Global warming...
-
But they haven't all signed a document saying racism is OK. The people who claim the documents were changed are the Ney York Times, The Times, CNN, The Guardian, etc etc. In other words, most of the major media sources in the world. Michael Crichtons book may be a good read but it isn't a current scientific document signed by most of the world's climate scientists. You cannot give links to any equivalent documents countering the claims made by the scientists therefore I must assume you don't have any and therefore I must assume you are speaking from a personal perspective, which is fine. It just isn't a basis for disputing a scientific document. How do the scientists stand to profit from this report exactly?
fakefur wrote: But they haven't all signed a document saying racism is OK But the ones who would, would be racists. Like the ones signing your document are ones who believe that the sky is falling. fakefur wrote: In other words, most of the major media sources in the world. But does this prove that the sky is falling ? I have no doubt that there is a vested interest on one side in minimising reporting of global warming and it's effects. The question is, do you accept that the other side has a vested interest in exaggerating it ? fakefur wrote: Michael Crichtons book may be a good read but it isn't a current scientific document signed by most of the world's climate scientists. I've not looked yet, are you saying that a significant majority of the thousands of climate scientests have signed this thing ? Is there a central register so you can check those numbers ? Michael Crichtons books all have their basis in science, and contain extensive bibliographies to provide further reading, from credibile scientific sources, backing up the science around which he builds his stories. That's why I said to read the bibliography, not the book. fakefur wrote: You cannot give links to any equivalent documents countering the claims made by the scientists therefore I must assume you don't have any and therefore I must assume you are speaking from a personal perspective, which is fine. It just isn't a basis for disputing a scientific document. I have no links, because the credible scientists I know, I know in person. I don't read much beyond that, although I read some of the Crichton stuff. Just because I have no online sources, doesn't mean I have no sources, or that I'm basing my comments on personal opinion only. fakefur wrote: How do the scientists stand to profit from this report exactly? I didn't say that they didn't believe it, only that you're only looking at one side of the coin. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ P.S. I've read your links, and you seem to have missed a point. No-one is arguing that global warming is happening, as such. The issues are: are we causing it, will it continue, will it cause us harm, and is there anything we can do about it ? Here's one quick link, took me seconds to find it: http://www.sciencedaily.com/release
-
fakefur wrote: OK. So you don't actually have an answer to the allegation you made. If you can't figure it out that explains how you are so easily dooped into the 'Global Warming' bunk. fakefur wrote: Maybe if you don't actually have anything worth saying you shouldn't say things just to make a noise no? The other thing I've noticed in reading many of your posts is that you are undoubtedly one of the rudest. Following your responses to the arguments you have no ability to join a good heated debate in any reasonable manner. I don't mind going back and forth with someone with some wit, sense and knowledge but you aren't exibiting either. If you want to argue 'Global Warming' in the future take it to the SoapBox where it is supposed to be. Don't pollute the lounge. ed ~"Watch your thoughts; they become your words. Watch your words they become your actions. Watch your actions; they become your habits. Watch your habits; they become your character. Watch your character; it becomes your destiny." -Frank Outlaw.
-
fakefur wrote: But they haven't all signed a document saying racism is OK But the ones who would, would be racists. Like the ones signing your document are ones who believe that the sky is falling. fakefur wrote: In other words, most of the major media sources in the world. But does this prove that the sky is falling ? I have no doubt that there is a vested interest on one side in minimising reporting of global warming and it's effects. The question is, do you accept that the other side has a vested interest in exaggerating it ? fakefur wrote: Michael Crichtons book may be a good read but it isn't a current scientific document signed by most of the world's climate scientists. I've not looked yet, are you saying that a significant majority of the thousands of climate scientests have signed this thing ? Is there a central register so you can check those numbers ? Michael Crichtons books all have their basis in science, and contain extensive bibliographies to provide further reading, from credibile scientific sources, backing up the science around which he builds his stories. That's why I said to read the bibliography, not the book. fakefur wrote: You cannot give links to any equivalent documents countering the claims made by the scientists therefore I must assume you don't have any and therefore I must assume you are speaking from a personal perspective, which is fine. It just isn't a basis for disputing a scientific document. I have no links, because the credible scientists I know, I know in person. I don't read much beyond that, although I read some of the Crichton stuff. Just because I have no online sources, doesn't mean I have no sources, or that I'm basing my comments on personal opinion only. fakefur wrote: How do the scientists stand to profit from this report exactly? I didn't say that they didn't believe it, only that you're only looking at one side of the coin. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ P.S. I've read your links, and you seem to have missed a point. No-one is arguing that global warming is happening, as such. The issues are: are we causing it, will it continue, will it cause us harm, and is there anything we can do about it ? Here's one quick link, took me seconds to find it: http://www.sciencedaily.com/release
"But the ones who would". Are we basing this on pure supposition then? If there is such an easy to find rebuttal of the report issued then please show me links to it. I expect the abuse and ridicule I am getting here. It amuses me to see such intelligent people so distressed at being unable to answer simple questions. Very funny.
