Do me a favor
On your way home, take the long way (especially if you have a big ass SUV). And if you could spray some hair spray out your window, that’d be great too. Why? Because it’s late October, the weather is beautiful and I’m wearing short sleeves.
I love global warming, even if it is made up.
October 27th, 2004 at 1:44 pm
If you don’t like the facts, just blame the liberal media/scientists/etc.
October 27th, 2004 at 1:51 pm
Well the good news is that global warming means more warm days, such as this. The bad news is, it also means fewer sunny days.
October 28th, 2004 at 12:28 am
If you can find facts linking human emission of greenhouse gasses to global temperature increase, then you’v done more than any scientist in the last couple of decades, when climatologists were working on the theory that man made interactions were leading to a new ice age.
For a look at the facts, < ahref="http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm">check this out
In short, the facts show that
A) While the global mean may be increasing, it cannot be accurately linked to human emissions since the bulk of the increase occured prior to industrialization.
B) While surface temperature is increasing, troposheric temperature, the portion of the atmosphere closest to the earth and below the so called reflecting layer, is cooling, indicating that the increased surface temperature has a cause othe than reflected/trapped heat.
C) Global surface temperature shows a strong correlation to solar cycle activity, much stronger than the correlation to CO2 emissions.
There’s a lot more detail in the report, if you want to read it, but in essence, the facts show that global warming is not due to human activity, but is part of a normal cycle the earth goes through.
Which begs the question, if this is a normal cycle, and the results will be as catastrophic as the alarmists project, should we try to alter this natural warming cycle?
October 28th, 2004 at 12:29 am
UNcle, your comment stripped the link out. What’s up with that? It says urls are allowed?
Here it is typed out:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm
October 28th, 2004 at 4:03 am
Rich,
A site that also says:
“The global warming hypothesis … lives on only in the dreams of anti-technologists and population reduction advocates”
and when you consider that the Marshall Institute gets most of its funding from far-right organizations, you can’t really claim that that research is unbiased.
At the end of the day, you’ll believe what you want to believe because it jives with your ideology. Now, I’m not disputing the possibility that global warming doesn’t exist, just questioning the source.
October 28th, 2004 at 8:18 am
I didn’t strip it out, you just messed up the html tag 🙂
October 28th, 2004 at 12:18 pm
Visit the Athabasca Glacier in Jasper, Canada to see global warming at work. In the past 120 years, two-thirds of the centuries-old glacier has melted. That global warming exists in not in dispute. That it is influenced by human activity is not in dispute. The only thing that’s in any serious dispute within the scientific community is to what extent (not whether) human activity has an effect.
October 28th, 2004 at 12:28 pm
me mess up a tag? Never!
And manish, ignore the source and look at the data. That and basic knowledge of thermodynamics is all it takes to completel explode the global warming hypothesis. I don’t reject the global warming hypothesis because I’m conservative, I reject it utterly because it doesn’t fit with the known facts.
So why does it live on?
Apply your accusation to the other side as well. They believe it because it fits with their ideology. Never for a second forget that scientists are not impartial. They’re funding comes from governments and agencies with a bias, just as the OISM research did.
Ignore the source and look at the facts.
Tell you what. Find research that counters the claims made in the oism site. Find an explanation for the thermodynamic impossibility of the troposphere being cooler than the surface. If the greenhouse gas theory is correct, the troposphere must be hotter than the surface. It’s a physical law. Heat flows from higher to lower temps, not the other way around. Find an explanation for the fact that the majority of the warming occurred prior to the Industrial era. Find an explanation for totally discounting the correlation between global surface temperature and solar activity cycles.
In short, rather than complain about bias, since it is present on both sides of the issue, find facts to counter those I presented. If you take the time to learn, you’ll walk away from the global warming hype just as I did.
October 28th, 2004 at 3:43 pm
Rich:
Then the vast majority of climatologists are blind or idiots. Or maybe it’s *gasp* a conspiracy!
*ducks*
October 28th, 2004 at 4:31 pm
Go ahead and do that, Rich. This engineer, for one, would find the attempt amusing, if nothing else.