Global warming???

[desirouspussy]

Originally Posted by aussiepride

we have also been hit with a levy to pay for a "desalinization plant" (turns salt water into drinkable freashwater), even when our freashwater dams are so far over maximum that they are over flowing

One wet summer and all the water restrictions the people of Melbourne suffered in the past are forgotten. Truly amazing!

[aussiepride]

Originally Posted by GGadmirer

One wet summer and all the water restrictions the people of Melbourne suffered in the past are forgotten. Truly amazing!

it sure is amazing how a climatic event called the El Nino effect and the La Nina Effect which are the major influence on climate and can cause either an increase or decrease in ocean temps, air pressure, land temperatures and rainfall, and which switches roughly every 5 years and effects areas from north america, south america, africa, asia, and oceania (including melbourne) which has NOTHING to do with global warming or greenhouse effect is used as evidence for tough times in aus, droughts, water restrictions, but not when it causes increase rainfall and a decrease in water, and land surface temperatures.

The current Australian federal government has taken a massively eccessive stance on this issue. the general public, industry, business and the general scientific community think its exessive. Pandering to the green vote to maintain the balance of power is doing nothing to deal with this issue.

[smc]

For all those anti-science folks ...

[aussiepride]

Originally Posted by smc

For all those anti-science folks ...

make that yourself?

but as you said in it.. 90% of the scientific community..
there are very few things in life that are certain.
science in all its honour although trying to find truth, often isnt at a stage where it can understand everything.
so if all of the general population and the scientific community believed something, then that would make something even more likely? say when people believed the earth was flat or the earth was the centre of the universe?

until such time as those "10%" can be proven that it is man caused, or for that fact even happening lol, then i will continue to remain open minded.

[tslust]

You're absolutely right, scientists believe climate change is real.

[smc]

Originally Posted by aussiepride

make that yourself?

No.

Originally Posted by aussiepride

but as you said in it.. 90% of the scientific community..
there are very few things in life that are certain.
science in all its honour although trying to find truth, often isnt at a stage where it can understand everything.
so if all of the general population and the scientific community believed something, then that would make something even more likely? say when people believed the earth was flat or the earth was the centre of the universe?

Wow, what an analogy. Seriously? That's the best you can do ... compare a belief held based on no serious experimentation or exploration, only on a simple observation of the sun seeming to rise from beneath and set to below a plane surface, with extensive study of data and testing of hypotheses with advanced scientific methods and instrumentation? Yeah, I can really tell that you honor science.

(Yes, that's sarcasm ... to make my point.)

Originally Posted by aussiepride

until such time as those "10%" can be proven that it is man caused, or for that fact even happening lol, then i will continue to remain open minded.

I think you need to do a little scientific exploration of your own. Specifically, you should explore what the term "open minded" means.

Do you believe in evolution? You know, there are some "scientists" out there who speak up for "intelligent design."

I hope if you are a dad, or become one, you will have your baby immunized against disease rather than wait until everyone on the planet (not the last asinine holdouts) accepts that immunizations DO NOT cause autism.

[smc]

Originally Posted by tslust

You're absolutely right, scientists believe climate change is real.

Imagine, that ... scientists changing their minds based on EVIDENCE and the testing of hypotheses employing the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

Note that nearly all scientists agree that calling the phenomenon "global warming" was a huge mistake that simply gave the nay-sayers the ability to pooh-pooh what scientists acknowledge should have been called "global climate change" from the beginning. (Remember the big snow storms in the U.S. South in the winter of 2010-2011. It gave morons like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity an opportunity to say there was no global warming if there could be so much snow in unusual places.)

Of course, the picture on right is PhotoShopped (not).

[aussiepride]

Originally Posted by smc

Imagine, that ... scientists changing their minds based on EVIDENCE and the testing of hypotheses employing the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

Note that nearly all scientists agree that calling the phenomenon "global warming" was a huge mistake that simply gave the nay-sayers the ability to pooh-pooh what scientists acknowledge should have been called "global climate change" from the beginning. (Remember the big snow storms in the U.S. South in the winter of 2010-2011. It gave morons like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity an opportunity to say there was no global warming if there could be so much snow in unusual places.)

