quote:

Originally posted by sobek:
I think all govt, dems and repubs, have grossly failed the scientific community in the US.

Well said.

quote:

Originally posted by jms2788:
Scott, I'm curious to know what philosophy courses you found to be as hard as math because that wasn't my experince at all, but of course everybody and every school is different.

As someone who enjoyed and succeed in both higher level philosophy and science courses, there are people whose minds just aren't wired to find success in certain areas. I knew people in my science-based courses who just didn't do well in philosophy, and I knew people in my philosophy courses who just didn't do well in science. Despite a very good understanding of most science, I am not much of a math person.

I think the whole point of the GW scare is to raise taxes and control the people. The Libs will do whatever it takes, and then some.

If we've lost almost all the temp we had gained the last hundred years in one year, and the temp hasn't increased in over a decade, what are we worried about exactly? With more cars, production, people, etc should the temp not continue to rise? I don't know much, I'm just a laymam trying to apply common sense to GW. I'm confused.

quote:

Originally posted by RFromm:
I think the whole point of the GW scare is to raise taxes and control the people. The Libs will do whatever it takes, and then some.

If we've lost almost all the temp we had gained the last hundred years in one year, and the temp hasn't increased in over a decade, what are we worried about exactly? With more cars, production, people, etc should the temp not continue to rise? I don't know much, I'm just a laymam trying to apply common sense to GW. I'm confused.

The temperature has gone up roughly .35 degrees per decade since 1975, that's why we're having this discussion. 2007 was the 5th hottest year since 1880.

Thank god for El Nino and the shifting jet stream because those hotter temps will surely produce bigger and more devastating hurricanes for us S. Florida folks.

quote:

Originally posted by jms2788:

quote:

Originally posted by RFromm:
I think the whole point of the GW scare is to raise taxes and control the people. The Libs will do whatever it takes, and then some.

If we've lost almost all the temp we had gained the last hundred years in one year, and the temp hasn't increased in over a decade, what are we worried about exactly? With more cars, production, people, etc should the temp not continue to rise? I don't know much, I'm just a laymam trying to apply common sense to GW. I'm confused.

The temperature has gone up roughly .35 degrees per decade since 1975, that's why we're having this discussion. 2007 was the 5th hottest year since 1880.

quote:

Originally posted by jms2788:
Scott, I'm curious to know what philosophy courses you found to be as hard as math because that wasn't my experince at all, but of course everybody and every school is different.

Philosophy of language, symbolic logic, and any course that required me to read Hegel.

Not to sound like a pompous d-bag, but the courses I'm referring to were typically taken by seniors majoring in philosophy (which I was at the time) and first year grad students. This wasn't freshmen level "if a tree falls in the forest..." type stuff.

quote:

Originally posted by did64:
Indeed Scott, differences of opinion abound.

What we can be sure of though is that if we require all scientific arguments to be either empirically demonstrable beyond all doubt or a priori truths then that pretty much devalues the entirety of human knowledge.

I'm no skeptic and I certainly don't think true knowledge needs to be either a priori or "demonstrable beyond all doubt." I'm just saying within the set of those worthy scientists who claim global warming is a fact, there are countless factional subsets and no clear consensus. Likewise, in the new science of climatology as such there are enormous x-factors. My amateur conclusion is that climatology is still in an immature state - like, say, philosophy in its pre-Socratic era.

quote:

Yes that's right. But here, we have a Republican party that takes advantage of lazy minded people and uses them to divide the country. Isn't it just amazing, that STILL, after the last 7 years that these ditto heads are still blindly following their BS?

Is that the best that you can do, refer to talk radio? How about get off your lib-environazi talking points and form an original thought on your own. You believe the climate is changing, good for you, go get different lightbulbs, a hybrid and start using a bike more frequently. Those of us who use the minds we were born with to think for ourselves will continue living as we wish to. I couldn't care less what all the environmentalist whack-jobs want to believe. However, when they start telling me how to live my life, that is too much goverment control.
JMS-instead of asking for sources, provide solid proof, not theories. I'm not the one here yelling about the sky falling, that would be those of you who believe a yet unproven theory.
BTW-JMS-the temp has not changed in the last decade.
The last two years NOAA has predicted above average hurricanes as well as many strong hurricanes. They were wrong both years and are predicting the same this year. If the scientists cannot predict the hurricane season accurately, I sure as hell don't trust them to tell me what the weather will be in 100 years.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Presley,

You gotta be kidding Presley. NOBODY in their right mind can be THAT extreme. Myself, whom you probably consider a commie airhead, have reservations towards GW apocalyptics (how much is it caused by humans... what is still too fuzzy to evaluate correctly... unpolitical, logical stuff like that), still, you have to be out of your mind to reject GW as a whole. I mean look at the melting of glaciers and polar ice caps...

