I thought there was no question we were in a period of warming and that the only debate is whether it’s primarily man made or not, but no. Do we have any objective proof that these scientists know what the hell they’re talking about? I mean, have they made any accurate predictions?
This is a big problem with science. It’s really complex, so you just have to trust those who spent the time studying it in depth because no one has the time to prove it all themselves. I mean, when I read a book on math, the author could just be making up stuff about integrals for all I know but at least I have some idea how to find that out. On the other hand, if Stephen Hawkings plays solitaire all day instead of researching and then just pulls his findings about black holes out of his ass, is there any way any of us would know?
We could try diving into a Black Hole to disprove him?
Not to get technical, but wouldn’t Stephen Hawking need SOMEONE ELSE to pull stuff out of his butt?
OK. So the thrust of the first 97% of the article is that the climate is a big super-complex system that scientists are still trying to figure out. But the few lines are an assertion by one such clueless scientists that we should still worry about the Earth burning to a crisp because of evil human civilization. I should be surprised that the author seems completely oblivious to the logical fallacy there, but sadly, I’m not.
EE…LMAO! Best one I’ve read today!
Sounds like a load of CYA from the scientific community. Guesstimation at its highest levels.
I have the solution, and will be happy to reprint it here.
Dry air is cold; Wet air is warm.
The polar regions are cold because of … Humidity 70%.
Water vapor is the most effective greenhouse gas.
On a clear/dry night it is colder than it is on a cloudy/humid one.
As an offset (natural) in the daytime, clouds cause shade. It is cooler in the shade than in the direct sun (at a given humidity).
Clouds are water (ice) vapor.
CO2 does not exist (on earth) in a vaporous form (no CO2 clouds).
Water is killing the earth, it must be eliminated.
You don’t make money or get published by writing about cold, hard scientific facts/evidence. The overwhelming majority of “science” you read is speculation upon spectulation, billed as “scientific fact”. That is how evolutionists and global warming hysterics sell their wares.
The solution? Always ask for the hard evidence that supports their speculation. “Nebraska Man” was publicized as a whole race of ancient people. The only evidence they had was “one tooth”! It turned out to be a pigs tooth. Does anyone think anyone at the Scopes Trial would have bought the story of “Nebraska Man” if they knew it was based on “one tooth”. Even dummies would have laughed that off. But speculation, with no basis in fact got evolution into our government schools.
Talking about Black holes ……..read my new book “Black holes, Asteroids and Hemmorhoids and the origin of the rings around Uranus”
Ahh yes, the “Who you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?” global warmmongering story, my second favorite type of global warmmongering story.
My favorite being the ones where some global warmmongers are suprised by cold in the winter. Like the ones who went to the North Pole to protest all the melting polar bears and got frostbite.
Because they didn’t bring enough cold weather gear.
To the North Pole.
I will answer your question though, you look and see if it makes sense.
Now take the article in question, it talks about global worming and the temperature of the Earth and yet, nowhere in the article is there mention of that gigantic flaming ball of nukular fire. The one that warms the Earth. The one with cycles whose cycles eerily match the temperature cycles of the Earth.
An analogy would be if Hawking were to give us his theory of black holes and it never mentioned gravity but just talked about time travel and Vulcan ears.
#4, I’m glad I’m not the only one who laughed at that. See y’all in Hell! 😉
On topic, even if that AGW is true, I don’t see the problem with a warmer climate:
Isn’t that the primary reason that seasoned citizens move to Florida or Arizona? And what little kid out there wants to wear a heavy winter coat over their Halloween costume? And in a warmer climate, the rest of us can hang out by the pool with a cold frosty adult beverage of choice…
Get with the program, Al…
Plus, it’s just funny to see
Global WarmingClimate Change conferences get cancelled because of SNOW! It’s God’s way of saying, “nuh uh, I’m in charge of weather, and don’t you forget it!”Science is funny, especially when it tries to be all sciencey.
As a scientist (MS Organic Chemistry, Colorado State University), I can not decide if I am more saddened or annoyed by the perversion of the scientific process used by the
Global WarmingClimate Change believers. Taking a hypothesis, ignoring contrary evidence, and demanding that no one speak against the consensus is not science.To be science, your hypothesis needs to either 1) be able to be falsified by experiment or 2) demonstrate predictive value. Since there appears to be NO data that the believers would accept as falsifying the hypothesis, then it should show predictive value to be accepted. Realizing of course that the emphasis on the predictive is on the “pre-“.
I know I would be much easier to convince of the validity of the computer models, if someone could do one simple thing. Show me one prediction made by any of the models BEFORE the current flat line to cooling period started in 1998 that predicted the current “pause” in the warming trend.
As things stand, I am very worried that we are going to wreck our prosperity fighting non-existant global warming as the lack of solar activity plunges the world into the slightly overdue ice age.
Frankly, I HOPE that Al Gore (may fleas be upon him) is right, cause a 1 C rise in temperature is much better than the 4-7 C drop predicted by the solar driven hypothesis groups. But given the correlation between temperature and solar activity and the lack thereof for temperature and CO2, Parkas look like a better investment then air conditioning right now.
All ya need to know – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3q3upFx4FcA
science has brought us many things that people just cann’t live without–check cards for welfare recipients—-smaller nedles for heroin addicts—internet for porn on demand—crack our inner cities might be in bad shape without all these wonderful things brought to us by science.
Dear EE …. I must admonish you not to refer to the doody covered items pulled or otherwise removed from Stephen Hawkings canal. You will have poor Frank in an OCD hand washing tizzy!
Dear Bob E. …. I resent your implications that Nebraska Man was pig toothed. Reason for my vehemence is? …. Is because indeed I am “Nantucket Man” ( there once was a man from Nantucket etc etc etc )
I read an article last month that said that the ice at the South Pole is melting at an alarming rate. February is like August in the southern hemisphere (I’ve been there, it’s true!) When Antarctica plunges back into 6 months of darkness and the ice still continues to melt, Then I’ll be convinced.
That has always been a concern of mine. What if we get some insane scientist that decides that it would be hilariously fantastic to create a cure for a disease that in fact puts you into such an irreversibly damaged state that you will never walk or speak again.
The world would be full of vegetable people.
The water issue,
We will just increase the size of our bladders and create human vaccume cleaner armies and blast the excess water into space.