olger Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Quote "Please don't feed the drama queens.." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted February 19, 2012 Moderators Share Posted February 19, 2012 Graphed exactly the temperature data from that graph above and asked Excel for a trendline over the period. Guess what - warming trend. Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olger Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Great. Graph it back to 1826. Which is a very small window of time to you millions-of-years proponents. Quote "Please don't feed the drama queens.." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug yowell Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Brav, in your educated opinion, when do you think we can likely expect the first of the millions of people to begin dying as a result the current trend in climate change? How hot will it have to get before things start getting serious and when might we reach that point? And how will we be able to accurately verify what those deaths were caused by? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted February 20, 2012 Moderators Share Posted February 20, 2012 It will be very difficult. A hurricane that kills thousands or tens of thousands of people is just a hurricane, and there have always been hurricanes. But they will be more frequent and severe. They already are. But here's just one situation: on one side of the Himalayas is China with its 1.3 billion people, on the other side is India with its 1 billion. Both countries are watered, during the dry season, by rivers fed by the Himalayan glaciers, which are receding. When there is a drought, hundreds of thousands will starve. Again, there have always been droughts, but there is a clear causal mechanism there. Human civilisation has arisen in a short span of stable climate. We are damaging that stability with very rapid change. There *will* be consequences. There are already consequences, with tropical diseases spreading further north and south as temperature increases. It's not simple, and I never said it was simple. But it's clear how climate change will make this world much less habitable, in many ways. And will contribute to disasters that, in combination, will kill millions. Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonnie Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Brav, in your educated opinion, when do you think we can likely expect the first of the millions of people to begin dying as a result the current trend in climate change? How hot will it have to get before things start getting serious and when might we reach that point? And how will we be able to accurately verify what those deaths were caused by? What has caused the warming and cooling trends of past centuries? It will be very difficult. A hurricane that kills thousands or tens of thousands of people is just a hurricane, and there have always been hurricanes. But they will be more frequent and severe. They already are. We were told centuries ago this would happen. Doubtful if eliminating the use of fossil fuel will change much of that Quote Everything you do is based on the choices you make. It's not your parents, your past relationships, your job, the economy, the weather, an argument, or your age that is to blame. You and only you are responsible for every decision and choice you make, period ... ... Wish more people would realize this. Quotes by Susan Gottesman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Bravus, reminds me of basic statistics class. Even a casual look at the cycle graph shows upward movement. Trend analysis is usaually avoided when hoping to have viewers not see something that is contrary to a stated viewpoint. The come back is always 'well, adding more points will......'. Misinformation is misinformation. I reckon some do not want the the word 'lie' used. lie    noun 1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood. 2. something intended or serving to convey a false impression; imposture: His flashy car was a lie that deceived no one. 3. an inaccurate or false statement. mis·in·form    verb to give false or misleading information to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug yowell Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 It will be very difficult. A hurricane that kills thousands or tens of thousands of people is just a hurricane, and there have always been hurricanes. But they will be more frequent and severe. They already are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug yowell Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Brav, What do you think of Richard S. Lindzen's position on Global Warming? Where would you disagree with him and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olger Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 They're dropping like flies http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html Quote "Please don't feed the drama queens.." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 You should check out those 'scientists' before posting the article. Start with the first one on the list and go from there. By the way, Rutan is not even close to be an expert on climate, not his field. The article loses it validity when seriously examened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted February 21, 2012 Moderators Share Posted February 21, 2012 http://www.forbes.com/sites/petergleick/...street-journal/ (links to more detail in that piece) Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted February 21, 2012 Moderators Share Posted February 21, 2012 http://blog.ucsusa.org/dismal-science-at-the-wall-street-journal Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Bravus Posted February 21, 2012 Moderators Share Posted February 21, 2012 http://www.skepticalscience.com/examining-the-latest-climate-denialist-plea-for-inaction.html Dropping like flies is, indeed, very much what they are doing. Quote Truth is important Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teresaq Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 I remember in the 80s that the town I've lived in most of my life had about 3 hot days a year. In the evenings I would have to change from summer clothes to something warmer. That was in the 80s. Now it gets quite hot most of summer. But if you all say it taint so, guess you would be the experts. :) Quote facebook. /teresa.quintero.790 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Just a snippet hopefully to get people to read the whole article. Quote: The op-ed begins with the wholly unsupported assertion that: "...a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed." The fact that only 16 scientists and engineers signed this letter casts serious doubt on this assertion. The fake skeptics were able to get ~100 signatories on a similar letter 5 years ago - this seems more like a small and dwindling number of fake skeptics. It's also worth noting that 255 National Academy of Science members (truly prominent scientists) signed an opposite letter, urging action to address climate change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialoguewithus Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 This applies somewhat to this thread, but perhaps fits better elsewhere: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/02/201222693753460310.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Interesting article. As has been seen on this thread, once the truth has been pointed out, no more replies. Which brings about the question, if a person says/posts something that turns out not to be true, should the originator make a correction? Seems not in the world of current politics, or perhaps not often in the forum postings. A reason to not get upset over what is posted!!!! Or take it serious!!!! Often times it is more like gossip!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members phkrause Posted February 28, 2012 Members Share Posted February 28, 2012 This applies somewhat to this thread, but perhaps fits better elsewhere: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/02/201222693753460310.html Excellent article Quote phkrause By the decree enforcing the institution of the papacy in violation of the law of God, our nation will disconnect herself fully from righteousness. When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with spiritualism, when, under the influence of this threefold union, our country shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government, and shall make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is near. {5T 451.1} Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.