What happened to global warming?

Freefaller · 14 Oct 2009 at 08:01

Global warming from what I've read about is a myth, though climate change is very true and happens naturally in cycles over 10s of thousands of years and more. Humans undoubtedly contribute a detremental effect on the environment, but I think the figures were something meagre like 3%? Still it's more than we should be, but at the same time I really don't care. What I care about is the fuss made about energy saving this, fuel efficient that, recycle more, eat less, waste less, blah blah blah. I will not be dictated as to what I can or can't do outside of the premise of law... which unfortunately most people feel the same way about - hence new laws and obligatory taxes which will no doubt line the pockets of some pointless endeavour to "rid the world of global warming" du-du-duuuuhhhhh. Oh please.

Anyway, I'm doing my bit, I'm eating cows, and other dead animals stopping them rotting away causing methane. I'm single handedly saving the world. :cool:

Uriel · 14 Oct 2009 at 08:44

Anyway - assuming greenhouse gases do have such a detremental effect - the credit crunch has done far more to arrest the upward march of CO2 levels than a bunch of political waffling was likely to in the short term.

Freefaller · 14 Oct 2009 at 08:46

True good point - I'll only be going on 4 plane holidays this year

unknownsock · 14 Oct 2009 at 08:50

Freefaller said:
Anyway, I'm doing my bit, I'm eating cows, and other dead animals stopping them rotting away causing methane. I'm single handedly saving the world.

Sawell · 14 Oct 2009 at 09:02

Humans are naive to think they could even come close to destroying this planet. It's been here a hell of a lot longer than us and will be around long after we kill ourselves. It's aided and harboured the creation of life, it has seen evolutionary bounds we can only estimate and knows the truths of all our speculations.

rypt · 14 Oct 2009 at 09:10

Nix said:
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

If global warming (or climate change as the new catchphrase is) is so important then why is nothing being done about it?
We keep getting taxed more and more on our "polluting" activities, yet and disproportionate rates.... the motorist pays far more tax than industry (and aviation) while producing far fewer "greenhouse gasses".
None (or very little) of these taxes are going towards payment for research towards better battery technology, nuclear fusion, or towards building new nuclear reactors - most of the money goes into the general government benefit-scounger pot.
So tell me, if climate change is so important, and plenty of "powerfull" people are saying so (Al Gore, Prescott) ... why is the tax money not put to good use by thier "mates" in power?

slambo69 · 14 Oct 2009 at 09:56

Sawell said:
Humans are naive to think they could even come close to destroying this planet. It's been here a hell of a lot longer than us and will be around long after we kill ourselves. It's aided and harboured the creation of life, it has seen evolutionary bounds we can only estimate and knows the truths of all our speculations.

Its not about destroying it, but about making it almost inhabitable - for humans at least.

Sawell · 14 Oct 2009 at 10:03

slambo69 said:
Its not about destroying it, but about making it almost inhabitable - for humans at least.

Exactly, so people need to stop saying we're 'destroying the planet'. Because we're not, just our existence (if any of it is actually true). I don't understand why it's not impossible for the world to just be changing on its own. Just because we don't understand it? Hahahahaha. Since when have humans truly understood anything anyway. We don't even know how women work, but the earth? Ah yeah we're all over it!

Amp34 · 14 Oct 2009 at 12:16

digipeep said:
Tute, when the global warming fascists get annoyed in an argument on this issue they love nothing more than insulting people and throwing their toys out of the pram. Nix is a prime example. It's sad that otherwise intelligent people like Nix fall for this modern day fairy story.

What he's trying to say is you have two main groups in this thread, the ones that know practically nothing about the subject (who may have got some info from the sun) and spout on about it being a myth, then those that have actually spent some time studying it in academia, who generally agree that is is occuring... Why would that make him mad?

regulus said:
You watch over the next day or two some 'experts' here would be linking or copy and pasting you regurgitated 'facts' to supports their point of view. There are just as many 'facts' supporting the non-excistance of global warming than there is supporting it. Pick a side you want to believe in, go forth and argue it

I wouldn't class myself as an 'expert', however I guess that was aimed prtially at me... In which case I could easily provide some links to papers from places like www.sciencedirect.com which are written by scientists and peer reviewed, finally being published in well reputed journals, however I can't be bothered because 1. you won't be able to access them, and 2. there will be a myriad of links to websites disputing the facts, probably written by someone who has no real background, using third hand information and certainly not peer reviewed. The first thing a scientist learns is that not all sources are as reliable as others...

Not that i'm disputing for one minute that there aren't papers on there that discredit global warming either, there's just less of them.

Messiah Khan · 14 Oct 2009 at 12:36

thecremeegg said:
Exactly. I'm pretty sure I read that whilst the polar icecaps are "melting", there are other icecaps that are becoming larger so its swings and roundabouts

Huh?

An what 'icecaps' are these then? The icecaps are at the poles! And as the world is heating up, they are thinning and breaking up. And as the icecaps contain a large amount of water, this water mixes with the oceans' water, desalinating it, potentially causing the gulf stream to shut down etc etc. Not really swings and roundabouts. The world IS heating up, there is no question about that. The question is how much humans are to blame for the increase.

regulus · 14 Oct 2009 at 18:06

Amp34 said:
I wouldn't class myself as an 'expert', however I guess that was aimed prtially at me... In which case I could easily provide some links to papers from places like www.sciencedirect.com which are written by scientists and peer reviewed,

We all know those peer reviews are so honest

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/05/03/merck-and-elsevier-p.html

You actually think not one scientist speaking for Global Warming have never been bought? Not even one?

