Page 1 of 1

General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-05 01:18pm
by AMT
A friend of mine is buying into the whole "Global Warming is a myth bit" (which is weird, because she's a meterologist with a MS) and has provided a link she claims shows that a large majority of scientists (or a growing majority, she isn't very clear)

EPA minority report link.
UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History'

'No evidence for accelerated sea-level rise'

Link to Intro and full report:

Link to Full Printable PDF Report

POZNAN, Poland - The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN. The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

The U.S. Senate report is the latest evidence of the growing groundswell of scientific opposition rising to challenge the UN and Gore. Scientific meetings are now being dominated by a growing number of skeptical scientists. The prestigious International Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists' equivalent of the Olympic Games, was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices and views of scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears. [See Full report Here: & See: Skeptical scientists overwhelm conference: '2/3 of presenters and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC' ]

Full Senate Report Set To Be Released in the Next 24 Hours – Stay Tuned…

A hint of what the upcoming report contains:

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

“The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.

“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

“CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan.

“The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata. # #

In addition, the report will feature new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears and a heavy dose of inconvenient climate developments. (See Below: Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History')

The Senate Minority Report is an update of 2007’s blockbuster U.S. Senate Minority Report of over 400 dissenting scientists. See here: This new report will contain the names, quotes and analyses of literally hundreds of additional international scientists who publicly dissented from man-made climate fears in just 2008 alone. The chorus of scientific voices skeptical grow louder as a steady stream of peer-reviewed studies, analyses and real world data challenge the UN and former Vice President Al Gore's claims that the "science is settled" and there is a "consensus." The original 2007 U.S. Senate report is available here: Full Report Set To Be Released in the Next 24 Hours – Stay Tuned…

Meanwhile, while the UN climate conference is in session here in Poznan, the bad scientific news for promoters of man-made climate alarm just keeps rolling in. Below is a very small sampling of very inconvenient developments for Gore, the United Nations, and their promoters in the mainstream media. Peer-reviewed studies, analyses, and prominent scientists continue to speak out to refute climate fears. The data presented below is just from the past week.
#

Peer-reviewed study: Half of recent warming was solar! - December 10, 2008 - Physicist Dr. Lubos Motl's Website

Excerpt: In this dose of peer-reviewed skeptical climatological literature, we follow Climate Research News. The blog was intrigued by a new article in Geophysical Research Letters that was accepted on Friday, December 5th. Eichler, A., S. Olivier, K. Henderson, A. Laube, J. Beer, T. Papina, H. W. Gäggeler, and M. Schwikowski: Temperature response in the Altai region lags solar forcing - Recall that the Siberian Altai Mountains are found at the intersection of Russia, China, Mongolia, and Kazakhstan. The authors looked at 750 years worth of the local ice core, especially the oxygen isotope. They claim to have found a very strong correlation between the concentration of this isotope (i.e. temperature) on one side and the known solar activity in the epoch 1250-1850. Their data seem to be precise enough to determine the lag, about 10-30 years. It takes some time for the climate to respond to the solar changes. It seems that they also have data to claim that the correlation gets less precise after 1850. They attribute the deviation to CO2 and by comparing the magnitude of the forcings, they conclude that "Our results are in agreement with studies based on NH temperature reconstructions [Scafetta et al., 2007] revealing that only up to approximately 50% of the observed global warming in the last 100 years can be explained by the Sun." Well, the word "only" is somewhat cute in comparison with the "mainstream" fashionable ideology. The IPCC said that they saw a 90% probability that "most" of the recent warming was man-made. The present paper would reduce this figure, 90%, to less than 50% because the Sun itself is responsible for 1/2 of the warming and not the whole 50% of the warming could have been caused by CO2 because there are other effects, too. Note that if 0.3 °C or 0.4 °C of warming in the 20th century was due to the increasing CO2 levels, the climate sensitivity is decisively smaller than 1 °C. At any rate, the expected 21st century warming due to CO2 would be another 0.3-0.4 °C, and this time, if the solar activity contributes with the opposite sign, these two effects could cancel. Even if you try to stretch these numbers a little bit - but not unrealistically - you have to become sure that the participants of the Poznan conference are lunatics.

Flashback: New scientific analysis shows Sun “could account for as much as 69% of the increase in Earth's average temperature” (LINK) & (LINK)

Dr. Bruce West, A U.S Army Chief Scientist, Says Sun, Not Man, Is Driving Climate Change – June 3, 2008 – (LINK)

21 spotless days and solar magnetic field still in a funk – Meteorologist Anthony Watts Excerpt: We are now at 21 days with no sunspots, it will be interesting to see if we reach a spotless 30 day period and then perhaps a spotless month of December.

New Arctic ice analysis reveals ‘No clear evidence of a delay in the start of the later summer/early fall freeze up or the start of the late winter/early spring melt’ – Excerpt: Based on analysis by William Chapman, author of The Cryosphere Today website, graciously prepared an analysis of the dates of the minimum and maximum Arctic sea ice coverage since 1979.

Oscillation Rules as the Pacific Cools – December 9, 2008 Excerpt: A cool wedge of lower-than-normal sea-surface heights continues to dominate the tropical Pacific, ringed by a horseshoe of warmer waters. The continuation of this long-term cool phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation stacks the odds against a wetter-than-average winter/spring in the southwestern United States. The latest image of sea-surface height measurements from the U.S./French Jason-1 oceanography satellite shows the Pacific Ocean remains locked in a strong, cool phase of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, a large, long-lived pattern of climate variability in the Pacific associated with a general cooling of Pacific waters. […] Sea-surface temperature satellite data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration mirror Jason sea-surface height measurements, clearly showing a cool Pacific Decadal Oscillation pattern, as seen at: http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/map/images/sst/sst.anom.gif . "This multi-year Pacific Decadal Oscillation 'cool' trend can cause La Niña-like impacts around the Pacific basin," said Bill Patzert, an oceanographer and climatologist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. […] This cool phase will likely persist this winter and, perhaps, beyond.

Report: Sea Level rise 'has stumbled since 2005' – Meteorologist Anthony Watts – December 5, 2008 Excerpt: We’ve been waiting for the UC web page to be updated with the most recent sea level data. It finally has been updated for 2008. It looks like the steady upward trend of sea level as measured by satellite has stumbled since 2005. The 60 day line in blue tells the story. From the University of Colorado web page: “Long-term mean sea level change is a variable of considerable interest in the studies of global climate change. The measurement of long-term changes in global mean sea level can provide an important corroboration of predictions by climate models of global warming. Long term sea level variations are primarily determined with two different methods.” - Yes, I would agree, it is indeed a variable of considerable interest. The question now is, how is it linked to global climate change (aka global warming) if CO2 continues to increase, and sea level does not?

Update: 'No evidence for accelerated sea-level rise' says Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute – December 12, 2008 Excerpt: In an op-ed piece in the December 11 issue of NRC/Handelsblad, Wilco Hazeleger, a senior scientist in the global climate research group at KNMI, writes: “In the past century the sea level has risen twenty centimeters. There is no evidence for accelerated sea-level rise. It is my opinion that there is no need for drastic measures. It is wise to adopt a flexible, step-by-step adaptation strategy. By all means, let us not respond precipitously.”
Peer-Reviewed Study: Recent worldwide land warming' NOT 'a direct response to increasing greenhouse gases (GHGs) over land' - WorldClimateReport.com – December 3, 2008 ‘Rethinking Observed Warming?’ Key quote: “Evidence is presented that the recent worldwide land warming has occurred largely in response to a worldwide warming of the oceans rather than as a direct response to increasing greenhouse gases (GHGs) over land.”

Alert: 2008 will be coolest year of the decade!- December 5, 2008 Excerpt: This year is set to be the coolest since 2000, according to a preliminary estimate of global average temperature that is due to be released next week by the Met Office. The global average for 2008 should come in close to 14.3C, which is 0.14C below the average temperature for 2001-07. [Note: For evidence of the panic apparently gripping the promoters of man-made climate fear, read the quotes in the article from the warming partisans absolutely assuring everyone that cool temperatures are “absolutely not" evidence that global warming is on the wane. Those same voices are usually absent when it comes to linking heat waves to global warming. ]

Flashback: Global Cooling? - 'Thirty years of warmer temperatures go poof' - National Post – October 20, 2008

Report: NASA’s James Hansen "adjusts" a cooling trend into a warming trend - December 9, 2008 Excerpt: "[H]ere is what the data looks like before and after NASA GISS adjusts it. These are the USHCN “raw” and “homogenized” data plots from the GISTEMP website. The before and after is quite something to behold. ... What was down, is now up." "How not to measure temperature, part 79"

Geophysist: ‘It is time to file this theory in the dustbin of history’ – ‘Alarmists are in denial and running for cover'- Washington Times

