------ THE SKY IS FALLING ------

[prashamk]

Maybe this could help a bit!


http://www.enn.com/climate/article/37805

[prashamk]

Maybe this could help a bit!


http://www.enn.com/climate/article/37805

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by JustTheFacts

I can hardly wait for the cooling to continue so I won't have to listen to the global warming morons anymore. Of course they will probably come up with some theory about how CO2 is making the climate change rapidly from warming to cooling and how the rapid transition is destroying life on the planet.

Hi Justthefacts,

In all fairness, the people supporting Global Warming have been conditioned to do so. Powerful scientists and educational institutions combined with high-ranking politicians and a willing media have furthered an agenda for a very motivated elite I imagine. Science is fraught with disagreements and controversy but the efforts to silence opposition related to further exploration into the truth here is alarming.

Some attempt to portray the word 'skeptic' in a negative light. Quite frankly, these people are morons for doing so...especially with this subject matter. The science is clear...a great deal of uncertainty exists and a 'gold-rush' for data to bridge the gap is underway. Skeptics are wise...GW activists are political operatives whether they know it or not.

Let me put it into perspective. The Earth is cooling due to the sun being inactive. This is abundantly clear. One of the GW elites positions has been that the sun is not as influential as Man-Made C02...well then why is our temperature plummeting? In another month we will have passed the observed variability in solar cycle activity and enter the realm of panic. If we don't see some activity from the sun, and soon, we're in big trouble and warming will be a fixation as everyone hopes and prays for it.

We're cooling, and until you hear headlines about a surge in sunspots the trend will continue.

~Paradox

[Paradox]

Tracking down abrupt climate changes:

[sandy winder]

This is a very well-informed article - unlike some of the many other sources we are given links to.

The Sydney Morning Herald: national, world, business, entertainment, sport and technology news from Australia's leading newspaper.

It show how Exxon has been selling doubt to the world and how the same kind of methods were used to try to hide the dangers of tobacco.

The best part though is this:

/// There are at least three other reasons the oil companies' PR campaign has had success for climate change deniers. First, the implications of the science are frightening. Shifting to renewable energy will be costly and disruptive. Second, doubt is an easy product to sell. Climate denial tells us what we all secretly want to hear. Third, science is portrayed as political orthodoxy rather than objective knowledge, a curiously postmodern argument.

The tide slowly turned on tobacco denial and the science finally was accepted. Some people still choose to smoke and some pay a price for it.

But climate is different. There are no "smoke-free areas" on the planet. Climate denial may turn out to be the world's most deadly PR campaign. ///

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by sandy winder

... Climate denial may turn out to be the world's most deadly PR campaign. ///

Sandy,

Is that the best you can do? Regurgetating such nonsense has no place given the massive amount of new evidence which has called the global warming 'theory' further into question (to put it lightly). A PR campaign? You need to do your homework. It is that simple. Global Warming is viewed as a movement with religious tones because of people like you who have so much faith you assume all others are succumbing to a massive conspiracy. Do your homework, three hail Gore's and call me in the morning.

~Paradox

[Bored Wombat]

Originally Posted by Paradox

Sandy,

Is that the best you can do? Regurgetating such nonsense has no place given the massive amount of new evidence which has called the global warming 'theory' further into question (to put it lightly). A PR campaign? You need to do your homework. It is that simple. Global Warming is viewed as a movement with religious tones because of people like you who have so much faith you assume all others are succumbing to a massive conspiracy. Do your homework, three hail Gore's and call me in the morning.

~Paradox

One often sees statements like this, but one never sees a peer reviewed scientific paper about any of this "massive amount of new evidence that has called global warming theory into question".

Do you know that there are about forty scientific organizations of national or international significance that agree that global warming is real and caused by humanity, and none that reject it?

Do you know that there are no peer reviewed scientific papers that reject global warming and thousands that implicitly or explicitly accept it?

Rejecting science is very stupid, and is why global warming deniers are similar to intelligent design adherents of today or geocentric solar system adherents of Galileo's time.
And you claim that the scientific view "is viewed as a movement with religious tones".

How utterly blind to both how you look and to the science.

[Bored Wombat]

Originally Posted by Paradox

The theory of Global Warming is history...a failed theory that had hundreds of billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of people accepting them to make this so.

Then you will be able to provide thirty or so scientific organisations of standing that agree with you, and a couple of hundred peer reviewed papers.

You so far have produced none.

Not one.

That's your scientific backing.

Nothing.

Doesn't that make you question your hallowed beliefs a little?

If it doesn't you need to start thinking a little bit more critically.

[prashamk]

I don't think climate change is over! It just can't. But than it has kept changing for billions of years and I don't think any of our green activity will save us!

We just can't help ourselves because we didn't ignite the phenomena.

[ThankyouMoneypenny]

Blah blah blah... scientific organisations... blah...blah... peer reviewed... blah.

Boring Wombat (sic) et al:

You guys just don't get it, do you? The burden of proof is not upon us 'deniers' (see below for comment on that, I prefer 'sceptic') to prove a non-problem. It is upon those who have initiated the 'problem' of AGW on the world. All we've had so far is models, predictions and theories about AGW. All we've got to show for it is a global temperature rise of about 0.6, deg C between 1948 and 1998, a recent slight cooling, a sea level rise of about... er, the size of my 'johnson' (I can just see the response posts on that one!) and over $50 billion spent already with another several trillion promised in order to pay for the Kyoto agreements.

Wow. The sheer front of it all leaves me in awe of the power of suggestion. (No, I'm not still talking about my 'johnson'...)

As for us being 'deniers', I doubt very much if any of the so-called 'denier' posters on this forum actually deny that the global warming of c1950-2000 took place or that mankind has contributed (in some way) to said warming. That's all fairly obvious. What I - because I can't speak for the others - 'deny', is that man's contribution is either as large or as problematic as you would suggest. Before you start regurgitating how many scientific organisations have said mankind is to blame, are you sure they have laid the blame wholly on mankind, or have they merely stated mankind has contributed? Before you start on peer-reviewed articles, have a look outside the window and tell us how many of the so-called catastrophic effects you can see! Please, no polar bear sob-stories.

Remember, Science is proof without belief; Religion is belief without proof. Which one are you following?

By all means stop wasting energy and resources - I completely agree with that - but do it for the right reasons. Efficiency and sensible management, yes; fear of impending doom and climate change, no.