But there's no evidence global warming is man-made. Correlation isn't causation. And no, thousands of scientists believing in it doesn't make it true.
That only makes it a religion.
Scientists don't "believe in" this or that, they follow the evidence. They don't "believe in" evolution, but rather acknowledge it as fact and have modeled all of modern medical science around it. Anyone "believing" in something based on faith rather than logic isn't a scientist.
"Climate change can only be detected from multi-decadal timescales due to the inherent variability in the climate system."
All they've done is choose end points further back than 16 years in order to get a warming trend.
A few years ago, when people were noting that there had been no warming for 9 years, the AGW crowd was saying that you had to go back at least 15 years. Now that there has been none for 16 years, they're claiming that you have to go back many more years.
They have had to rewrite the entire climate history of the last 12-13 hundred years to eliminate the Medieval Warm Period to be taken seriously at all. And that revisionist history has been clouded by one scandal after another.
And now we have discovered a period during Roman times that was as warm as it is now.
The global warming campaign is just a leftist political campaign, science being corrupted by govt money and politics.
Burke,
I always pictured you as someone that based arguments on logic and cold, hard facts regardless of the peripheral fallout. Now, you are claiming global warming (a scientific fact) is a leftist conspiracy.
You aren't what I thought you were. You're just a partisan hack with no regard for the truth.
Global warming... one of the biggest money making frauds in the history of this planet.
I always have to laugh about the Cap & Trade tax too, that govt. thinks if it taxes everybody it will somehow cool the Earth.
GW & CC are not even real, tangible things, they are computer model predictions, and even U.N. "expert" Dr. Phil Jones, who they based almost all their claims of glbal warming chaos on, said his models were flawed and incorrect. of course, you never heard any of this from the LMSM.
The Earth's atmospheric changes are cyclical, period. Man has nothing to do with it and there is no proof anywhere, no matter how many of these liberal ideology BS GW & CC claims you want to present, that will prove it either.
__________________ Resistance is futile. Schedule is irrelevant, opponent is irrelevant... We are Gator, you will be assimilated.
I always pictured you as someone that based arguments on logic and cold, hard facts regardless of the peripheral fallout. Now, you are claiming global warming (a scientific fact) is a leftist conspiracy.
You aren't what I thought you were. You're just a partisan hack with no regard for the truth.
Well you have to admit that the godfather of global warming has been found to profit heavily from this phenomena and has also been found to be quite the hypocrite.
My favorite time was when Gore said the Earth was "millions and millions of degrees just a few miles down".
Gore isn't a climate scientist. The right only continues to promote him as a spokesman in order to demagogue public opinion, discredit global warming and divert attention from all of the legitimate climate scientists that know the truth based on myriad studies and data.
Mentioning Gore in regard to global warming is an unscrupulous red herring. You have "good" company, as the same tactic is frequently used by Hannity and Limbaugh.
Well you have to admit that the godfather of global warming has been found to profit heavily from this phenomena and has also been found to be quite the hypocrite.
You're pretty naive if you think that govt funded "scientists" are motivated by evidence. Maybe you should be taking a closer look at that evidence yourself.
Prior to about 1995, there were over a hundred peer-reviewed scientific papers showing that it was as warm 700 years ago as it is today. And there was no appreciable man made CO2 then.
Then along came Michael Mann with his infamous "hockey stick" graph, govt power grabs, and one scandal after another.
Ever heard of the "Climategate scandal"
Ever heard of the CLOUD experiments?
These were the beginning of the end for the AGW movement as anything but a politically motivated fraud.
There used to be thriving orange groves in and around the Orlando area. Were they killed off by global warming?
More like Mickey Mouse!
__________________
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their president." Author Unknown
"The arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and assistance to foreign hands should be curtailed, lest Rome fall." Cicero 55 BC
My family was in the citrus business in Lake County. That business was killed (literally) by freezes. Our entire grove and about 100,000 acres in the county were wiped out by a freeze in the '80's.
Gore isn't a climate scientist. The right only continues to promote him as a spokesman in order to demagogue public opinion, discredit global warming and divert attention from all of the legitimate climate scientists that know the truth based on myriad studies and data.
Mentioning Gore in regard to global warming is an unscrupulous red herring. You have "good" company, as the same tactic is frequently used by Hannity and Limbaugh.
I guess their point is that if they show Gore saying something stupid, it means that all the scientists are wrong about global warming.
My family was in the citrus business in Lake County. That business was killed (literally) by freezes. Our entire grove and about 100,000 acres in the county were wiped out by a freeze in the '80's.
Yeah, some of us older Floridians remember way back beyond GW hysteria. Hell, Ted Danson said we only had 10 years left back in the 80's.
You're pretty naive if you think that govt funded "scientists" are motivated by evidence. Maybe you should be taking a closer look at that evidence yourself.