By Geophysicist Dr. David Deming, associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma who has published numerous peer-reviewed research articles. Excerpt: Environmental extremists and global warming alarmists are in denial and running for cover. Their rationale for continuing a lost cause is that weather events in the short term are not necessarily related to long-term climatic trends. But these are the same people who screamed at us each year that ordinary weather events such as high temperatures or hurricanes were undeniable evidence of imminent doom. Now that global warming is over, politicians are finally ready to enact dubious solutions to a non-existent problem. […] To the extent global warming was ever valid, it is now officially over. It is time to file this theory in the dustbin of history, next to Aristotelean physics, Neptunism, the geocentric universe, phlogiston, and a plethora of other incorrect scientific theories, all of which had vocal and dogmatic supporters who cited incontrovertible evidence. Weather and climate change are natural processes beyond human control. To argue otherwise is to deny the factual evidence.

Climate Chancellor' No More – Der Spiegel Excerpt: Angela Merkel is facing withering criticism for remarks she made on Monday that seemed to back away from her earlier commitment to tackling climate change.

Alert: Under the Weather: Internal Report Says U.N. Climate Agency Rife With Bad Practices - Fox News – December 4, 2008

Excerpt: As more than 10,000 delegates and observers gather in Poznan, Poland, to discuss the next phase in the battle against "climate change," a U.N. agency at the center of that hoopla badly needs to do some in-house weather-proofing. […] But the WMO, the $80 million U.N. front-line agency in the climate change struggle, and the source for much of the world's information in the global atmosphere and water supply, has serious management problems of its own, despite its rapidly expanding global ambitions. The international agency has been sharply criticized by a U.N. inspection unit in a confidential report obtained by FOX News, for, among other things, haphazard budget practices, deeply flawed organizational procedures, and no effective oversight by the 188 nations that formally make up its membership and dole out its funds. The inspection was carried out by a member of the United Nations Joint Inspection Unit (JIU), a small, independent branch of the U.N. that reports to the General Assembly and is mandated to improve the organization's efficiency and coordination through its inspection process. […] WMO did not respond to a series of questions from FOX News regarding its future programs, sent on the eve of the Poznan meeting.

16-year-old suggests sheep dung can help save planet Card business has really dung good - Daily Post North WalesExcerpt: The company makes its products at the Twll Golau Papermill in Aberllefenni Slate Quarry using sustainable fuel and materials. Every sheet of paper is made from recycled materials, including sheep dung, waste paper and discarded rags, using processes designed to affect the natural environment as little as possible. […] Katie 16, from Tal-y-Bont, Conwy, was appointed to help spread the word on how Wales can reduce its carbon footprint and is urging other North Wales businesses to follow Creative Paper Wales’ example and adopt innovative approaches to the design and manufacture of products and the delivery of services.

Lord Christopher Monckton: 'Companies could be sued over climate change' Excerpt: The alarmist faction knows that, if it were to bring a case against a corporation whose executives were not minded merely to believe in the extremist presentation of "global warming" just because it is temporarily in fashion, they would lose. The case of Dimmock v. Secretaries of State for Education and for the Environment in the UK in 2007 was a very clear warning. The UK Government threw all of the resources of the taxpayer and of the Meteorological Office at the case, attempting to defend Al Gore's sci-fi comedy horror movie against the plaintiff's allegation that it was serially and seriously inaccurate. The Government failed and was humiliated. The judge, having heard both sides, said bluntly of Al Gore, and particularly of his unscientific allegation that sea level was about to rise by 20 feet, that "the Armageddon scenario that he depicts is not based on any scientific view". A few more judgments like that and the "global warming" fantasy would rapidly collapse. End of scare.

OOPS, We Forgot Siberia! (M4GW) - Weather Stations in Coldest parts No Longer Reporting

Excerpt: The thing that these skewed chart never take into account is that when the Soviet Union fell in 1990 the number of reporting weather stations went form a high of 15,000 in 1970 to 5,000 in 2000. This takes some of the coldest places on the planet out of the equation like Siberia. # #

Related Links:

UN Data shows ‘Warming has Stopped!’ – Climate Fears Called ‘Hogwash’ – ‘Global Carbon Tax’ Urged - December 3, 2008

‘Planet Has Cooled Since Bush Took Office’ & Global Warming Theory has ‘failed consistently and dramatically’ – November 20, 2008
Any specific rebuttals to this or in general would be appreciated. I've attempted to show how the majority of scientists still fall behind GW as a Man Made phenomena as well as the crazy weather we receive is because of it (i.e. yes, its cold, but thats part of the MODEL) but any aid would be appreciated.

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-05 01:56pm
by Darth Wong
Collections of quotes are not a viable argument, and you need to be highly skeptical of claims of numbers of scientists against global warming. One of the recent "500 scientists against global warming" lists made the news because many of the scientists on the list demanded to have their names taken off, and the people running the list refused.

It's not difficult to find individual quotes, even dozens of them, against an idea. Creationists do the EXACT same thing. Where are the statements from reputable scientific associations saying the same thing? Why is it always an individual here, an individual there, and then a list of names of people who may or may not agree about specific claims being made by the people publishing the list?

Also: how do we know which specific part of the global warming theory they disagree with? I've personally seen quotes taken out of context from scientists where they dispute some part of global warming, but if you actually read them in context it's clear that they do agree it's happening, they just dispute some of the exact projections on the magnitude.

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-05 01:56pm
by Count Chocula
AMT wrote:she's a meterologist with a MS
Your first step, IMO, should be to check your premises. Your friend is a meteorologist with a MS degree, so she probably knows how to read weather-related tea leaves much better than you or I. Here are a few snippets that could prompt you to check your assumptions that global warming is man-made:
  • The fossil record shows that Earth has been both much cooler and much warmer than it is now, including times far, far before man-made CO2 and other fossil fuel-burning emissions were widespread;
  • The sun has a large influence on our global mean temperatures; I'd have to double-check, but IIRC from my reading on this subject there are consistent correlations between solar activity and global temperatures;
  • Climatology is still a young science, and attempting to measure (at best) a couple hundred years' worth of data and reach definite conclusions about man-made influences provides shaky data at best. Al Gore, the Guru of Global Gatastrophe, has had to remove his "waterfall" chart from his presentations and has started calling global warming "Climate Change;"
  • Data may not be accurate, unless corrected. For example, a sensor measuring Arctic ice pack size failed in December 2008, and an amount of ice pack equivalent to the size of California was omitted from measurements, leading to false conclusions about the Arctic ice melting at a faster rate, until the malfunction was caught.
A local talk show guy here in Tampa has a page dedicated to Global Warming, with dozens of external links to studies, polls, news articles and some humor. It's a pretty good place to start.

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-05 02:02pm
by Darth Wong
One of the biggest intellectual tricks played by the global warming denier crowd is to pretend that one must choose between natural global warming/cooling cycles and human-induced global warming/cooling cycles. THIS IS A FALSE DILEMMA FALLACY. There is no reason why we can't simultaneously have natural cycles of warming/cooling and human-induced cycles of warming/cooling.

Ergo, 100% of the arguments which are based upon showing that natural warming/cooling exists are based on a logic fallacy: they require you to assume that human-induced warming/cooling is false because natural warming/cooling is true. They completely sidestep the scientific argument for human-induced global warming by ignoring it and showing that other mechanisms exist.

As an aside, this is the same trick used by AIDS/HIV deniers: they show that there are things besides HIV which can induce immune deficiency problems, and then they conclude that HIV must not cause immune deficiency.

Only conservatards fall for such idiot logic.

Oops, Chocula posted before I did. And hey, it looks like he's one of those idiots.

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-05 02:07pm
by AMT
That is a very good point. I actually have fallen prey to the false dilemma myself (or perhaps a more black/white mentality) in that I automatically pushed towards man-made being a factor while disallowing natural conditions. So... that cuts both ways. I'll see if she'll be honest enough to do the same, which I doubt.

As for her having her MS with Metereology, trust me, that's not THAT hard to get. I know her and I know I'm smarter than her. She just has more specialized knowledge, which is what astounds me when it comes to some of her views.

Edited to add: Also, do you have a link for the 500 scientists or however many wanted to be taken off such a list? Having it would be a nice rebuttal towards her link.

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-05 02:30pm
by Samuel
Most CO2 emissions are natural. The problem is that the man made ones are upsetting the equilibrium.
The sun has a large influence on our global mean temperatures; I'd have to double-check, but IIRC from my reading on this subject there are consistent correlations between solar activity and global temperatures;
The Sun has constantly been getting warmer and the Earth has not. They aren't correlated.
Climatology is still a young science, and attempting to measure (at best) a couple hundred years' worth of data and reach definite conclusions about man-made influences provides shaky data at best.
Er, no. Making accurate predictions, yes- seeing trends does not require that though.
started calling global warming "Climate Change;"
Wasn't that because people don't mind global warming in the winter?

