Do you believe in man-made global warming?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=109837
Printed Date: November 22 2024 at 10:26
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Do you believe in man-made global warming?
Posted By: Logan
Subject: Do you believe in man-made global warming?
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 18:59
|
Read the poll question before voting. I'm amazed at how many people deny the evidence for man-made (or shall I at least say sped up by industrial technology) global (greenhouse) warming, and I'm very skeptical about the motives of many of them when they do. I don't quite like the term man-made, but I think you know what I mean. "The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive" (Donald Trump). Yes, I do think he's full of hot air. It doesn't make historical sense either, since the concept of greenhouse gasses/ man induced climate change and global warming is such an old one. I watched this whole debate on youtube earlier, but here's the relevant bit: Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts has said "It is clear that climate change is a scam" and has said that NASA has corrupted data, there is no empirical evidence that people are causing global warming, and the climate models are wrong. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Replies:
Posted By: mechanicalflattery
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 19:29
| To be fair, there's a crucial distinction between asserting that climate change is a hoax/conspiracy versus simply asserting it to be bad science. I don't believe either of those, but deniers of man-made climate change don't necessarily have to be conspiracy theorists. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 19:34
|
I would say the term Climate Change is not ideal because the climate does change over time and has nothing to do with man, but that is a somewhat different discussion. Emissions that cause ozone damage do exist and clearly have a marked impact. Pollution in general is a big problem we've always faced, even before the industrial era. My question is, how did Los Angeles clean up their air? When I was a kid and you'd fly in to L.A. you literally could not see it from the air due to the massive brown cloud that perpetually hung over the city. Now the smog is much less visible except on certain days. De-industrialization? (in SoCal, really?). Fewer cars on the road? (let's be serious). I mean I know they probably had some EPA mandate to do something but it was a pretty impressive clean-up in a fairly short time. ------------- "Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 19:53
Agree that the term climate change is not ideal. As for LA, the introduction of catalytic converters had a big effect on lessening the smog (such technology didn't stop cars from polluting, but it did lessen the impact).
I know, and to be clear the poll and poll question is just a fun accessory to discussion on climate change/ greenhouse warming. Whatever the skeptic, I'm skeptical about those who deny it. My parents had a friend who invented a fuel cell for hybrid vehicles that was being touted as more environmentally friendly, and I was amazed when speaking to him that he didn't believe that carbon dioxide emissions were causing climate change. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
mechanicalflattery wrote:Posted By: Pastmaster
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 20:22
|
Yes, there's scientific proof that technological advancements since the industrial age have at least partly caused global warming. There is, however, also a pattern of climate change that the Earth has naturally gone in, so it's not like we've completely altered the atmosphere. To believe humans have the power to do that in such a relatively short time is absurd. I think one reason so many people don't believe in global warming is because of how blown out of proportion it's been in the past. Just look at how wrong Al Gore's predictions were. Oh crap, I posted something serious. Better sh*tpost.  |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 21:42
|
Absolutely there's scientific proof that technology has contributed to global warming and that there are natural climate change patterns. Al Gore is a lawyer and a politician rather than a scientist and I don't know who interpreted the data for him (to be honest, I've never really followed him). Humans have the power to do a lot of damage, and in the case of global warming, if you pump out as much CO2 as we have it's going to contribute to a greenhouse effect -- made worse by increased icemelt so less sunlight is reflected and methane is released in the tundra etc. etc. I think most people, at least here, know the basic science. What worries me is that the process of greenhouse warming can speed up exponentially due to various factors. It is interesting to think that if there were no CO2 in the atmosphere then the earth would freeze. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 22:54
|
It's real. There's no conspiracy. The evidence has been verified and published and this debate is effectivey over. It's only kept alive by people like Alex Jones, Donald Trump and David Icke. Time to move on. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 23:29
|
Of course I felt pretty silly even doing this topic since the evidence is so overwhelming, and I tried to approach it with some humour (of the absurdist kind). There has been some conspiracy when it's come to man induced greenhouse warming deniers. For the next one I might do one that is a little more charged: Is evolution a hoax perpetrated by God? I would love to move on, but I think humanity must ask itself one very important question, how do we convince Ted Nugent? "Global warming is a fraud. Watch Glenn Beck" (Ted Nugent). ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 23:36
I'd be more concerned about convincing Donald Trump. Nugent was a no one even when he was a 'someone'....  I have to say, though, I'm kind of on George Carlins page regarding "white bourgeois liberals" who want to 'save the planet' The planet is absolutely fine, it's the people who are f***ed. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 04 2017 at 23:51
Brilliant Carlin quote. And just to pad out my post since I have nothing really to say, most people don't care about global warming, or have different priorities. I'm not really surprised that people could support someone who supports such irrational notions and denies evidence. I mean I am no Hillary fan (not that Duff is that bad), but I'd take her over Ted Nugent any day. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 00:08
|
... as long as America does take stupid to a whole new level, like by electing a climate change denier to a position of power and influence, we'll be fine... ------------- What? |
Posted By: Mascodagama
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 02:05
| I just voted the wrong way because the question in the actual poll reverses the question in the thread title. Yeah, I didn't read the poll question, but why do it that way to start with? |
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 02:25
|
A conspiracy, a hoax, a scam or just poppycock... one of these four it should be, albeit not made in China. I always have the idea that this smells a bit too much like science subdued to politics. I voted the Yes option for other reasons than Mascodagama. OK, global temperatures may be a bit beyond my scope, and at a local level the monthly average temperatures have been rising more than one degree Centigrade in some months during the last three or four decades, but I have my doubts, I cannot help it, even though the average time lapse between two editions of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elfstedentocht" rel="nofollow - Elfstedentocht has increased (the last one was held twenty years and one day ago, but that is not yet a record, this is still 22 years and 34 days, 1963-85; the "global warming" started in '87 or '88 as far as I'm informed). Weather update: a minimum temperature of -8°C is predicted for tonight at De Bilt, NL's main weather station
.------------- 
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 04:18
|
Yes, I believe it's true, at least to some extent. However, what can be done about it with most of America in denial (its not just Trump/Republicans) and China being the world's factory is something, IMO, that can, sadly, never be rectified. And to be fair, with so many American jobs related to generating some form of pollution and waste, tighter regulations regarding the minimization of green house gases, etc., will just be fodder to send what remaining jobs America has to unregulated countries overseas. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: emigre80
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 06:00
|
People say "Oh, I'm not a scientist so I can't judge." Well, my husband is a scientist and he can judge. It's real and since the GOP will do everything it can to roll back regulations and get out of global agreements to fix it, we're screwed. By the time the Democrats get back in and start doing anything about it, too much damage will be done and it will be irreversible. The planet will probably last out our lifetimes, but things will be tough for our children and grandchildren. The changes will kill millions, maybe billions, and the people who are left are in for a bad time. Sorry to be the voice of gloom, but it's true.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 06:43
The planet will last for billions of years to come. The planet surviving is not dependent on us being here. Quite the opposite...but I I know what you mean, and by and large I agree. If people think the current migration crisis is bad, then just wait until the sea level rises to a point where half of Europe and the east coast of the US is under water. People will then start jumping up and down demanding to know why nothing had been done to prevent the crisis. People depress me. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 08:02
|
All environmental problems are caused by overpopulation. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 10:44
Pick your choice: a) To see if people are paying attention b) Becuase I have impish qualities c) Because I have an appreciation for the absurd d) Because I care far more about what people write and bring to the discussion table here than what they choose in a poll e) all of the above The answer is e. And like I said earlier in the thread, "...to be clear the poll and poll question is just a fun accessory to discussion on climate change/ greenhouse warming." It's such a serious and depressing to me issue that I wanted to bring a little fun and humour to the proceedings. I'm very pessimistic when it comes to the future of humanity.
