Contrary to many pronouncements, climate changer/global warming is not a proven science by any measure.
Jim Wagner
It was the scientific skeptics who bucked the 'consensus' and said the Earth was round.
Updated Feb. 19, 2014 7:31 p.m. ET
In a Feb. 16 speech in Indonesia, Secretary of State John Kerry assailed climate-change skeptics as members of the "Flat Earth Society" for doubting the reality of catastrophic climate change. He said, "We should not allow a tiny minority of shoddy scientists" and "extreme ideologues to compete with scientific facts."
But
who are the Flat Earthers, and who is ignoring the scientific facts? In
ancient times, the notion of a flat Earth was the scientific consensus,
and it was only a minority who dared question this belief. We are among
today's scientists who are skeptical about the so-called consensus on
climate change. Does that make us modern-day Flat Earthers, as Mr. Kerry
suggests, or are we among those who defy the prevailing wisdom to
declare that the world is round?
Most
of us who are skeptical about the dangers of climate change actually
embrace many of the facts that people like
Bill Nye, the ubiquitous TV
"science guy," say we ignore. The two fundamental facts are that
carbon-dioxide levels in the atmosphere have increased due to the
burning of fossil fuels, and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a
greenhouse gas, trapping heat before it can escape into space.
What
is not a known fact is by how much the Earth's atmosphere will warm in
response to this added carbon dioxide. The warming numbers most commonly
advanced are created by climate computer models built almost entirely
by scientists who believe in catastrophic global warming. The rate of
warming forecast by these models depends on many assumptions and
engineering to replicate a complex world in tractable terms, such as how
water vapor and clouds will react to the direct heat added by carbon
dioxide or the rate of heat uptake, or absorption, by the oceans.
Submitted by Jim Wagner
14 comments:
Just 30 or so years ago scientists were in agreement that we were going into an ice age.
At best these "facts" are only theories. Computer models are just educated guesses.
Now these flat earthers say we should not question their facts and anyone who does is crazy.
We need to always question.
How is it that in an area with so many institutions of higher learning their are still dolts writing and agreeing to post this sheet? What is it about Pacifica that attracts these morons like a moth to a candle?
Oh dear, where to start?
Anyone who thinks the scientists know what will happen is dreaming.
From the Yale website:
"The rate of sea level rise has mysteriously slowed down in the most recent decade"
"The picture of the Antarctic is far fuzzier: The panel cannot even say for certain that the continent will lose mass by 2100"
"All this means that unravelling what the oceans are doing today is a heinously complicated task."
Anon 4:11 doesn't want to link to the Yale article because he wants to cherry pick statement s from "Tale" to make him sound edumacated.... er smart.
From the very same article -
"Things today are more certain. In its latest report, released on September 27, the IPCC finally could and did put a number on ice flow from the poles. The result was an estimate of sea level rise of 28 to 98 centimeters (a maximum of more than three feet) by 2100 — more than 50 percent higher than the 2007 projections. "We have our arms around the problem well enough to say there’s a limit to how crazy things are going to get..."
See how easy it is to plat this game?
This article in the Guardian neatly debunks the claim that the models have been wrong: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/oct/01/ipcc-global-warming-projections-accurate
Using unproven science will "impact" Pacifica more than any of us realize. Linda Mar, Manor, hell, all of Pacifica, get ready for the climate police to knock on your door to cite you for throwing away a recyclable. And those of you that live in Fairway West, get ready to move. The berm is coming down. The pier? Don't waste any money on it. Manor Safeway, Colombos, Tams? Good bye. Managed retreat. So innoculous yet so dramatic. Get ready for Perdition because it's coming.
Studies. Before you believe any of them you need to know who paid for them. Same with the use of excerpts.
Always follow the money!
"Just 30 or so years ago scientists were in agreement that we were going into an ice age."
No they weren't. The fact that this easily debunked canard won't die shows the extent of the denier's disinformation campaign.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
At least we're beyond "Climate change is a hoax" and "Climate change is just the natural cycle that the Earth's climate goes through.
Ian you are wrong as usual. There were wide spread warnings from scientists and the media in the 70's about an impending ice age.
Here are some newspaper articles from the day:
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/1970s-ice-age-scare/
And here's more http://www.examiner.com/article/today-it-s-global-warming-the-70s-it-was-the-coming-ice-age
And here are some scientists who think we are heading for another mini ice age because sun spot activity has stopped:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2013/05/26/to-the-horror-of-global-warming-alarmists-global-cooling-is-here/
Ian. Wrong as usual? That's harsh.
1110, we know the earth's north polar cap is melting, and the seas are rising. This time, based upon empirical evidence and modern technology calculations, "99%" of these research scientists and ordinary informed people think this must be "global warming".
Ian is "right again" that 30 years ago, (and far earlier), there were indications the earth may be cooling, and an ice age might be expected. Unfortunately some of these past theories drag forward. (And who knows as the earth tries to heal itself, and the weather is uneven and erratic, the flip side of warming may be cooling).
The theory of global cooling was only seriously considered by a small number of climate scientists. It's true that a few magazines sensationalized the issue, but the mainstream scientific community never took it seriously. It is actually analogous to today's climate change deniers. Ironic, isn't it?
Post a Comment