Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
global warming Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Re: global warming

    consensus

    The world is flat
    The sun revolves around the world
    The universe is not expanding
    Black holes can not exist
    The speed of sound can not be broken
    Automobiles will never catch on
    No one could possibly need more than 10 meg's of disk storage

    Who polled all the scientists on earth and came up with this so called consensus? The answer would be NOBODY. There is no consensus, never has been one either. What there has been is a very vocal group that, right or wrong has managed to sway public opinion. Conspiracy theory folks would argue that these so called "consensus" scientists have been bought off by big corporations that stand to make trillions off the whole thing. There is a preponderance of evidence that indeed, theere is a crap load of money to be made by scaring the public into buying stuff that they don't need. Want an example? Toilets. How is a toilet manufacturer going to make a profit selling toilets if nobody but those building a new house or remodeling buy toilets? Face it. Unless your toilet gets totally destroyed, you can fix it for about 30 bucks in parts even if it's better than 50 years old. So lets hire lobbiests to go to Washington and convince our reps that we need to save the planet and the best way to save the planet is to make everyone buy a new water saving toilet. Problem solved. The corporation shows record toilet sales. The plumbing companies show record toilet sales. The homeowner can show his new "green" toilet off to his neighbors and feel smug satisfaction every time he sits on his new low flow toilet and takes a dump. Then, guys like me with a K60 can feel good when we charge him a couple hundred to snake his drains out because the new green toilet does not flush worth a crap (pun intended) We went with global warming because when they rolled out global cooling in the late 60's, nobody bought into it. Nobody bought into it because there were not legions of school teachers and college professors carrying the banner yet. The foundation had not been properly laid. You believe in global warming then by all means buy a Prius and change your lightbulbs. Me, I believe that no matter what we do, the earth is going to do what it wants to do.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #92
      Re: global warming

      Originally posted by darius View Post
      Actually, this is incorrect.

      Global cooling had little support in the scientific community. The hype was perpetrated by the media. In fact the very term (global cooling) wasn't even in much use before the global warming came to the fore. The term was introduced by global warming skeptics.
      The term global cooling was taught to me in elementary school if I'm not mistaken. I think here in America the term was in wide spread use. Maybe not in the scientific community but in the school system it was.

      Comment


      • #93
        Re: global warming

        There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.
        The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.
        To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”
        A survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.
        To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin points out that the Earth’s average temperature during the great Ice Ages was only about seven degrees lower than during its warmest eras – and that the present decline has taken the planet about a sixth of the way toward the Ice Age average. Others regard the cooling as a reversion to the “little ice age” conditions that brought bitter winters to much of Europe and northern America between 1600 and 1900 – years when the Thames used to freeze so solidly that Londoners roasted oxen on the ice and when iceboats sailed the Hudson River almost as far south as New York City.
        Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. “Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data,” concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. “Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions.”
        Meteorologists think that they can forecast the short-term results of the return to the norm of the last century. They begin by noting the slight drop in overall temperature that produces large numbers of pressure centers in the upper atmosphere. These break up the smooth flow of westerly winds over temperate areas. The stagnant air produced in this way causes an increase in extremes of local weather such as droughts, floods, extended dry spells, long freezes, delayed monsoons and even local temperature increases – all of which have a direct impact on food supplies.
        “The world’s food-producing system,” warns Dr. James D. McQuigg of NOAA’s Center for Climatic and Environmental Assessment, “is much more sensitive to the weather variable than it was even five years ago.” Furthermore, the growth of world population and creation of new national boundaries make it impossible for starving peoples to migrate from their devastated fields, as they did during past famines.
        Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.
        PETER GWYNNE with bureau reports
        "Somewhere a Village is Missing Twelve Idiots!" - Casey Anthony

        I never lost a cent on the jobs I didn't get!

        Comment


        • #94
          Re: global warming

          "The world is flat
          The sun revolves around the world
          The universe is not expanding
          Black holes can not exist
          The speed of sound can not be broken
          Automobiles will never catch on
          No one could possibly need more than 10 meg's of disk storage"

          You present the textbook example of why the author of the article I provided said that using the word 'consensus' is misleading. From the examples you cited I'd have to say you did not read the article.

          If global warming is not real, where is the guy that is going to make history by proving global warming is not occurring?

          Much as those two guys a few years ago wanted to prove that room temperature fusion was possible, science had a field day disproving and embarrassing them. Scientists love to prove others wrong.

          Why do we have kids fresh out of college, with no training in science, filtering scientific press releases? Why do we industry experts editing science reports even though they do not possess the credentials to challenge the data or conclusions in the report? Talk about politicization and controlling the message.

          And since when is conserving natural resources a bad thing? Who would have thought that man could have brought the buffalo to near extinction? Us puny humans have the capacity to change our planet easily. Deforestation, strip mining, mountain top removal, overfishing, North Pacific garbage patch (twice the of Texas), Chernobyl, Hanford (just a minor earthquake removed from releasing highly radioactive waste en mass into the Columbia river and then a short jaunt to the Pacific - puny little human activity would have catastrophic, international affect).

          Look at the coal fired power plants running 24/7 for the past 100 years. Look at the smog in LA County from just a few million automobiles. Look at the toxic waste along side the hiways in LA County now (lead).

          Just like the accumulative effect of low flow toilets allows affluent to collect in sewer pipes, mans activities (not to mention population growth) over the past couple of centuries has pushed the ecosystem past the point of homeostasis.

          Comment


          • #95
            Re: global warming

            I'd like to continue with this but alas, like most arguments it will only deteriorate into mindless manipulation of numbers and facts. Anyone can and will find support for their argument on either side of the issue. At this point though, arguing is pointless because those that pull the purse strings are in total and complete charge of the propaganda. Sadly, what you will eventually come to realize it that the only thing that matters to anyone is their bank balance at the end of the day. You have been and will continue to be manipulated into thinking and doing exactly what they want you to do and that is to fatten their wallets. If you really want to do some digging, take a look at Mr. Gore's net worth since he decided to become the defacto spokesperson for this whole movement. But just out of spite, I think I'll head out to the back yard and burn a pile of tires that have been lying around.
            Last edited by NHMaster3015; 01-10-2010, 07:08 PM.
            sigpic

            Comment


            • #96
              Re: global warming

              Mark, lock it up please! It's run it's course and now it's down to name calling, enough. Thank you. Frank.

              Comment

              Working...
              X