What happened to global warming?

I think the current popular position overstates the importance of anthropogenic effects on climate. That's not to say they aren't happening. Climatology is a science in relative infancy. We should expect the odd revolution now and then.

It does strike me as slightly worrying that until recently those skeptical of climate change have been shouted down as if they were denying the holocaust. Come to think of it, it strikes me as worrying that people denying the holocaust get shouted down as if they were denying the holocaust.

What is to be gained by preventing people from airing badly conceved ideas? If anything, it presents an opportunity for those people that are knowledgeable in the subject to present their more rigorous arguments. Silencing alternative opinion is not winning the argument.

Edit: Global warming or no global warming - we need to work out what to do when the oil gets scarce and expensive.
 
Once again this forum astounds me. Too many members have strong opinions on subjects they know absolutely nothing about bar what that mistakenly diagnosed 'feeling' in their gut is trying to tell them.

Time and time again, members here have had this explained to them sufficiently and objectively; the facts have been laid down in front of them - but they still choose to treat the arena like a pick 'n' mix stand only choosing what they really want to digest. They refute scientific evidence in favour of Clarkson's tantrums and home-made conspiracy.

Amp38, I'm glad you tried as I really can't be bothered anymore, but you really are fighting against the tide on this one. It doesn't matter how much you tell most of the posters, or in what fashion - they will only believe what they want to believe and by and large that involves pretending that this big issue isn't really an issue at all and they can carry on with their selfish little lives. A lot of the vocal idiocy on this subject seems to stem from Motors' regulars anyway and let's be honest: I question the merit of a boyracer-come-petrolhead (always an exception to the rule, I know...) giving me 'lessons' on most subjects, let alone one to do with the Earth Sciences. Heck, it took me a year at university level to fully appreciate only a small area of the topic - so let's not expect miracles from the guy who gets most of his factoids from that weirdo down the pub.

/rant
 
Last edited:
Global warming is a bunch of crap, simple. More tax for the goverment, why should they care?
Look more into it and piece together story'sw from over the years an you'll reliae how much of a farce it is. Look at Al gore for example, 60% of his film is all opinions based on facts, and the rest is twisted facts or put into the wrong perspective.
 
Global warming or Climate Change as it's now called because Earth isn't actually warming up anymore is the new religion. It has now become a case that if you disagree with "Global Warming/Climate Change" you are an evil person who needs to be burned at the stake, no matter how much this is really no more than a fantasy.

As the the Earth is going through a localised bit of Global Cooling at the moment will this be the next buzz word the government will be ramming down our throats?
 
Last edited:
digipeep said:
Global warming or Climate Change as it's now called because Earth isn't actually warming up anymore is the new religion. If you disagree with it your are an evil person who needs to be burned at the stake.

As the the Earth is going through a localised bit of Global Cooling at the moment will this be the next buzz word the government will be ramming down our throats?
Click to expand...

I'm evil?
Are you a scientist, have you done field work, research? Been to the antartic and seen the ice caps? I would presume no.

So i'll rest my case.
 
No you missed my point, if your don't believe in any of this nonsense then as a non-believer you automatically become the evil person. I'll edit my comment above to make that clear.
 
We have been indoctrinated to believe that anthropogenic global warming is occuring, however, there is no conclusive scientific evidence that this is the case.

Why, when they are funded by the govt, would the researchers say "Well no, climate change is not related to Co2 emissions, and the human race has no bearing on it"

Funds = cancelled, no more research budget, no job, bye!

It's best to string everyone along, as the carbon taxing is £££'s in the govts pocket.
 
dave_beast said:
We have been indoctrinated to believe that anthropogenic global warming is occuring, however, there is no conclusive scientific evidence that this is the case.

Why, when they are funded by the govt, would the researchers say "Well no, climate change is not related to Co2 emissions, and the human race has no bearing on it"

Funds = cancelled, no more research budget, no job, bye!

It's best to string everyone along, as the carbon taxing is £££'s in the govts pocket.
Click to expand...

+1

Not much more to add to that.
 
digipeep said:
+1

Not much more to add to that.
Click to expand...

I've read a number of story's of researchers spending time down in the artic etc, with animals researching and photographing, claiming whilst down there, there hasn't been any change what so ever.
And i mean over a period of 7 years none stop down there.

Although im not saying these are 100% correct, putting the puzzle together with a lot of these story's and they seem a little bit more believable than goverment backed projects.
 
That's the problem, research bias, it seems that all have there own bias and slant findings to suit their needs.

The climate changes on it's own, it always has, always will. Co2 is a constant, we don't produce it, we move it around. Eventually, it will return to it's natural state.

BTW, the worlds oceans release 98% of the Co2, and we release 2% worldwide, are we really making a difference?

Al Gore fiddled the hockey stick to show that temp follows Co2 when in fact, it's the other way around.
 
No!

It's the only accurate data available that can be relied on, anything older is considered non-accurate, and therefore would not be suitable for research (in other words, would not be beneficial to prove AGW)
 
unknownsock said:
Scientists are always reluctant to mention that mini ice-age we had couple of hundreds years back also. Wonder why this is?
Click to expand...

because

1) global warming is occurring

2) the temperature of region X has been decreasing for the last 200 years

both of these statements can be true at the same time, while most people would say this is contradictory, it is not, and so every single thing people dont understand is messed up, spawning random views which somehow have ended up on this thread, and it is annoying
 
We in the UK are going to hear nothing more than Global Warming/Climate Change for the next 5 years and how we must protect the planet. Do you imagine the emerging economies of China, India, Brazil, Indonesia will be doing the same. Those countries are industrialising on a scale far larger than anything we have done on this small island in the past.

The whole Global Warming scare story is about our government raising taxes nothing more.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom