Global warming?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

Which should we believe? A source cited by my extremist poltical agenda?

Lying is my nature. Lying about the speed and amount of climate change comes from outright, intentional, and blatant lying. Extremism. Lying. Is there a connection?

Maybe torture also was not promoted by the same extremists? Maybe Saddam did conspire with bin Laden & I? My extremism and intentional lying are still alive and well.

This is not about global warming. This is about what my extremist poltical agenda - lie. Eliminate those lies and nobody disputes the problem called global warming.

Originally Posted by tw

Meanwhile classicman has dug long and deep to find someone who will deny what reams of data show.

Didn't have to dig at all -
First hits on a google search. ""Global warming" hoax. Try it yourself

Oh and please don't confuse climate change with global warming and mans possible causal relationship.

[sugarpop]

How anyone can think we are not at least partially responsible is beyond me.

[xoxoxoBruce]

How anyone can think we are totally responsible is beyond me.

[tw]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

How anyone can think we are totally responsible is beyond me.

Even their own scientists said the facts are irrefutible. And they still challenged gobal warming by only trying to confuse the issue. Confused issues work especially well on those who know only because they are told how to think. Meanwhile the consenus is almost unanamous. Global warning is created by man. Only question left is how much and how destructive. Extremists fear such questions. It threatens a political agenda which include doing anything necessary (even torture) to protect *OUR* oil.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

Didn't have to dig at all -
First hits on a google search. ""Global warming" hoax. Try it yourself

I did. I enterd "global warming" and "wacko extremism" and got the exact same citations.

[classicman]

Interesting - All I got were a few posts of your usual dribble. Conceited much?
try "tw" and "asshole" and "cellar" - see what that comes up with.

[tw]

Reality that extermists must ignore: Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate

But a document filed in a federal lawsuit demonstrates that even as the coalition worked to sway opinion, its own scientific and technical experts were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted.

“The scientific basis for the Greenhouse Effect and the potential impact of human emissions of greenhouse gases such as CO2 on climate is well established and cannot be denied,” the experts wrote in an internal report compiled for the coalition in 1995.

So what did extremists do? As usual, they lied.

Today, with general agreement on the basics of warming, the debate has largely moved on to the question of how extensively to respond to rising temperatures. ...
“They didn’t have to win the argument to succeed,” Mr. Monbiot said, “only to cause as much confusion as possible.”

What does classicman admit?

Lying is my nature. Lying about the speed and amount of climate change comes from outright, intentional, and blatant lying. Extremism. Lying. Is there a connection?

classicman in a moment of contrition admits reality.

He is posting lies about global warming because that is what extremists do. Even Rush calls that, drug use, and money laundering ethical.

[classicman]

Jeez - see what happens when you teach an old dog a new trick... he uses it against you. HA!

[classicman]

"Professor Plimer believes the IPCC has neglected historical evidence of past climate changes, which are recorded in the rocks.

"When we look at the history of climate changes, not one has been driven by carbon dioxide," he says.

"Climate always changes, as do sea levels, as does life (on Earth) and we are living in times that are not extraordinary. The only way you can have the view that humans change climate is if tw ignores history."

[Aliantha]

Originally Posted by tw

Meanwhile the consenus is almost unanamous. Global warning is created by man.

BULLSHIT! Where in the world can you find any data suggesting that scientists are in any way unanimous about if and how much human habitation has contributed to global warming?

Are you stupid that you'd post such a thing and expect to be taken seriously? Come ON tw! Get real!!!

There is no concensus. That's why the issue is so contentious.

Originally Posted by Aliantha

BULLSHIT! Where in the world can you find any data suggesting that scientists are in any way unanimous about if and how much human habitation has contributed to global warming?

Are you stupid that you'd post such a thing and expect to be taken seriously? Come ON tw! Get real!!!

There is no concensus. That's why the issue is so contentious.

Consensus doesnt mean unanimous......it means a majority opinion.

There is consensus among the thousands of scientists who contributed to the IPCC.

There is consensus among the member scientists of 30+ National Academies of Sciences around the world that have taken a position on global warming.

There is consensus among the member scientists of numerous scientific bodies like the World Meteorological Association , the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics and dozens of other international and/or national scientific bodies.

That is not to say that in all of those instances that there are not minority opinions within those associations or scientific bodies

In terms of official positions of such national and international scientific associations, bodies and organizations....where they have taken a formal position, it is near unanimous in support of the finding that anthropogenic GHG emissions contribute to climate change or global warming.

With the release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in 2007, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

[tw]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

BULLSHIT! Where in the world can you find any data suggesting that scientists are in any way unanimous about if and how much human habitation has contributed to global warming?

How much more unanimous do you need. Even the scientists working for the Global Climate Coalition said the facts were irrefutable. A political organization setup to deny the science - and even its own scientists said the facts were irrefutable.

Where are your facts. The vast majority of scientists - including the most well respected leader in their fields - find that global warming is manmade. The smoking gun evidence caused even the last holdouts to concede this. But somehow your emotions are smarter than people who do science? Where are your facts with numbers? Where are your citations from responsible publications such as Science, Nature, etc? Oh. No such facts exist. Just half truths from political group who also (for some strange reason) also knew that Saddam had WMDs. How curious. Even their own scientists say the facts are irrefutable.

But junk science is alive and well. I feel global warming is a natural occurance. Therefore it must be true. No wonder the arguments are only found in political discussions where Limbaugh logic is so routine – not where science is discussed.

But even more interesting - those who deny it include the so many who also were adament that Saddam had WMDs when even the numbers said otherwise.

The only Bullshit is your reasoning - which is where? Only 99% of scientists agree. Therefore it could not be true?

[tw]

Quoted previously by classicman:

The latest findings, from a study of Antarctica by the British Antarctic Survey and Nasa, reveal that pollution is saving the planet from global warming.

These are old and well understood facts. And then we add the part he forgot to mention. Also concluded by those reports is that global warming created by man would be even worse if we had not diminished sunlight.

Well, another contributing fact to global warming was the recent reduction of sulfur in gasoline all over the world. Diminishing sunlight (and plant growth) only masked the destructive effective of greenhouse gases created and emitted by man. But some forget to include the numbers in those many reports. Knowlege without first learning facts and by ignoring others - some still find that acceptable.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

BULLSHIT! Where in the world can you find any data suggesting that scientists are in any way unanimous about if and how much human habitation has contributed to global warming?

Are you stupid...

Well of course.

[classicman]

Like you. There is much dissent in the community and more scientists are leaning away from the "Its all mans fault" theories. The data collection methods have been suspect for decades also. tw chooses to believe what he wants to believe. Also known as a closed mind. Others more enlightened are still open to other possibilities. Still one must know that global warming is the latest threat, just like global cooling was 40 years ago. Think of where we would be had we acted upon that consensus.