Global Warming?

[IslandTractor]

Is there room beside yours? AGW hard core believers that see no other possibilities in a universe of possibilities are certainly using up a lot of the world's available sand!

It is not a question of believer vs non believer. The question is whether you follow the progress of climate science, whichever way it takes us, or if you choose to take a closed minded position based primarily on your political views. I don't think I qualify as "AGW hardcore" and I sure hope I am not as close minded as the naysayers who issue proclamations regarding the gullibility of those who take a position that is supported by the vast majority of professional climate scientists. We don't yet have an obviously correct and complete theory or model yet but that is no reason to reject the current state of the art models. I would remind you that we don't yet have a full understanding of cancer but that is no reason to sit on the sidelines and refuse less than perfect therapy. You go with the best assessment you can put together using the best available data and best trained minds to interpret that data. It's called science. There is a strong anti intellectual strain amongst those who protest that scientists are all biased or protecting their gravy train. Wouldn't that also hold true for cancer researchers, NASA engineers, etc etc. look back at the history of science, the anti intellectual forces are virtually always proven wrong in the end. Science, done properly with open minded criticism and experimentation has so far never failed to come to conclusions that turn out to be close enough to reality or truth that we can act reasonably. To state plainly that "AGW is a hoax" is simply anti intellectual. We don't know yet whether it is absolutely the case but a preponderance of evidence as interpreted by those in the field seems to raise the likelihood that AGW is real. To argue that we need further confirmation is just saying the science is unfinished. To plainly deny AGW today is either naive, stupid, or reflects a willingness to ignore science for political reasons.

 

[tcreeley]

I remember reading years ago that due to the large amount of fish netted, the larger ones were being removed from the gene pool while the smaller ones became the majority of the gene pool. The small ones would manage to slip through the net openings while the larger ones couldn't. Because of this, the offspring were also shrinking in size.

I also recall that it was claimed that due to over fishing the world's fish stocks would be in danger of collapsing around 2050.


Sounds like the people doing this study (Oxygen-starved fish......) took old studies and simply inserted their own reason, AGW, for the causes.

If there were no GW, the fish would still shrink in size and would still be depleted unless remedial actions were take.

Maine has a lobster fishery. But its ground fisheries collapsed 20-25 years ago.
Here is a good link with overfishing info.
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/statusoffisheries/2012/second/MapOverfishedStocksCY_Q2_2012.pdf

 

[tcreeley]

How many deaths would another Little Ice Age cause? How about a full on glacial event?

So do you live in the past, or today? We deal with the problems we face, and we solve them.

 

[BurgerSteak]

.
Global cooling / warming / climate change. A long time ago there was another indellible belief postulated by professional scientists. Naysayers were considered heretics and were attacked aggressively. Naive, stupid, anti-intellectual, etc.

A remnant of these professional scientists remains in existence today.

The Flat Earth Society

.

 

[Mace Canute]

Well...this article is going to cause some debate no doubt!

Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it | Mail Online

 

[2LaneCruzer]

Well...this article is going to cause some debate no doubt!

Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it | Mail Online

I think this illustrates just what some of us have been saying in this thread, and although its tone is anti, it doesn't discount the possibility that AGW is lurking out there somewhere.

 

[IslandTractor]

Well...this article is going to cause some debate no doubt!

Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it | Mail Online

Last paragraph of that article: "So let’s be clear. Yes: global warming is real, and some of it at least has been caused by the CO2 emitted by fossil fuels. But the evidence is beginning to suggest that it may be happening much slower than the catastrophists have claimed – a conclusion with enormous policy implications."

So they conclude that AGW is real but perhaps not as rapid as earlier forecasts. That is a pretty good example of unfettered science collecting data and revising theory/model/predictions in a typically iterative process.

 

[BurgerSteak]

There is something similar in golf. They call it "mulligan". :laughing:

 

[IslandTractor]

There is something similar in golf. They call it "mulligan". :laughing:

Golf is not a bad analogy for how science functions. Mulligans are not so much part of the process but second, third, fourth shots towards the pin with each attempt getting closer to the hole until the ball finally drops. Incremental progress. Forward movement until you reach the hole (sorry Houston but it appears golf is also a commie conspiracy).

 

[EE_Bota]

"Maybe the real issue is that republicans are just stingy and don't give a da** about anyone else but themself. So what if the mile wide swath goes through town....sucks to be them doesn't it."

Isn't that really what's at the heart of the whole concept?

The underlying basis, is political viewpoint... and a desire to do away with the others and their viewpoint... because they aren't as human as you. Dehumanize the other viewpoints and those who hold them... because what you think is right... because you think it.

Not Science.

Non-sense.

Oops...I hate to do this to you, but based on a pattern in this thread, you are due, so here goes:

It's called science. Look it up.
Do you know anything about the scientific method?
Are you a member of the flat earth society?
So, what you're saying is that you hate the world, and all of the people, and especially babies and puppies.

I'll stop right there, but I think I have clued you in with my short expose that I am a very clever scientist for the purposes of this thread, and you better watch your step or I'll be theorizing about you again real soon.