Greenpeace Founder: No Scientific Proof for Global Warming
- Thread starter user 64972
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
Age change: I'm against it
Long ago I was for it, Then I was against it, Now I don't even acknowledge it.:cry:
Long ago I was for it, Then I was against it, Now I don't even acknowledge it.:cry:
Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
Double post - Dinner cocktail
Last edited by a moderator:
Frank screwyourednecks
Well-Known Member
[Broken External Image]:
It is really a "debate" if 97 percent of people agree? I wouldn't say it is..
Hey blksn8k nice post. I'm sure you will get rewarded for that.
I wont argue with you deniers because it is not a debate. I will ask you though a question...what if the consensus was 100 percent? would you deniers still disagree?
What single thing would make you change your minds?
Answer that.
It is really a "debate" if 97 percent of people agree? I wouldn't say it is..
Hey blksn8k nice post. I'm sure you will get rewarded for that.
I wont argue with you deniers because it is not a debate. I will ask you though a question...what if the consensus was 100 percent? would you deniers still disagree?
What single thing would make you change your minds?
Answer that.
Redfish,
Your last statement to Frank was very well said....and hits the nail on the head.
We would all like the air we breathe and the water we drink to be as cleen as possible and I am all for efforts to save our resources. The Climate Change, Global Warming nuts have taken these basic environmental issues to the doom and gloom stages without any factual evidence.
I agree that we should reduce the use of fossil fuels to help clean the air, and reduce our independence on imported oil, but don't imply that we are creating any level of climate change, or that we can reverse the natural changes. Too many outlandish statements by environmental extremist only hurts their cause. The issue of climate change needs a lot more discussion before the Government goes off on a witch humt. However, when someone is unwilling to logically debate the issue by claiming "The Debate is Over" when the debate never began is a very childish attitude and does not promote understanding and a reasonable dialog.
Whenever man attempts to play God and control nature, even on a small scale, is when things really get screwed up.
...Rich
.
Your last statement to Frank was very well said....and hits the nail on the head.
We would all like the air we breathe and the water we drink to be as cleen as possible and I am all for efforts to save our resources. The Climate Change, Global Warming nuts have taken these basic environmental issues to the doom and gloom stages without any factual evidence.
I agree that we should reduce the use of fossil fuels to help clean the air, and reduce our independence on imported oil, but don't imply that we are creating any level of climate change, or that we can reverse the natural changes. Too many outlandish statements by environmental extremist only hurts their cause. The issue of climate change needs a lot more discussion before the Government goes off on a witch humt. However, when someone is unwilling to logically debate the issue by claiming "The Debate is Over" when the debate never began is a very childish attitude and does not promote understanding and a reasonable dialog.
Whenever man attempts to play God and control nature, even on a small scale, is when things really get screwed up.
...Rich
.
Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
Frank Said Before
You just can't grab a poster.
Most of the 97% quotes comes from the Doran Survey, really a MS Thesis. The survey was sent to 10,256 scientist and 3,146 replied. Out of this 3,147 the thesis presenter selected 75 individuals that he declared experts and based the 97% number on them. Many scientist that responded dispute the findings. 90% of the "experts" selected were from north America.
A few other studies also reflect a number near 97%. All have similar problems. One was a review of papers presented by scientist on Climate Change.
If you read everything about the studies the BS flag is waving like a hurricane is blowing.
Rich "Nature is seldom wrong, Management of Nature always"
You just can't grab a poster.
Most of the 97% quotes comes from the Doran Survey, really a MS Thesis. The survey was sent to 10,256 scientist and 3,146 replied. Out of this 3,147 the thesis presenter selected 75 individuals that he declared experts and based the 97% number on them. Many scientist that responded dispute the findings. 90% of the "experts" selected were from north America.
A few other studies also reflect a number near 97%. All have similar problems. One was a review of papers presented by scientist on Climate Change.
If you read everything about the studies the BS flag is waving like a hurricane is blowing.
Rich "Nature is seldom wrong, Management of Nature always"
Frank,
You still do not understand the issue!! Your last pie chart agrees with most people...Climate Changes, has changed in the past and will continue to change as long ast the Earth exists !! However the point your chart avoids is if all those scientist believe that Humans are the cause of Climate Change, and if we can do anything about it. That's is the whole argument that the so-called deniers want answered !
Remember when this all started and Al Gore proclaimed that CO2 was causing "Global Warming". Now that studies have shown that the Earth has actually been cooling since 1997 dispite higher CO2 levels, it throws a wet blanket on the Global Warming theory. So they just started to call it Climate Change knowing that nobody will accept the Global Warming theory when evidence shows the Earth is cooling.
The issue is not if the Earth is warming or cooling, it's whether any Climate Change is caused by Humans.
Why don't any of your cartoons or charts clearly state that those scientists actually believe that Climate Change is caused by Humans, and that they believe humans can reverse Climate Change?? Everything you have presented here only shows that most scientist believe that the Climate is Changing....it certainly does not take a scientist to tell us that? But how many actually believe Humans are causing Climate Change?
Shortly after WWII, CO2 was at the highest levels ever recorded yet the global weather was bitterly cold. At that time, the scientist believed that the CO2 was the cause of the cold weather and warned that we were causing another Ice Age? 40+ years later they were saying that CO2 was causing Global Warming? In the last 10 years, they have renamed it Climate Change only because their theories cannot show that the CO2 is causing the Earth to Warm or Cool...That signals the BS Flag to me! When they can't prove their point, they change the question, and refuse to debate the issue.
...Rich
You still do not understand the issue!! Your last pie chart agrees with most people...Climate Changes, has changed in the past and will continue to change as long ast the Earth exists !! However the point your chart avoids is if all those scientist believe that Humans are the cause of Climate Change, and if we can do anything about it. That's is the whole argument that the so-called deniers want answered !
Remember when this all started and Al Gore proclaimed that CO2 was causing "Global Warming". Now that studies have shown that the Earth has actually been cooling since 1997 dispite higher CO2 levels, it throws a wet blanket on the Global Warming theory. So they just started to call it Climate Change knowing that nobody will accept the Global Warming theory when evidence shows the Earth is cooling.
The issue is not if the Earth is warming or cooling, it's whether any Climate Change is caused by Humans.
Why don't any of your cartoons or charts clearly state that those scientists actually believe that Climate Change is caused by Humans, and that they believe humans can reverse Climate Change?? Everything you have presented here only shows that most scientist believe that the Climate is Changing....it certainly does not take a scientist to tell us that? But how many actually believe Humans are causing Climate Change?
Shortly after WWII, CO2 was at the highest levels ever recorded yet the global weather was bitterly cold. At that time, the scientist believed that the CO2 was the cause of the cold weather and warned that we were causing another Ice Age? 40+ years later they were saying that CO2 was causing Global Warming? In the last 10 years, they have renamed it Climate Change only because their theories cannot show that the CO2 is causing the Earth to Warm or Cool...That signals the BS Flag to me! When they can't prove their point, they change the question, and refuse to debate the issue.
...Rich
Andy Chase
Well-Known Member
[Broken External Image]:
Frank, This is the "results" from the cook et al 2013 studies that your pie chart shows 98.4% of scientists agree on global climate change being results of man. Well this just shows that you can produce any results you want. If you see they basically looked over about 12,000 papers on global climate change. roughly 33-35% of these papers were written by people who believe in humans causing global climate change, and of those 98.4% endorse this. Well no S#!& Sherlock, if I believe in something, I'm going to probably write about it. 2/3 of the papers did not link humans to climate change. That's why there is still a debate.
Frank, This is the "results" from the cook et al 2013 studies that your pie chart shows 98.4% of scientists agree on global climate change being results of man. Well this just shows that you can produce any results you want. If you see they basically looked over about 12,000 papers on global climate change. roughly 33-35% of these papers were written by people who believe in humans causing global climate change, and of those 98.4% endorse this. Well no S#!& Sherlock, if I believe in something, I'm going to probably write about it. 2/3 of the papers did not link humans to climate change. That's why there is still a debate.
Last edited by a moderator:
Great post Andy!
That's exactly what the NIPCC found...that the numbers were being deliberately biased and manipulated to reflect the Political/Financial views of the government, depending upon their control over the funding of those scientists.
...Rich
That's exactly what the NIPCC found...that the numbers were being deliberately biased and manipulated to reflect the Political/Financial views of the government, depending upon their control over the funding of those scientists.
...Rich
Andy Chase
Well-Known Member
Hugh and Richard :bwahaha:
here's one just for you:
[Broken External Image]:
here's one just for you:
[Broken External Image]:
Andy Chase
Well-Known Member
[Broken External Image]:
Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
Frank
Here's one just for you
[Broken External Image]:
Here's one just for you
[Broken External Image]:
Frank screwyourednecks
Well-Known Member
Maybe this is simple enough? Probably not
[Broken External Image]:
[Broken External Image]:
[Broken External Image]:
[Broken External Image]:
[Broken External Image]:
[Broken External Image]:
Frank screwyourednecks
Well-Known Member
Hugh there are several on here refuting the existence. I am showing you that it is a systematic denial by one party that is killing any progress here in America. They are owned by corporate interests who do not want to pay their share in taxes. That type of culture is not a functioning Democracy. Its broken and we are gonna have a crumbling infrastructure until the right starts doing things for the people instead of the greedy corporations.
Remember the people?? WE THE PEOPLE?? you know the constituents that the Govt is supposed to be serving?? Wake up dude and try to be less extreme right and swing a little towards the center. Im not asking you to hug trees and march in the gay pride parade...just see what needs to happen here in the USA and do the right thing.
Taxes for corporations are at an all time low. Don't believe what they say. if it is one dollar they are going to skew the research and say its too much. Go look it up...
OPEN YOUR MIND
Remember the people?? WE THE PEOPLE?? you know the constituents that the Govt is supposed to be serving?? Wake up dude and try to be less extreme right and swing a little towards the center. Im not asking you to hug trees and march in the gay pride parade...just see what needs to happen here in the USA and do the right thing.
Taxes for corporations are at an all time low. Don't believe what they say. if it is one dollar they are going to skew the research and say its too much. Go look it up...
OPEN YOUR MIND
Frank screwyourednecks
Well-Known Member
And Climate change is without a doubt being worsened by humans. There is nuclear waste coming ashore in California. Nitrogen Runoff in the oceans from farms, oil spills, fracking, acid rain, ozone depletion..etc etc...
The rain forest...the trees are the filter for airborne CO2 They are disappearing. The ice melt is 100x faster than normal. 97 percent of scientists attest that it is man doing it.
I could go on forever.
The rain forest...the trees are the filter for airborne CO2 They are disappearing. The ice melt is 100x faster than normal. 97 percent of scientists attest that it is man doing it.
I could go on forever.
Frank,
You are just confirming that this whole Global Warming, Climate Change is a Political/Financial conspiricy! If you want to blame Conservatives, fine! Just remember that it is the Liberal who started this....and it still does not prove that any climate change is caused by Humans, nor can it be reversed by Humans !
All of your numbers have been shown to be exaggerated and yet you continue to perpetuate the lie.
Lie 1. It is not 97% of ALL scientist, but only 97% of a handfull who replied to a specific survey ! The opinions of 2/3s of the scientist who did not reply are never mentioned.
Lie 2. Current NASA satellite photos show that the size of the polar ice caps have increased by near 50% in the past few years !
Lie 3. The rain forest might be disappearing, but more than 70% of the CO2 in our atmosphere comes from the evaporation of the oceans...and there has only been a 0.3% increase in Global Temperatures which has been proven to be well within the range of natural variance
Thus the cause of increases in CO2 in the atmosphere are cause by Global Warming... That's exactly the complete opposite of what Al Gore believes and what started this whole mess. From the day Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" came out, scientist from around the world have been critical of the lack of scientific research that was used to reach the conclusions expressed in the film.
Frank, All you do is recite unproven statements made by the Liberal media and Government agencies. The reason why this issue has not been resolved is the same reason why our government is so dis-functional. Everything is based on political ideology rather than evidence or proven facts. Nobody wants to debate the issues and workout a compromise solution base on known and verifiable facts. You are just another liberal puppet mouthing words from someone else's mouth. It's not a political issue, its a scientific issue that should be free from political pressures...but it's not!
...Rich
You are just confirming that this whole Global Warming, Climate Change is a Political/Financial conspiricy! If you want to blame Conservatives, fine! Just remember that it is the Liberal who started this....and it still does not prove that any climate change is caused by Humans, nor can it be reversed by Humans !
All of your numbers have been shown to be exaggerated and yet you continue to perpetuate the lie.
Lie 1. It is not 97% of ALL scientist, but only 97% of a handfull who replied to a specific survey ! The opinions of 2/3s of the scientist who did not reply are never mentioned.
Lie 2. Current NASA satellite photos show that the size of the polar ice caps have increased by near 50% in the past few years !
Lie 3. The rain forest might be disappearing, but more than 70% of the CO2 in our atmosphere comes from the evaporation of the oceans...and there has only been a 0.3% increase in Global Temperatures which has been proven to be well within the range of natural variance
Thus the cause of increases in CO2 in the atmosphere are cause by Global Warming... That's exactly the complete opposite of what Al Gore believes and what started this whole mess. From the day Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" came out, scientist from around the world have been critical of the lack of scientific research that was used to reach the conclusions expressed in the film.
Frank, All you do is recite unproven statements made by the Liberal media and Government agencies. The reason why this issue has not been resolved is the same reason why our government is so dis-functional. Everything is based on political ideology rather than evidence or proven facts. Nobody wants to debate the issues and workout a compromise solution base on known and verifiable facts. You are just another liberal puppet mouthing words from someone else's mouth. It's not a political issue, its a scientific issue that should be free from political pressures...but it's not!
...Rich
Last edited by a moderator:
To call me far right is to thoroughly misunderstand my politics.:bwahaha:
And I welcome face to face political discussion. In fact, it's right in my wheelhouse and I am very experienced in it as a political scientist. Your arguments are more in line with young liberals in political science than the more mature (realistic) ideologies of those in the upper classes and graduate classes. Or more appropriately, your political philosophy more resembles art or philosophy majors (political philosophy excepted). Taking economics classes and understanding economies helps, too.
I am, in fact, in favor of big government and understand economies of scale. The mission needs to be clear and concise, though, and it no longer is. The Constitution is an excellent source.
I am opposed to nanny government, though, and legislation for the sake of legislation and legislation to pick winners and losers.
I am incredibly socially liberal (it's actually conservatism but the GOP has hijacked the term to mean religious conservatism). Simply mind your own business.
I am very economically conservative. Saving and investing works better than redistribution.
I am in favor of balanced budgets.
I am in favor of no child going hungry and nobody ever being denied the best healthcare.
I hate war and preemptive action but appreciate true military might as a deterrence.
I believe the US is exceptional and I believe our exceptionalism has made the entire world better but only by example not force. Nation building has failed in every single instance and I can provide a paper I wrote on this very subject.
I'd gladly pay 50% of my income to taxes if I knew that nobody ever went to bed hungry or we cured cancer, etc. Unfortunately, all I see my taxes resulting in is declining infrastructure, generational poverty brought on by government dependence, starving children, drug dependent (economically and physically) urban centers, and expensive wars we have no business waging. We can send men to the moon in the 1960s and we can spy on every person in the world but we can't balance a budget or cure cancer?
Please don't pretend to know my politics, Frank. It's much deeper than any one of the issues above and is complex - not ideological as yours.
Which of the political philosophers are your favorite, or do you just wing it from the media?
Please read Rand Paul's voting record, not MSNBCs or even Fox's version of who he is. Both sides are very afraid of him and it's because he does not follow party lines.
And people should take care of the environment because we have to live here and a healthy environment and animals are preferable to the alternative...not because we are arrogant enough and scared enough to believe we could destroy the Earth.
And I welcome face to face political discussion. In fact, it's right in my wheelhouse and I am very experienced in it as a political scientist. Your arguments are more in line with young liberals in political science than the more mature (realistic) ideologies of those in the upper classes and graduate classes. Or more appropriately, your political philosophy more resembles art or philosophy majors (political philosophy excepted). Taking economics classes and understanding economies helps, too.
I am, in fact, in favor of big government and understand economies of scale. The mission needs to be clear and concise, though, and it no longer is. The Constitution is an excellent source.
I am opposed to nanny government, though, and legislation for the sake of legislation and legislation to pick winners and losers.
I am incredibly socially liberal (it's actually conservatism but the GOP has hijacked the term to mean religious conservatism). Simply mind your own business.
I am very economically conservative. Saving and investing works better than redistribution.
I am in favor of balanced budgets.
I am in favor of no child going hungry and nobody ever being denied the best healthcare.
I hate war and preemptive action but appreciate true military might as a deterrence.
I believe the US is exceptional and I believe our exceptionalism has made the entire world better but only by example not force. Nation building has failed in every single instance and I can provide a paper I wrote on this very subject.
I'd gladly pay 50% of my income to taxes if I knew that nobody ever went to bed hungry or we cured cancer, etc. Unfortunately, all I see my taxes resulting in is declining infrastructure, generational poverty brought on by government dependence, starving children, drug dependent (economically and physically) urban centers, and expensive wars we have no business waging. We can send men to the moon in the 1960s and we can spy on every person in the world but we can't balance a budget or cure cancer?
Please don't pretend to know my politics, Frank. It's much deeper than any one of the issues above and is complex - not ideological as yours.
Which of the political philosophers are your favorite, or do you just wing it from the media?
Please read Rand Paul's voting record, not MSNBCs or even Fox's version of who he is. Both sides are very afraid of him and it's because he does not follow party lines.
And people should take care of the environment because we have to live here and a healthy environment and animals are preferable to the alternative...not because we are arrogant enough and scared enough to believe we could destroy the Earth.
Last edited by a moderator:
