Hey nice avatar Hank

SW,

My post above should be considered nothing more than a sharp stick poking at some conservatives who post here from time to time. Even a smart guy can take the low road some times.

Sg

Fair enough Salmo.

Hank I hope you haven't made any bets that would guarantee such vengence.

My brother-in-law signed with the Winers 2yrs ago then was traded to the Saints. Said SF was one me, me, me organization. Total disarray.

Wouldn't count on any of those lofty predictions actually holding true.

I just can't believe the tentative grip some of you have on the scientific method.

The fact the earth warmed long ago, and humans weren't around says NOTHING about what is or isn't causing the earth to warm now. It does NOT prove humans aren't causing the warming now.

Is that hard to understand?

That was really my only point.

Yeah.

That's the line.

Just keep in mind who originated the phrase.

Ah, one of my favorite arguements, global warming....

Check it out....the biggest factor in Global warming is the Farking SUN!

The corruption of science is rampant these days, as ideology pretends to be science, and trumps the facts.
Solar Scientists who have long seen direct correlation between periods of high sunspot activity and heating of the earth, and like this year, lulls in sunspot activity with subsequent cooling of the earth, are fearful to publish their observations for fear of loosing funding. They also fear being portrayed as loons and liars by all the naysayers.

It's so freekin simple it's incontrovertable.

An article discussing the purported correlation between solar activity and global temperature.

http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/DamonLaut2004.pdf

Still looks and sounds to me like the connection is tentative at best.

http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/solar/lassen1.html

It seems there are always more ways than one to explain things...note the similarity around 1900

If you believe that chart shows correlation Slab Happy, why don't you plot on the years since the mid-80's? On the scale in your link, the red line will go off the top of your image, and I'd LOVE to see what the black line does.

The measure of a theory is not that they managed to curve fit/filter a very noisy data set to make a semi-matching curve to your eye. The measure is to see how well it predicts FUTURE events. As I mentioned the red line positively SKYROCKETS (literally off the chart you supplied, check the scale on the side). The black line in your chart ends 20 years ago.

The reality is none of us are climate scientists. We can decide we want to take action on something that CLEARLY 90%++++ of the most qualified people in the world say is real, and a serious problem for the planet. Or we can decide to let our kids deal with whatever mess we left behind because we are cocksure those pencil neck geeks are all out to get rich by fixin' to make up all this crap. Course the people telling us this won't get rich (climate science doesn't have stock options), but screw them anyways--they always busted the curve in geometry class.

I see a trend... there appear to be pairs of squiggly lines on those grids, and sometimes they get close to each other, while other times they split apart.

Do you see any similarities between 1940 and 1980 on the two charts?
Because I don't.
I only posted a chart and suggested a possible similarity.
If you think one chart represents something worth doing something about, congratulations....do it.
I saw that 97% (figures from the original site of the first chart) of scientists agree......you buying that, too? Try getting 97% of anything to agree on anything.
Personally, I'm not willing to get all worked up over it. Chaos and Crisis are today's monikers and most everyone has a cause. How's that working for you?

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for the "science" to put more silvers at my disposal.....seems 97% haven't shown up.

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northw...ear_humans.html


It's not you Aunty! Even the berry crops suck.

The question seems to be in the minds of many conservatives, science on the other hand seems fairly sure that in fact global warming is taking place, and many indicators point to man made causes.

"in the minds of many conservatives"

Isn't that an oxymoron?

Ah, I see we've now shifted from the nihilistic "Scorched Earth" (future nuclear war) to misdirection (chemicals in the food supply).

If your car has brakes that are failing, and also has bald tires, what should you do? Fix BOTH.

FWIW -- I believe both Air and Water quality in a great many places have improved markedly in the past 40 years (Lake Washington, e.g.), and it wasn't the free market, nor pro-business "conservatives" (how ironic that name seems at times) who did the heavy lifting. It was science + environmentalists. The same people who you're ignoring on this one.

[/quote]
science on the other hand seems fairly sure that in fact global warming is taking place
[/quote]

Now is that fairly sure? Absolutely sure? Positively sure? Maybe just a little sure?

Maybe it's just fairly sure because global temps have been leveling off and cooling since 1998.

In the late 60's and early 70's is was more eco-nut UN scientists scaring everyone with global cooling theories. Telling everyone how England would "disappear" by the year 2000.

Of course then, as now, totalitarian forms of population control was our only answer for salvation.

Maybe if the UN told you liquid Mercury was safe to drink you'd be OK with that too?

I find it interesting how some on this board see humanity as some scurge or disease upon the earth and would think it just dandy to begin the horrific task of reducing the population. Just how are you going to go about that? Forced sterilization? Induced plague? IMO population control advocates harbor these feelings born out of a great selfishness. You don't want anyone invading your space, eating your food, fishing on your river. The hypocrisy is laughable.

I tell you what. If some of you are so convinced that population control is a great idea,........ be the first to stand behind your convictions. Do the world a favor and rid it of your parasitic presence.

137 climate scientsts dispute the anthropogenic warming theory.

They do so at risk of never being published and risking their careers.

But I'm sure Al Gore and his bar graphs are WAY more in tune than all these PhDs

They're probably all on oil company payroles anyway

http://www.climatescienceinternational.o...9&Itemid=96

137 out of a total of how many other climatologist saying something totally different?
3,146 scientists say not only is global warming real, it's in fact man induced.

And yet only around 3,000 or so even participated?

Certainly sounds like a consensus to me

Only another example to throw on the enormous heap of evidence that points to the fact the we have no clue what the fark is going on!

Further, there is no evidence that justifies de-industrializing first-world nations and implementing a global tax administered by the UN and payable to the World Bank.

How gullible can you be!

Yeah, but freespool, SW has 137 people in his echo chamber telling him what he wants to hear. He needn't apply any critical thinking, or take any preventative steps if he ONLY listens to his 137 climatologist friends.

Rather than the echo-chamber, let's be democtratic about this. Let's put all the climatologists in a room, and we'll have a vote. You want majority to rule? Okay, how about a SUPER majority? How about a 3/4 majority? Not enough, how about 80%? 90%?

At some point, folks are just being shamelessly, willfully, ignorant. We're past that point.