Prior to about 1995, there were over a hundred peer-reviewed scientific papers showing that it was as warm 700 years ago as it is today. And there was no appreciable man made CO2 then.
Then along came Michael Mann with his infamous "hockey stick" graph, govt power grabs, and one scandal after another.
Ever heard of the "Climategate scandal"
Ever heard of the CLOUD experiments?
These were the beginning of the end for the AGW movement as anything but a politically motivated fraud.
And there are still lots of papers describing the medieval warm period. I don't know if there is true consensus on the causes, but most research I've seen implies that it was caused by increased solar radiation.
But there are a lot of things that can drive climate change, and most likely the MWP has nothing to do with modern global warming. Particularly if the solar radiation theory of MWP is true, because solar radiation has been quite stable the past century yet we've seen an unprecedented warming. Carbon dioxide's greenhouse effect is simple physics, the increasing concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is simple measurement. What hypothesis do you think exists that both provides an alternative reason for the measured warming AND explains why the increasing carbon dioxide concentration isn't behaving as physics tells us? By the way, CLOUD isn't the answers; the authors of those papers admit that the phenomena they describe has insignificant impact on climate.
There are been no scandals in climatology. There are been ideological fishing trips, sure. But there has never been any evidence or judgment of misconduct, fraud, or conspiracy. Every investigation into your so-called Climategate has completely exonerated the researchers.
I'm sorry to hear that your family's citrus business was destroyed by the freezes. But the occasional cold snap in Florida does nothing to refute the measured warming over the last century. There will still be cold and hot snaps. Even with an over-simplified expression of warming, saying that a 4 degree rise means you'll never, ever see a temperature less than 4 degrees more than the previous historic low, well, central Florida has seen temperatures in the teens. 20 degrees will still kill citrus.
The fact is the planet is warming. The studies quantify this. However, the real question is how do we, as a rational global society address this? Natural warming cycle or man induced should not be the core of the debate. The core of the debate should be how do we confront this. The population of the earth is exploding, approaching 10 billion very fast. Very fast. Resources are not infinite, they are finite. And the planet is getting warmer. Again, natural or man made is not important. What is important is how we will confront this problem and what we will do to avoid the catastrophic results if we do nothing.
I agree with you here. We shouldn't "fix" the planet because we screwed it up. It isn't some
moral obligation to return the earth to its non-human state or even it's state 200 years ago. Who cares? The earth certainly doesn't.
The question is a matter of economics and living standards. Do we benefit from a hotter or colder earth? What is the cost to achieve that temperature modification? And does then what is the cost/benefit analysis of that.
You're pretty naive if you think that govt funded "scientists" are motivated by evidence. Maybe you should be taking a closer look at that evidence yourself.
Burke, I like you. I know you have staunch opinions that aren't easy to change, but we all do. However, this is a place where you need to seriously wonder if you are one of those that needs to look at the evidence yourself. We don't understand feedback loops? A point worth considering. We don't have proper controls on our data. Agreed. But you are getting into some seriously precarious territory with these two claims:
1) Warming stopped 16 years ago. This claim is completely arbitrary and silly, and as river has pointed out, been explained several times on here. There are decadal cycles that need to be accounted for. It's like saying that the Earth is cooling because January is cooler than June. You are missing the periodicity. Berkeley Earth explains the issue very well here: Has Global Warming Stopped?
2) All climate scientists are engaged in a multinational conspiracy to...um...artificially cool the Earth, I guess. This one is odd for a few reasons: (a) nobody on here knows any climate scientists, so where the hell does this come from? At least you've seen somebody with a corvette buy milk with foodstamps. (b) the tremendous amount of money backing organizations like the Heritage Institute to say the opposite, and finally (c) scientists get fame and notoriety by explaining new things that work differently than everyone thought. Yet, of all the thousands of scientists working on the problem, you think they would all trade their life long goals for a couple of thousands of dollars of summer salary for a grad student? (yes NSF grants amount to much less than you might think).
Not only is this one a non-falsifiable claim (a clear no-no in the search for truth), it really doesn't make any sense. The people at Solyndra maybe. Al Gore perhaps. Likely the people at PETA. These are people who are likely to treat their goal with higher reverence than the truth. But Kerry H Cook is just some woman who analyzes data. She sit at her small desk dealing with grad students, undergrad classes, faculty meetings, publishing, grant writing, and presenting her work at meetings. Maybe she has a lab meeting on Wednesdays. But for you to call her a crook without knowing anything about her is crazy. Or worse. If tarnishing her entire career is worth believing something you desperately want to believe, fine. But don't then go around criticizing the analytical methods of others.
__________________
It is in the admission of ignorance and the admission of uncertainty that there is a hope for the continuous motion of human beings in some direction that doesn't get confined, permanently blocked, as it has so many times before in various periods in the history of man.
Linear Mode