-
Oh please don't hurt my feelings any more! ed ~"Watch your thoughts; they become your words. Watch your words they become your actions. Watch your actions; they become your habits. Watch your habits; they become your character. Watch your character; it becomes your destiny." -Frank Outlaw.
-
Oh please don't hurt my feelings any more! ed ~"Watch your thoughts; they become your words. Watch your words they become your actions. Watch your actions; they become your habits. Watch your habits; they become your character. Watch your character; it becomes your destiny." -Frank Outlaw.
-
"But the ones who would". Are we basing this on pure supposition then? If there is such an easy to find rebuttal of the report issued then please show me links to it. I expect the abuse and ridicule I am getting here. It amuses me to see such intelligent people so distressed at being unable to answer simple questions. Very funny.
fakefur wrote: "But the ones who would". Are we basing this on pure supposition then? You are. A group of scientists who believe that global warming is a problem have signed a petition saying so. In your eyes, this proves everything you want it to. In my eyes, it proves that some scientists believe the available data about global warming is a sign of impending catastrophe, but as I said from my experience, and showed with a link, some scientists disagree. Most scientists believed in eugenics, including some really bright people, about 100 years ago. Should we revive that belief ? fakefur wrote: If there is such an easy to find rebuttal of the report issued then please show me links to it. I'm tempted to repost my link. What's wrong with you ? Are you illiterate ? 'I expect abuse and ridicule' means that the second anyone disagrees with you, you refuse to listen, and play the pariah. Here it is AGAIN in simple terms. The world is currently getting warmer Although some ice caps are growing in size, and the effect is not happening everywhere Nevertheless, the overall effect is one of warming, and some people make a lot of money lobbying for changes to things like our rate of fossil fuel consumption, because they believe this is a man made effect, and that it endangers life on this planet However, the warming was being recorded before we started burning fossil fuels to any great degree And it is a natural state of affairs for our planet to warm and cool Many scientists realise this, but their findings are drowned out by a media that would prefer to claim the sky is falling, as that sort of news attracts more viewers/sells more papers/generates more hits Many people find it easy to demonise big business ( which I agree isn't going to act in all our interests ), and to assume that unless something is done, our planet will be left a smoking ruin. This is very unlikely to happen. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
fakefur wrote: "But the ones who would". Are we basing this on pure supposition then? You are. A group of scientists who believe that global warming is a problem have signed a petition saying so. In your eyes, this proves everything you want it to. In my eyes, it proves that some scientists believe the available data about global warming is a sign of impending catastrophe, but as I said from my experience, and showed with a link, some scientists disagree. Most scientists believed in eugenics, including some really bright people, about 100 years ago. Should we revive that belief ? fakefur wrote: If there is such an easy to find rebuttal of the report issued then please show me links to it. I'm tempted to repost my link. What's wrong with you ? Are you illiterate ? 'I expect abuse and ridicule' means that the second anyone disagrees with you, you refuse to listen, and play the pariah. Here it is AGAIN in simple terms. The world is currently getting warmer Although some ice caps are growing in size, and the effect is not happening everywhere Nevertheless, the overall effect is one of warming, and some people make a lot of money lobbying for changes to things like our rate of fossil fuel consumption, because they believe this is a man made effect, and that it endangers life on this planet However, the warming was being recorded before we started burning fossil fuels to any great degree And it is a natural state of affairs for our planet to warm and cool Many scientists realise this, but their findings are drowned out by a media that would prefer to claim the sky is falling, as that sort of news attracts more viewers/sells more papers/generates more hits Many people find it easy to demonise big business ( which I agree isn't going to act in all our interests ), and to assume that unless something is done, our planet will be left a smoking ruin. This is very unlikely to happen. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
Clearly neither you nor the rest of the people who responded to my post even read the links I supplied. If you had this conversation would not have happened. You are quite content to respond to what you thought I said and have a nice discussion all by yourselves. Go right ahead. Like I said before - belief is not necessary for facts to be facts. They simply are. Carry on with the rest fiddling while Rome burns. You all deserve what happens anyways I guess. Now this conversation has become tedious in the extreme.
