User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 47

  1. #21
    Senior Member wyrdsister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    Ape
    Posts
    106

    Default

    Climate change: A guide for the perplexed - earth - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist Environment

    Climate change: A guide for the perplexed

    This might interest you.
    Wyrd is a concept in Anglo-Saxon and Nordic culture roughly corresponding to fate. It is ancestral to Modern English weird, which has acquired a very different meaning.

  2. #22
    Lex Parsimoniae Xander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    4,463

    Default

    Was this the same program which quoted one scientist in it's broadcast as agreeing with their theories but he then later raised severe objections and claimed that they'd cut his part down quite a bit and managed to alter his message from one of raising doubts and criticisms into one confirming their theories?
    Isn't it time for a colourful metaphor?

  3. #23
    Senior Member Langrenus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    358

    Default

    Yes, the same programme Xander

    The scientist in question was Carl Wunch (based at MIT), who was one of the few people actually working on active research projects to be featured on the programme (many of the others were captioned at working at universities they retired from years ago).

    See link for his open letter to Channel 4 (the broadcasters)

    Edit:

    A nice quote, particularly in light of some of the discussions here:

    In general, good scientists (unlike lawyers) are meant to keep in mind at all times that conceivably they are wrong. There is a very wide spectrum of scientific knowledge ranging from the almost certain, e.g. that the sun will indeed rise tomorrow, or that no physical object can move faster than the speed of light; to inferences that seem very plausible but for which one can more readily imagine ways in which they might prove incorrect (e.g., that melting of the Greenland ice cap means that sea level will rise); to fiercely disputed ideas (e.g., that variations in the North Atlantic circulation directly control the climate of the northern hemisphere). Most of us draw conclusions that seem to us the most compelling, but try hard to maintain an open mind about counter arguments or new observations that could prove us wrong. Reducing the extremely complicated discussion of future climate change to the cartoon level we see on both extremes is somewhat like making public policy on the basis of a Batman movie.
    January has April's showers
    And 2 and 2 always makes a 5

  4. #24
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wyrdsister View Post
    This might interest you.
    Thank you. I'll have a good look over it later today.
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  5. #25
    Senior Member darlets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wyrdsister View Post
    Climate change: A guide for the perplexed - earth - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist Environment

    Climate change: A guide for the perplexed

    This might interest you.
    I brought it yesterday at the news agent. Haven't got round to reading it. It even has a polar bear on the cover
    "The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time."
    Bertrand Russell

    http://rayofsolar.blogspot.com/
    http://zeropointseven.blogspot.com/

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darlets View Post
    I brought it yesterday at the news agent. Haven't got round to reading it. It even has a polar bear on the cover
    Haha, I was just going to recommend this. Made for great reading.

  7. #27
    Senior Member htb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,506

    Default

    Global warming: Jesus for secularists.
    Likes Xann liked this post

  8. #28
    Senior Member Opivy1980's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    138

    Default

    What is actually happening according to most scientists is a combination of greenhouse gas buildup and cyclical climate change.

    Climate change usually occurs at a rate of millennial and it is now occurring at a centennial rate. So the changes are more noticeable and are causing more drastic weather patterns and natural disasters more frequently.


    I had all sorts of quotes and scientific studies url links but when I went to post it erased everything.

    So here is my proof:

    Go to google and put the phrase: global warming causing earth climate cycle faster

    read some of the studies done and see if it doesn't make sense.

    Then go back to watching documentaries that spoon feed you what you want to hear.
    Question everything especially yourself.

    Opivy1980

  9. #29
    Senior Member Veneti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    XNTX
    Posts
    264

    Default

    When some scientist can actually prove what they actually preach then "I'm a believer".

    When we have carbon particles measured in 2-3 parts per billion, I can't really emphasise with the blanket concept. When scientists can say "Hey, the bubble of pollution over china creates a convection which transfers heat" then I'll start getting interested. Carbon has a 15 year life in the atmosphere.

    When you look at the earth in relation to the sun you are comparing a pea against a basketball. Then consider the differential in heat between the poles and the equator and you can see any small change with the sun will create significant heat changes.

    Nup, most of this global warming is just Y2K bug in disguise, so research scientists can get their funding allocated.

    Bring on global warming; the summer was crap in the UK. In fact I'm going to burn some toast right now...

  10. #30
    heart on fire
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    8,457

    Default

    I am not yet ready to sign on as a Global Warming true believer. I am still skeptical about it. Maybe in part because I can still be a skeptic about. However, it is getting to the point where it is a "you are with us or against us" kind of thing. Some people believe it is impossible to be liberal without signing on whole heartedly to the global warming theory and its attending dogma.

    You are accused of not "caring" about the environment, as if simply supporting the idea of GW were the real solution to the problem. You can say that you do still care about the environment and that we should all do what we can to live more green but in the end if you don't 100% without question support the idea that GW is manmade and not a natural cycle of weather then you are accused of not being a caring person. *sigh*

    I am still open to new information on the subject either way, my mind is still open about it but it raises my feelings of unease to think that a political agenda could be silencing voices that critique the man made Global Warming theory, even if they come from the political side that I am most often in sympathy with.

    In opinion the left needs to watch this idea or else fall victim the hijacking of their parties in the same manner that the Christian Dominionism hijacked the right and the dogma will be used for political gain just the same as with the right. Some people absolutely cannot tolerate any questioning , just mere questions and discussion, of GW without it turning into a heated, emotional debate and that in and of itself should be a red flag about the potential nature of this growing concept.



    Chris Landsea Leaves IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
    "I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound."
    Chris Landsea


    Global-warming theorists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence:

    "But there is a more sinister side to this feeding frenzy. Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis."

    MIT Professor Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT

    Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory

Similar Threads

  1. New Solar Minimum; Mini-Ice Age - The Cure for Global Warming
    By Mal12345 in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-01-2014, 04:09 PM
  2. The so-called Mini-Ice age and "Global Warming"
    By heart in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 08-02-2009, 08:51 PM
  3. The Great Christian Argument
    By Kiddo in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 71
    Last Post: 08-05-2008, 10:44 PM
  4. Global warming
    By Nocapszy in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 04-09-2008, 11:18 AM
  5. The Great Blog Transplant - Sign up now!
    By cafe in forum Official Decrees
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-28-2007, 10:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO