Post #183,778
11/9/04 1:04:48 PM
|
Re: yeah, that "petition"...
Thanks for that [link|http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/|unbasied] article. I'm sure you verified those names were actually on the petition.
Of course the disenting opinions on global warming are not limited to that one web site. Here's a few more I got after a couple minutes on Google:
[link|http://www.co2science.org/|http://www.co2science.org/]
[link|http://www.junkscience.com/|http://www.junkscience.com/]
[link|http://www.globalwarming.org/|http://www.globalwarming.org/]
[link|http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/|http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/]
[link|http://www.sepp.org/books/gwunfbus.html|http://www.sepp.org/books/gwunfbus.html]
[link|http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=9442|http://www.heartland...le.cfm?artId=9442]
[link|http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=67|http://www.marshall....article.php?id=67]
[link|http://weathereye.kgan.com/expert/warming/skeptic.html|http://weathereye.kg...ming/skeptic.html]
[link|http://www.cato.org/dailys/04-20-04.html|http://www.cato.org/dailys/04-20-04.html]
[link|http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2004/09/20/do2002.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2004/09/20/ixop.html|http://portal.telegr...4/09/20/ixop.html]
[link|http://www.skepticism.net/faq/environment/global_warming/|http://www.skepticis...t/global_warming/]
[link|http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/04/10/wo_muller101504.asp|http://www.technolog..._muller101504.asp]
|
Post #183,783
11/9/04 1:30:27 PM
|
Scientists are all bought and paid for . . .
. . so you can always find plenty to support any crank (or legitimate) theory you want. Every one of them knows where his/her paycheck / grant money came from, to whom s/he is beholden, and how to slant the "research".
That's the great wonder of the "free enterprise" system - the truth can never be known because all the "experts" are working to someone else's agenda.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #183,792
11/9/04 3:31:09 PM
|
BFD
sorry, but what we have happening up here to our glacial cover etc simply brooks no argument, no matter how many shills the oil companies can afford to pay for.
The differences in the Ross Ice Shelf in the last ten years alone are huge. Someone up here did a series where they took an explorer ancestor's shots of glaciers in the Rockies and took pictures from the same place today. In most cases, an ice covered landscape from 100 years ago is bare rock today with no ice in sight, and in all cases the ice cover is very much diminished. The polar ice cap has shrunk precipitously in the last ten years as well.
Your guys' ideological posturing on behalf of their paymasters doesn't cut it any more, when anyone can see the changes that the last ten years have brought to the seasons.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #183,797
11/9/04 3:45:32 PM
|
Really
You'd think that if they are too stupid to see that vast quantities of ice are vanishing, something that only requires opening the eyeballs and gazing, well, at least they'd be ashamed to be so many hirelings for a lowlife crowd of money-grubbing goons.
Those people have no pride.
-drl
|
Post #183,799
11/9/04 3:50:44 PM
|
Oh, you fool, you . . .
Don't you know that's "hearsay evidence"? Observing that all the ice that was there is gone now is simply not scientific.
Of course, if you can pull out a doctorate from a prestigious university, 3 reams of meaningless statistics you've deliberately misinterpreted, and prove you've never worked a day of your life at a "real world" job, perhaps we could reconsider.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #183,800
11/9/04 3:51:14 PM
|
Counterpoint...
I don't think they're arguing that the ice isn't disappearing. I think they're arguing that we don't know that humans have caused it in its entirety.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #183,801
11/9/04 3:55:30 PM
|
'In it's entirety'
It has been scientifically measured that a bird took a dump on the ice in 1997, causing "significant melt" so there's no way humans can be responsible "in its entirety".
What will be "in its entirety" is a sudden dramatic climatic shift causing extreme dislocation of agriculture and national economies. Evidence is these things happen very quickly and may be accompanied by tremendous storms, so Florida, hold on to your hat.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #183,803
11/9/04 4:08:07 PM
|
Lower third of Florida
will need more than their hat, unless it's to bail out the boat.
It'll be interesting to see what the masses do to the Titans of Industry once they figure out just how badly we're all screwed.
--\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca *\n* [link|http://consultron.ca|http://consultron.ca] [link|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] *\n* Kingston Ontario Canada [link|news://news.consultron.ca|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Post #183,805
11/9/04 4:18:28 PM
|
Clinton caused it.
He had SEX in the WHITE HOUSE and now GOD is PUNISHING US.
Four more years!
Imric's Tips for Living
- Paranoia Is a Survival Trait
- Pessimists are never disappointed - but sometimes, if they are very lucky, they can be pleasantly surprised...
- Even though everyone is out to get you, it doesn't matter unless you let them win.
|
Nothing is as simple as it seems in the beginning,
As hopeless as it seems in the middle,
Or as finished as it seems in the end.
|
|
Post #183,808
11/9/04 4:37:48 PM
|
I'll make popcorn
--
Chris Altmann
|
Post #183,806
11/9/04 4:22:39 PM
|
I'm not saying I agree.
Just that I don't think they're denying that the ice is actually melting.
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #183,812
11/9/04 5:29:53 PM
|
Yup.
There are 2, er 3 issues.
1) Is the ice melting? Y/N
Most people would say Y.
2) Is the melting unusual? Y/N
It is on the last 100-200 year or so timescale, but it's not clear if it is on other time scales. Scientists have to answer this.
3) Is the melting caused by what humans have done and are doing to the environment? Y/N
This is where it gets hairy. Some say yes; some say no; some say we don't know and won't know until we do more studies and shouldn't change economic policy until we do; some say we don't know but the risk is so large that we have to act as if we do know. Scientists and politicians have to answer this.
I'm in the "we don't know, we need more studies, and we should take the risk seriously but not exaggerate it" camp. I remember in grade school that we were taught that the next ice age was just around the corner. And I'm also given pause by the recent controversy about the [link|http://www.techcentralstation.com/102704F.html|"hockey stick"] temperature measurements/extrapolations. We need to know more, there's no doubt, but we shouldn't take the problem lightly.
Cheers,
Scott.
(Who realizes that there are some scenarios where ice ages can result from too much CO2 in the atmosphere.)
|
Post #183,819
11/9/04 6:11:39 PM
|
Don't forget...
4) If so, we should quickly sign an agreement hamstringing the economies of the west while giving a completely free ride to China and Southeast Asia where the issues of pollution are getting worse instead of better.
[link|http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/08/12/asia.haze/|Brown is a good color!] But we have to make sure Kansas is safe!
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
