Man made global warming is real.

Started by Diomedes, January 23, 2007, 11:37:52 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Tomahawk

I believe in science, and I believe this scientific test had poor sampling. Science isn't infallible.

Use the exact same methodology from at least 10 different million year increments, and I'll lend the resulting analysis more credence.

rjs246

I'd like a study of every single human being who has ever smoked or come into contact with tobacco back to the beginning of time before I lend any credence to the idea that tobacco increases the risk of cancer.
Is rjs gonna have to choke a bitch?

Let them eat bootstraps.

Tomahawk

#872
Scientific Fact: Humans haven't been around since the beginning of time

rjs246

Is rjs gonna have to choke a bitch?

Let them eat bootstraps.

Rome

I hope the overwhelming peer-reviewed evidence is wrong, actually.

It's not, of course.  We are clearly having a harmful effect on the planet and it's getting worse by the day.

But I guess I have a tiny shred of hope that it's wrong.

And btw... the industrial age only started 150 years ago, so studying back beyond that is really pointless.


General_Failure

Quote from: Tomahawk on October 24, 2011, 05:08:23 PM
Scientific Fact: Humans haven't been around since the beginning of time

Where's your proof?

The man. The myth. The legend.

SD

Quote from: Tomahawk on October 24, 2011, 04:39:31 PM
I believe in science, and I believe this scientific test had poor sampling. Science isn't infallible.

Use the exact same methodology from at least 10 different million year increments, and I'll lend the resulting analysis more credence.

Just a word of advice, don't try arguing with this crowd. They're like evangelicals who believe the bible is meant to be taken literally, only their bible is 'An Inconvenient Truth' and their messiah is Al Gore. The sad part is they're too blind to see the resemblance.



General_Failure

The whole "I'm not going to discuss this topic because everyone else is so farging stupid, so I'll sit here and call you names" attitude is really far too common. It doesn't matter what the topic is, that attitude overwhelms any kind of discussion. I don't think you can go ten minutes online without seeing it. I've had enough of it, and I'm sure as hell not putting up with it here anymore.

How bad does it have to be when I'm the one wishing people would grow the farg up?

The man. The myth. The legend.

SD

Global Warming No Hippos then? I thought this was the section we were allowed to call people stupid.

rjs246

Quote from: SD on October 24, 2011, 06:45:44 PM
Quote from: Tomahawk on October 24, 2011, 04:39:31 PM
I believe in science, and I believe this scientific test had poor sampling. Science isn't infallible.

Use the exact same methodology from at least 10 different million year increments, and I'll lend the resulting analysis more credence.

Just a word of advice, don't try arguing with this crowd. They're like evangelicals who believe the bible is meant to be taken literally, only their bible is 'An Inconvenient Truth' and their messiah is Al Gore. The sad part is they're too blind to see the resemblance.




I've actually never seen An Inconvenient Truth but Al Gore did speak at my hs graduation. So that's something.
Is rjs gonna have to choke a bitch?

Let them eat bootstraps.

General_Failure


The man. The myth. The legend.

Rome

I just think the evidence is so overwhelmingly clear that I refuse to believe otherwise whereas the religious thing is the polar opposite of that.  I can't believe anyone with an IQ over 50 wouldn't question religion or the existence of a supernatural being. 

I'm not saying either theory is right or wrong here.  I'm just saying that the scientific method has all but indisputably proven the existence of man-influenced climate change and nothing has proven the existence of God.

Sgt PSN

#882
Quote from: SD on October 24, 2011, 04:18:16 PM
Quote from: Tomahawk on October 24, 2011, 04:12:41 PM
The problem I have with Rome's link is it only uses data from 1800 (at the earliest) to present. That's way too small of a sample to use in a trend analysis for a planet that's been around for either 10,000 or 4 billion years

Hey...look at this, someone else with common sense. Welcome to my club.

I agree with the notion that 200 years is a small sampling and may not provide the most accurate data.  However, before 1800 there was pretty much no depletion of the earth's natural resources.  There were no trains, factories, cars, toxic chemicals, plastics, pollution, etc.  So there isn't as much need to study our impact on the environment because people had practically no impact.  Entire forests weren't being leveled to make room for condos and strip malls.  Factories were polluting the air or water sources.  People were living off the land just like every other animal on the planet. 

I suspect that's why scientists don't go any further back.  They're studying the impact people have on the environment/climate and that didn't really happen until the industrial revolution.  So they go back 100 years before that for a baseline and then move forward from there. 

Geowhizzer

I know that "modern" society is only a few centuries old, but going further back with these studies would show whether the current changes climate aren't caused by other factors.

Maybe there are some of these out there.  All I know is there's another farging hurricane that may have my name on it, and it's all Reagan's Bush's Clinton's Bush's Obama's fault.

Sgt PSN

Quote from: Geowhizzer on October 24, 2011, 08:50:38 PM
I know that "modern" society is only a few centuries old, but going further back with these studies would show whether the current changes climate aren't caused by other factors.

Since the whole global warming thing popped up, I've always said that climate change is real.  The history of this planet tells us that as there have been dramatic changes in the climate over millions and millions of years.  To think that it will suddenly just stop changing and remain suitable for our species is just ignorant.  So a change in the climate is coming and there's nothing we can do to stop it.  The questions to ask are (a) Are we expediting the process? and (b) Are we impacting the type of change that's going to take place?