-
No, he's saying that you should look beyond the hype, and investigate the facts. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
What, and ruin a good rant? :rolleyes:
Firefox? CodeProject? GreaseMonkey? A better Life?
-
Clearly neither you nor the rest of the people who responded to my post even read the links I supplied. If you had this conversation would not have happened. You are quite content to respond to what you thought I said and have a nice discussion all by yourselves. Go right ahead. Like I said before - belief is not necessary for facts to be facts. They simply are. Carry on with the rest fiddling while Rome burns. You all deserve what happens anyways I guess. Now this conversation has become tedious in the extreme.
I read your links. This is the sort of crap that shows you to be beyond reason. Anyone with a dissenting view is 'fiddling while Rome burns'. You hypocrite. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++
-
Huh? Does that mean you have no comment except trying to imply that I'm not being rational? Is that your idea of reasoned discussion? :confused:
You, sir, are trying your hardest to get a flame war going with anyone and everyone who'll reply. You'd have better luck if you tried to make this a bit less obvious. :|
Ave Shog9, CP-addicti te salutant! - K(arl), The Soapbox
-
As I asked Christian below - Can you give me links to a document or news story or report where many of the worlds top climate scientists have disagreed with the current risks of global warming?
It's late and I haven't read through these, but after a quick google search here you go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy[^] http://www.cato.org/dailys/04-20-04.html[^] http://www.junkscience.com/[^] The wikipedia one seems to be unbias upon a quick glance.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
Clearly neither you nor the rest of the people who responded to my post even read the links I supplied. If you had this conversation would not have happened. You are quite content to respond to what you thought I said and have a nice discussion all by yourselves. Go right ahead. Like I said before - belief is not necessary for facts to be facts. They simply are. Carry on with the rest fiddling while Rome burns. You all deserve what happens anyways I guess. Now this conversation has become tedious in the extreme.
You are proving Chrisitian's point quite well. We're not a bunch of morons (we're programmers, *smart* people) so it's only natural for most of us to investigate on our own. Don't believe everything they tell you. Investigate the other points of view for yourself.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
Well, guess I'll have to go find someone with a little snap to have a conversation with since the only thing you've added to this debate is: You're saying that all those scientists have got it wrong? In fact there are several folks below waiting for you to add something to the debate and the only thing I've see from you is your smart @$$ remarks. Must be nice to be able to hide behind an email address. ed ~"Watch your thoughts; they become your words. Watch your words they become your actions. Watch your actions; they become your habits. Watch your habits; they become your character. Watch your character; it becomes your destiny." -Frank Outlaw.
-
fakefur wrote: But hey! Don't Let facts spoil the gas-guzzling party guys. I live in England. That's a fact. It's also a fact that 10,000 years ago (that's a blink of an eye in geological terms) the north of England was under 1KM (over half a mile) of ice. Here's another fact for you. 3,000 years ago, people were living in the Outer Hebrides, (islands at the northern tip of England), where it was 3 degrees warmer than it is now. The world changes. Are you saying that those changes were caused by cavemen in Jeep Cherokees?
Graham Bradshaw wrote: people were living in the Outer Hebrides, (islands at the northern tip of England) Excuse me? The environmental argument you're making is fine, but your political geography is well dodgy. The Outer Hebrides are not "at the northern tip of England". They're to the west of Scotland, and not really very close to the English border. Gavin Greig "Haw, you're no deid," girned Charon. "Get aff ma boat or ah'll report ye." Matthew Fitt - The Hoose O Haivers: The Twelve Trauchles O Heracles.