I don't understand how you can pretend to be intelligent and yet be so unilateral for something which demands, at least, reasonable caution in regulating our habits.

And obviously, you don't know many scientists -- except perhaps those developping more lethal ways of spreading shrapnel -- cause most of those I know (and I know a few) are so soding straight and apolitical when it comes to research that it's not even funny.

somone made a nice point early in this thread that (and I paraphrase here) "it makes sense to take care of the planet we live on".

That being said, there has obviously been some form of warming RECENTLY. To say this is a trend that WILL continue and to say that this IS a man-made phenomenon is complete conjecture.

I will admit it humans MAY have a factor in it, but to say there is a definite cause and effect is impossible and I think a lot of people spread this theory as fact for a variety of reasons (gives them power/control, makes them feel more important/compasionate/whatever, makes them money [Mr. Gore], etc).

Every day since the begining of the earth, C02 has been released in to our atmosphere. Every day since the begining of the earth, the sun has risen. Therefore C02 causes the sun to rise. Doesn't make much sense.

The earth's population is rising. More people have been born recently. Average global temperature has gone up recently. Therefore birth must obviously cause global warming.

Get real. Feel free to do as much as you can to help the environment, but don't try to scare/fear-monger people with psuedo-science.

Have you seen the horrible affect we as humans have had on Mars as well. I swear, we're just screwing up the whole solar system.

Mars is Warming

quote:

Originally posted by Presley:

quote:

Yes that's right. But here, we have a Republican party that takes advantage of lazy minded people and uses them to divide the country. Isn't it just amazing, that STILL, after the last 7 years that these ditto heads are still blindly following their BS?

Is that the best that you can do, refer to talk radio? How about get off your lib-environazi talking points and form an original thought on your own. You believe the climate is changing, good for you, go get different lightbulbs, a hybrid and start using a bike more frequently. Those of us who use the minds we were born with to think for ourselves will continue living as we wish to. I couldn't care less what all the environmentalist whack-jobs want to believe. However, when they start telling me how to live my life, that is too much goverment control.
JMS-instead of asking for sources, provide solid proof, not theories. I'm not the one here yelling about the sky falling, that would be those of you who believe a yet unproven theory.
BTW-JMS-the temp has not changed in the last decade.
The last two years NOAA has predicted above average hurricanes as well as many strong hurricanes. They were wrong both years and are predicting the same this year. If the scientists cannot predict the hurricane season accurately, I sure as hell don't trust them to tell me what the weather will be in 100 years.

Haha, good one. You saying the temperature hasn't increased between 1998 and 2008? Between 1990 and 2000, you're right, it didn't change. Again, that was due to a decrease in insolation, not because CO2 and CH4 don't cause warming, we were simply getting less heat from the sun.

Actually, that helps me more than you. Normally, such as between 1945 and 1975, a decrease in insolation would normally cause temperature to decrease, but between 1990 and 2000 it didn't, and guess why? More greenhouse gasses.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: jms2788,

Global warming is all bullshit and your lemmings if you believe in it.

Our weather patterns are cyclical and changes are dependent on the activity of our sun when it goes thru solar min or maximums.

That is our weather in a nutshell.

You can believe all the bullshit politicians if you want that use Global Warming to seek office or Nobel Prizes.

Global warming is all bull-excrement and you are lemmings if you believe in it.

Our weather patterns are cyclical and changes are dependent on the activity of our sun when it goes thru solar min or maximums.

That is our weather in a nutshell.

You can believe all the bull-excrement politicians if you want that use Global Warming to seek office or Nobel Prizes.

quote:

Originally posted by Pharmdudeoh:
Global warming is all bull-excrement and you are lemmings if you believe in it.

Our weather patterns are cyclical and changes are dependent on the activity of our sun when it goes thru solar min or maximums.

That is our weather in a nutshell.

You can believe all the bull-excrement politicians if you want that use Global Warming to seek office or Nobel Prizes.

Keep thinking it's a political issue. How many times to I have to say that? Buddy, with solar mins and maxs, insolation only provides 10% of warmming while the GHE adds 90%. That "nutshell" is wayyyyy to simplified.

If anybody ever tells you CO2 (and CH4) do not cause warimg, they are very dumb, completely uneducated, or just are mistaken. It's been that way for 4.5 billion year. If adding CO2 always caused warming is the past, why would it cease to happen now. Please, somebody answer this. This is my question, Presely. If you can tell me why all of a sudden CO2 would stop causing warming after it has done exactly that for 4.5 billion, I'll be happy to continue with anybody. If you can't answer, I see no point it continue because you can't find a counter argument.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: jms2788,

quote:

Originally posted by Pharmdudeoh:
Global warming is all bull-excrement and you are lemmings if you believe in it.

I'm no rodent but arguments like this do make we want to jump off a cliff.

Yet more sources...

"The greatest warming in 2007 occurred in the Arctic, and neighboring high latitude regions. Global warming has a larger affect in polar areas, as the loss of snow and ice leads to more open water, which absorbs more sunlight and warmth. Snow and ice reflect sunlight; when they disappear, so too does their ability to deflect warming rays. The large Arctic warm anomaly of 2007 is consistent with observations of record low geographic extent of Arctic sea ice in September 2007.

"As we predicted last year, 2007 was warmer than 2006, continuing the strong warming trend of the past 30 years that has been confidently attributed to the effect of increasing human-made greenhouse gases," said James Hansen, director of NASA GISS.

link to NASA for more information

From NASA. Hmm, I have posted sources from two universities and NASA, while nobody has posted a single source.We're not talking about CC's here, I believe it's within the rules to post sources about climate change.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: jms2788,

More from NASA...

NASA

Climatologists (scientists who study climate) have analyzed the global warming that has occurred since the late 1800's. A majority of climatologists have concluded that human activities are responsible for most of the warming. Human activities contribute to global warming by enhancing Earth's natural greenhouse effect. The greenhouse effect warms Earth's surface through a complex process involving sunlight, gases, and particles in the atmosphere. Gases that trap heat in the atmosphere are known as greenhouse gases.

The main human activities that contribute to global warming are the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and natural gas) and the clearing of land. Most of the burning occurs in automobiles, in factories, and in electric power plants that provide energy for houses and office buildings. The burning of fossil fuels creates carbon dioxide, whose chemical formula is CO2. CO2 is a greenhouse gas that slows the escape of heat into space. Trees and other plants remove CO2 from the air during photosynthesis, the process they use to produce food. The clearing of land contributes to the buildup of CO2 by reducing the rate at which the gas is removed from the atmosphere or by the decomposition of dead vegetation.

A small number of scientists argue that the increase in greenhouse gases has not made a measurable difference in the temperature. They say that natural processes could have caused global warming. Those processes include increases in the energy emitted (given off) by the sun. But the vast majority of climatologists believe that increases in the sun's energy have contributed only slightly to recent warming.


So yes, some do say it's not anthropogenic, but the vast majority do. Now, if any of you want to post some arguments against anthropogenic warming, feel free to do so and we can go from there.

There is disconnect in the cause and effect relationship. Increases in co2 lags by close to 400 years vs the increase in temp. The true motivator in climatic changes has to do with the activity of our sun. Industrialized mankind has not been on earth long enough to have any significant effect on our climate. Hundreds of years vs billions of years. Volcanic eruptions have done far worse. But don't worry, I have faith in technology solving some problems within the next couple decades to limit pollutants and excessive flatulence created by man. In 1940's and 50's there was an ice age scare, now we are afraid of melting to death. Short term memories and gullible people sucked into a meaningless, passionate cause that in turn defend so passionately. You keep listening to the scare tactics and analytical bull-excrement theories that have no way of being proven. In 20 years you will find out the political process will start over in one way or another. You just gotta chill.