PS, Wasn't aimed at you, I didn't read the thread as I read the 112 previous threads on Global Warming and it's usually the same. The ones that believe speaks down on those that want more than politicians flapping their lips on TV.

Tute · 14 Oct 2009 at 19:44

Amp34 said:
What he's trying to say is you have two main groups in this thread, the ones that know practically nothing about the subject (who may have got some info from the sun) and spout on about it being a myth, then those that have actually spent some time studying it in academia, who generally agree that is is occuring... Why would that make him mad?

Because his post, in a nutshell, is that "people who believe global warming is a myth are idiots".

I don't see why i'm an idiot just because I don't sign up for what I consider to be socialist brainwashing. I would consider that to be common sense.

Jet · 14 Oct 2009 at 19:58

With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

Chimerical · 14 Oct 2009 at 20:05

Tute said:
Because his post, in a nutshell, is that "people who believe global warming is a myth are idiots".

I don't see why i'm an idiot just because I don't sign up for what I consider to be socialist brainwashing. I would consider that to be common sense.

Its really not socialist brainwashing.

Uriel · 14 Oct 2009 at 23:12

See the icecaps in Antarctica from this 2005 Science article? The ones in yellow to brown were growing from 1992 to 2003.

While I personally believe that anthropogenic climate change is important and we should do what we can to limit it, the reality just isn't simple.

Edit: Gah - image just not working. Linky http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Lxqre8hMG...5Rx-yGJ8/s1600-h/weatherAntarcticIceTrend.jpg (note this is from a 'climate skeptic blog' although the original source is an article in the journal Science)

Tute · 14 Oct 2009 at 23:25

I really didn't want to get into this at length as tbh, there's as much evidence for as against, nobody seems to be impartial so it really does come down to what you believe.

I'm happy if some of you think that humans are causing climate change - sadly I don't for two good reasons.

1. There's nothing conclusive either way, so i'm not going to believe something that's unproven.
2. This is classic scaremongering at it's best, and typical of the governments of the world, especially ours. Rather than do something that might actually make a difference, they're happy to just use it to milk the motorist (amongst other things). What a shocker!

Jet said:
With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_global_warming

There's very little in the way of impartial talk in there.

Chimerical said:
Its really not socialist brainwashing.

I think it is. Apologise to your friend Gordon for me.

Uriel said:
See the icecaps in Antarctica from this 2005 Science article? The ones in yellow to brown were growing from 1992 to 2003.

While I personally believe that anthropogenic climate change is important and we should do what we can to limit it, the reality just isn't simple.

Edit: Gah - image just not working. Linky http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_Lxqre8hMG...5Rx-yGJ8/s1600-h/weatherAntarcticIceTrend.jpg (note this is from a 'climate skeptic blog' although the original source is an article in the journal Science)

I'm happy to accept that the climate on the planet is changing. I just don't believe that humans caused it, are causing it, or can stop it. I believe it's just natural solar cycles from the sun, and evenually temperatures will drop again of their own accord.

regulus · 14 Oct 2009 at 23:59

Tute said:
lol.

lol.

This post is 100% lol.

He is quite funny when he gets on his high horse. Think he mentioned once that he took a geography course/degree so watch out!

Edit. Also google the Harvard authored article on Al Gore (one of the mouthpieces of GW) and see how he DON'T practice what he preaches.

digipeep · 15 Oct 2009 at 00:24

The other big favourite with the global warming/climate change fascists is that if you argue against their point of view you must be a Sun/Daily Mail reader. I dispair with these people. If you truely believe in this nonsence then present your arguments and stop insulting people who disagree.

timaloy · 15 Oct 2009 at 00:29

its not something that really fusses me but my 2 pennies worth -in the past 10-15 years the amount of snow fall has droped so far that this year we had 2 days of snow ,compared to 10 years ago we would be snowed in for weeks every year .its a sharp fall in a short time

drunkenmaster · 15 Oct 2009 at 00:46

I love how people talk about respect for the planet, destroying the planet and treating it badly.

Firstly, its rock, chemicals and minerals, who the heck cares what state its in, secondly, if we damage the enviroment to the point it becomes unliveable, its only for us, we die out, lol at us, the planet survives and goes on to change over time as its always done, no harm no foul, we can only harm ourselves, nothing else.

Thirdly, I'll be dead long before the planet becomes unliveable, and so will my kids, and my kids kids, infact my family will most likely stop because of a large scale singular event, massive world war, meteor impact etc, etc.

But the main crux of the situation is, for all the "evidence" being gained, the problem is its not really evidence, its just data. WE don't have long term uber accurate data, and as per usual stupid scientists are panicking as they see fluctuations they haven't seen before, but thats larger because they haven't been able to see them before. AS someone said, the field of science involved, is in its infancy, to pretend they can accurate interpret the data they've only recently started to collect is naive at best and flat out stupid at worst.

THe problem is, armed with lots of fancy new numbers they are recording that they go looking for in the first place to back up their theories, well you can prove almost anything when you research as blindly and narrowly as that.

Frankly right now, its a non issue, its really not effecting us in any way at all, we can't interpret or use the data being collected right now and we can't effect meaningful world change without destroying the economy which would plunge the entire planet into crisis and eventually wars, so again, who the hell cares. We quite literally couldnt' do anything about it now anyway, but we don't know if anything needs doing yet either.

We've got plenty of time for the field to move out of its "infancy" stop being overly biased, learn to gather real data and learn to understand what they are seeing.

We as a race of people just have a tendancy to see any minute change and instantly over react and panic assuming its not normal and it must be stopped.