Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11
Go  |
New |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
|
quote: Originally posted by mistergoode: Is that the best way you can argue against what i say 
You've made an argument? Where?! |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by mistergoode: quote: Originally posted by Raoul Duke 303:
Can you provide some "neutral scientific reports"?
YES! Our God the Sun is evidence enough of the main contributor to climate change. When its cloudy (june and july), it was cold, now theres no clouds its warm to flipping hot again. There, a scientific report on GW. If we have to be taxed on petrol because were destroying the earth, why is it legal at all???
I think even your fellow skeptics will be cringing at this post of yours mistergoode. Try a little harder please! |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DaveCH:
Of course I opened it and had a look. It overwhelms everything by it's size and this is the standard approach. It is not for me to have answers to my questions it is for you to prove it and on your admission it only suggests a trend in the absence of any other explanation. That my friend ain't good enough, the burden of proof is with you and you cannot do it. Simply giving tomes of stuff in the hope the volume will show me the error of my ways is of little use. Here's my explanation, there is another explanation centuring on the fact that the world is a big and mighty place subject to forces that a degree in anything without a lifes work cannot begin to allow anyone to comprehend. Stone the witch I say.
Ahhh... back online Not sure what you mean by the burden of proof in my court. Even skeptics accept the climate is changing, you haven't offered any explanation into the cause of climate change nor have you offered any alternative explanation to the causes listed on the site. You merely attack the general consensus which I think is a pretty poor way of engaging in debate. At least I've offered underlying reason why man-made climate change may be the cause |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Mark2391:
I think even your fellow skeptics will be cringing at this post of yours mistergoode. Try a little harder please!
Fellow skeptics of what? Whats wrong with the post? Dont you believe the Sun warms our planet? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Baron von Lotsov.:
Back in the 16th century it could be claimed that most of the 'scientists' believed the world was flat. Who were these 'scientists'? Well they were the authority at the time. You see the proof was overwhelming, huge numbers of treaties had been published to honour this creed. Who could argue when so many distinguished people had 'proved' it'? Look back at that time and many other strange ideas were also in vogue. Right up to when the steam train was invented when one authority claimed that travelling over 30 miles per hour would be damaging to the body. Unfortunately our scientific establishment, with its government grants is little different to the church, which were the authority and the one with all the money at the time. Have fun on your environmental science theology degree.
...and a man of science was locked up because he said the world was round. What rubbish you write, I can't believe you just ostracized all scientists. Talk about shooting the messenger??!!?? I know, let's forget that science brought us nylon, pencillin etc. It was all brought to us by the fairies in the back of our gardens  |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron:
At least I've offered underlying reason why man-made climate change may be the cause
May be being the important thing. I never siad the weather is changing, yesterday it was lovely. Now do you want me to post 50 references of peoples work suggesting we are only a small part in the scheme of things. No it would not help it would overwhelm the discussion. Take one at a time and prove it, otherwise it is what it is an unsubstantiated claim. Let's have it as that and not exclude all other possibilities. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sampanviking:
GLobal Warming is a very useful smokescreen to divert the publics attention from the pressures and strains of Globalisation (rapid inflation and of and competition for energy reserves) and massive social dislocation and re-adjustment. Only by calling it AGW the politicians can both claim massive power for themselves and blame us for the problems.
Incidently, the majority og Global Warming proponets tend to be theoretical scientists and computer model programmers, whilst the scepticla scientist are the feild workers and proxy experts. They report very little long term increase in the troposphere and nothing out of the ordinary in todays climate.
They also point out that modern records began in 1874, which just happened to be the trough of the coldest phase that the climate has had for the last 10,000 years. Thus rapid warming since can hardly be a surprise.
AGW = Smoke, Mirrors, Bad Science and Political Convenience.
Err have you any proof all the supporters were armchair scientist and all skeptics were field scientist? No! because it's not true! Pretty sad when they make the science of man-made climate change a conspiracy theory. I've got advise for you, read the science, ignore the politics at the moment. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DaveCH: quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron:
At least I've offered underlying reason why man-made climate change may be the cause
May be being the important thing. I never siad the weather is changing, yesterday it was lovely. Now do you want me to post 50 references of peoples work suggesting we are only a small part in the scheme of things. No it would not help it would overwhelm the discussion. Take one at a time and prove it, otherwise it is what it is an unsubstantiated claim. Let's have it as that and not exclude all other possibilities.
Offering your explanation would be good enough for starters. What is then, volcanoes? the sun? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Baron von Lotsov.:
Right up to when the steam train was invented when one authority claimed that travelling over 30 miles per hour would be damaging to the body.
Just one authority? Not really a good analogy for the near total consensus we now have on global warming then. quote: Unfortunately our scientific establishment, with its government grants is little different to the church, which were the authority and the one with all the money at the time.