Something is going to need to happen to limit reproduction, but of course that opens up a long list of ethical quandaries. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 12:00
|
^^^ Around 1975 Prof John P Holdren (Obama's Science Tzar) co-authored a book called Ecoscience, in which in which he sggested reproduction could be controlled by the selective granting of birthing licenses, and also the introduction of chemicals into the food chain to reduce fertility. That is probably a more likely approach than temporarily outlawing childbirth. That would be too difficult to police and even more contraversial than what he was suggesting. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 12:15
|
Thanks for that, I'll look for the book (I have heard of it). I don't think that the premise of Z.P.G. would be the way that societies would go, and Holdren's premises would be much more likely (very controversial still). Of course China had the one child policy. One of my favourite modern television series dealt with population control, Utopia. I won't give spoilers for those that haven't seen it. "Malaria? The only disease that needs curing is us." ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Barbu
Date Posted: January 05 2017 at 13:13
|
We plead guilty, Your Honor. ------------- |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: January 07 2017 at 02:33
The key to making any judgements about "global warming" is understanding the difference between global climate and local climate. In simplest terms seasonal global temperatures are the average of all the individual local seasonal temperatures so for example some regions will see an increase in temperatures above average while others can experience a decrease - "Global warming" does not preclude local decreases in temperature. There are two major mechanisms that affect the local climate in the North Atlantic - the atmospheric jet stream and the oceanic Gulf stream, both of which can result in decreases in average season temperatures in Eastern North America and North-Western Europe as a consequence of "Global Warming". For The Netherlands (and the UK) the major player here is the Gulf Stream that brings warm water across the Atlantic from the Gulf of Mexico that keeps local average land temperatures several degrees warmer than they would normally be for these northern countries. For example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgary" rel="nofollow - Calgary and Kiev are on the same latitude as De Bilt (and Cambridge) but experience far colder winters and less warmer summers than any city in Holland (or England). Anything that affects the North Atlantic ocean currents can have a marked effect on local climate that far exceeds any global average. For this reason it is better to refer to this as climate change rather than global warming. And it pretty much started during the first industrial revolution when there was a marked increase in the burning of fossil fuel but the effects of that on the atmosphere and global temperatures were only noticeable in the 1980s as these effects tend to follow a power-law (as do most things in physics).
------------- What? |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 07 2017 at 05:27
|
^^^ Indeed, and it is broadly referred as climate change these days rather than global warming, at least in the mainstream. Alt media still referes to it as global warming. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 07 2017 at 20:29
|
I would propose next a poll asking whether we belive the Earth is kind of round or flat. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Magnum Vaeltaja
Date Posted: January 07 2017 at 20:36
Hey now, don't you start criticizing the rigour of the Flat Earth Theory! It's one of those tried and true tenets of sound science, like geocentrism and the plum pudding model of the atom! ------------- when i was a kid a doller was worth ten dollers - now a doller couldnt even buy you fifty cents |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: January 08 2017 at 09:37
How could the Earth be flat, when it had been proved it was hollow?!  |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 14:10
|
Has anyone looked into the amount of hair spray used in Hollywood? You know Hollywood started in the 1930's, so could be responsible- think they need to do some core samples there.................... ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 14:31
Me thinks we also should investigate Michale Bay's movies: with all these explosions, this guy must send a lot of carbon in the atmosphere!  |
Posted By: Upbeat Tango Monday
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 14:37
|
Climate changes are natural. You have periods of warming and cooling. Human contribution to the environemnt through gas emissions is almost negligible when contrasting it to the amount of natural chemical processes in play through history, and today: cows alone contribute more than humans...and we are talking about methane, not CO2 which is a minor gas compared, for instance, with water vapor. Sea levels are on the rise since the last ice age...also natural. Claiming climate change is man-made is akin to claiming the earth is flat. Utter unadulterated ignorance. I hope primitivist nutjobs don't come forward with the theory that dinosaurs had factories and cars... ------------- Two random guys agreed to shake hands. Just Because. They felt like it, you know. It was an agreement of sorts...a random agreement. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 14:57
|
Climate change occurs naturally, and I've never heard anyone dispute that, but the evidence is overwhelming that man, especially since the industrial revolution, has had a very significant impact on the climate, has accelerated change, and we pump out so much CO2 that the greenhouse effect is worrying. For that matter, methane production has been increased due to the beef industry. And as the ice melts (more permafost is lost) due to global warming, more methane will be released. Volcanoes have been a major contributor to CO2 levels, but our technology is pumping out more. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:10
|
Even most climate change deniers have changed their tune from "it doesn't exist" to "we are in a natural warming cycle" to now "man has probably had an impact, but not too much and it's nothing to worry about" . When even the skeptics are getting less skeptical, seems like odds are it's not bunk science. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:16
-------------
|
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:17
|
Climate change is real. Trump is a hoax. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:20
Then, whom did the Americans vote for?  |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:21
|
^Most voted for Hillary. Strange, isn't it? ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:27
-------------
|
Posted By: Magnum Vaeltaja
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:28
Yep, it's not "man-made" in the sense that climate change hasn't existed until we came along, it's just that human activity is causing it to change far more rapidly than it ever has in the past. http://xkcd.com/1732/" rel="nofollow - Here's a pretty good visual depiction of the time scales of climate change. It should give a bit more of an intuitive sense of just how drastic climate change has been in recent years. ------------- when i was a kid a doller was worth ten dollers - now a doller couldnt even buy you fifty cents |
Posted By: Tillerman88
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:29
What do you suggest then? Another conspiracy or a cover-up?
|
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:30
 ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:30
Yeah, I know: there is this system of Great Electors, and all that American constitutional stuff that I hardly understand, since we silly French people vote directly for our President without passing by an assembly of "representatives"... Which may make us look even sillier when you realise that many French citizens effectively voted for Sarkozy... But that's another story and we should stick to the thread. |
Posted By: Saperlipopette!
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:31
| Do you believe in man-made global warming? - before reading I just felt like voting (Yes) to get that out of the way. Looking at the results I hope I'm not alone. |
Posted By: Upbeat Tango Monday
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:50
|
So..is this all about politics? Really? This is science we are talking about. It seems like all democrats are in favor of believing man-made climate change is a thing, and all GOP voters are against that notion. It doesn't work like that. Individuals don't work like that (or shouldn't work like that, unless they are braindead). Hypothesis are the first step of the scientific method, and it's alright as long as we take them as they are. There are fads we take for granted which are dangerous and might hurt our lives, the industry and the progress of mankind. I remember the times when BS like homeopathy and acupunture were a big thing... Analysing and asking for proof for and against a certain hypothesis is normal in science. Those who speak about "conspiracy theorists, aliens and tinfoil hats" when dealing with unproven hypothesis are well...not that clever in my book. ------------- Two random guys agreed to shake hands. Just Because. They felt like it, you know. It was an agreement of sorts...a random agreement. |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 15:54
|
I hear tinfoil is not so good in Microwaves ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 16:01
| Plus the tinfoil hat actually functions as an antenna, this is why the mainstream media wants you to wear one. |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 16:02
Well, on one hand, you deny the idea that climate change is a consequence of the human activities and you already have expressed right-wing opinions... So, I'm not sure if you're not taking it to the political field, too, in spite of your call to scientifical reasoning. |
Posted By: Upbeat Tango Monday
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 16:19
Left wingers think I'm a conservative, right wingers think I'm a hippie... it all depends on the topic  Go on, ask me about my position on family values, religion, drugs and homosexuality...and you'll know how far from those on the right I am. If I were a US citizen, I'd always vote libertarian. I'm just telling you what I think about this particular topic, nothing more than that. ------------- Two random guys agreed to shake hands. Just Because. They felt like it, you know. It was an agreement of sorts...a random agreement. |
Posted By: Failcore
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 16:20
|
I mean if we gonna go full technocracy, all of us should cram it, because none of us have a phD in atmospheric science. -------------
|
Posted By: Tillerman88
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 16:40
|
Good sense tells me that I don't need a phD in atmospheric science in order to figure why our planet climate's driven nuts lol |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 17:08
|
Are Nut trees responsible....................... ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 19:50
|
Believe? Are we asking about unicorns or a messiah? Here's the thing. Most deniers I've met have kids/grandkids. I do not and my days are rather short now. If they want to leave a dump or the Hunger Games for their progeny, fine, to hell with 'em. Sooner or later the host will reject the infection and repair itself. Until some other absurd species decides it's going to evolve and be "intelligent", while over half of them operate on "belief" rather than evidence, to start the whole stupid process over again. ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow">  https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 20:02
But doesn't that go for the "Scientists" too - lets see what the next calamity is in 10 years time when they are searching for research funds to keep them employed............. ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: Thatfabulousalien
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 20:13
It was all the Illuminati!!!! ------------- Classical music isn't dead, it's more alive than it's ever been. It's just not on MTV. https://www.soundcloud.com/user-322914325 |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 20:19
Doesn't what go for the scientists? It's not entirely clear what your position is here. ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow"> https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 20:29
In terms of being impartial in identifying and solving/ resolving issues Scientist are conflicted, it is in their interests to sprook and even exaggerate issues to keep themselves employed an sometime even to fake results to continue funding............. ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 20:50
Fake results? They've been hiding the glaciers in their sheds all these years? Seriously? ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow"> https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 20:54
------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 21:25
|
We've had the warmest year in recorded history in 2016. Several of the warmest years have occurred in the last decade. There are 7 billion people on the planet, nearly all burning some form of fossil fuel. The arctic ice is melting at an alarming rate. I would rather err on the side of caution. I would use my perception and experiences to say that humans are indeed adversely affecting the planet. In my youth, I saw rivers in Detroit and Cleveland on fire. I've seen great gouts of man-made smog envelope cities (so bad that people had to wear surgical masks to walk about outside). I've seen soot covering cars in the morning in areas of cities with heavy manufacturing. As I stated, I would rather err on the side of caution and make sure my children and their children live without the threat of environmental disasters that could have been easily prevented if not for greed. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 21:35
As long as your not worried about the Antarctic Ice all is well I guess.................. ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 21:38
I have read more on the problems in the Arctic. It is of more interest to me, since I have been there. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 21:50
|
So your not worried about the Antarctic Ice? ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 21:54
Heavens no! I am not at all worried about the Antarctic ice, because it's too far south to concern me. And it's very dense ice, not unlike some posters on this forum. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 21:58
Ah good, so the melting there and the imminent split of of the largest Ice Berg is history is OK https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/06/giant-iceberg-poised-to-break-off-from-antarctic-shelf-larsen-c Yeah Don't worry sea levels will only rise in the Northern Hemisphere anyway ............ Not so sure about who is the denser North or South
------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 22:00
I will say the density remains the thickest on this forum. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 22:04
They say the darkest ice is the thickest.............. ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 18 2017 at 23:20
Me too Men are destroying the planet ------------- 
|
Posted By: Saperlipopette!
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 01:31
I'm glad to hear. Not that we're destroying the planet - but that many of us did the same mistake and it partly explains the absurd poll results.
|
Posted By: Kingsnake
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 01:50
|
I voted wrong, because of the misleading title and the pollquestion. My Yes should be a No. Men are destroying the planet. And as far as I know, only far-right idiots think otherwise (Trump, Wilders, etc.)
