It's Bloody Cold Here - Is Global Warming All Over?

ILW

Forget all that, I couldn't care less if it got a degree or so warmer or colder here. Why all the fuss?

smeagold

Sorry to rain on the warmists parade but that volcano that exploded in iceland recently emitted more CO2 than has been 'saved' through all the green energy initiatives for the last 5 years.

1st Global warming...then global climate change... now Global climate disruption. A 'science' utterly discredited. look out the window. wheres them med temperatures we were promised 10 years ago?

smeagold

andykn wrote: »

Causation came first. Callendar, building on the work of Fournier, Tyndall and Arrhenius predicted in 1938 that increasing CO2 would lead to increasing global temps.

It's quite easy to show what the temp of earth should be with no "greenhouse effect" and it's about 30 degrees colder than it is. CO2 is one of the gases that helps with it.

And we have nothing else that either correlates or has been identified as being a likely cause of the rise.


So what would you do, continue to increase the concentration of a known warming gas and hope it stops working? An imprecise model is better than none at all.

A known warming gas? its a theory. wheres your proof? there is no proof its a casual extrenuous causal link without proof. A theory increasingly discredited by completely normal world temperaturs.. just like now

Linton

smeagold wrote: »

Sorry to rain on the warmists parade but that volcano that exploded in iceland recently emitted more CO2 than has been 'saved' through all the green energy initiatives for the last 5 years.

....

And your source for this amazing piece of information is......???

Dont tell me, you saw it on the internet.

Linton

andykn wrote: »

Causation came first. Callendar, building on the work of Fournier, Tyndall and Arrhenius predicted in 1938 that increasing CO2 would lead to increasing global temps.

It's quite easy to show what the temp of earth should be with no "greenhouse effect" and it's about 30 degrees colder than it is. CO2 is one of the gases that helps with it.

And we have nothing else that either correlates or has been identified as being a likely cause of the rise.


So what would you do, continue to increase the concentration of a known warming gas and hope it stops working? An imprecise model is better than none at all.

You are wasting your time. The denyers dont need years of study, a detailed understanding of the complex mechanisms involved, or access to massive amounts of data collected from all over the world over many decades. They are in the fortunate position of just knowing the truth without being encumbred with such unnecessary baggage.

ILW

I find it very difficult to take any of the climate change cheerleaders seriously when they insist on flying off to conferences about the subject. Seems it is just a nice little earner for most of them.

Linton

ILW wrote: »

I find it very difficult to take any of the climate change cheerleaders seriously when they insist on flying off to conferences about the subject. Seems it is just a nice little earner for most of them.

Err, that's how all science works. You will find conferences on molecular biology, astrophysics, civil engineering, number theory etc etc happening all over the world with acknowledged experts and wannabe experts delivering papers and discussing ideas with their counterparts in other countries.

Science is of necessity an international cooperative enterprise, people need to meet and exchange ideas.

I guess from your comments that you have never attended an international conference. It's a great experience if you are fascinated by the subject but a leisurely jolly it isnt.

Incidently, professional scientists people dont get paid extra for attending conferences, it's hardly a "nice little earner". If that's what they were interested in they would be in another job.

But I guess that if you have little experience of the real world, childish conspiracy theories provide you with the ideal opportunity to stop thinking.

Linton

smeagold wrote: »

Sorry to rain on the warmists parade but that volcano that exploded in iceland recently emitted more CO2 than has been 'saved' through all the green energy initiatives for the last 5 years.

FYI - http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/19/eyjafjallajokull-volcano-climate-carbon-emissions

or

http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/2010/planes-or-volcano/

Sorry to make things complicated but these references include numbers.

smeagold

Linton wrote: »

And your source for this amazing piece of information is......???

Dont tell me, you saw it on the internet.

No doubt the same place your getting your info unless of course you were at kyoto last year or are a memebr of the IPCC. pathetic argument. try not to embaress yourself in future will you.

ILW

Linton wrote: »

Err, that's how all science works. You will find conferences on molecular biology, astrophysics, civil engineering, number theory etc etc happening all over the world with acknowledged experts and wannabe experts delivering papers and discussing ideas with their counterparts in other countries.

Science is of necessity an international cooperative enterprise, people need to meet and exchange ideas.

I guess from your comments that you have never attended an international conference. It's a great experience if you are fascinated by the subject but a leisurely jolly it isnt.

Incidently, professional scientists people dont get paid extra for attending conferences, it's hardly a "nice little earner". If that's what they were interested in they would be in another job.

But I guess that if you have little experience of the real world, childish conspiracy theories provide you with the ideal opportunity to stop thinking.

No conspiracy theories, just human nature. If most of these experts were to decide that there either wasn't much climate change or if there is, it is not going to cause many problems, they would be putting themselves out of work. Also the vast majority of professional scientists are paid by corporations or governments with an interest in getting the answers that suit them.

Additionally, are you saying that flying delegates to a conference is the most carbon neutral way to exchange data and opinions?