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-05 02:46pm
by AMT
Probably shouldn't have used that desmogblog person, since she's now bringing the personal attacks out, and saying that if I believe him I'm a fraud. heh

http://desmogblog.com/about_us
http://www.worldcasinodirectory.com/thr ... -founder--

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/
http://www.infowars.com/professor-big-m ... ropaganda/

So... yeah. Anyone know anything about those sites?

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-06 12:42am
by Count Chocula
Darth Wong wrote:Oops, Chocula posted before I did. And hey, it looks like he's one of those idiots.
Positing a logical fallacy and claiming 100% falsehood based on a claimed fallacy doth not an argument make. It does not appear that there is enough reliable data, peer review, historical data, or agreement among the scientists studying global warming to make a definitive yes or no decision regarding man's impact. Is there an impact from our use of fossil fuels and the exhalations of 6+ billion people? Possibly. Is it affecting climate to a degree that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are inciting a "tipping point" to overall warming? We don't know yet; the issue is still not settled among the people studying the subject, and until a trend is concretely established, I think it's premature to set policies based on speculation. If my attitude makes me an idiot, so be it.

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-06 12:54am
by Formless
Count Chocula wrote:It does not appear that there is enough reliable data, peer review, historical data, or agreement among the scientists studying global warming to make a definitive yes or no decision regarding man's impact.
Bullshit.

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-06 01:18am
by Darth Wong
Count Chocula wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Oops, Chocula posted before I did. And hey, it looks like he's one of those idiots.
Positing a logical fallacy and claiming 100% falsehood based on a claimed fallacy doth not an argument make. It does not appear that there is enough reliable data, peer review, historical data, or agreement among the scientists studying global warming to make a definitive yes or no decision regarding man's impact.
And how have you arrived at this conclusion? By reading a few websites?
Is there an impact from our use of fossil fuels and the exhalations of 6+ billion people? Possibly. Is it affecting climate to a degree that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are inciting a "tipping point" to overall warming? We don't know yet; the issue is still not settled among the people studying the subject, and until a trend is concretely established, I think it's premature to set policies based on speculation. If my attitude makes me an idiot, so be it.
I saw your previous post, you pitiful bilge-spewing excuse for a debater. You threw up the fact of natural warming and cooling cycles as disproof of global warming. And now you pretend that you are not guilty of a logic fallacy by ... well, you just say that for some reason, my pointing out of your fallacies "doth not an argument make". Care to explain why not?

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-06 02:24am
by Samuel
Positing a logical fallacy and claiming 100% falsehood based on a claimed fallacy doth not an argument make.
It "just" refutes your argument.
yes or no decision regarding man's impact.
Degree questions don't have yes/no answers.
Is there an impact from our use of fossil fuels and the exhalations of 6+ billion people? Possibly.
:banghead:
For the love of the Emperor, the exhalations of humans aren't the contributor- if we weren't here, there would be other animals in our place. The problem is that the carbon dioxide stored in the ground is being released.
Is it affecting climate to a degree that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are inciting a "tipping point" to overall warming? We don't know yet; the issue is still not settled among the people studying the subject, and until a trend is concretely established, I think it's premature to set policies based on speculation.
... A tipping point is when nothing we can do can salvage anything because it has passed the point of no return. Typically they can't be predicted because, by definition, they do not follow the normal pattern.
If my attitude makes me an idiot, so be it.
Words not to live by.

Re: General Global Warming Debate Help against Denier

Posted: 2009-03-06 07:48pm
by Wyrm
Count Chocula wrote:Is there an impact from our use of fossil fuels and the exhalations of 6+ billion people? Possibly. Is it affecting climate to a degree that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are inciting a "tipping point" to overall warming? We don't know yet; the issue is still not settled among the people studying the subject, and until a trend is concretely established, I think it's premature to set policies based on speculation.
It was hotter in the ancient past, about 4 degrees warmer in the Cretaceous. This correlates to the higher carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, seven times the pre-industrial level, and the role of carbon dioxide in the greenhouse effect is clear. It was likely warmer in the Cretaceous because of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Now, all that carbon dioxide had to go somewhere. Where do you think it went?

Probably into the world's fossil fuels.

That we are currently burning.

And at least one major fossil fuel (petroleum) is near peak or already peaked (that is, the world supply halfway consumed). Think about that.