For those that believe in man-made climate change.
Discussion
Here's a little something that I found whilst scouring the internet for environmental studies: 18,000 signatures against the theory of man-made climate change.
www.oism.org/pproject/
I must say that this an American petition and therefore could contain some sort of political bias or underlying agenda. But I dunno.
Speaking from a personal point of view, I haven't seen anything concrete to suggest that our industries are having an effect. - Yet.
>>> Edited by _VTEC_ on Saturday 23 April 20:39
www.oism.org/pproject/
I must say that this an American petition and therefore could contain some sort of political bias or underlying agenda. But I dunno.
Speaking from a personal point of view, I haven't seen anything concrete to suggest that our industries are having an effect. - Yet.
>>> Edited by _VTEC_ on Saturday 23 April 20:39
I for one believe that man contributes to climate change, alongside many natural factors. I also believe that the effects of it are nowhere near as severe as the Greens are suggesting (a lot of it is trumped up and used as an excuse to implement socialist policies), but they are happening.
If global warming occurs in the way science suggests, beaches might be a foot or two shorter and summer will be a bit warmer. Unlike the Greens would like you to believe, London will not be engulfed in a volley of tidal waves, and we are not going to be trekking across the Yorkshire Desert on camels swatting locusts from our eyes either.
The biggest environmental concern the world faces IMO is deforestation. The rainforests are the key to the oxygen cycle, have provided the cures for many illnesses and contain wildlife we've never heard of yet, all of which is upset by their destruction.
If global warming occurs in the way science suggests, beaches might be a foot or two shorter and summer will be a bit warmer. Unlike the Greens would like you to believe, London will not be engulfed in a volley of tidal waves, and we are not going to be trekking across the Yorkshire Desert on camels swatting locusts from our eyes either.
The biggest environmental concern the world faces IMO is deforestation. The rainforests are the key to the oxygen cycle, have provided the cures for many illnesses and contain wildlife we've never heard of yet, all of which is upset by their destruction.
I for one always remember that global warming is a theory and not a fact.
The computer models which predict global warming and climate change are just that, in other words models or computerised guesses. These models have been unable to satisfactorily model what has happened over the last 20 years, so why should we believe they are suddenly accurate for 400 years into the future.
The Greens point to the number of severe weather incidents as evidence of global warming. Well actually their beloved global warming theory actually predicts that global warming will result in fewer sever climate events. Talk about spin!
If you look at surface temperature records there are indeed some places which show a warming. However the graphs the Greens show have been doctored by a factor to allow for the effect of urban sprawl. That correction factor is a guess, no more no less, nobody knows how correct or incorrect the "correction factor" is. Therefore you have to look at the raw (prime) data rather than secondary data, this is always good practice anyway when looking at statistical analyses. So look at the raw data and what do you get in trend lines, virtually flat, no overall change, some increase by hundredth's of a degree and some drop. Most show no discernible change.
Only this week in our rag there was a piece about the numbers of glaciers melting on th Antarctic peninsula. This is true, but there was no mention that the peninsula only forms 2% of the Antarctic land mass, that the continent as a whole is getting colder, the ice getting thicker, the melting trend of the last 6,000 years has been reversed, the sea ice season has increased by 21 days, oh nuts you get the picture.
Selective reporting by discredited journalists who just repeat press releases from the Greens without doing any research.
Yes there may be climate change, but it is a natural phenomenon. Maybe there is an effect from man, but I would suggest it is possibly far more down to changes in land use than any atmospheric effect.
The Greens and those opposed to their ideas are all well intentioned, of that I am sure, but the corrosive influence of belief resulting in rationalisation and distortion of results and reports is all pervading, from both sides of the debate. It is true that research tends to produce results based upon the desires of the funding source. Many blind tests have shown this.
The ONLY solution is to fund research in a non partisan blinded way and in that way we have a chance of determining appropriate policy.
The computer models which predict global warming and climate change are just that, in other words models or computerised guesses. These models have been unable to satisfactorily model what has happened over the last 20 years, so why should we believe they are suddenly accurate for 400 years into the future.
The Greens point to the number of severe weather incidents as evidence of global warming. Well actually their beloved global warming theory actually predicts that global warming will result in fewer sever climate events. Talk about spin!
If you look at surface temperature records there are indeed some places which show a warming. However the graphs the Greens show have been doctored by a factor to allow for the effect of urban sprawl. That correction factor is a guess, no more no less, nobody knows how correct or incorrect the "correction factor" is. Therefore you have to look at the raw (prime) data rather than secondary data, this is always good practice anyway when looking at statistical analyses. So look at the raw data and what do you get in trend lines, virtually flat, no overall change, some increase by hundredth's of a degree and some drop. Most show no discernible change.
Only this week in our rag there was a piece about the numbers of glaciers melting on th Antarctic peninsula. This is true, but there was no mention that the peninsula only forms 2% of the Antarctic land mass, that the continent as a whole is getting colder, the ice getting thicker, the melting trend of the last 6,000 years has been reversed, the sea ice season has increased by 21 days, oh nuts you get the picture.
Selective reporting by discredited journalists who just repeat press releases from the Greens without doing any research.
Yes there may be climate change, but it is a natural phenomenon. Maybe there is an effect from man, but I would suggest it is possibly far more down to changes in land use than any atmospheric effect.
The Greens and those opposed to their ideas are all well intentioned, of that I am sure, but the corrosive influence of belief resulting in rationalisation and distortion of results and reports is all pervading, from both sides of the debate. It is true that research tends to produce results based upon the desires of the funding source. Many blind tests have shown this.
The ONLY solution is to fund research in a non partisan blinded way and in that way we have a chance of determining appropriate policy.
I've often wondered whether the flooding problems in winter all look worse because more houses keep getting built on floodplains. Look at the news reports - you never really see old houses getting bailed out do you? There's a good reason for that - they knew the area flooded and didn't build there. Now Johnny Two-Jags wants to build 'affordable housing' everywhere, you can bet it will be on the floodplains, and then when they flood in winter (which they will), the Greens will blame it on global warming and cars 
I think the biggest problem is air craft pumping fumes directly into teh atmosphere and bloody great space shuttles.
after 911 the temperature changed over the atlantic by a couple of degrees because fewer planes were flying alegedly.
As for trees being cut sown contributing to global warming. i don't buy that.
trees absorb carbon from teh air and give out oxygen but when tree dies it rots and all the carbon it absorbed goes streight back in the atmosphere!
so teh best thing to do is cut down all teh trees and make tables out of them and tehy wont rot! then plant more trees
pesty said:
I think the biggest problem is air craft pumping fumes directly into teh atmosphere and bloody great space shuttles.
after 911 the temperature changed over the atlantic by a couple of degrees because fewer planes were flying alegedly.
As for trees being cut sown contributing to global warming. i don't buy that.
trees absorb carbon from teh air and give out oxygen but when tree dies it rots and all the carbon it absorbed goes streight back in the atmosphere!
so teh best thing to do is cut down all teh trees and make tables out of them and tehy wont rot! then plant more trees
good point well made, but i think the amount of air defense aircraft and vehicles being run up may have off set the effect of no public air travel
>> Edited by anhamgrimmar on Saturday 23 April 21:52
Volcanic eruptions can't help us out much, Just think of the millions of tons of sulphur and cocktails of crap that gets put into the atmosphere when one goes off.
I also think that man contributes to global warming, but how do you explain the ice ages if the earth doesn't go through large warming and cooling cycles?
I also think that man contributes to global warming, but how do you explain the ice ages if the earth doesn't go through large warming and cooling cycles?
Quote from East Anglian Daily Times 22nd April 2005
Global warming is a largely natural phenomenon and the world is in danger of wasting stupendous amounts of money on trying to fix something that can't be fixed and doesn't need to be anyway. Professor David Bellamy TV conservationist
Global warming is a largely natural phenomenon and the world is in danger of wasting stupendous amounts of money on trying to fix something that can't be fixed and doesn't need to be anyway. Professor David Bellamy TV conservationist
the planet would not be what it is today if global warming and global cooling had not happened for millions of years, it is cyclical and human records do not go back far enough to be trusted one way or the other!
the things that will have an effect are deforestation,the plundering of the seas and the rate at which we use up oil and gas reserves, these things are not finite and unless we start to seriously think about something more efficient and clean like nuclear power stations, we may run out of fuel!
for a politician this issue must be a nightmare, on the one hand you are trying to promote economic growth, which usually entails raping the environment! and on the other you are trying to be slightly green and preserve the environment!
the things that will have an effect are deforestation,the plundering of the seas and the rate at which we use up oil and gas reserves, these things are not finite and unless we start to seriously think about something more efficient and clean like nuclear power stations, we may run out of fuel!
for a politician this issue must be a nightmare, on the one hand you are trying to promote economic growth, which usually entails raping the environment! and on the other you are trying to be slightly green and preserve the environment!
Here we go again....!
Came across this new challenge to the Faithful the other day.....
www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=3
Came across this new challenge to the Faithful the other day.....
www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=3
There was a very interesting, level headed post on a Met Office noticeboard from someone old enough to remember the "big freezes" of the 40s and 60s, and how the predictions back then were of a forthcoming ice age!! Actually I can sort of remember that prophecy when I was a kid and I'm not that old (I hope).
So in 30 years it seems we have switched from a freezer to an oven. This older dude also opined that doom and gloom about climate change had replaced the preachings of damnation inteneded to keep us all head-bowed with guilt and easy to rule. Sound right.
So in 30 years it seems we have switched from a freezer to an oven. This older dude also opined that doom and gloom about climate change had replaced the preachings of damnation inteneded to keep us all head-bowed with guilt and easy to rule. Sound right.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff