nice and tidy for you... You are so sure about your beliefs, yet you can't post one- you simply suggest I go off and do your research for you. You've really got to do better...
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
  #1546  
Old 15.10.2013, 12:27
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: ZH
Posts: 142
Groaned at 4 Times in 4 Posts
Thanked 147 Times in 80 Posts
mustard has earned some respectmustard has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
About "I'm of the opinion that there's only so much sh1t we can pump into the world before we all end up swimming in it"

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant; it is the stuff that makes the flowers grow.
Your house plants must be thriving so

Sh1t has a broader meaning here... sewage, trash, industrial smog, radio-active waste, rubber tyres, oil, you name it...

Anything in the wrong concentration can be considered a pollutant (including natural substances), when it upsets the natural balance.

Excessive CO2 is causing ocean acidification as it dissolves into the seas, rivers and lakes. Climate change would be far worse if it weren't for the oceans.

On my last holidays, I was literally swimming through sh1t (nappies, plastic bags and bottles, boat oil, and sewage no doubt... as evidenced by the large amounts of algae).
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank mustard for this useful post:
  #1547  
Old 15.10.2013, 13:12
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 10,568
Groaned at 472 Times in 405 Posts
Thanked 19,378 Times in 10,229 Posts
marton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
I do not have access to the entire thing, but presumably you do. Does it not make any mention of the impacts in Greenland of higher temperatures ?

Perhaps you can also demonstrate how the authors of said paper have been "treated like heretics" ?
About "Does it not make any mention of the impacts in Greenland of higher temperatures ?"

Well the Vikings were farming there so there must have been less ice; would be nice to know what the sea levels were.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank marton for this useful post:
  #1548  
Old 15.10.2013, 13:40
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
I never said this either.
I didn't say you did.

Quote:
I've pointed out obvious contradictions in this belief that the planet is getting warmer, yet the data points to a trend towards a new ice age, regardless of what humans do on the planet.
No, it doesn't.

Quote:
From polar bears to melting ice, the climate debate is rife with beliefs that aren't supported by the data.
For example ?

Quote:
Again and again, I've shown how these "fundamentals" are fundamentally flawed, and you've ignored it. This is why I point out that you are so emotionally tied to your scientismic dogma.
WTF does "scientismic dogma" even mean ?

Why are you criticising the scientific method then attempting to use it to support your position ? Seems a little... Ironic ? Hypocritical ? I can't decide.

Quote:
What, skeptical science? That's the ONLY source you've cited.
It provides a convenient way of refuting the standard roll call of "arguments" that get trotted out ad nauseum, with links to sources to backup same.

Quote:
I've given numerous sources, linking directly to them to make it nice and tidy for you...
You mean your list of 1,100 non-climate scientists (or "scientists" in a lot of cases) ?

Explain to me again why I should find them more credible than the actual climate scientists ?

Quote:
You are so sure about your beliefs, yet you can't post one- you simply suggest I go off and do your research for you. You've really got to do better...
Like I said, you could start at the IPCC. I hear they even release regular reports.

Last edited by drsmithy; 15.10.2013 at 13:56.
Reply With Quote
  #1549  
Old 15.10.2013, 16:35
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
I didn't say you did.


No, it doesn't.


For example ?


WTF does "scientismic dogma" even mean ?

Why are you criticising the scientific method then attempting to use it to support your position ? Seems a little... Ironic ? Hypocritical ? I can't decide.


It provides a convenient way of refuting the standard roll call of "arguments" that get trotted out ad nauseum, with links to sources to backup same.


You mean your list of 1,100 non-climate scientists (or "scientists" in a lot of cases) ?

Explain to me again why I should find them more credible than the actual climate scientists ?


Like I said, you could start at the IPCC. I hear they even release regular reports.
Reply With Quote
  #1550  
Old 15.10.2013, 16:55
AbFab's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 8,226
Groaned at 347 Times in 237 Posts
Thanked 11,995 Times in 4,115 Posts
AbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
On my last holidays, I was literally swimming through sh1t (nappies, plastic bags and bottles, boat oil, and sewage no doubt... as evidenced by the large amounts of algae).
Where was that? I must cross it off my list.