|
Posted By: Upbeat Tango Monday
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 04:06
|
Gotta love a good, smart, scientific debate. "Tidal waves are upon us. Mankind is doomed. I feel it in my guts, we are condemned! We will pay for our sins against Gaia!" You are talking about rapture and judgment day...show me hard proof God exists. You are talking about men destroying the earth...show me hard proof it is so. Clowns to the left. Jokers to the right. ------------- Two random guys agreed to shake hands. Just Because. They felt like it, you know. It was an agreement of sorts...a random agreement. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 06:10
And your point is... Gravity isn't real the Earth sucks? ------------- What? |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 06:31
So the evidence published by climate scientists the world over isn't proof as far as your concerned? You're equating religious psychosis with science. Good luck with that. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Mascodagama
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 06:54
If you actually want a good, smart, scientific debate then why don't you start it off by making a post that contains some element of reasoning, evidence or indeed coherent thought of any kind? Because on the basis of what you've contributed to this thread so far you come off as an opinionated, arrogant buffoon who is trolling the forum for laughs. Not much point in debating with someone like that. |
Posted By: CPicard
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 07:38
Funnily, no one has mentionned the name of "Gaïa" in this thread until now. I suppose that makes us "bad leftist hippies" since we can't even make references to our, er, "Goddess".  And if we're talking about men destroying the earth... Well, it's not exactly news: endangered species everywhere, rarefaction of natural resources, air pollution in China, Europe, Mexico (oh, could this also be linked to the climate change?! ) , nuclear wastes poisoning deers in Scandinavia, etc... |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 10:49
|
33.33% of the people here think man-made global warming isn't real. Well I guess Trump could also become main super-Admin of ProgArchives after all. -------------
|
Posted By: Saperlipopette!
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 10:55
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 11:10
|
Thee results of the poll itself are meaningless since I set up up the topic title question and poll question at odds with each-other in a joking way since I figured that the topic is quite absurd due to the overwhelming evidence for man's effect on greenhouse warming/ contribution to climate change (and to protect myself from the scorn of people asking such a "duh" thing, I resorted to my usual absurdity which does belie some lack of intellectual honesty at play in my psyche). I'm generally more interested in what people have to say in topics than how they vote in a poll, so the poll works more as a fun accessory to discussion. I may have already mentioned it, but my family was friends with the inventor of a fuel cell for hybrid vehicles, and was amazed when my wife was talking to him when he said that he was not concerned with fossil fuels effect on climate and did not buy into climate change models that most scientists agree on. He was driven by business models rather than environmental concern. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: Tillerman88
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 11:48
| LOL , long before the Sun death, there will be no human being on this planet to tell the well succeeded story of both the modern technologies and the business industry. |
Posted By: omphaloskepsis
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 13:14
|
Most scientists, not paid by the government or the oil and gas industry believe that man made global warming is for real. And it's speeding up, as warming side effects are exacerbating situation. For example, ice is white and reflects the sun's energy back into space. So as sea ice and land ice melt, less Solar energy is reflected into space. Since sea water is dark, it absorbs more heat which in turn causes higher world temperatures and so on...
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 13:17
|
^ Exactly so. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: omphaloskepsis
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 13:28
|
When weighing the evidence, one must consider the authority. Does the scientist have a vested interest in denying Global Warming? For example, a scientist working for Exxon gets paid by Exxon to provide fodder for the Oil and Gas propaganda machine. Would a politician or lobbyist have a vested interest? Would a politician have the scientific background to speak intelligently on global warming? Maybe...Maybe not. Here is blog post from Sabine Hossenfelder ( A theoretical physicist at CERN) on weighing (arguments from authority)
How to use an "argument from authority" It has become a popular defense of science deniers to yell “argument from authority” when someone quotes an experts’ opinion. Unfortunately, the argument from authority is often used incorrectly. What is an “argument from authority”? An “argument from authority” is a conclusion drawn not by evaluating the evidence itself, but by evaluating an opinion about that evidence. It is also sometimes called an “appeal to authority”. Consider Bob. Bob wants to know what follows from A. To find out, he has a bag full of knowledge. The perfect argument would be if Bob starts with A and then uses his knowledge to get to B to C to D and so on until he arrives at Z. But reality is never perfect. Let’s say Bob wants to know what’s the logarithm of 350,000. In reality he can’t find anything useful in his bag of knowledge to answer that question. So instead he calls his friend, the Pope. The Pope says “The log is 4.8.” So, Bob concludes, the log of 350,000 is 4.8 because the Pope said so. That’s an argument from authority – and you have good reasons to question its validity. But unlike other logical fallacies, an argument from authority isn’t necessarily wrong. It’s just that, without further information about the authority that has been consulted, you don’t know how good the argument it is. Suppose Bob hadn’t asked the Pope what’s the log of 350,000 but instead he’d have asked his calculator. The calculator says it’s approximately 5.544. We don’t usually call this an argument from authority. But in terms of knowledge evaluation it’s the same logical structure as exporting an opinion to a trusted friend. It’s just that in this case the authority is your calculator and it’s widely known to be an expert in calculation. Indeed, it’s known to be pretty much infallible. You believe that your friend the calculator is correct not because you’ve tried to verify every result it comes up with. You believe it’s correct because you trust all the engineers and scientists who have produced it and who also use calculators themselves. Indeed, most of us would probably trust a calculator more than our own calculations, or that of the Pope. And there is a good reason for that – we have a lot of prior knowledge about whose opinion on this matter is reliable. And that is also relevant knowledge. Therefore, an argument from authority can be better than an argument lacking authority if you take into account evidence for the authority’s expertise in the subject area. Logical fallacies were widely used by the Greeks in their philosophical discourse. They were discussing problems like “Can a circle be squared?” But many of today’s problems are of an entirely different kind, and the Greek rules aren’t always helpful. The problems we face today can be extremely complex, like the question “What’s the origin of climate change?” “Is it a good idea to kill off mosquitoes to eradicate malaria?” or “Is dark matter made of particles?” Most of us simply don’t have all the necessary evidence and knowledge to arrive at a conclusion. We also often don’t have the time to collect the necessary evidence and knowledge. And when a primary evaluation isn’t possible, the smart thing to do is a secondary evaluation. For this, you don’t try to answer the question itself, but you try to answer the question “Where do I best get an answer to this question?” That is, you ask an authority. We do this all the time: You see a doctor to have him check out that strange rush. You ask your mother how to stuff the turkey. And when the repair man says your car needs a new crankshaft sensor, you don’t yell “argument from authority.” And you shouldn’t, because you’ve smartly exported your primary evaluation of evidence to a secondary system that, you are quite confident, will actually evaluate the evidence *better* than you yourself could do. But… the secondary evidence you need is how knowledgeable the authority is on the topic of question. The more trustworthy the authority, the more reliable the information. This also means that if you reject an argument from authority you claim that the authority isn’t trustworthy. You can do that. But it’s here’s where things most often go wrong. The person who doesn’t want to accept the opinion of scientific experts implicitly claims that their own knowledge is more trustworthy. Without explicitly saying so, they claim that science doesn’t work, or that certain experts cannot be trusted – and that they themselves can do better. That is a claim which can be made. But science has an extremely good track record in producing correct conclusions. Questioning that it’s faulty therefore carries a heavy burden of proof. So. To use an argument from authority correctly, you have to explain why the authority’s knowledge is not trustworthy on the question under consideration. But what should you do if someone dismisses scientific findings by claiming an argument from authority? I think we should have a name for such a mistaken use of the term argument from authority. We could call it the fallacy of the “omitted knowledge prior.” This means it’s a mistake to not take into account evidence for the reliability of knowledge, including one’s own knowledge. You, your calculator, and the pope aren’t equally reliable when it comes to evaluating logarithms. And that counts for something. |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 13:29
|
A majority of PA pollsters, so far, think that the world is millions of years old but that climate change is false. What gives? ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 13:35
A majority here think that man-made (or man exacerbated to put it a little better) greenhouse warming is not a hoax or conspiracy. One has to take into account the clowning around I did with the poll question as opposed to the topic title. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: SteveG
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 13:46
|
O-tay, Panky. ------------- This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State. |
Posted By: Pastmaster
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 16:36
Honestly, global warming has been essentially turned into political psychosis rather than science. Yes, there's absolutely scientific proof that humans have had an effect on climate change since The Industrial Age, but it's turned into a political issue. It shouldn't be, as it has nothing to do with politics and is purely science, hence why it can be hard to have an actual scientific debate about the issue. Politicians need to get out of the scientific world, so actual science can be presented without bias and agenda.
|
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 16:44
|
It does have a political dimension, of course, since politicians make decisions on policy and make choices when it comes to funding, direction etc. ------------- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - Duos for fave acts |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 17:22
------------- A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now) |
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 17:26
Like I said the darkest Ice is the densest  ------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 18:26
------------- A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now) |
Posted By: Pastmaster
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 20:47
I forgot about that, and that is true. I guess I wasn't being clear enough, as I was trying to say that some things relating to global warming have been somewhat blown out of proportion in the past.
|
Posted By: siLLy puPPy
Date Posted: January 19 2017 at 22:03
Dream on! Everything gets tainted by politics, even unicorns on rainbow factories on Planet X. Seriously, how can this even be a topic? Exxon was already busted for hiding climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels since the 1950s. While there in irrefutible evidence that humans have been changing the climate at a faster rate, it is quite true that the climate changes with or without us. We are a sort of catalyst. It is also true that we are entering a more energetic sector of the galaxy and the fact is that EVERY planet in our solar system is also experiencing changes in their atmospheric tendencies. The problem is that it is super complex and that science is indeed very much hijacked for the sake of poltical manipulation and to be skewed for money making endeavors (hear that carbon traders?) that create a huge misty cloud of confusion for the scientific illiterates of the world (hello USA! do you hear me?) -------------  https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy |
Posted By: Tillerman88
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 02:48
 It took 5 pages 'till someone come up here posting at last what sums up my thoughts. And I would add China to the major portion of the cake, less than half a century of globalisation and we are already seeing the damn effects on their political relationships. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 08:14
|
I really can't believe this is even up for debate. Please other nations, copy what's good about the US, not what's bad. -------------
|
Posted By: Tillerman88
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 08:46
| Okay , The T-Rump. |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 09:00
A more injuring insult I have never received.  -------------
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 10:27
No T, at least 4 out of the 13 votes have been posted by mistake, due the misleading question. -------------
|
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 10:35
Have you ever gone to Santiago? I have   You can't breathe and temperature is almost 2 degrees over normal Have you gone to Mexico City   The same China    Don't tell me this doesn't have a terrible effect on climate. Don't tell me it's not a political issue.
-------------
|
Posted By: siLLy puPPy
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 15:06
|
^ amen, Ivan. Los Angeles used to be the same and BECAUSE of regulations set forth by the EPA we can now see the mountains around the city! The solutions may indeed be complex but the evidence is so overwhelming and damning about our contributions to the problem that our species deserves the ultimate Ostrich head in the Sand Award. BTW, most scientists agree that we are now in the 6th mass extinction of the planet due to human activities so UNLESS you have a degree in the sciences your opinion about this matter is MEANINGLESS ------------- https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy |
Posted By: Pastmaster
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 17:01
|
^^I never said that it doesn't have a terrible effect on climate, and yes it's a political issue in the sense of needing regulation. Again, I had a poor choice of words. I was simply trying to say that politics can get in the way of what's true, with many politicians using real issues to their advantage (On both sides). It's absurd to believe that global warming isn't real, as is believing that the mountain tops should have been free of ice by 2015/2016.
|
Posted By: EddieRUKiddingVarese
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 17:05
|
^ If we could just contain Donald Trump's usage of Hair Spray the world would be safe..............
------------- "Everyone is born with genius, but most people only keep it a few minutes" and I need the knits, the double knits! |
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 17:23
When you learn to discern sarcasm without the need of emoticons, get back with me. ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: siLLy puPPy
Date Posted: January 20 2017 at 18:32
------------- https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy |
||||||
Post Options
Thanks(0)
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/new_reply_form.asp?Quote=1&PID=5421940&PN=5&TR=99" rel="nofollow - Quote 
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/new_reply_form.asp?PID=5421940&PN=5&TR=99" rel="nofollow - Reply 
Posted: 1 hour 23 minutes ago at 17:05