Possible global cooling?

[Easy Rhino]

I don't need a scientist to tell me how fucked this planet is. Just look around you and see for yourself.

actually you do because simple observation is not enough to prove anything. you walk down your street and you see garbage there. does that mean every street is filled with garbage. don't be so narrow minded. a scientific mind is an open mind. science means all theories get rigorously tested and retested and peer tested. consenting theories and data should be WELCOMED not immediately dismissed because they dont fit into YOUR world view.

 

[alexsubri]

Mentioning Alex Jones or anything on Alex Jones crackpot website on TPU S&T forum is worthy of a two week ban. You have been warned . . .

Seriously though. Don't do it again. :shadedshu

Feel free to post your pseudoscience on GN. Those kooks love it.

Excuse me, I never once mentioned Alex Jones on this thread or on TPU ever. Alex Jones didn't even create the movie "What In The World Are They Spraying."

And, I have the right to throw in my 2 cent`s

I wouldn't mention Alex Jones anyway`s on TPU because this is a Technology website, not an Alternative News website

Don't talk silly please. Refering to a "new world order" is utter BS when mentioning a former US presidential candidate. We are not talking about hostile takeovers by Stalin or by fictional creatures from outerspace.

Again, I am just going to say this, the NWO does exsit. It has been stated from Bush Senior, all the way through Henry Kissinger (ALL on LIVE TV) about forming a One World Government. But, again, I am refraining myself from going on. If you want I will PM you and we can debate it there.

 

[m4gicfour]

actually you do because simple observation is not enough to prove anything. you walk down your street and you see garbage there. does that mean every street is filled with garbage. don't be so narrow minded. a scientific mind is an open mind. science means all theories get rigorously tested and retested and peer tested. consenting theories and data should be WELCOMED not immediately dismissed because they dont fit into YOUR world view.

You realize that's the scientific method, right? Observation? Walk down your street, go to another street, watch TV, look online, see friend's vacation photos...

The only thing lacking is control of variables, which in that example (and indeed, in actuality) is impossible. All variables that can be controlled must be controlled. For example, don't include garbage dumps and cities where the sanitation workers are on strike. Not all variables (such as the bias of the scientist) can be controlled.

Simple observation, simple by design - making things as simplified and un-complex as possible, and observing the results of introducing X - is the definition of science.

I know what you're saying, one data point does not a trend make, but really, there's a hell of a lot of data out there. I'll refrain from judgement on what that data actually indicates, however, as I am not doing a study.

 

[Thatguy]

Yeah anything that slows down polar melting and thus keeps sea levels down would be good. The cause really isn't the point or what's important. It's the effects.

If the ice is flaoting, why would the sea levels rise, you are familiar with displacement no ?

 

[gumpty]

Sorry, again I don't have time to dive into everything.

Because it fits the rhetoric they will follow anything. Both sides of the debate are guilty of this.

That's just it ... take a look at 'both sides'. On one side you have the scientific community. On the other side you have bloggers, politicians, and 'interested' parties (I'm not claiming that there are no 'warmists' that are taking backhanders - but let's face it, they don't have the oil companies on their side).

97% of climate scientists agree that the climate is changing and that we are the cause. It's hard to argue that they are just saying that to get paid or get grants, when they would get paid and get grants anyway if it wasn't our fault, because research would still need to be done into the 'real' reasons and what we can do to mitigate the effects.

And go check what scientists get paid anyway; it's pathetically low.


----------------------

Regarding reducing the population, I've always been of the opinion that education is the key - not just wealth. Educate the third-world and we reduce the dependence they will have on us as they will be able to more ably help themselves out of poverty & large-family situations.

----------------------

If the ice is flaoting, why would the sea levels rise, you are familiar with displacement no ?

Warmer oceans expand = sea levels rise. Also, not all of Antarctica's ice is floating.

 

[W1zzard]

97% of climate scientists agree that the climate is changing and that we are the cause. It's hard to argue that they are just saying that to get paid or get grants, when they would get paid and get grants anyway if it wasn't our fault, because research would still need to be done into the 'real' reasons and what we can do to mitigate the effects.

+1. also instant nobel prize if you can prove 97% of scientists wrong

If the ice is flaoting, why would the sea levels rise, you are familiar with displacement no ?

antarctica ice shelf, greenland, glaciers

 

[btarunr]

In your face, Al Gore and carbon tax.

 

[WhiteLotus]

actually you do because simple observation is not enough to prove anything. you walk down your street and you see garbage there. does that mean every street is filled with garbage. don't be so narrow minded. a scientific mind is an open mind. science means all theories get rigorously tested and retested and peer tested. consenting theories and data should be WELCOMED not immediately dismissed because they dont fit into YOUR world view.

So you think that the world is going to be fine and dandy in a few hundreds years to come. What with the population ever increasing, you think everything is going to be as it is now in a few hundred years??

Right... well I don't know what unicorn planet you live on, but I live on this planet called Earth.

 

[streetfighter 2]

never believe the doomsayers. they are always wrong.

Originally Spoken by Douglas Adams
This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in - an interesting hole I find myself in - fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, it's still frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for. We all know that at some point in the future the Universe will come to an end and at some other point, considerably in advance from that but still not immediately pressing, the sun will explode. We feel there's plenty of time to worry about that, but on the other hand that's a very dangerous thing to say. Look at what's supposed to be going to happen on the 1st of January 2000 - let's not pretend that we didn't have a warning that the century was going to end! I think that we need to take a larger perspective on who we are and what we are doing here if we are going to survive in the long term.

Also I'm sure you're familiar with the Holocene extinction. I'm not saying it's doomsday or anything quite as nuts as that but we've got to be careful about getting ourselves (humans) into a tight spot. We're watching the canaries die and we're pretty indifferent to it.

Not that I care really. I figure if you tell somebody a few times and they don't listen then it's not important to them.

you walk down your street and you see garbage there. does that mean every street is filled with garbage?

Sure, if it's Italy.

Excuse me, I never once mentioned Alex Jones on this thread or on TPU ever. Alex Jones didn't even create the movie "What In The World Are They Spraying."

And, I have the right to throw in my 2 cent`s

You linked a youtube video that is sourced from infowars.com (Alex Jones' website). Furthermore "What In The World Are They Spraying" is sold on Alex Jones website, which violates the separation of stupid shit and the TPU S&T forum.

You absolutely have the right to throw in your two cents.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Sorry, again I don't have time to dive into everything.



That's just it ... take a look at 'both sides'. On one side you have the scientific community. On the other side you have bloggers, politicians, and 'interested' parties (I'm not claiming that there are no 'warmists' that are taking backhanders - but let's face it, they don't have the oil companies on their side).

97% of climate scientists agree that the climate is changing and that we are the cause. It's hard to argue that they are just saying that to get paid or get grants, when they would get paid and get grants anyway if it wasn't our fault, because research would still need to be done into the 'real' reasons and what we can do to mitigate the effects.

And go check what scientists get paid anyway; it's pathetically low.

See thats the issue. A lot of the scientific community that has reviewed the IPCC findings (main source for all climate change panic) has called bullshit on them. However the people who do are spin off as nut jobs even if before they were highly respected. The other side has a lot of evidence of this. So like I said. Open your mind to both sides and take the middle road.

Follow the money and power.

Also I'm sure you're familiar with the Holocene extinction. I'm not saying it's doomsday or anything quite as nuts as that but we've got to be careful about getting ourselves (humans) into a tight spot. We're watching the canaries die and we're pretty indifferent to it.

Not that I care really. I figure if you tell somebody a few times and they don't listen then it's not important to them.

Sure, if it's Italy.

You linked a youtube video that is sourced from infowars.com (Alex Jones' website). Furthermore "What In The World Are They Spraying" is sold on Alex Jones website, which violates the separation of stupid shit and the TPU S&T forum.

You absolutely have the right to throw in your two cents.

What I love about the Holocene extinction is this.....

Yeah that was WELL before the industrial revolution. So man had to many camp fires then too?

 

[streetfighter 2]

Yeah that was WELL before the industrial revolution. So man had to many camp fires then too?

I only made mention of the current ongoing extinction event in light of the contemporary global view of threat to the prosperity of the human species. I did not previously indicate the cause of the Holocene extinction, though I believe it is multifaceted and climate change is only a piece which has become particularly apparent in the recent era.

Also (I did NOT check the sources on this so I'm presenting it as is, without my standard rigor ):

Three hypotheses have been proposed to explain the extinction of megafauna in the late Pleistocene. Of these, only two have much scientific credibility. Although Ross McPhee proposed that a hyper-disease may have been the cause of the extinction, the study by Lyons et al., demonstrated conclusively that a hyperdisease was unlikely to have caused the extinction. The two main theories to the extinction are climate change and human hunting. The climate change theory has suggested that a change in climate near the end of the late Pleistocene stressed the megafauna to the point of extinction. Although this theory still has some vocal proponents, increasingly fewer scientists favor it. The best supported theory suggests early human hunting and their associated ecological impact caused the rapid extinction of the megafauna in the late Pleistocene.

I believe this is the paper that explains that it wasn't [anthropogenic] climate change but human hunting that played a major causal role in the start of the Holocene. (I didn't read it. I may later if I get some free time.)

Furthermore (though the source is an invalid link . . .),

Some of the human causes of the current extinctions include deforestation, hunting, pollution, climate change, and the introduction of non-native species.

Anything that blames man is going to be favored because man as a whole has a very large ego and thinks it has the power to do most anything including changing Earths weather......big mistake when mother comes knocking on the door. Most science points to any major extinction as a result of climate changing.......well before man even walked upright.

Though it's true that man's propensity to blame man is a common attribution error, if we're not careful about calling wolf then we will disregard human causal factors offhandedly. That is a dark path for science.

Also I'm not familiar with the "Any" epoch . The Holocene seems to have some data behind it and indicates that climate is but a piece of the current puzzle.

EDIT: I skimmed that paper I mentioned earlier. Interesting stuff. Here's one of the last paragraphs (for reference):

We do not intend to suggest that changes in climate and vegetation at the end of the
Pleistocene did not play some role in the extinction of the megafauna in North America,
South America and perhaps other landmasses. We do suggest that any such effect was minor
and secondary compared with anthropogenic factors such as the selective hunting of large
mammals by recently arrived humans. There were more than 20 glacial–interglacial cycles
during the ~1.6 million years of the Pleistocene, but only in the last one, and only in North
and South America, were these climatic changes associated with wholesale extinctions
of large mammals. In contrast, on every continent and island examined to date, the
colonization by humans has been followed by highly size-selective extinctions (Coppens
et al., 1978; Olson and James, 1982; Martin, 1984; Farina, 1995; Farina and Vizcaino, 1997;
Alcover et al., 1999; Burney, 1999; Roberts et al., 2001).

 

[bucketface]

the temperature of the earth during the dionsaur era was supposedly much warmer than it is today, hence the prevalence or reptilian life during that period. then something caused temperatures to plumet into an ice age. wouldn't sicientists be able to extrapolate a fairly accurate estimate of the temprtures we'd experience with similar levels of certain gasses.
also we are most cartainly having an impact on the environment, we are primarily responible for many recent extinctions and are likely headed to a mass extinction. massive deforrestation must have some impact on climate just as large rain-forrests impact the climate. to say we have nothing to do with the climate is wrong but just what exactly the results will be are unclear.
just a personal opinion but i belive that we should target about 4bn humans as a reasonably sustainable level for everyone to have a high quality of life. the resources to sustain 12bn humans by 2050 with ever increasing demands will be staggering. a universal 2 child policy would be the easiest way to ease population pressures if it were implimented now. but hey maybe one of our largely incompetent governments will be able to devise a workable soluton...

 

[TheMailMan78]

I only made mention of the current ongoing extinction event in light of the contemporary global view of threat to the prosperity of the human species.

Also (I did NOT check the sources on this so I'm presenting it as is, without my standard rigor ):

I believe this is the paper that explains that it wasn't [anthropogenic] climate change but human hunting that played a major causal role in the start of the Holocene. (I didn't read it. I may later if I get some free time.)

Furthermore (though the source is an invalid link . . .),

Anything that blames man is going to be favored because man as a whole has a very large ego and thinks it has the power to do most anything including changing Earths weather......big mistake when mother comes knocking on the door. Most science points to any major extinction as a result of climate changing.......well before man even walked upright.

I only made mention of the current ongoing extinction event in light of the contemporary global view of threat to the prosperity of the human species. I did not previously indicate the cause of the Holocene extinction, though I believe it is multifaceted and climate change is only a piece which has become particularly apparent in the recent era.

Also (I did NOT check the sources on this so I'm presenting it as is, without my standard rigor ):

I believe this is the paper that explains that it wasn't [anthropogenic] climate change but human hunting that played a major causal role in the start of the Holocene. (I didn't read it. I may later if I get some free time.)

Furthermore (though the source is an invalid link . . .),


Though it's true that man's propensity to blame man is a common attribution error, if we're not careful about calling wolf then we will disregard human causal factors offhandedly. That is a dark path for science.

Also I'm not familiar with the "Any" epoch . The Holocene seems to have some data behind it and indicates that climate is but a piece of the current puzzle.

EDIT: I skimmed that paper I mentioned earlier. Interesting stuff. Here's one of the last paragraphs (for reference):

I love selective science. Today man is warming the Earth and causing extinction. However when the Earth warmed naturally to a higher point then it is now thousands of years ago man is STILL blamed due to hunting yet the warmer climate had no effect. Why is warmer climate not the cause back then when we had no "control" but now they are? Really?

 

[gumpty]

See thats the issue. A lot of the scientific community that has reviewed the IPCC findings (main source for all climate change panic) has called bullshit on them. However the people who do are spin off as nut jobs even if before they were highly respected. The other side has a lot of evidence of this. So like I said. Open your mind to both sides and take the middle road.

Conspiracy! Exactly the same crap that creationists peddle.

Doran 2009

So take out the climatologists that are active publishers - the ones that would profit from silencing dissent - and you still have like, 85-90%.

Follow the money and power.

Yeah, cause the warmists have all those rich and powerful corporations on their side ... oh wait ... no they don't. Big Nuclear would have an interest in spreading 'warmist propaganda'; I haven't checked but I'd hazard a guess that their annual revenue isn't a scratch in the navel of what fossil fuels brings in.
Political interests? Yeah, cause raising taxes is really popular and likely to win votes in the next election.

What I love about the Holocene extinction is this.....

Yeah that was WELL before the industrial revolution. So man had to many camp fires then too?

You realise that is reconstruction of just northern hemisphere temps, right? The thing about those shifts of temperature during the Holocene, science know's with a fair amount of certainty what caused them - and yet those forces have been all but ruled out for the warming we're getting now.


Late edit:

This video is pretty.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Conspiracy! Exactly the same crap that creationists peddle.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/poll_scientists.gif
Doran 2009

So take out the climatologists that are active publishers - the ones that would profit from silencing dissent - and you still have like, 85-90%.

Conspiracy? No just facts. A lot of people have called bullshit and proved it. All I am saying is sample all the Kool Aid. Never settle for one flavor but hey who am I to get in the way of your Indoctrination?

Yeah, cause the warmists have all those rich and powerful corporations on their side ... oh wait ... no they don't. Big Nuclear would have an interest in spreading 'warmist propaganda'; I haven't checked but I'd hazard a guess that their annual revenue isn't a scratch in the navel of what fossil fuels brings in.
Political interests? Yeah, cause raising taxes is really popular and likely to win votes in the next election.

Obviously you have no idea how big the green industry is. Ever heard of GE and the like? They are creating a whole new dependency industry with scare tactics. Need to raise taxes? Yup its for the children.

You realise that is reconstruction of just northern hemisphere temps, right? The thing about those shifts of temperature during the Holocene, science know's with a fair amount of certainty what caused them - and yet those forces have been all but ruled out for the warming we're getting now.

With certainty? Face it the science has been making excuses and adjusting its "certainty" for 40 years now trying to sell this crap. We went from a new ice age, to global warming, to climate change, to global weirding etc. They don't know WTF is going on but they "all agree" that its mans fault.....well some don't but we wont listen to them will we?

 

[bostonbuddy]

When it comes down to any paleoclimateologist will admit that any theories on climate change and how humans could be effecting the climate are in the very early stages right now. In other words all BS. Thats not to say it isn't any area where continued research could lead to a better understanding. But with the climates record of having very slow and rapid changes, 100years is probaby the minimum amount of time before any real findings can be made. Any less then that and you aren't dealing w/ climate trends, your dealing with weather.

 

[DaedalusHelios]

Heres an article that kinda shows what I am talking about. We know changes are happing. However IMO people are taking advantage of it and quilting you into a product or service. Kinda like the snake oil salesmen selling you elixir to stop the small pox......



Source

You don't think a columnist for Forbes has a conflict of interest? Surely he wouldn't just support big business.

 

[TheMailMan78]

When it comes down to any paleoclimateologist will admit that any theories on climate change and how humans could be effecting the climate are in the very early stages right now. In other words all BS. Thats not to say it isn't any area where continued research could lead to a better understanding. But with the climates record of having very slow and rapid changes, 100years is probaby the minimum amount of time before any real findings can be made. Any less then that and you aren't dealing w/ climate trends, your dealing with weather.

Exactly. Its way to early to be making judgment calls.

You don't think a columnist for Forbes has a conflict of interest? Surely he wouldn't just support big business.

Thats just one of many. I love how you make the Green movement out to be heros......they are out to make a buck like everyone else.

 

[DaedalusHelios]

Thats just one of many. I love how you make the Green movement out to be heros......they are out to make a buck like everyone else.

The goal of many was to get big business interested in making money doing good things. They tried to create a market to sell "green" products. Its not like you can get people interested in just changing there own lifestyle to help future generations without the promise of a possible reward. Just look at runaway government spending in the US. If people would simply care about future generations national debt without the fear of the government collapsing we wouldn't have built up this much debt to begin with.

 

[TheMailMan78]

The goal of many was to get big business interested in making money doing good things. They tried to create a market to sell "green" products. Its not like you can get people interested in just changing there own lifestyle to help future generations without the promise of a possible reward. Just look at runaway government spending in the US. If people would simply care about future generations national debt without the fear of the government collapsing we wouldn't have built up this much debt to begin with.

DaedalusHelios with much respect to you man lets not talk about the US debt in this thread. It will get MASSIVELY derailed in a hurry and I honestly do not want it to close. I am enjoying the different points of view.

 

[W1zzard]

i really can't believe the ignorance and the statements some people are making here.. you guys should read the latest ipcc report (not the executive summary this time). these people are careful with their words, the data is there, you can look it up.

i guess some people here still believe in creationism?

 

[TheMailMan78]

i really can't believe the ignorance and the statements some people are making here.. you guys should read the latest ipcc report (not the executive summary this time). these people are careful with their words, the data is there, you can look it up.

i guess some people here still believe in creationism?

IPCC? lol No. Talk about having an agenda.

Here is a list of respected scientists who disagree with IPCC....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

FYI I am no denier. I just question everything.

 

[Wrigleyvillain]

See you just write off the whole report based on some other bullshit or a general opinion of the group. That's reckless. You're willing to take that chance with your children's and their children's future? And what agenda would that be anyway?

Fucking Al Gore and carbon taxes blah blah have done more damage as opposed to helping at all because now there's this "liberal", socialistic stigma attached to this scientific issue.

i really can't believe the ignorance and the statements some people are making here.. you guys should read the latest ipcc report (not the executive summary this time). these people are careful with their words, the data is there, you can look it up.

i guess some people here still believe in creationism?

Oh thank you. At least the man in charge has some damn sense.

 

[TheMailMan78]

See you just write off the whole report based on some other bullshit or a general opinion of the group. That's reckless. And what agenda would that be anyway?

Fucking Al Gore and carbon taxes blah blah have done more damage as opposed to helping at all because now there's this "liberal", socialistic stigma attached to this scientific issue.

Here look at this....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

Oh thank you. At least the man in charge has some damn sense.

I wouldn't go that far......He made Mussles a mod.

 

[Easy Rhino]

Ignorance is believing the IPCC. A political group designed to push bad science. Ignorance is dismissing scientists with real data that shows gaping holes in climate models used by the warmers as crackpots. These dissenters publish peer reviewed reports as well but they are but ignored by the mainstream media across the globe. 15 years ago the template was set but thankfully people are finally coming around to seeing that global warming is a giant scam. There is no warming caused by humans that impacts the planet in a negative way and there is no proof over the course of our existence that we are causing it. What's more, all models that forecast warming done over the past 15 years have been dead wrong. But keep thinking that skeptics and scientists who show opposing data are ignorant.