I must say having experienced the Mediterranean in the 1970s and compared to today, it is far less polluted.

Likewise Chicago in the 1960s. You could see the brown clouds 30 miles out and the lake was dead...
Reply With Quote
  #1551  
Old 15.10.2013, 17:24
Texaner's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Zentralschweiz
Posts: 2,047
Groaned at 99 Times in 89 Posts
Thanked 2,984 Times in 1,429 Posts
Texaner has a reputation beyond reputeTexaner has a reputation beyond reputeTexaner has a reputation beyond reputeTexaner has a reputation beyond reputeTexaner has a reputation beyond reputeTexaner has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Quote:
View Post
From polar bears to melting ice, the climate debate is rife with beliefs that aren't supported by the data.
For example ?
How about polar bears and melting ice?

Quote:
View Post
Why are you criticising the scientific method...?
Can you cite the exact passage in which he 'criticized the scientific method'?

Quote:
View Post
You mean your list of 1,100 non-climate scientists (or "scientists" in a lot of cases) ?

Explain to me again why I should find them more credible than the actual climate scientists ?
Why don't you explain what credible and unequivocal basis you have for disparaging the credentials and credibility of those scientists who disagree with your beliefs (other than the mere fact that they disagree with you)?

Exactly what credentials (other than agreeing with you) qualify a scientist to independently examine the available empirical data and offer analysis as to what it means about the earth's climate?
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Texaner for this useful post:
  #1552  
Old 15.10.2013, 17:42
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: ZH
Posts: 142
Groaned at 4 Times in 4 Posts
Thanked 147 Times in 80 Posts
mustard has earned some respectmustard has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Where was that? I must cross it off my list.

I must say having experienced the Mediterranean in the 1970s and compared to today, it is far less polluted.

Likewise Chicago in the 1960s. You could see the brown clouds 30 miles out and the lake was dead...
Boracay in the Philippines and Tunku Abdul Rahman Marine Park in Borneo.

Algae is a big problem in Boracay during high tourist season.

Tunku Abdul Rahman Marine Park charge an entrance fee and don't seem to mind when visitors leave the place like a tip. Algae isn’t bad here because there are only a couple of high-end hotels but the litter in the water and on the beaches is a disgrace.

Just want to add that if you were to walk along my hometown beach in the UK, you’d find all sorts of rubbish, either dumped there or washed in by the sea... bicycles, tyres, oil/fuel drums, lots of fish crates and nets, plastic bottles, etc. I picked up a decent stainless steel cooking pot not so long ago.

Last edited by mustard; 15.10.2013 at 18:16.
Reply With Quote
  #1553  
Old 15.10.2013, 22:56
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
How about polar bears
Wait, what ? You use this as some sort of support for his position, then a few lines later link to this ?

Hypocrite.

Quote:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Has-...termediate.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/arct...telegraph.html


Quote:
Can you cite the exact passage in which he 'criticized the scientific method'?
Quote:
View Post
....Aaannd Scientism rears its ugly head again. Fun.
Quote:
View Post
This is why I point out that you are so emotionally tied to your scientismic dogma.
Quote:
Why don't you explain what credible and unequivocal basis you have for disparaging the credentials and credibility of those scientists who disagree with your beliefs (other than the mere fact that they disagree with you)?
I'm not disparaging their credentials. At least, not yet.

Their relevance and credibility on a topic outside of their field of expertise is implicitly less credible than those within it.

There's a reason it's always a list of xxx "scientists" and not xxx "climate scientists". Because you need to start digging into unrelated fields to find any meaningful number of "scientists" who disagree with the consensus.

When I want my car fixed, I take it to a mechanic. I don't take it to the local computer store.

Similarly, when I want to know about how the world's climate works, I ask climate scientists, not geologists or aircraft engineers.

Quote:
Exactly what credentials (other than agreeing with you) qualify a scientist to independently examine the available empirical data and offer analysis as to what it means about the earth's climate?
Qualifications and research in the field of climate science is usually a good start.

