quote: Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming
quote: it'd be nice to have both sides of the story.
quote: Are you kidding me? Global warming is in the mainstream news all time time, at least daily. Here, check this out:
quote: Michael Asher is the only person I have seen writing about Global Warming on a regular basis
quote: The lyrics for the chorus were, “Satan said/ come liberate carbon it’ll spin your wheels/ liberate carbon, it’ll nuke your meals/ liberate some carbon baby, it’s the American way.”
quote: Satan said/ come liberate carbon it’ll spin your wheels/ liberate carbon, it’ll nuke your meals/ liberate some carbon baby, it’s the American way.”
quote: I would like to see some more scientific opinions other than Mr. Asher's
quote: Michael Asher is the only person I have seen writing about Global Warming on a regular basis. I don't remember ever seeing it in the so-called "main stream media"
quote: Maybe you live in a place that reports more on these things, but it isn't reported much around here.
quote: But I'm not going to do what I can't afford to make that happen.
quote: Once I see proof that my grandchildren or their grandchildren, etc. will die because I drove a car to work then I'll change my ways
quote: Saving nature means sacrifice.
quote: Global warming has some serious effects before you can actually say it is 5 Celsius warmer than 10 years before.
quote: Like tsunami, tornadoes...
quote: The least you could do is get another blogger who offers a different perspective.
quote: Michael Asher is using spin here, as has been demonstrated time and time again
quote: He's not qualified to be preaching about details of climate science.
quote: Did Asher even provide a reference for this paper today? He could be totally misreading an article again.
quote: There is a consensus among scientists about global climate change
quote: Did you read any of the 30+ articles that explicitly support global climate change?
quote: Conservative spin also brought us those WMD's in Iraq
quote: And now conservatives are trying to serve up global warming as a hoax.
quote: Michael Asher continues to do this to supplement his income in essence because he could not succeed as a professional scientist.
quote: Here are just two with tipping point in the title
quote: Summary: ...the model results are equivocal on the mechanism and magnitude of enhanced climate change [but] are in agreement that it is a process that occurs only after warming (about 13 deg C above modern) and is geographically confined.</ quote>Now, pull that rather large foot out of your mouth, eh? That is about as far from "predicting climate catastrophe" as one can get.
quote: Still, it is interesting to know what the scientific community is writing about.
quote: Since we (all people) may soon be forced to consumer alot less energy, goods, etc in the name of preventing anthropogenic global warming the fear of which is based primarly on the writing of scientists...
quote: The results of my analysis contradict Oreskes' findings and essentially falsify her study: Of all 1117 abstracts, only 13 (1%) explicitly endorse the 'consensus view'. However, 34 abstracts reject or question the view that human activities are the main driving force of "the observed warming over the last 50 years"
quote: I do not agree with either stance, as it is rather illogical to look for patterns chaotic data over a very short timeframe.
quote: But, I can't help but question all the researches, whether supporting global warming or dismissing it. I say it's just too early to tell. But by the time we are able to tell, it may be too late. So what do you do?
quote: But if we had been driving diesal cars for the past 10 years (reducing CO2) we would have been releasing a significantly greater amount of particale pollution
quote: Actually, I think max efficient may mean max CO2
quote: Something that bothers me is that the cost of "fixing" the problem of CO2 will be extreme and in the process humans may further unbalance the climate
quote: All I was saying was just that I honestly (and I think we all) don't know whether CO2 does cause "global warming," because what we've seen thus far are just empirical models.
quote: Plan for the worse and hope for the best?
quote: Some of my professors at my school have said on numerous occasions that if you want to win a Nobel Prize, find a way to model turbulent flows exactly. If that's true, this means that researchers have yet found a way to do so. Well, without this capability, how exactly are we modeling the warming trend (if there is one)? You can do all the curve fitting you want, but human activities ain't gonna follow no mathmatical formula (I think...).Further, from my studies in heat transfer, various turbulent correlations leading to quantities of heat transferred often times have an error as large as 20%, and sometimes even bigger.Maybe I'm missing the point here, but how can an overly simplified model produce accurate result? The model may be capable of differentiating temperatures by half a degree or less, but that does not guarantee accuracy. It just means that the model can produce "precise" results, and nothing more.
quote: Obviously, I'm no scientist. But, I can't help but question all the researches, whether supporting global warming or dismissing it. I say it's just too early to tell. But by the time we are able to tell, it may be too late. So what do you do?
quote: Seems as ifA) History professors should stick to history,B) Medical doctors should stick to patients,C) CLIMATOLOGISTS should stick to climate studies, and
quote: What exactly are we debating here ? Here is what we have - a history professor did a CLIMATE study three years ago and then a medical doctor repeated the same CLIMATE study recently and then a reporter has reviewed pre-copy of this new study that NONE of us can read yet.
quote: SourceWatch seeks to expose what it calls the "propaganda activities of public relations firms" and the activities of organizations working "on behalf of corporations, governments and special interests." These "exposes," which tend to be critical of their subjects, deal predominantly with conservative entities...As with the online reference Wikipedia, the contents of SourceWatch are written and edited by ordinary Web users. Says SourceWatch: "You don't need any special credentials to participate - we shun credentialism along with other propaganda techniques.” While stating that it seeks to maintain fairness in the profiles and articles appearing on its website, SourceWatch does acknowledge that "ignoring systemic bias and claiming objectivity is itself one of many well-known propaganda techniques."...The perspectives are mostly leftist; the entries rely heavily on leftist and far-leftist sources.
quote: Why do I need to get this BS with my tech news?
quote: and dead people!
quote: and people with no qualifications to do with climate. (political science, microbiology, mining geology).
quote: I wish you luck in this rat's nest. If this were 200 years earlier you'd get stoned by these people.
quote: By the way you can't embellish your facts or see a positive outcome from them. Those processes are the sole custody of MAsher and his cult followers.
quote: Actually 99% of them endorse "Masher's theory".
quote: Yea...right...you're so cute when you're wrong!
quote: . So it is not at all surprising that a scientific paper on an aspect of climate change would not speculate on anything outside of the conclusion that the researcher can draw from his or her data
quote: I suspect that if you actually DID a "Survey" of "Published Scientists," that you would find that the majority do in fact support the conclusion
quote: A survey of 530 climate scientists from 27 different countries determined there is no consensus regarding the causes of the modern warming period, how reliable predictions of future temperatures can be, and whether future global warming would be harmful or beneficial. Assertions that “the debate is over” are certainly not supported by the survey results. Two-thirds of the scientists surveyed (65.9 percent) disagreed rising CO2 is causing climate change and 72.6% did not agree we could predict what the climate will do 100 years from now.
quote: TAMBORA (1815) -- Thirty years later, in 1815, the eruption of Mt. Tambora, Indonesia, resulted in an extremely cold spring and summer in 1816, which became known as the year without a summer. The Tambora eruption is believed to be the largest of the last ten thousand years. New England and Europe were hit exceptionally hard. Snowfalls and frost occurred in June, July and August and all but the hardiest grains were destroyed. Destruction of the corn crop forced farmers to slaughter their animals. Soup kitchens were opened to feed the hungry. Sea ice migrated across Atlantic shipping lanes, and alpine glaciers advanced down mountain slopes to exceptionally low elevations.
quote: I always wonder what the world would be like if the internet wasn't around to show us all sides of the argument and not just the one that the news reports.
quote: when in reality, its the politicians who are putting their fud into it and then snipping bits from the scientists papers to support their claim
quote: It also doesn't specify what papers are being talked about. What is he defining as "papers on climate change"?
quote: Scientific papers generally don't have to explicitly support something which is already accepted
quote: Forgive me if I'll take the word of climatologists over that of someone who has zero training in the field.
quote: Great! Take their word for it. They're all saying the media has exaggerated and politicized the debate, and movies like Gore's Inconvient Truth bear no relationship to the truth.
quote: Industry has had a full court press going on where for example they offered $10K to any "scientist" willing to whore themselves out and write papers disputing climate change theory
quote: is 100% clear that the data was cherry picked and massaged
quote: Sell it somewhere else. That Newsweek story has been long discredited, by an editor at Newsweek itself, no less.
quote: Why not do just what this researcher did? Query the same database using and look at the same list of papers? He gave his methodology-- you can reproduce his results exactly. Isn't that better than closing your eyes and pretending its all a conspiracy?
quote: Its obvious, though, you're far too emotionally wrapped up in the religion of global warming to ever do anything remotely so rational and unbiased.
quote: “These predictions are very relevant to businesses and policy-makers who will be able to respond to short-term climate change when making decisions today. The next decade is within many people’s understanding and brings home the reality of a changing climate.”
quote: Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."
quote: I'm really confused as to the argument Masher is attempting to make here; it seems as though he is saying since no overwhelming majority agrees that global warming is caused by man, then it must not be?
quote: Either way, a (substantially) larger percentage of the scientists surveyed seem to be of the opinion that global warming is caused by man than not by man