3rdnlng Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d70iXVN5EVM&feature=player_embedded# When you start out with the conclusion already, this is what you get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 If he's right he is right...if he is wrong....he is STILL right. Must be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 If he's right he is right...if he is wrong....he is STILL right. Must be nice. That's why global warming is more religion than science these days. Still...he's not entirely wrong. It CAN cause more snow in certain places - last year's Snowpocalypse in DC can be traced to global warming (weakened Arctic high pressure over the center of the continent causes nor'easters to veer further west, and hence the mid-Atlantic gets the winter storms that New England would otherwise get). But this - and the scary-ass weather in Australia right now - is due to the La Nina event in the Pacific...and I haven't yet seen anyone tie that in any sense to "global warming". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 That's why global warming is more religion than science these days. Still...he's not entirely wrong. It CAN cause more snow in certain places - last year's Snowpocalypse in DC can be traced to global warming (weakened Arctic high pressure over the center of the continent causes nor'easters to veer further west, and hence the mid-Atlantic gets the winter storms that New England would otherwise get). But this - and the scary-ass weather in Australia right now - is due to the La Nina event in the Pacific...and I haven't yet seen anyone tie that in any sense to "global warming". And they still can't prove my truck is causing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Have any of the 'tards explained yet how we came to have climate change so extreme that the planet went through several ice ages and melting of same before there was a single SUV (or human) in existance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 That's why global warming is more religion than science these days. Still...he's not entirely wrong. It CAN cause more snow in certain places - last year's Snowpocalypse in DC can be traced to global warming (weakened Arctic high pressure over the center of the continent causes nor'easters to veer further west, and hence the mid-Atlantic gets the winter storms that New England would otherwise get). But this - and the scary-ass weather in Australia right now - is due to the La Nina event in the Pacific...and I haven't yet seen anyone tie that in any sense to "global warming". You make the religion to science comparison and then show why Gore's statement is actually sound science. There may be other aspects to the prevailing global warming science that you could argue are dogmatic, but this is not one of them. Notice I didn't call you an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 2, 2011 Author Share Posted February 2, 2011 You make the religion to science comparison and then show why Gore's statement is actually sound science. There may be other aspects to the prevailing global warming science that you could argue are dogmatic, but this is not one of them. Notice I didn't call you an idiot. Do you agree with Al Gore or the esteemed democrats in the video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Have any of the 'tards explained yet how we came to have climate change so extreme that the planet went through several ice ages and melting of same before there was a single SUV (or human) in existance? Found a nice explanation on Yahoo Answers... There are two types of ice ages and both are caused by different natural cycles. The conventional ice age occurs of it’s own accord at intervals of approx 100,000 years and this is due to the shape of the orbit that Earth takes around the Sun (it’s called eccentricity and relates to the elliptical orbit of the Earth, over time the orbit tends to and from circularity). The last ice age of this nature ended 10,000 years ago, we’re due for another in about 90,000 years. There are also the great ice ages that occur at intervals of approx 125 million years. Unlike the lesser ice ages that only affect parts of the planet, these great ice ages can turn the entire planet into a ball of ice. These are most likely caused by changes in the orbit of the Sun around the centre of the galaxy. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100524160435AAgMjZO COMPLETELY unrelated, the logical fallacy of the day is: The Argument from Personal Incredulity: I cannot explain this, therefore it cannot be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Found a nice explanation on Yahoo Answers... The last ice age of this nature ended 10,000 years ago, we’re due for another in about 90,000 years. So basically we are still coming out of the last ice age. If that's the case the temperature should be doing what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Do you agree with Al Gore or the esteemed democrats in the video? Al Gore in this case - because his view coincides with the accepted science. In the video, it seems like a lot of people, including nervous people in industry, are falling victim to confirmation bias. So basically we are still coming out of the last ice age. If that's the case the temperature should be doing what? Is my last name Google? If you're actually interested in the answers, try doing some reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Al Gore in this case - because his view coincides with the accepted science. In the video, it seems like a lot of people, including nervous people in industry, are falling victim to confirmation bias. Is my last name Google? If you're actually interested in the answers, try doing some reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Sorry for suggesting that you use your own brain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Sorry for suggesting that you use your own brain. Which is a hell of a lot smarter than him using yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Sorry for suggesting that you use your own brain. I just thought you might have a link handy, forgot you are not connor!!!! found it. http://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/FOS%20Essay/HoloceneOptimumTemperature.jpg The temp has been rising for over 500 years. which predates automobiles by about 400 hundred years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Found a nice explanation on Yahoo Answers... There are two types of ice ages and both are caused by different natural cycles. The conventional ice age occurs of it’s own accord at intervals of approx 100,000 years and this is due to the shape of the orbit that Earth takes around the Sun (it’s called eccentricity and relates to the elliptical orbit of the Earth, over time the orbit tends to and from circularity). The last ice age of this nature ended 10,000 years ago, we’re due for another in about 90,000 years. There are also the great ice ages that occur at intervals of approx 125 million years. Unlike the lesser ice ages that only affect parts of the planet, these great ice ages can turn the entire planet into a ball of ice. These are most likely caused by changes in the orbit of the Sun around the centre of the galaxy. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100524160435AAgMjZO That was !@#$ing retarded. Conner write that answer? I just thought you might have a link handy, forgot you are not connor!!!! found it. http://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/FOS%20Essay/HoloceneOptimumTemperature.jpg The temp has been rising for over 500 years. which predates automobiles by about 400 hundred years. And the current "abnormal warming" is established by comparison with a period of recognized "abnormal cooling". Damn good science there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 2, 2011 Author Share Posted February 2, 2011 Al Gore in this case - because his view coincides with the accepted science. In the video, it seems like a lot of people, including nervous people in industry, are falling victim to confirmation bias. Is my last name Google? If you're actually interested in the answers, try doing some reading. I guess it must have been the fire exhaling dragons causing global warming way back when then to allow palm trees to grow in Greenland. And btw, accepted science by who and for what purpose? Sound science is like 2+2+2+2=8. The "science" you are referring to is like 8=2+4+2 or 6+1+1 or 3+2+3. In other words, sound science doesn't consist of starting out with the answer you want and finding a way to prove it. It's coming to a conclusion based on facts. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090617131356.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 (edited) That was !@#$ing retarded. Conner write that answer? And the current "abnormal warming" is established by comparison with a period of recognized "abnormal cooling". Damn good science there... what abnormal cooling. Looking at that chart I see that this happens in a cycles. nothing abnormal at all. and definitely not man made. Edited February 2, 2011 by Gary M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 If this is all a recent trend, how come all the records being broken are from, like...the 20s or the 40s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 That was !@#$ing retarded. Conner write that answer? After further research, it appears the answer is not so clear on this. The periodic orbital explanation is, however, a part of some existing theories. To my original point, my lack of knowledge on the subject does not mean there is not a perfectly reasonable explanation for this. If this is all a recent trend, how come all the records being broken are from, like...the 20s or the 40s? There's a common theme in this thread...if you don't understand something and you actually care to know the answer, by all means use the Internets and do some research. There is no validity in using your ignorance as proof of bad science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 After further research, it appears the answer is not so clear on this. The periodic orbital explanation is, however, a part of some existing theories. To my original point, my lack of knowledge on the subject does not mean there is not a perfectly reasonable explanation for this. There's a common theme in this thread...if you don't understand something and you actually care to know the answer, by all means use the Internets and do some research. There is no validity in using your ignorance as proof of bad science. There is another trend, if the facts don't agree with your arguement ignore the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts