Jump to content
toomuchbaloney toomuchbaloney (New Member) New Member

The Myth of Climate Change

Lounge   (15,261 Views 353 Comments)
2 Followers; 37,291 Visitors; 9,157 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.
advertisement

You are reading page 8 of The Myth of Climate Change. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

Scientists Agree Human-Caused Climate Change is Real: But Wait, We've Known That for Decades!

... Let's do a classic "thought experiment" (it's only classic because climate scientists have been telling this one for so many years now).

Imagine you went to 100 medical experts and asked each of them to diagnose whether you had cancer or not. If 97 of those hundred confirmed your worst fears and verified that you did indeed have cancer, would you keep asking for more evidence before you did something about it?

Most people would have a hard time ignoring that kind of agreement amongst experts! Except, it seems, when the experts we're talking about are climate scientists and the subject is the consequences of burning so much coal and oil and destroying so many tropical forests...

http://blog.ucsusa.org/scientists-agree-anthropogenic-climate-change-is-real-but-wait-didnt-we-know-this-already-128?_ga=1.209755413.1237559919.1411578718

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC News - Scientists debate polar sea-ice opposites

Although, the last two summers had seen greater coverage than the record-setting low of 2012, she cautioned that the long-term trend was still clear: September Arctic sea ice is declining in extent by more than 10% per decade.

The eight lowest ice covers in the satellite record have now occurred in the past eight years.

Higher temperatures are seen as the cause; the Arctic has been one of the fastest warming regions on Earth.

Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis | Sea ice data updated daily with one-day lag

Arctic Sea Ice Grows But Still Shrinking - Business Insider

But not hitting a record low doesn't mean that the amount of sea ice is climbing again. We started measuring Arctic sea ice using satellites in 1979, and from one year to another, the amount of ice varies. Sometimes, it's higher than the year before, but the overall trend is still clear: The amount of Arctic sea ice is going down

Read more: Arctic Sea Ice Grows But Still Shrinking - Business Insider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The authors of this literature search analyzed the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991-2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'.

 

They found that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed

AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.

 

This analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/...8_2_024024.pdf

... For some reason, global warming still remains a divisive issue. While there have been many measures implemented through government regulation and education about the environment for decades, some people still don't believe global warming is something we need to be worried about or a phenomena that exists at all.
Gallup reported in March
that 65 percent of Americans believe global warming is happening or will happen during their lifetime, but only 36 percent actually see it as a threat.

 

Sorry to burst their bubble, but global warming is happening, and it's not stopping any time soon. Last year, a study by The Consensus Project found that a whopping
97 percent of published papers
had the position that global warming is happening and that humans are to blame...

 

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/15...al-warming.htm

Below is a link to the study by The Consensus Project. I disagree with their statement, "The Debate is Over".

the consensus project

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One of the reasons I have not participated in this thread since my initial comments is that I don't care to keep re-inventing the wheel. In my view, if you can't be bothered to understand the difference between weather and climate, then your opinion on the subject is pretty worthless.

Whenever an area experiences unusually warm/hot conditions, the global warming supporters point to it as EVIDENCE of global warming.

But whenever an area experiences unusually cool/cold conditions, those same supporters are quick to claim that such conditions are NOT evidence AGAINST global warming, but merely "weather". Then, they proceed to mock those who they claim don't understand the difference between "climate" and "weather".

Interestingly enough, they never quite explain why we shouldn't write off the warm/hot conditions as "weather" too. Possibly, it is because calling THOSE conditions "weather" undermines the mantra.

Perhaps it is NOT those who question the mantra whose opinions are "worthless".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typically, in the realm of science, those opinions which cannot be supported by facts or evidence are not terribly valuable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
advertisement
Perhaps you will like this report better......and I found the link to it in a (gasp) breitbart piece:

Former Obama Official: Climate Change Not 'Settled' Science

From the article your link discusses:

The crucial scientific question for policy isn't whether the climate is changing. That is a settled matter: The climate has always changed and always will. Geological and historical records show the occurrence of major climate shifts, sometimes over only a few decades. We know, for instance, that during the 20th century the Earth's global average surface temperature rose 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit.

Nor is the crucial question whether humans are influencing the climate. That is no hoax: There is little doubt in the scientific community that continually growing amounts of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, due largely to carbon-dioxide emissions from the conventional use of fossil fuels, are influencing the climate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Typically, in the realm of science, those opinions which cannot be supported by facts or evidence are not terribly valuable.

Insofar as true, intellectually honest science is concerned, you are correct.

However, political agenda is often disguised as science, and "facts" and "evidence" manipulated to fit the agenda.

The myth of man-made global-warming is one such agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Insofar as true, intellectually honest science is concerned, you are correct.

However, political agenda is often disguised as science, and "facts" and "evidence" manipulated to fit the agenda.

The myth of man-made global-warming is one such agenda.

Considering the last two sources for climate-change-denial specifically stated the humans do affect climate change, there doesn't seem to be anything significant to support that claim. Which part of what we know is a myth?; Greenhouse gasses have the ability to alter the climate, we produce substantial amounts of greenhouse gasses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One could also argue that the ongoing attempts to confuse the discussion of climate change is exactly an example of political agenda disguised as science with "facts" and "evidence" manipulated to fit the agenda.

Is the argument against climate change an appeal to ignorance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One could also argue that the ongoing attempts to confuse the discussion of climate change is exactly an example of political agenda disguised as science with "facts" and "evidence" manipulated to fit the agenda.

"Confuse the discussion of climate change..."?

Are you saying the theory of man-made climate change is so fragile that it cannot withstand scrutiny?

Is the argument against climate change an appeal to ignorance?

There is no argument against "climate change" that I am aware of. That the Earth's climate has gone through periodic changes for Earth's entire history seems clear.

The actual debate is over the idea that MAN is CAUSING the climate change, and as I am sure you are aware, this is the actual point of contention.

And it is THIS point, for which there is NO proof - only agenda-driven claims, cloaked in pseudo-science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Considering the last two sources for climate-change-denial specifically stated the humans do affect climate change, there doesn't seem to be anything significant to support that claim. Which part of what we know is a myth?; Greenhouse gasses have the ability to alter the climate, we produce substantial amounts of greenhouse gasses.

At he end of the last Ice Age, when the glaciers receded and the Earth warmed, what was going on that caused it? Climate change. Climate change that is a part of Earth's natural cooling and warming cycles, and HAS been since the Earth cooled down from a big molten ball of rock.

Funny thing though: There was no industrial human society 10,000 years ago pumping out greenhouse gases, or any OTHER kind of gases, for that matter.

Yet the Earth warmed up anyway...... Go figure.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×