Incidentally, it's not about them agreeing with me. It's about me agreeing with the majority of experts in the field. When I see bubbles in my paintwork, I don't decide it's just paint and look for someone who agrees with me, I ask a bunch of experts and when they all say it's rust, I accept it's rust and get it fixed.

Last edited by drsmithy; 15.10.2013 at 23:54.
Reply With Quote
This user groans at drsmithy for this post:
  #1554  
Old 16.10.2013, 03:02
Wollishofener's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Glattbrugg
Posts: 18,978
Groaned at 332 Times in 257 Posts
Thanked 11,716 Times in 6,858 Posts
Wollishofener has a reputation beyond reputeWollishofener has a reputation beyond reputeWollishofener has a reputation beyond reputeWollishofener has a reputation beyond reputeWollishofener has a reputation beyond reputeWollishofener has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Wait, what ? You use this as some sort of support for his position, then a few lines later link to this ?

Hypocrite.


http://www.skepticalscience.com/Has-...termediate.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/arct...telegraph.html







I'm not disparaging their credentials. At least, not yet.

Their relevance and credibility on a topic outside of their field of expertise is implicitly less credible than those within it.

There's a reason it's always a list of xxx "scientists" and not xxx "climate scientists". Because you need to start digging into unrelated fields to find any meaningful number of "scientists" who disagree with the consensus.

When I want my car fixed, I take it to a mechanic. I don't take it to the local computer store.

Similarly, when I want to know about how the world's climate works, I ask climate scientists, not geologists or aircraft engineers.


Qualifications and research in the field of climate science is usually a good start.

Incidentally, it's not about them agreeing with me. It's about me agreeing with the majority of experts in the field. When I see bubbles in my paintwork, I don't decide it's just paint and look for someone who agrees with me, I ask a bunch of experts and when they all say it's rust, I accept it's rust and get it fixed.

There were climate changes from cold to warm and back, and ice-ages, long before Henry Ford and Adam Opel. Animals



came and left
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank Wollishofener for this useful post:
  #1555  
Old 16.10.2013, 07:52
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Wait, what ? You use this as some sort of support for his position, then a few lines later link to this ?

Hypocrite.


http://www.skepticalscience.com/Has-...termediate.htm
http://www.skepticalscience.com/arct...telegraph.html







I'm not disparaging their credentials. At least, not yet.

Their relevance and credibility on a topic outside of their field of expertise is implicitly less credible than those within it.

There's a reason it's always a list of xxx "scientists" and not xxx "climate scientists". Because you need to start digging into unrelated fields to find any meaningful number of "scientists" who disagree with the consensus.

When I want my car fixed, I take it to a mechanic. I don't take it to the local computer store.

Similarly, when I want to know about how the world's climate works, I ask climate scientists, not geologists or aircraft engineers.


Qualifications and research in the field of climate science is usually a good start.

Incidentally, it's not about them agreeing with me. It's about me agreeing with the majority of experts in the field. When I see bubbles in my paintwork, I don't decide it's just paint and look for someone who agrees with me, I ask a bunch of experts and when they all say it's rust, I accept it's rust and get it fixed.
You just don't listen, do you?

Again with the skeptical science... Is that your ONLY source of information? Perhaps this is why you're so blinkered?

I criticized your dogmatic belief in "scientism," not the scientific method; unfortunately the difference is lost on you.

You're so deep in your environmental dogma that you'll only accept things handed to you by the "priests" of environmentalism (as you say "experts in the field") and you'll ignore the fact that "laymen" routinely make significant contributions to the realm of human knowledge (Einstein, for example, was a lowly patent clerk, not an "expert" physicist when he was first published). It doesn't take a knowledge of climate science to perform statistical and mathematical analysis of data. In many cases, it might be better to not have an "expert" who is tied up in the inertia of all that environmental dogma.

But, hey, its a free world in which you can run around and keep telling us the sky is falling, when it just might not be...
Reply With Quote
  #1556  
Old 16.10.2013, 09:17
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
There were climate changes from cold to warm and back, and ice-ages, long before Henry Ford and Adam Opel. Animals



came and left
And...?
Reply With Quote
  #1557  
Old 16.10.2013, 09:19
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Again with the skeptical science... Is that your ONLY source of information?
No.

Quote:
I criticized your dogmatic belief in "scientism," not the scientific method; unfortunately the difference is lost on you.
Maybe you should define "scientism" for us.

Quote:
You're so deep in your environmental dogma that you'll only accept things handed to you by the "priests" of environmentalism (as you say "experts in the field") [...]
Nope.

Quote:
[...] and you'll ignore the fact that "laymen" routinely make significant contributions to the realm of human knowledge [...]
Nope.

Quote:
But, hey, its a free world in which you can run around and keep telling us the sky is falling, when it just might not be...
Pretty sure I haven't told anyone the sky is falling.
Reply With Quote
  #1558  
Old 16.10.2013, 09:30
Jobsrobertsharpii's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Z-U-R-I-C-H
Posts: 2,335
Groaned at 173 Times in 124 Posts
Thanked 3,384 Times in 1,536 Posts
Jobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond reputeJobsrobertsharpii has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
No.
Then when are you going to cite something else? I'm still waiting for your proofs...


Quote:
View Post
Maybe you should define "scientism" for us.
I'll define scientism for you, as it seems most here understand the distinction I'm making.


Quote:
View Post
Nope.


Nope.


Pretty sure I haven't told anyone the sky is falling.
The rest of this you simply being in denial, or, like your animated graph, another example of you picking data to manipulate your point- a 20-30 year timescale when we're discussing climate trends on a planet that is roughly 4.5 billion years old is marginally relevant; of course we're going to see fluctuations in the ice at that level of granularity. This doesn't mean that the Earth is warming unnaturally.

You are so emotionally tied to this formalized, dogmatic view of environmentalism that you can't even see it. Please keep trying, though...
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
  #1559  
Old 16.10.2013, 10:09
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, Oz
Posts: 610
Groaned at 155 Times in 110 Posts
Thanked 318 Times in 211 Posts
drsmithy has earned some respectdrsmithy has earned some respect
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Then when are you going to cite something else?
If I see a need to.

Quote:
I'm still waiting for your proofs...
No such thing as "proofs" in science.

As I've said, you could start with the IPCC reports, if you want evidence.

Quote:
I'll define scientism for you, as it seems most here understand the distinction I'm making.
Right. So my initial interpretation was right, and you're attacking the principles that form the foundation of the only working model for reality we have, with an ad-hominem.

Or, in simpler terms, you're criticising science itself. By name-calling.

Quote:
The rest of this you simply being in denial, or, like your animated graph, another example of you picking data to manipulate your point- a 20-30 year timescale when we're discussing climate trends on a planet that is roughly 4.5 billion years old is marginally relevant; of course we're going to see fluctuations in the ice at that level of granularity.
This is like arguing you shouldn't go and see a doctor after breaking your arm because you'll be dead in seventy years.

Quote:
This doesn't mean that the Earth is warming unnaturally.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/glob...ural-cycle.htm

Quote:
You are so emotionally tied to this formalized, dogmatic view of environmentalism that you can't even see it. Please keep trying, though...
I am, indeed, quite tied to reality. I find that makes life easier than relying on fantasy.
Reply With Quote
This user groans at drsmithy for this post:
  #1560  
Old 16.10.2013, 11:31
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 11,604
Groaned at 284 Times in 232 Posts
Thanked 24,745 Times in 10,458 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Global Warming - what's behind it?

Quote:
View Post
Just want to add that if you were to walk along my hometown beach in the UK, you’d find all sorts of rubbish, either dumped there or washed in by the sea... bicycles, tyres, oil/fuel drums, lots of fish crates and nets, plastic bottles, etc. I picked up a decent stainless steel cooking pot not so long ago.
A friend of mine has built a tea house in his garden entiely out of stuff he found on the beach.
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
Reply

Tags
climate change, climategate, co2, global warming




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 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 15:56.


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