AN ASSAULT ON SCIENCE

@layman,

layman wrote:

OK, so the question remains. Why do you mean by AGW? For example, do you mean that additional CO2 in the atmosphere has a known and well-established capacity to "capture" and then redirect toward earth, some radiation that had previously reached the earth's surface? Or what?

Yes, that and other things. Man is responssible for most of the current warming. But my point has been, more precisely, that our grand children are going to suffer bitterly from the effects of our innaction today, that it's not going to be a mild change as it has been so far. It will badly worsen, and the effects are going to be far worse than anything scientists dare to say today.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Man is responssible for most of the current warming.

How can man be responsible for most of the GW when man is not responsible for most of the greenhouse gases?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Man IS responsible for most of the greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere over the past century.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

You're confusing people, Ollie. First you say all scientists agree. On what? On AGW that's what. So what is AGW, as you use the term? Well, for one thing:

Quote:

It will badly worsen, and the effects are going to be far worse than anything scientists dare to say today.

But how can all scientist's agree on something that's far beyond what they say?

Heh, and I thought some of THEM were alarmists. They appear to be no match for you in that category of activity, though, eh?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Man IS responsible for most of the greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere over the past century.

Rly? Will you be offering proof?

Quote:

It is ten times as likely that atmospheric CO2 is coming from natural sources, namely the warming ocean surface, as it is likely that it is coming from anthropogenic sources. The changes in CO2 track ocean surface temperature, not global carbon emissions. Burning fossil fuels is not increasing atmospheric CO2. Recovery from the Little Ice Age, driven by the sun, is causing the oceans to release CO2. It is temperature driving CO2 release, not the other way around. Just as it has always been.

As the sun gets quiet in the next few years, sea surface temperature will begin to fall, and the rise in CO2 will cease. If the sun stays quiet for 30 or 40 years, ocean surface temperatures will fall far enough to reverse the CO2 rise, the globe will enter a new little ice age, and things will get really interesting.

http://notrickszone.com/2013/03/02/most-of-the-rise-in-co2-likely-comes-from-natural-sources/#sthash.edKRtpTi.dpbs

1 Reply

@Ionus,

This is not evidence, its mombo jumbo by voodoo thinkers.

Man is responsible for the CO2 rize since the industrial revolution, not "the sun". We are dumping millions of tons of CO2 every day.

Anyway, i don't what you "think". Our kids and grand kids are toast anyway, whatever we do at this stage is too little too late.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

I asked you for any counter evidence and that was your reply. I hope you didn't get a headache.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

I told you already: What you think doesn't matter in the least. Also, how many times have you asked for evidence which you flipantly rejected when provided? It's not like you are intellectually honest...

1 Reply

@layman,

Scientists don't want to frighten people if they are not 100% sure, which they will never be. They are on average underplaying the threat.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Nonsense as if anything this unproven threat had been far overstated not downplay as human love doomsday stories even scientists love doomsday stories.

It used to be the job of the priesthood to predict the ends times due to our sins but now that we had loss a lot of faith in such predictions by the priests we have turn to the men in the lab coats with flashing computers lights in the background.

An our doom is no longer connected with displeasing the gods but by setting up a high energy culture and burning coal and oil to do so.

The theme is still the same as a result of our sins the earth and humans will be ended.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Little kids like to hear scary stories and then be tucked in bed by a reassuring mom. This is not one such stories. It's science, it's well established science, buttressed with masses of data, and it predicts a future as hard as hell for our grandkids.

It doesn't matter what you believe. Your kids and grandkids will suffer just as much.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

it's well established science, buttressed with masses of data, and it predicts a future as hard as hell for our grandkids.

Sorry it is not science as long as the predicts are base on a far far from complete understanding of the earth climate system using unproven computer models.

You are likely to get similar or even better results by cutting chickens open and reading their inners.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

You don't want to open your eyes because you're afraid of seeing something you don't want to, that's all.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

guy falling from a skyscrapper,

I been falling off one so call skyscraper or another all my life,

First the nuclear scientists placed their doomsday clock to one minute to midnight and we needed to have drills of ducking under our classroom desks.

On the way home from school I got such books from the library as "silent spring" that predicted we was all going to died from pesticides or the book "Made room made room" where we was going to breed ourselves to death by starvation.

Then in college I read the book :"The limits of growth" that base on then state of the art computer model informed me that we was about to have our technology society come down around our ears within a decade.

Oh popular science have a cover showing NYC being wiped out be a glacier due to us placing particles into the air and causing a new ice age.

Then of course we have the rollover clock bug that was going to shut our society down on Jan. the first 2000.

I am sure I am missing some of the predication of doomsdays in my lifetime.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSD_RGn7UcePR8pN_snoQNq3hI9BuVtJuN2Jbc0P6jJyTr6i15g

1 Reply

@BillRM,

That's a nice list of predictions we took seriously enough to change the way we were doing things.

We eliminated the use of DDT.
We increased crop yields.
We reduced our particulate pollution.
We spent a lot of money correcting the Y2K bug before Y2k and there were still a few issues but nothing life threatening because all those systems were corrected.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Ok so you read a few bad sci-fi novels so now you don't believe in science. Makes a lot of sense...

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Ok so you read a few bad sci-fi novels so now you don't believe in science. Makes a lot of sense.

..

Science fiction as in the book silent spring or the limit to growth base on the club of Rome computer model or the concern nuclear scientists doomsday clock?

The one book I comment on that was science fiction was Make room make room and that science fiction book was base of population growth predictions at the time of it writing.

Good try however if very dishonest

1 Reply

@parados,

Good try to but in the areas of the world that did not have the resources to fix the 2000 computer bug nothing happen to their computer systems either.

We did reduce the used of DDT that also help the population problem in as far as more humans end up dying from mosque borne diseases as a result in the third world then otherwise would had died but we are now using far more powerful and harmful to humans pesticides then in the DDT days

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Yeah.. because the areas in the world that didn't have the resources to fix the 2000 computer bug had the resources to put vital computer systems in place in the 1970s. Which areas of the world was that Bill? A link?

Oh.. "the people are dying because we banned DDT" argument. I wonder how India and the sub Saharan areas of Africa have managed to survive while their populations have been decimated since DDT was banned. It's also nice to know that unlike other pesticides you feel mosquitoes will never become resistant to DDT.

http://www.isciencetimes.com/articles/6880/20140225/scientists-discover-gene-makes-mosquitoes-resistant-ddt.htm

1 Reply

AN ASSAULT ON SCIENCE

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know