More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent (Global warming merged)

[August]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

If done properly, then not necessarily.

Do you really think conservation efforts could keep pace with population increases?

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Try observing the data of big orange ball in the sky called the sun. Look at the data on solar flares and compare it with the data collected so far here on earth. You just might see a patten developing. When the activity in the sun flares up it gets warmer here, when it subsides it gets cooler. Imagine that.

Oh, can't collect a tax on that now can they so we blame YOU and get your money.

Direct measurements of solar output since 1978 show a steady rise and fall over the 11-year sunspot cycle, but no upwards or downward trend .


Similarly, there is no trend in direct measurements of the Sun's ultraviolet output and in cosmic rays. So for the period for which we have direct, reliable records, the Earth has warmed dramatically even though there has been no corresponding rise in any kind of solar activity.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11650

[longam]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Try observing the data of big orange ball in the sky called the sun. Look at the data on solar flares and compare it with the data collected so far here on earth. You just might see a patten developing. When the activity in the sun flares up it gets warmer here, when it subsides it gets cooler. Imagine that.

Oh, can't collect a tax on that now can they so we blame YOU and get your money.

I managed to sit threw the first hour of his docudrama and even in it they show with the core samples from the north that the earth has warmed up before and does this cycle over and over.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

[ Why regulate CO2 when all the top worlds scientists tell you its a hoax?



-S

I always told you, those guys at NASA are a bunch of blockheads.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

We know that:

Good post Stealth Hunter!

[Fish]

Originally Posted by August

Waste of time. Continued world population increases will make such efforts futile.

I am afraid your right here.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

Before we take this any further, I suppose you've got a source for that claim, that all the top world's scientists say global warming is a hoax.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...0-274616db87e6

This one is especially telling:

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Need more?

-S

PS. I forgot to mention that you'd naturally assume that there are an equal number of 'Pro' GW scientists too, but you'd be mistaken.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...0-274616db87e6

On the quote page with the "top" scientists, you are aware that only six are actually well-known and have done something important: Iviar Giaever, Joanne Simpson, David Gee, Takeda Kunihiko, Eduardo Tonni, and Delgado Domingos. The rest, if you looked, were just research members of teams and organizations (in short, they're just your average scientists).

Still, the PDF report had some... "interesting" quotes from the dissenters. I took note that the majority of them rejected the idea that humans were solely to blame (the keyword being solely) for climate change.

Whether they like it or not, the climate is changing.

I'm also going to have to agree with some of the scientists criticising the IPCC. They get a little too radical for my taste at times, and the claim that global warming is all our fault is nonsense. While we're definitely to blame and while we're absolutely causing it to speed up, we're not the sole problem. It's also a natural phenomenon.

Here's also a link to some of the most famous organizations in the world who agree that climate change is occuring and humans are partially to blame:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti..._organizations

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

This one is especially telling:

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Visit the SESTAT database. As of 2002, they represented roughly 13 million American scientists and engineers. The petition you cited had 31,072 scientists, of which, 9,021 had PhDs and were qualified. That's a tiny amount.:rotfl:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Need more?

For your sake, I'm going to need A LOT more.

[Stealth Hunter]

Originally Posted by August

Do you really think conservation efforts could keep pace with population increases?

We can't really know unless we give it our best shot. Sometimes with science, you've got to take a gamble.

[August]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

We can't really know unless we give it our best shot. Sometimes with science, you've got to take a gamble.

Well you understand that "best shot" is completely subjective.

I guess it comes down to whether the potential rewards are worth the gambles we have to take. I have my doubts about that as long as we continue to ignore overpopulation, the true source of human caused global warming. I fear conservation efforts are basically feel good actions that will have little or no effect.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Originally Posted by August

Well you understand that "best shot" is completely subjective.

I guess it comes down to whether the potential rewards are worth the gambles we have to take. I have my doubts about that as long as we continue to ignore overpopulation, the true source of human caused global warming. I fear conservation efforts are basically feel good actions that will have little or no effect.

Well, as a country we can only do so much about the birth rate in other countries. Developing cleaner and more efficient technology is something we can definitely do.

PD

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Fish

I always told you, those guys at NASA are a bunch of blockheads.

Most good NASA scientists left to work for other companies when Nixon screwed up the agency.

James Hansen however is a blockhead - who is in charge of climate data at NASA and who has a personal vendetta to turn us all into hut living freaks without modern conveniences.

He only changes wrong data when forced to. Now that's what I call reliable.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Stealth Hunter

On the quote page with the "top" scientists, you are aware that only six are actually well-known and have done something important: Iviar Giaever, Joanne Simpson, David Gee, Takeda Kunihiko, Eduardo Tonni, and Delgado Domingos. The rest, if you looked, were just research members of teams and organizations (in short, they're just your average scientists).

Still, the PDF report had some... "interesting" quotes from the dissenters. I took note that the majority of them rejected the idea that humans were solely to blame (the keyword being solely) for climate change.

Whether they like it or not, the climate is changing.

I'm also going to have to agree with some of the scientists criticising the IPCC. They get a little too radical for my taste at times, and the claim that global warming is all our fault is nonsense. While we're definitely to blame and while we're absolutely causing it to speed up, we're not the sole problem. It's also a natural phenomenon.

Here's also a link to some of the most famous organizations in the world who agree that climate change is occuring and humans are partially to blame:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti..._organizations

Visit the SESTAT database. As of 2002, they represented roughly 13 million American scientists and engineers. The petition you cited had 31,072 scientists, of which, 9,021 had PhDs and were qualified. That's a tiny amount.:rotfl:

For your sake, I'm going to need A LOT more.

All hoopla. You 13 Mil scientist may belong to an org and that org may agree with climate change, but 13 mil scientists do not agree. I'd bet you have a hard time numbering in the hundreds. The list I gave is very specific on what it is they are against.

Besides, these are scientists that beleive in proper research and know how to conduct it. So 31K is quite a bit.

The other side of the equation consists of only Al Gore and James Hansen of NASA.

-S

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

All hoopla. You 13 Mil scientist may belong to an org and that org may agree with climate change, but 13 mil scientists do not agree. I'd bet you have a hard time numbering in the hundreds. The list I gave is very specific on what it is they are against.

Besides, these are scientists that beleive in proper research and know how to conduct it. So 31K is quite a bit.

The other side of the equation consists of only Al Gore and James Hansen of NASA.

-S

This is not the case: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten.../306/5702/1686