Global Warming...Fact or Fiction?

[JAD_333]

It doesn't matter to me. I don't give a shit what happens in 50 years. I won't be around and how long do any of you really believe homo sapiens will be around at this current birth rate. It's all pointless. Signed Albert Camus!

Yep, it's 'pointless'; some posts are like that.

[rogerwilko]

It doesn't matter to me. I don't give a shit what happens in 50 years. I won't be around and how long do any of you really believe homo sapiens will be around at this current birth rate. It's all pointless. Signed Albert Camus!

[dalem]

wooglin,

i agree with that as an overall outline. unfortunately, many of the anti-AGW advocates fall into a distinctly do-nothing camp, ie if AGW doesn't exist, why bother with pollution regulations/EPA/etc. thus many environmentalists either join the AGW advocates because the other side simply doesn't support any of their other positions.

the focus should instead be, "instead of wasting futile billions on CO2, let's work on THIS issue or THAT issue instead". renewables, for instance, have more benefits than merely reducing carbon dioxide output.

So warming climate change crap is all crap, lies, religion and theft, but...

other climate crap stuff is okay?

Does that make you feel smart or dumb?

-dale

[BadKharma]

wooglin,
the focus should instead be, "instead of wasting futile billions on CO2, let's work on THIS issue or THAT issue instead". renewables, for instance, have more benefits than merely reducing carbon dioxide output.

I would agree with focusing on renewable or sustainable technology. Of course certain earmarks will always go into programs with dubious backgrounds, or possibly "appear" to. Whatever happened to setting a goal and following through with it? Such as putting a man on the moon before the end of the decade.

[astralis]

wooglin,

i agree with that as an overall outline. unfortunately, many of the anti-AGW advocates fall into a distinctly do-nothing camp, ie if AGW doesn't exist, why bother with pollution regulations/EPA/etc. thus many environmentalists either join the AGW advocates because the other side simply doesn't support any of their other positions.

the focus should instead be, "instead of wasting futile billions on CO2, let's work on THIS issue or THAT issue instead". renewables, for instance, have more benefits than merely reducing carbon dioxide output.

[Wooglin]

Zraver,

This is one reason I keep saying we need to unmarry actual conservation efforts with AGW. AGW advocates and their appeal to authority and smear the disbeliever tactics is killing real science, real conservation, and species... and we're paying them billions to do it. This is a long but great read from an insider.

Contrasting Good and Bad Science: Disease, Climate Change and the Case of the Golden Toad

Guest essay by Jim Steele, Director Emeritus, Sierra Nevada Field Campus San Francisco State University

[Goatboy]

I'm sure. There's also some real "climatologists" that like to moonlight as conspiracy theorists. I'll just go ahead and paint them all with the same brush.

Tom Nelson: Steig/Mann braintrust: "FACT. It's big oil, not self-described "citizen scientists" behind persecution of climate-change science"

Better make sure Home Depot has enough paint ;)

[Wooglin]

I'm sure a large percentage of the "Twin Towers collapsed via controlled demolition" armchair structural engineers also moonlight as armchair climatologists.

I'm sure. There's also some real "climatologists" that like to moonlight as conspiracy theorists. I'll just go ahead and paint them all with the same brush.

Tom Nelson: Steig/Mann braintrust: "FACT. It's big oil, not self-described "citizen scientists" behind persecution of climate-change science"

[zraver]

The claims the ocean is responsible for the lack of surface warming bugs me. The idea that ocean wasn't having much of an impact when temps were skyrocketing, but then suddenly kicked in a decade ago.... Not just recent warming, but at least 2 other warm periods saw much warmer temps that the oceans should have blocked.

Now, admittedly the amount of carbon sinking the ocean is doing is bugging me. It threatens the ocean and thus the entire planetary ecosystem via the production of carbonic acid. But then I think the ocean's health is a much bigger concern than AGW anyway.

[Red Team]

Before this turns into another conspiracy theorist s--tfest...here's a draft of the latest IPCC report.

IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change