1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

The Dangers of Lay People talking Science

Discussion in 'Science & Technology' started by the54thvoid, Sep 3, 2011.

  1. the54thvoid

    the54thvoid

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,242 (1.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,471
    Location:
    Glasgow - home of formal profanity
    There was a forum post a while back about research calling into question the man made influence on climate change. Lots of folk then started waving the old skeptic flag about global warming. Well, the editor that allowed that article into his journal has now resigned over it. I read an article about the 'paper' and it's author last night. Find it here:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14768574

    The basic summary is this:

    That would be those idiots that think the earth is about 7000 years old.

    I rarely post in this forum because it's full of uneducated opinions on branches of science most of us know nothing about and as such - should keep our mouths shut about. It's fine to have an opinion on a moral (abortion) or subjective (art) matter but to grab tidbits of info from selected (and highly questionable) articles makes a mockery of having a forum called "Science and Technology".

    Furthermore, the scientific community is prone to influence from outside sources (the tobacco lobby was one of the most influential). An evangelical scientist working for a group that has the views expressed in the quoted section above is just as bad. His interest is not in the scientific benefit but instead on qualifying his own organisations belief.

    Science is ultimately about getting closer and closer to the truth. Mistakes get made along the way but real science is something above religion and money. It's about understanding why everything is. Giving credence to 'controversial' new papers is damaging to that ultimate quest. So please, before all the malleable young minds start saying 'yeah, i knew that <insert mainstream accepted view> was crap', please question it's source and it's objectivity.

    Scientific revolutions do happen but normally when a new approach lets somebody test it for the first time (when the theory starts to become fact). The vast majority of climate work points to a hotter planet with human industrial (and biological) influence being a factor. So when one or two studies pop up and say "no", ask yourself why.

    And finally, its so easy to be a skeptic because it takes away the guilt or responsibility. It must be even easier to be an evangelical scientific skeptic because 'god must will it'. In today's mainstream and empirically structured scientific community - being a skeptic is ignorant but easy way out of responsibility.

    Enjoy that guilt free ride on your descendants one way ticket to disaster.
    Chevalr1c and Wrigleyvillain say thanks.
  2. micropage7

    micropage7

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,712 (3.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,309
    Location:
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    i guess theres a time for smart people stop act like the god and say we know it all
    we have push this nature too much and we have taken from this nature too much
    look at fossil energy, from billions time we just drain it for 100years
    we never pay attention until its late, like this time as usual
  3. DannibusX

    DannibusX

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    2,527 (1.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    979
    Location:
    United States
  4. Arctucas

    Arctucas

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,764 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    290
    I believe that science has shown the climate of the Earth to be cyclical; cold-to-warm-to-cold-to-warm..., on a several tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years basis. So yes, there is 'climate change', it is perfectly natural, and has being occurring long before mankind emerged on this planet. And it will continue long after mankind is gone.

    I also believe we are currently in one of the warmer periods. Given the length of time humans have been aware of climate is so short as to to be statistically insignificant.

    When humankind is able to collect, analyze, interpret, and present (sans agenda) empirical data spanning several millions of years, then I believe an argument may be made one way or the other.

    That 'scientists' for either side believe they know enough at this point is, frankly, the height of arrogance and conceit.
    rpsgc says thanks.
  5. dorsetknob

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Messages:
    268 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    141
    Location:
    Dorset where else eh?
    """ ello """

    i got mixed Views on global warming
    one line of reasoning is as the earth ages it loses heat from the core and therefor earth is cooling (like a poker pulled out of a fire loses heat) don't think many will argue that's not true.

    now balance that against the expectation that as the Sun Ages its going to evolve into a RED GIANT and expand. probably well past the orbit of the earth and as such will probably engulf the earth this will certainly cause global warming.

    So yes Earth will eventually suffer from global warming :banghead: but at the end it or whats left of it will only get colder ( down to -274K or about absolute ZERO).

    PS remember flaming only reheats something for awhile
  6. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,416 (6.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,395
    Location:
    IA, USA
    ...but these claims are accurate. Climate legislation leads to jobs being deported to countries that don't have tough legislation in place (namely, India and China--shifting to sub-Saharan Africa sooner or later) and it's pretty easy to come up with a "trillions of dollars" figure when you factor in everything from increased cost of food production and distribution to artifical increases in costs through "carbon tax(es)."

    The science behind "global warming" I say "meh" to. On the economics side of things: we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. The only solution to this problem is a technological breakthrough on the level of discovering fission.
    majestic12 says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  7. streetfighter 2

    streetfighter 2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,658 (1.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    732
    Location:
    Philly
    [​IMG]
  8. hat

    hat Maximum Overclocker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    16,912 (5.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,063
    Location:
    Ohio
    As for the core cooling, it stands to reason that eventually, over the course of a very, very long time, eventually the Earth could possibly lose heat, but if true, that's a highly insignificant factor at this point. Up against the natural climate phases of the planet, core cooling isn't even a drop in the bucket. If that were the case, one might think we were steadily on a decline, but that's not the case is it?

    As for your red giant idea... that has nothing to do with global warming. We're talking about climate change within the planet's internal climate, not external forces such as the sun. Until some extreme events occur, like the sun's expansion during its death sequence, the sun's activity doesn't play a major role in our climate. Thanks to our nifty atmosphere, our temperatures remain remarkably stable. Take a look at planets like Mercury, that get deep fried on the sunny size and flash frozen on the dark side, thanks to not having an atmosphere... and there's also the opposite extreme with planets like Venus, which remain toasty forever because of the atmosphere there. Also, when the sun expands and engulfs the earth, it will be more than global warming... it would be more like not having a planet Earth anymore because it melted inside the sun.

    Don't we already have an experimental fusion reactor somewhere?
    Crunching for Team TPU
  9. HTC

    HTC

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    2,238 (0.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    303
    Unless we do something bad to the atmosphere: then it would be a problem, no?

    EDIT

    That's the problem with priorities: who cares if the planet ends up imploding or something, as long as we make money, it's all good ...
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2011
  10. hat

    hat Maximum Overclocker

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    16,912 (5.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,063
    Location:
    Ohio
    The planet produces loads of smoke to go into the air on its own. Volcanoes can be pretty dirty things...
    DannibusX says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  11. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,519 (1.94/day)
    Thanks Received:
    931
    It's a rather pointless debate anyways. Whether the amount of heating caused by man is miniscule or the majority, natural or not, you still have to spend money to do something about it. A natural ice-age is just as bad as an unnatural one. Unfortunately that doesn't really matter to those at the top spurring the argument against man made warming as their whole goal is to be "conservative" in the expenditure of money for anything other than making more money in the short term. Only when the shit hits the fan will something large scale be done about this, and by then it will cost more and be less effective.
    Jegergrim says thanks.
  12. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    13,416 (6.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,395
    Location:
    IA, USA
    Probably a dozen or more of them around the world but none of them can sustain a reaction for more than a fraction of a second. The problem with fusion is that the fuel (deutrium, tritrium, and hydrogen) wants to fly apart. Stars keep running because of their mass--we have to replicate a strong gravitational field in a small area (some do it with lasers, some do it with magnets) and that's a tough nut to crack.

    Fusion would be a great answer to our energy problems but it remains out of reach. :(
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2011
    Crunching for Team TPU
  13. Jetster

    Jetster

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    4,851 (2.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,917
    Location:
    Oregon
    The only facts are that this is pointless. Use common sense people. Don't pollute and reuse when you can. Scientist on both sides of this issue have lost integrity. Just like the Media has.
    streetfighter 2 and erocker say thanks.
  14. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,186 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,137
    The sun plays a HUGE part in the temperature of our planet as we experience it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation

    Maunder Minimum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maunder_Minimum

    The temp of the earths core plays a large part in the stability, as well as the ocean and atmosphere, but the sun is directly responsible for heating them to maintain temperature.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Radiation_and_Climate_Experiment

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_irradiance


    There are far too many factors that we still don't even know exist to try and include them in any sort of climate model predictions. The largest contributor to our earths temperature we know little about and have only early warning systems of a few minutes for solar radiation storms, and no high accuracy prediction for output.

    We need to gather data for another few hundred years, and during that time we need to still live, work, and play.
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  15. streetfighter 2

    streetfighter 2 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,658 (1.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    732
    Location:
    Philly
    This thread is silly, so forgive me while I quote more Onion:
    Scientists Trace Heat Wave To Massive Star At Center Of Solar System
    Ditto. I don't believe that being environmentally friendly leads to economic chaos -- profiteering does that.

    My eco-measures include, but are not limited to:
    a) driving at ~60MPH on the freeway to conserve gas.
    b) driving a 4 banger with no aftermarket stupidity.
    c) strategic replacement of lights with CFLs.
    d) turning off lights and electronics whenever possible.
    e) eating lots of animals to piss off PETA.
    f) only buying hookers from pimps which certify that their merchandise is local (not trafficked/imported).
    g) drinking liquor to conserve water.
    h) not falling to sleep in the shower at least one day of the week.
    i) ripping on Mussels in every other post.
    j) disposing of hazmats using approved facilities.
    k) praying to an open-minded god.
    l) buying local produce whenever possible.
  16. twilyth Guest

    This thread really is ridiculous. It's the same as saying that you can't learn anything until you've learned something. Yahright, and how exactly do you think that's going to work? Hmmmm? :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
  17. Wrigleyvillain

    Wrigleyvillain PTFO or GTFO

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,652 (3.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,765
    Location:
    Chicago
    I don't think it's nearly as ridiculous as many of the responses in the climate change thread(s) which is what he's talking about in the OP.
  18. Chevalr1c

    Chevalr1c

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,180 (2.19/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,356
    There is water involved in its production.
    Crunching for Team TPU

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page