There were scientists from over 130 countries involved in the IPCC report, so 130 different governments of various political complexions, not to mention the thousands of peer-reviewed articles from scientists working quite independently. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by mistergoode: quote: Originally posted by Mark2391: The standard proof for AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) is IPCCs third report: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis If that's what most scientists agree, then it's good enough for me.
When will zombies wake up? The IPCC is biased government "scientists", payed up tax funded people who file reports to help government tell us were "bad", and that we have to do what government say so they can charge us massive tax. GET SOME NEUTRAL SCIENTIFIC REPORTS!!
like the ones published by Exxon... |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron:
Offering your explanation would be good enough for starters. What is then, volcanoes? the sun?
It is too complex for me to comprehend, certainly far more so than X or Y. The systems affecting it interact in many and various different ways no doubt. I liked the sun explanation earlier if you want a monotype answer, it is responsible for heating us. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Bioethanol:
We know fossil fuels are running out.
Can't we get science doing something more useful that arguing about things that are going to happen naturally anyway?
That's if you believe in the natural cause. Unfornately, most scientist say the most likely cause is human activity. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DaveCH: quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron:
Offering your explanation would be good enough for starters. What is then, volcanoes? the sun?
It is too complex for me to comprehend, certainly far more so than X or Y. The systems affecting it interact in many and various different ways no doubt. I liked the sun explanation earlier if you want a monotype answer, it is responsible for heating us.
Yes, but how is causing the globe to warm even further? and why? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by the majority of the beast:
science is great as long as it is free, how many have died because their ideas went against the status quo...?
More have died from politics... |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron: quote: Originally posted by DaveCH: quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron:
Offering your explanation would be good enough for starters. What is then, volcanoes? the sun?
It is too complex for me to comprehend, certainly far more so than X or Y. The systems affecting it interact in many and various different ways no doubt. I liked the sun explanation earlier if you want a monotype answer, it is responsible for heating us.
Yes, but how is causing the globe to warm even further? and why?
How has it done it without man over the last 1000's of centuries? I expect it's like it has oft before like. |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron: That's if you believe in the natural cause. Unfornately, most scientist say the most likely cause is human activity.
They think it is CONTRIBUTING, but can't decide how much by. They also can't decide whether aeroplane contrails have more effect than greengouse gases. Why don't they do something important? irrigate the sahara, develop a better electric car. ANTHING useful. Instead if just talking about things that are going to happen anyway. |
| |
|
|
quote: quote: Originally posted by DaveCH:
Yes, but how is causing the globe to warm even further? and why?
How has it done it without man over the last 1000's of centuries? I expect it's like it has oft before like.
Yes, but what is causing the rapid heating trend? If it's the sun, how is it causing it? Has the sun's irradiance increased? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron:
What is your obsession with jetting off to climate conferences???!!!
Hipocrisy freeloading scamming important research funds for useless PR exercises. quote: Why don't we cancel ALL conferences, would that make you happy?
if wasting fossil fuel is such a problem - why not video-conference? Unless its all about the money in politics.... |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Bioethanol: quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron: That's if you believe in the natural cause. Unfornately, most scientist say the most likely cause is human activity.
They think it is CONTRIBUTING, but can't decide how much by. They also can't decide whether aeroplane contrails have more effect than greengouse gases. Why don't they do something important? irrigate the sahara, develop a better electric car. ANTHING useful. Instead if just talking about things that are going to happen anyway.
35% |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Bioethanol: quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron:
What is your obsession with jetting off to climate conferences???!!!
Hipocrisy freeloading scamming important research funds for useless PR exercises. quote: Why don't we cancel ALL conferences, would that make you happy?
if wasting fossil fuel is such a problem - why not video-conference? Unless its all about the money in politics....
good, lobby parlerment to have conferences banned |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron: Has the sun's irradiance increased?
Its not a light bulb. sometimes it gives off more, sometimes we get closer etc. we cycle from ice age to interglacial summer. Instead of trying to prevent the inevitable - why not devote your attention to something practical? at the moment - the climate lobby is developing into a theology. all fortelkling the futures and issuing edicts of behaviour - very little PRACTICAL ideas being developed. Of course - if you are a believer - these are just the empty jabberings of a heretic... |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron:
35%
so 65% is happening naturally? Don't you wish we were spending more time developing clever new ways to deal with the inevitable? |
| |
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DaveCH: quote: Originally posted by Raver Ron: quote: Originally posted by DaveCH:
I liked the sun explanation earlier if you want a monotype answer, it is responsible for heating us.
Yes, but how is causing the globe to warm even further? and why?
How has it done it without man over the last 1000's of centuries? I expect it's like it has oft before like.
The point is the temperature of the earth is increasing but the solar radiation falling on the earth has not been increasing, so the sun can not be used as an explanation for global warming. (See It's the sun, stupid for more detail and references.) |
| |
|
|
