Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's an interesting article for everyone's review...

http://news.nationalgeographic.....rming.html

Quote:
Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says

Kate Ravilious for National Geographic News
February 28, 2007

Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet's recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist's controversial theory.


The controversial theory is that planetary orbits are not static and subject to "bobbles" which are not predictable. Closer to the sun, warmer... Farther from the sun, cooler. Of course, there's a rebuttal. An Oxford scholar claims such might explain Mars' recent heating but the "bobbles" by Mars are more marked than bobbles by the Earth because (get this!) Mars doesn't have any moons.

I guess Mr. Oxford Scholar forgot that Mars has two moons, albeit much smaller ones than our Moon. Maybe I'm wrong but it seems to me that a larger moon means more gravitational influence... ie: greater bobbles.

Anyway, the article is well worth the read!

-Mac
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was speaking about this earlier, and a serious question regarding global warming legislation is this:

Has the market demand for green technologies matured to the point where only the market can initiate change?

I have to answer yes to this.

CFL usage is a perfect example of market forces making changes. Manufacturers creating eco-friendly vehicles because the demand for them is so massive is another example. This year's auto-show was full of eco-friendly vehicles, the oscars were the first "green" production(how green they really were, I really question... nonetheless.)

Recycling is a classic example; in the past decades we have seen recycling labels show up on almost everything. The reason? People want to see that recycling label. Consumers MADE a market for recyclable goods. Without consumer demand(consumer and business consumers) we'll never see any businesses change their ways. As I see it, demand is already going that way; there's not really a need for kyoto(or legislation) in the days of environmentalism becoming the next "cool" movement.

Al Gore might be full of it on his political policies, and his new found fame is only to serve his own ego and wallet. But one thing you must give the man is that there is a chance he will have contributed more than anyone to shifting market demand toward "green" technology.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

biggie wrote:
Al Gore might be full of it on his political policies, and his new found fame is only to serve his own ego and wallet. But one thing you must give the man is that there is a chance he will have contributed more than anyone to shifting market demand toward "green" technology.

Even a broken clock is right once a day... sometimes twice... :wink:

-Mac
winchry





Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 115
Reputation: 16.5Reputation: 16.5
Location: Sarnia, Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Everyone here seems to have an idea of something that caused global warming, but no one seems to accept it was caused by humans. Why is it that once the industrial revolution started, C02 emissons sharply rose and guess what? So did global temperatures. Also the # of human s of earth seems to affect C02 emmisions. More people means more need for gas and more emmisions. I strongly believe the world needs to keep its population down to help stop poverty, global warming, and better the economy.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 1:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

winchry wrote:
Everyone here seems to have an idea of something that caused global warming, but no one seems to accept it was caused by humans.

Perhaps that's because there's very little evidence that such is the case? Most of the fear mongering is a power play by socialists who see global warming as an opportunity to seize power and redistribute wealth. You can tell who they are pretty easily. As soon as they say things like "The evidence is conclusive!" then, by their closed minds, you'll know them.

winchry wrote:
Why is it that once the industrial revolution started, C02 emissons sharply rose and guess what? So did global temperatures. Also the # of human s of earth seems to affect C02 emmisions. More people means more need for gas and more emmisions.

How firm is your grasp of history, winchry? The last time the world had a warming session, it was rather short lived but it coincided with the Renaissance. The population of the Earth was remarkably less than a billion souls and the Industrial Revolution was a couple of hundred years in the future. Where did the CO2 come from for that global warming?

How about when the Vikings arrived in Greenland just before 1000 AD? Were the Viking using outboard motors and emitting CO2? How about the dinosaurs? Were they driving SUVs? Why have we found fossil evidence of tropical plants in the Arctic?

Keep in mind that the thermometer wasn't invented until 1714 and it's use wasn't common until the early 20th century. Most of the historical temperature estimates are based upon educated guesses. In other words, there isn't a great deal of precise information from which to analyze trends... yet there's a whole group of very vocal pseudoscientists who are prepared to use those guesses to claim the current warming trend is unprecedented.

winchry wrote:
I strongly believe the world needs to keep its population down to help stop poverty, global warming, and better the economy.

I agree that overpopulation is a danger, especially since most of the growing populations are third world countries where poverty is the norm. How about instead of sending food aid, we send condoms instead?

I'm all for cleaning up pollution! I'm all for creating sustainable development instead of depending on a resource based economy in Canada. Let's stop flooding our nation with immigrants so our population stabilizes. Let's stop racing to grow our cities. Let's focus on raising the standard of living for our citizens so we can show the world what sustainable development looks like.

-Mac
biggie





Joined: 06 Sep 2006
Posts: 1738
Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44Reputation: 44
votes: 10
Location: Ottawa, Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 3:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

winchry wrote:
I strongly believe the world needs to keep its population down to help stop poverty, global warming, and better the economy.


I couldn't agree more; now find a good way to do that.

God knows the west is doing it's part.
Trooper





Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 17
Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3
Location: Northern Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I strongly believe the world needs to keep its population down to help stop poverty, global warming, and better the economy.


I'll probably get chastized for this but....

If we assume that excessive population and all the attendant pollution producing activities are a major contributing factor to climate change and CO2 emissions then.....population control can probably be effected quite easily by our standing back and allowing the Islamic terrorists to pursue their avowed goal of killing off all the infidels. This would probably surpass all Kyoto objectives quite easily and we wouldn't have to listen to any more whining and bitching. Maybe Gore and Suzuki should team up with them and start promoting this as an efficient, cost free way of solving the global warming issue to go along with all the other ridiculous crap they are spewing. :D :roll:
winchry





Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 115
Reputation: 16.5Reputation: 16.5
Location: Sarnia, Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
How firm is your grasp of history, winchry? The last time the world had a warming session, it was rather short lived but it coincided with the Renaissance. The population of the Earth was remarkably less than a billion souls and the Industrial Revolution was a couple of hundred years in the future. Where did the CO2 come from for that global warming?


Clearly humans are not the only factor which affects global temperatures. I believe though based on the fact that the greenhouse affect is a proven theory and Co2 emissions have spiked that this warming curve is definitely caused by humans. Also the speed and severity of the warming are much more drastic than when it has been caused by nature.
Trooper





Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 17
Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3Reputation: 7.3
Location: Northern Ontario

PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
a proven theory
??????

Da proof is da proof. A theory is not da proof.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 5:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

winchry wrote:
I believe though based on the fact that the greenhouse affect is a proven theory and Co2 emissions have spiked that this warming curve is definitely caused by humans. Also the speed and severity of the warming are much more drastic than when it has been caused by nature.

You believe but you cannot prove. Neither than the IPCC or David Suzuki or Al Gore. Kindly demonstrate any evidence whatsoever of the speed of prior global warming incidents for comparison.

Is it okay if I don't hold my breath while waiting for you?

-Mac
Swift





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 57
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9

PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The level of CO2 in the atmosphere has shown great variation. It has been as much as 18 times the current level. But there is no evidence that this level caused the huge temperature rise that the global warming theories say must have occured. To be accepted by real scientists as accurate, the models that supposedly forcast the future temperature should demponstrate their ability to correctly reflect the known historical variations in CO2 levels and temperature. The claims of the global warming supporters make put the ability of any current model to successfully pass this test at zero.
goward4u





Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 112
Reputation: 28.7Reputation: 28.7Reputation: 28.7

PostPosted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you look at the Drudge report you will see a documentary set to air that argues against the Al Gore global warming theory with scientists who find that CO2 doesn't cause global warming, global warming causes CO2 and other interesting polemics.

The main value is that it names serious climate scientists who do not support the UN report. Some of them actually worked on that report but couldn't bring themselves to sign off on it.

It also says that Africa will never progress unless it burns carbon to create energy and will be hurt the most by the unnecessary reduction of CO2 in the atmosphere.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

winchry wrote:
Quote:
How firm is your grasp of history, winchry? The last time the world had a warming session, it was rather short lived but it coincided with the Renaissance. The population of the Earth was remarkably less than a billion souls and the Industrial Revolution was a couple of hundred years in the future. Where did the CO2 come from for that global warming?


Clearly humans are not the only factor which affects global temperatures. I believe though based on the fact that the greenhouse affect is a proven theory and Co2 emissions have spiked that this warming curve is definitely caused by humans. Also the speed and severity of the warming are much more drastic than when it has been caused by nature.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability

Quote:
If a theory is falsifiable, then it is scientific; if it is not falsifiable, then it is not open to falsification and requires faith in it not being, in fact, false. Some have used this principle to cast doubt on the scientific validity of many disciplines (such as macroevolution and physical cosmology).


So, since the theory of man made global warming is not falsifiable, it is outside the realm of science. As such rational argument cannot be applied to it and this thread no longer has a point.

PS. Until there is actually a theory on the Arctic oscillation, and the polar vortex, climate modeling will not be accurate.
winchry





Joined: 22 Feb 2007
Posts: 115
Reputation: 16.5Reputation: 16.5
Location: Sarnia, Ontario

PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

All I see is excuses to ignore global warming. Everone needs to step up to the plate and do their part. Also to help the Consevatives next election Candians need to see Conservatives really care about envriomental issues. Conservatives saying global warming isn't real doesnt't help. Everyone except a few still don't believe the science. So why do you all come on board and help get some more concrete results.
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Not falsifiable, I rest my case.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 2 of 3

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Climate change Real

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB