Bush Says Yes To Global Warming

[CyberGnu]

No Wraith, in your world the data that shows the global temperature rising 0.6 +-0.2 degrees doesn't correspond with your view what is right, and so they are obviously 'flawed'.

Tha the future computer projections are uncertain is quite natural. We have no way to estmate effects such as release of the methane trapped by permafrost, decreases refelction of light due to smaller icecaps etc.

But this is not the point of the projections. The sole purpose of them is to put a reasonable estimate for the temperature change, so that other scientists can model the change in weather patterns and climate. The temperature is not an end in itself.

And while I'm sure the screaming will commence that these preditions are even more uncertain, that is also beside the point. Regardless of how exact they are, the scientific consensus is that the global impact will range from bad to catastropic.

[CyberGnu]

If you think that it is insulting to be called on the fact that your'd rather trust O'Reilly over Science and Nature, well, I can understand that. I would find it intensely insulting, but then again, I never would... Just like I would not trust greenpeace over Science and Nature.

I find this statement 'plenty of scientists' intriguing. I've tried to find this petition, but apparently no one wants to publish the actual names... Just raw data such as '15000 people, 6000 of which with advanced degrees in science have signed the petition'. Minor details such as that it was sent out on official NAS letterhead while not being condoned by the NAS is usually left out, and there is never a breakdown on how many of the scientists who signed it are in relevant sciences. I woulnd't consider my signature relevant even though I have a PhD in chemistry - I'm not an atmospheric chemist.

I guess you call the multitude of data presented in peer reviwed journals personal insults....

[CyberGnu]

BTW, I don't know what you refer to when you talk about the 'unprofessional treatment of Bjorn Lomburg'.

A searh on Lomborg in Nature doesn't give a single hit. In Science there are two hits, one is a review of his book, and the other is a news item saying that danish scientists are alarmed over Lomborgs appointemnt to a danish envornmental agency...

I guess it is unprofessional to give an honest review...

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Say hello to sunny beaches.

ROTF

I bet Canada and UK should be the biggest proponensts of global warming. (with the scandinavian countries & Russia too

The only thing is that 90% of world's population will come to seek bread at your door

[chequita guevara]

I doubt very highly whether any computer model would accurately predicate past weather events. If you rewound time, and ran the past century forward again, weather would not repeat itself.

The 600 pound gorilla of the problem, though, is, regardless of what we do now, it won't start having an effect for generations. Global warming is here, it's going to get worse, and there's nothing we can do about it. By the time we start to have an effect, the consequences will already have happened.

So, does that mean we should do nothing? Well, no. I'm still hoping for a cure to old age (seriously), so I'd like the weather not to go to hell in handbasket.

[DanS]

Tolls: No doubt that it needed to be taken care of. But it simply wasn't a more than $200 billion problem that it was hyped into being, in the U.S. alone. It has distorted the technology market for years.

It was a one byte problem, costing us $200 billion, for God's sake! You better believe that I want to know more about global warming because the price tag will be fvcking enormous.

[DanS]

"And when the second opinion confirms the first? And the third? And fourth to twentieth? When the only people who don't agree that there is a 90% chance of you duying are Jehovas wintesses and one old witchdoctor you found in swamp, what would you choose?"

I know that you're impatient about this supposed problem, but to my mind there hasn't been much of a dialogue on the issue, at least here in the States. And the science seems in its infancy. Further, I'm surprised that scientists such as yourself aren't being more skeptical, since that's part of your job.

This debate reminds me that 15 years ago, some scientists were talking about overpopulation in apocalyptic terms. But here, 15 years later, we have a clearer idea that it's probably not much of a problem.

Re the "self selection" on smartness, the comment was meant to show that your criteria are entirely made up by you. It's like any random Joe saying, "you know I thought about it some, and figured out that I'm smart and most other people are stupid!"

[Ned]

I don't know if Kyoto allows credit for CO2 sinks, but the longer growing seasons in the North should automatically give all the Northern countries credit for CO2 reductions.

I half recall that the US was asking for such credits, but this was denied by the Europeans. This is one of the reasons the US has chosen a separate path from Europe.

[CyberGnu]

Ned, the Europeans caved on that issue, but the US refused regardless...

[CyberGnu]

DanS, well, that's your opinion. I think it's quite an objective measurement... If you kill yourself because you disregard a warning, you die from stupidity.

Take a look at the darwin award for prime examples.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave


ROTF

I bet Canada and UK should be the biggest proponensts of global warming. (with the scandinavian countries & Russia too

The only thing is that 90% of world's population will come to seek bread at your door

Let them eat cake.

[CyberGnu]

DanS, I am sceptic, but right now the data suggests that we are causing global warming.

I'm not well versed in atmosspehric science to interpret the raw data, so I have to rely on people who are to do that. Since I don't know them either personally or professionally, I have to rely in turn on peer-reviewed journals and possibly non-politically affiliated commissions.

But to just say 'no' to the combined scientific consensus is not being sceptic, just ignorant...

[Richelieu]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Let them eat cake.

She didn't say cake. She said brioche...

[KrazyHorse]

She was just a lousy German anyway. What did she know?

[CyberGnu]

BTW, Ned, you might want to look for more objective sources. The Marshall organization is sponsored by Exxon, the Olin Fund and the Bradley Fund (both well known right-wing sponsors)...