Of course, the picture on right is PhotoShopped (not).

other than observational measurements, what new found proof of global warming is out there? Remembering that very few things in science are absolute proofs.. even darwins THEORY of natural selection is only part of what we consider "evolution", and there are many other conflicting processes that are occuring (i.e sexual selection), and possibly that we havent found yet.

and the name "global warming" had to be changed because there is no longer and global warming. global temperatures have stopped rising for about the past 7 years. Proponents of the global warming THEORY have failed to explain why this has happened.
your arguments, although with some merit, are about 7 years too late. Research has moved on from then.

[cwjakesteel]

Originally Posted by smc

For all those anti-science folks ...

Eh, that picture pretends that those are the only two factors involved.

[tslust]

Originally Posted by smc

Imagine, that ... scientists changing their minds based on EVIDENCE and the testing of hypotheses employing the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

Note that nearly all scientists agree that calling the phenomenon "global warming" was a huge mistake that simply gave the nay-sayers the ability to pooh-pooh what scientists acknowledge should have been called "global climate change" from the beginning. (Remember the big snow storms in the U.S. South in the winter of 2010-2011. It gave morons like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity an opportunity to say there was no global warming if there could be so much snow in unusual places.)

Of course, the picture on right is PhotoShopped (not).

People have to remember that planet Earth has been around for millions of years. We've only been keeping records for a little over one hundred years. Also, the Earth has been a lot warmer in the past and it's been a lot cooler too. So, it's hard, if not impossible, to say what the weather "average" should be.

[cwjakesteel]

Originally Posted by tslust

People have to remember that planet Earth has been around for millions of years. We've only been keeping records for a little over one hundred years. Also, the Earth has been a lot warmer in the past and it's been a lot cooler too. So, it's hard, if not impossible, to say what the weather "average" should be.

Or instead of a constant, there could be a cycle? If we want any solid evidence the fractal nature of macroscopic temperature cycles need to be mapped, because who knows what a temperature map is 'supposed' to look like.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by aussiepride

other than observational measurements, what new found proof of global warming is out there? Remembering that very few things in science are absolute proofs.. even darwins THEORY of natural selection is only part of what we consider "evolution", and there are many other conflicting processes that are occuring (i.e sexual selection), and possibly that we havent found yet.

and the name "global warming" had to be changed because there is no longer and global warming. global temperatures have stopped rising for about the past 7 years. Proponents of the global warming THEORY have failed to explain why this has happened.
your arguments, although with some merit, are about 7 years too late. Research has moved on from then.

Some thoughtful comments, Aussiepride.
Here in California the warming trend started in the mid 1970s and stopped in the mid 1990s, since then the climate has stabilized at about one degree above the long term average. If the warming is directly correlated with increasing CO2, then one would expect the climate to continue to warm. That has not happened, at least in California. The cooling that occured after WWII was probably the result of massive industrialization and the production of large quantities of sulfurous aerosols that reflect sunlight. The warming that began in the 1970s may have been the result of widespread industrial expansion. Smokestack sleanup and the installation of catalytic converters on automobiles reduced smoke and smog. Unfortunately, this supprression of smoke and aerosols did not effect the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, consequently temperatures began to rise. In the 1980s China bagan it's massive industrial development energized by coal with huge releases of smoke, smog and carbon dioxide. It is quite likely that the huge quantities of aerosols released into the atmosphere by chinese power generators has counteracted the rise in CO2. Hence, temperatures have ceased to rise. The risks of warming continue. Our best bet is to focus on energy efficiency and moderating the endless quest of more stuff. We are not going to stop using fossil energy until it is all gone so it behooves us to find viable alternatives.

[LillyBerry]

GW seems t have vanished like a passing fad now