TELL ME AGAIN ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING ???

[Bob Denman]

This is almost as much fun as arguing about helmets, guns, and oils put together! :roflblack: :2thumbs:
Ultimately; what can we do about ANY of it? :dontknow:

 

[SNOOPY]

This is almost as much fun as arguing about helmets, guns, and oils put together! :roflblack: :2thumbs:
Ultimately; what can we do about ANY of it? :dontknow:

roflmao


.

 

[DragonSpyder]

Everyone seems to have an opinion on the subject. I want to know where the scientific studies are that disprove global warming. Your opinion does not trump peer reviewed scientific studies...

BTW - If you research it, the "scientific community" did NOT back the claims of the earth cooling years ago. It was only a couple scientists who made that claim yet we keep hearing it over an over.

 

[Bob Denman]

I just kind of dig the fact that the "tourists" who recently got stranded in the ice in Antarctica weren't tourists; they were scientists, that were there to study Global Warming :shocked:... :roflblack:

 

[Dan McNally]

I am always skeptical of articles that start out with: "Leading scientists say . . . " because "Leading scientists" are, in fact "funded scientists" and "funded scientists" get funding by saying what those in power want said, therefore "leading scientists" = "political parrots." Climate and weather are two different, although somewhat related, things. Here is some interesting reading that argues against man-made CO2 being the cause for climate change . . . http://notrickszone.com/2011/08/08/joe-bastardi-calls-manmade-co2-global-warming-an-obvious-fraud/

 

[GeoffCee]

This is another thread where reason, scientific evidence and consensus will be overcome by those who, while unqualified to speak on the topic, will do so.
"

You are absolutely correct but is a qualification necessary before a thinking human being can be allowed to express a layman's opinion? There are examples throughout human history where learned experts working alone or in isolated cliques has lead to fundamental errors of judgement, errors which may have been mitigated had common sense from an unqualified outside source been heeded.
Just askin'.

 

[Bootie]

Climate Change

The UK Meteorological Office has just announced that the UK this week "celebrates" a full 21 year trend of cooling temperatures. In the past the Green Lobby used to refer to it as "Global Warming" but now they call it "Climate Change".

The new name is a good strategy -- particularly as the Mediterranean Climate they were promising us 20 years ago disappointingly did not arrive. Personally, my priority was not to begin growing grapes but to enjoy a longer riding season on board my Spyder. Was it too much to expect?

London is roughly the same latitude as Hudson Bay and should have the same temps if it were not for the Gulf Stream which brings warm water up from the equatorial regions. The melting Greenland Icesheet is expected to cut off the Gulf Stream conveyor which will result in COLDER temps in the UK. Seems like your observations about cooling temps in the UK fit right in with the Global Warming predictions. Congrats:yes:

 

[Bootie]

Climate Change

I taught statistics at the University of California, Riverside. I also taught several subjects in the MBA program. These are my observations on global warming.
edit: oh, by the way, the data for arctic ice only goes back to 1959... That's when the first satellite photos were taken. Moreover, there appears to be a magma pool heating the ground under the Greenland ice sheet--but I'm unsure of this last one.

By using the data from Ice Core Drilling, scientists can study the atmospheric conditions back 350,000 years. That's a little before 1959.

 

[Dan_Ashley]

You are absolutely correct but is a qualification necessary before a thinking human being can be allowed to express a layman's opinion? There are examples throughout human history where learned experts working alone or in isolated cliques has lead to fundamental errors of judgement, errors which may have been mitigated had common sense from an unqualified outside source been heeded.
Just askin'.

My opinion is not "a layman's opinion". See my post above. The people who use the data to prove global warming are not analyzing the data correctly. That is not a surprise. It is in their financial interest to behave the way they do. Remember the ads "Four out of five doctors recommend Chesterfield [cigarettes]?"
http://www.healthcare-administratio...intage-cigarette-ads-promising-better-health/

If the studies cannot be duplicated by disinterested parties, if you can't have the original source data, or if margins of error and both the incidence of false positives and false negatives are not published, then you can pretty well bet that the conclusions are bogus. Few people remember the "scientific" support for eugenitics. This was the "science" that supported the actions of the Nazis during the holocaust.

If data does not support theory, then the theory is wrong. That is simple scientific method.

 

[SNOOPY]

By using the data from Ice Core Drilling, scientists can study the atmospheric conditions back 350,000 years. That's a little before 1959.

Personally, I think the earth is only 6,000 to 8,000 years old like the bible says, so the 350,000 years is one mans theory that is to be highly debated. Lol

 

[Bob Denman]

:banghead: :gaah:
NOW; it's on...

 

[SNOOPY]

Oops :roflblack:

 

[Bob Denman]

 

[ARtraveler]

opcorn:opcorn:opcorn: Only time will tell which camp is right. Bottom line--we are all in this together. :thumbup:

 

[Dan_Ashley]

By using the data from Ice Core Drilling, scientists can study the atmospheric conditions back 350,000 years. That's a little before 1959.

That says nothing about the area covered with ice. It says nothing about the melt rate, formation rate, or the size of the glaciers. The only information it contains is the content of impurities in the water, and the content of the air bubbles. Through modeling it provides a little information on the amount of precipitation year over year.

Moreover, neither the Antarctic ice core analysis nor the Greenland ice core analysis say anything about arctic sea ice coverage. This is because the North Pole is too far away from Greenland and Antarctica.

Don't confuse analysis of atmosphere with analysis of temperature. Some will say that the pollen in the ice can help with that. But be careful with that because there are lots of possible causes of the changes in pollens over time. Remember during the Roman Empire, wine grapes were grown in Brittan.

 

[Dan_Ashley]

Personally, I think the earth is only 6,000 to 8,000 years old like the bible says, so the 350,000 years is one mans theory that is to be highly debated. Lol

Seriously?

Do you also think that Lamarkian learning occurs across generations?

 

[Dan_Ashley]

That is Lamarkian learning.
But then I think the world began on Aug.19, 1952 at exactly 5:10AM and will end sometime in the next couple of decades.

How did you get to be so old? Just askin'...

...but Lamarckism is about inheritance overall. The learning aspect is just a small subset...a non-epigenetic inheritable trait, that is. Lamarckian learning was first claimed to be observed by Ivan Pavlov. However, in 1926 Pavlov stated that his experiments had a fatal flaw. In 1933 Dorcus replicated the experiments and did not make any findings in support of Lamarckian learning.

...my only reason for asking the question was due to the posters claim that the Earth is just a few thousand years old. I was attempting to ascertain whether the poster was for real or not.

 

[Bob Denman]

He was born older than most... :roflblack: :thumbup:

 

[SNOOPY]

Seriously?

Yes, I am absolutely serious.


I think it's totally absurd that people can actually believe stuff like that we come from tadpoles or monkeys or whatever the latest theory is, and that the world and universe are millions of years old. :roflblack:



.

 

[spydaman60]

Global warming??
That's just all of the "hot air" being relased by our National, State, and local governments! :gaah:

I find this post totally despicable!!! and I like it!!!!:roflblack::roflblack: