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 1, 2  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:52 am    Post subject: The Current State of the Science... Reply with quote

The anthropogenic GW scare being perpetuated by Al Gore, David Suzuki, et al. is on a lot of minds. Pretty much every modernized nation on Earth is being forced by public opinion to at least acknowledge the theory, and implement solutions to a problem that may not exist.

As we creep closer and closer to actual consequences for adherence to the GW belief system, skeptics have started to get a fair shake in the media. It is my hopeful opinion that it is only a matter of time before we can leave this mess behind us.

Some do not agree, and so I bring this thread. I'll examine most of the major claims made by the GW movement that have now been refuted, some sources culled from these very forums.

1) 'There is A Scientific Concensus'

Usually the first argument when GW is met by resistance, it is important to note that science is not a democracy game, millions of people believing the earth was flat did not make it so. That being said, the latest survey of peer-reviewed research shows that less than half of the reports support the GW theory advance in 'An Inconvenient Truth'. Only 48% implicitly or explicitly endorsed the theory, only 1 single report predicted 'catastrophic' results: Link

2) The IPCC Reports involved the concensus of thousands of scientists

The IPCC report quoted by GW enthusiasts is almost exlusively the "Summary for Policy Makers" which is written and approved exclusively by a handful of politicians and bureaucrats. The chapters of the actual scientist-written report are edited to comply with the summary: Link
Furthermore, many scientists who contributed to the actual research disagreed so strongly with the summary that they asked to have their names removed from the report; only when faced with legal action did the IPCC comply: Link

3) Mann's Hockey Stick

One of the key pieces of data in every GW argument, including Gore's 'An Inconvenient Truth', has been Mann's Hockey Stick, a graphical representation of data that supposedly demonstrated a massive increase in global temperatures in the last century. This model has been throughly debunked by Canadian researchers: Link

4) CO2 levels are rising at historical rates and increasing warming

Quote:
"Over the last hundred years the CO2 has increased from about 300ppm to about 350ppm. At various times during the Earth's history carbon dioxide levels have been many times higher than the present levels (up to 10 times!) in fact we actually have one of the lowest levels of CO2 in earths history.
Greenhouse gases represent about 4% of the total atmospheric gases. CO2 represents less than 1% of the greenhouse gases (water, CO2, methane). In the last hundred years the CO2 increase cause the total greenhouse gas composition to increase by fractions of a percent!"
Link

Furthermore, despite the claims of GW believers, data shows that CO2 increases follow temperature increases, rather than precede them: Link

5) The Earth is warming at an unprecedented rate in human history / Warmer now than ever before ... etc

The data collection upon which this was based has been shown to be riddled with errors. There are numerous online sources demonstrating the problems with current climate monitoring sites (check SDA or climateaudit.org if you're so inclined).

The data set for the records was corrupted further by bad math:

Quote:
The hottest year since 1880 becomes 1934 instead of 1998, which is now just second; 1921 is third.Four of the 10 hottest years were in the 1930s, only three in the past decade. Claiming that man-made carbon dioxide has caused the natural disasters of recent years makes as much sense as claiming fossil-fuel burning caused the Great Depression.
The 15 hottest years since 1880 are spread over seven decades. Eight occurred before atmospheric carbon dioxide began its recent rise; seven occurred afterwards.
In other words, there is no discernible trend, no obvious warming of late:
Link

6) Miscellaneous Claims / Chicken Little Proclaimations

Quote:
Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported, "Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and that global warming was to blame."


Quote:
Gore claims global warming is causing more frequent and severe hurricanes. However, hurricane expert Chris Landsea published a study on May 1 documenting that hurricane activity is no higher now than in decades past. Hurricane expert William Gray reported just a few days earlier, on April 27, that the number of major hurricanes making landfall on the U.S. Atlantic coast has declined in the past 40 years.


Quote:
Gore claims global warming is causing an expansion of African deserts. However, the Sept. 16, 2002, issue of New Scientist reports, "Africa's deserts are in 'spectacular' retreat . . . making farming viable again in what were some of the most arid parts of Africa."


Quote:
Gore argues Greenland is in rapid meltdown, and that this threatens to raise sea levels by 20 feet. But according to a 2005 study in the Journal of Glaciology, "the Greenland ice sheet is thinning at the margins and growing inland, with a small overall mass gain." In late 2006, researchers at the Danish Meteorological Institute reported that the past two decades were the coldest for Greenland since the 1910s.


Quote:
Gore claims the Antarctic ice sheet is melting because of global warming. Yet the Jan. 14, 2002, issue of Nature magazine reported Antarctica as a whole has been dramatically cooling for decades. More recently, scientists reported in the September 2006 issue of the British journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series A: Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, that satellite measurements of the Antarctic ice sheet showed significant growth between 1992 and 2003. And the U.N. Climate Change panel reported in February 2007 that Antarctica is unlikely to lose any ice mass during the remainder of the century.


HT: Craig :D

Link: Polar Bear Populations Actually Increasing, Decreases in Local Areas Due to Over-hunting

7) Conclusion

This is only the tip of the iceberg, as far as GW claim debunking goes. However, I think its safe to say that Anthropogenic Global Warming has been reduced to a shaky hypothesis at best, a cult obsession on par with Trutherism at worst. There is much, much more research to be completed before we commit ourselves to the massive, costly programs and efforts espoused by Gore and Co.

Any thoughts, comments, snide remarks?
urbanmonk





Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 307
Reputation: 16.8Reputation: 16.8
votes: 5

PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:27 am    Post subject: Re: The Current State of the Science... Reply with quote

FF_Canuck wrote:

Global Warming has been reduced to a shaky hypothesis at best, a cult obsession on par with Trutherism at worst. There is much, much more research to be completed before we commit ourselves to the massive, costly programs and efforts espoused by Gore and Co.

It's a "cult obsession" that all the leaders of the world seem compelled to bow down to (latest one(s) Bush/Rice). The implications are frightening imo.

Nice to see the polar bears are adapting! :~)
Mac





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

PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 1:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The story on global warming is dynamic and enviro-activists are still claiming the sky is falling. The glaring hypocrisy of those pseudo-scientists who have declared "the science is in" should have led to their dismissal. Instead, even those politicians who were initially skeptical are now kneeling before the global warming altar, albeit reluctantly. At least it appears the Kyoto Wealth Redistribution Scheme has been shuffled to the backburner by the majority of nations.... for now...

-Mac
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2007 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another link snaps in the already broken chain:

Quote:
A new peer-reviewed scientific study counters a major premise of global warming theory, concluding carbon dioxide did not end the last ice age

The study, led by University of Southern California geologist Lowell Stott, concluded deep-sea temperatures rose 1,300 years before the rise in atmospheric CO2, which would rule out the greenhouse gas as the main agent of the meltdown.


From World Net Daily, via SDA.
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:28 am    Post subject: Climate Warming "Shows no human influence" Reply with quote

From Canada Free Press:

CFP wrote:
"Climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia report that observed patterns of temperature changes (‘fingerprints’) over the last thirty years are not in accord with what greenhouse models predict and can better be explained by natural factors, such as solar variability. Therefore, climate change is ‘unstoppable’ and cannot be affected or modified by controlling the emission of greenhouse gases, such as CO2 ... The report is published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society "
Big Tuna





Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 368
Reputation: 15
votes: 6

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:11 am    Post subject: Re: The Current State of the Science... Reply with quote

FF_Canuck wrote:
...
Usually the first argument when GW is met by resistance, it is important to note that science is not a democracy game, millions of people believing the earth was flat did not make it so.
...
Any thoughts, comments, snide remarks?


One quick comment/snide remark:

I think this "people believed world was flat argument" is a weak argument if you're on the anti global warming side and works better for the global warming advocates.

It was a common belief that the world was flat until science proved that it was round. Just as it was common belief that we could pollute the planet with no effect on the earths atmosphere until maybe science we'll prove that that isn't the case.

Don't worry I'm sure there were plenty of "world is round" deniers too when it was first discovered! :D
Vicki





Joined: 22 Sep 2007
Posts: 92
Reputation: 24Reputation: 24
votes: 2
Location: West Vancouver

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The world IS flat. And if you move too far to the left you are bound to fall off !
Big Tuna





Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 368
Reputation: 15
votes: 6

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vicki wrote:
The world IS flat. And if you move too far to the left you are bound to fall off !


I guess the same applies if you move too far the right. We all better stay in the center with the Liberals just to be sure!
mltoryblue





Joined: 29 Oct 2007
Posts: 109
Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7Reputation: 7

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Big Tuna wrote:
Vicki wrote:
The world IS flat. And if you move too far to the left you are bound to fall off !


I guess the same applies if you move too far the right. We all better stay in the center with the Liberals just to be sure!


Those who stay in the centre bring about very little change and accomplish very little.

Since when are the Liberals in the centre?
Mac





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

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 2:40 pm    Post subject: Re: The Current State of the Science... Reply with quote

Big Tuna wrote:
One quick comment/snide remark:

I think this "people believed world was flat argument" is a weak argument if you're on the anti global warming side and works better for the global warming advocates.

It was a common belief that the world was flat until science proved that it was round. Just as it was common belief that we could pollute the planet with no effect on the earths atmosphere until maybe science we'll prove that that isn't the case.

Don't worry I'm sure there were plenty of "world is round" deniers too when it was first discovered! :D

As reluctant as I am to use Wikipedia as a resource, give this a read: Flat Earth

Some of those who believed and argued that the earth was flat were scientists. They solidly denied any round earth theory.

So when the AGW theory is proved utterly, completely wrong by history, you and the IPCC will be lumped with them.

-Mac
Big Tuna





Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 368
Reputation: 15
votes: 6

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:30 pm    Post subject: Re: The Current State of the Science... Reply with quote

Mac wrote:
Big Tuna wrote:
One quick comment/snide remark:

I think this "people believed world was flat argument" is a weak argument if you're on the anti global warming side and works better for the global warming advocates.

It was a common belief that the world was flat until science proved that it was round. Just as it was common belief that we could pollute the planet with no effect on the earths atmosphere until maybe science we'll prove that that isn't the case.

Don't worry I'm sure there were plenty of "world is round" deniers too when it was first discovered! :D

As reluctant as I am to use Wikipedia as a resource, give this a read: Flat Earth

Some of those who believed and argued that the earth was flat were scientists. They solidly denied any round earth theory.

So when the AGW theory is proved utterly, completely wrong by history, you and the IPCC will be lumped with them.

-Mac


Yes.. and some of those who believed pollution is not having a negative effect on the earths atmosphere are scientists. They solidly deny the human causes of global warming.

The sad part is that if you're proved utterly completely wrong, I might not be around to lump you with the anyone.
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fish wrote:
Quote:
I guess the same applies if you move too far the right. We all better stay in the center with the Liberals just to be sure!


We spell it centre in Canada.

CPC stands for.
Centre Party of Canada
Bill_in_Calgary





Joined: 18 Jun 2007
Posts: 27
Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5Reputation: 8.5

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yes.. and some of those who believed pollution is not having a negative effect on the earths atmosphere are scientists. They solidly deny the human causes of global warming.



Pollution is a problem and is having a negative effect. CO2 is not a pollutant and is having no negative effect. It does however cause crops to grow better in times of higher concentration.
mrsocko





Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 2463
Reputation: 131.2
votes: 8
Location: Southwestern Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Pollution is a problem and is having a negative effect. CO2 is not a pollutant and is having no negative effect. It does however cause crops to grow better in times of higher concentration.


Hey Bill , you an old farmer or something.

I asked my father-in-law who has been farming for 55 years how much longer the growing season is with all this GLOBAL warming compared to when he started.

It's not one day longer he said.
Quote:
Not one f'in day
FF_Canuck





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 3360
Reputation: 73.4
votes: 17
Location: Southern Alberta

PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
It was a common belief that the world was flat until science proved that it was round. Just as it was common belief that we could pollute the planet with no effect on the earths atmosphere until maybe science we'll prove that that isn't the case.


The flat earth point works both ways - its more of an example that science is not a popularity contest. I could just have easily used ether theory as an example.

Also, that's one hell of a straw man you're putting out. Most of us acknowledge the threats of overconsumption, toxicity, ... etc. and are for measures that combat actual pollution. We don't believe that CO2 is a pollutant. I personally acknowledge that the climate is changing - but I think human impact is negligable.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  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


The Current State of the Science...

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB