Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Human-caused Global Warming is Hogwash


  • Please log in to reply
118 replies to this topic

#1    NeoSavant

NeoSavant

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 159 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 June 2010 - 12:13 AM

I love the argument that Global-warming and CO2 emissions are the cause for climate change on Earth. Seems they totally avoid the facts of Solar cycles and the output of solar energy's effect on Earth.


#2    Subjugator

Subjugator

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 33 posts
  • Joined:30 May 2010

Posted 13 June 2010 - 12:28 AM

The Earth has been through gamma rays, massive earthquakes, plate separation, hit with thousands of meteors, solar flares, massive volcanoes and we're still here

The current capitalist system only offers alienation and various forms of wage slavery of varying degrees of tyranny and intrusiveness. In the current capitalist system, labor is not valued adequately in terms of rages and monetary payment. Capital save in terms of money is either owned or operated completely by workers, the property owning class merely sits back, funds the money and reaps the profits from the worker's labor.

WORKERS OF THE WORLD, UNITE!

#3    Fernand0

Fernand0

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 June 2010 - 12:37 AM

We're still a Type 0 civilization and belong to the same civilization cavemen belong to. In about 100 years we will be a Type 1 civilization and will have harnessed the power of our planet, meaning we'll have complete dominion over it. What is or may be a problem at the present time will not be a problem forever. When we are a Type 1 civilization we can regulate the atmosphere, restoring and undoing much of what the Type 0 civilization cavemen did.


#4    Mr Meowgi

Mr Meowgi

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 313 posts
  • Joined:21 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ostraya

Posted 13 June 2010 - 12:52 AM

Ok, I think I have found a solution for both sides of this argument.

Everyone who believes man made climate change is a farce, move to the U.S.A. That place is screwed either way.

The rest, well, the 1000 of us left, we'll just have to do the best we can. :w00t:


#5    Fernand0

Fernand0

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • Joined:27 May 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 June 2010 - 01:22 AM

View PostMr Meowgi, on 13 June 2010 - 12:52 AM, said:

Ok, I think I have found a solution for both sides of this argument.

Everyone who believes man made climate change is a farce, move to the U.S.A. That place is screwed either way.

The rest, well, the 1000 of us left, we'll just have to do the best we can. :w00t:
The damage done by the current Type 0 civilization cavemen in the dystopian Piscean Age will be undone in about 100 years when we are a Type 1 civilization.

http://en.wikipedia....Kardashev_scale

That's if we make it, we may destroy our planet before we make the transition. If our planet is still here and there are scientists left alive in about 100 years, all the damage done will be undone. All the problems we face now will not last forever.



The person speaking in that video is Dr. Michio Kaku, co-founder of unified string field theory and theoretical physicist.

Edited by Fernand0, 13 June 2010 - 01:40 AM.


#6    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 10,989 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 13 June 2010 - 03:31 AM

View PostNeoSavant, on 13 June 2010 - 12:13 AM, said:

I love the argument that Global-warming and CO2 emissions are the cause for climate change on Earth. Seems they totally avoid the facts of Solar cycles and the output of solar energy's effect on Earth.

The solar output has not changed in any significant way. The 11 year solar cycle is of sunspot activity. Our weather does not oscillate in 11 year cycles.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#7    NeoSavant

NeoSavant

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 159 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 June 2010 - 04:41 AM

View Postninjadude, on 13 June 2010 - 03:31 AM, said:

The solar output has not changed in any significant way. The 11 year solar cycle is of sunspot activity. Our weather does not oscillate in 11 year cycles.

Perhaps you should do research on the changes in solar output. The variations it causes and effects can be seen here.

Quote

"It turns out that none of our models were totally correct," says Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center, NASA's lead representative on the panel. "The sun is behaving in an unexpected and very interesting way."

To say that the solar cyle is limited to only sunspot activity shows how little you have studied the subject. Perhaps this will link or this link will help.

Quote

The solar cycle, or the solar magnetic activity cycle, is the main source of periodic solar variation (changing the level of irradiation experienced on Earth) which drives variations in space weather and to some degree weather on the ground and possibly climate change.[1] The cycle is observed by counting the frequency and placement of sunspots visible on the Sun. Powered by a hydromagnetic dynamo process driven by the inductive action of internal solar flows, the solar cycle:
Structures the Sun's atmosphere, corona and wind;
Modulates the solar irradiance;
Modulates the flux of short-wavelength solar radiation, from ultraviolet to X-ray;
Modulates the occurrence frequency of flares, coronal mass ejections, and other geoeffective solar eruptive phenomena;
Indirectly modulates the flux of high-energy galactic cosmic rays entering the solar system.

Quote

By 1976, that began to change when Jack Eddy, a solar astronomer from Boulder, Colo., examined historical records of sunspots and published a seminal paper that showed some century-long variations in solar activity are connected with major climatic shifts. Eddy helped show that an extended lull in solar activity during the 17th Century --called the Maunder Minimum -- was likely connected to a decades-long cold period on Earth called the "Little Ice Age."

Two years after Eddy published his paper, NASA launched the first in a series of satellite instruments called radiometers, which measure the amount of sunlight striking the top of Earth's atmosphere, or total solar irradiance. Radiometers have provided unparalleled details about how the sun's irradiance has varied in the decades since. Such measurements have helped validate and expand upon Eddy's findings. And they've led to a number of other discoveries—and questions—about the sun.
Link

Edited by NeoSavant, 13 June 2010 - 04:49 AM.


#8    Mike D boy

Mike D boy

    ...from the Desert...

  • Member
  • 2,401 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm Desert, Cal US America

  • he's Native and Indio-geneous to the Americas.

Posted 13 June 2010 - 04:55 AM

Whoever is a global warming denier has failed to pass their school science class, but the sun has always been the #1 factor in influence over the Earth's climatic cycles in its' ancient history. The warmest periods in earth's recent history recorded in world weather records was in two parts of the 20th century: from 1900-1945 and again since 1980 continuing into the present time. The earth's temperature fluctuates every 10-12 years, but it seems to peaked at every 33 years: 1902, 1936, 1971 and 2006, which was the warmest year in average global temperature: 62 degrees fahrenheit (that is 3 degrees above the average 59F) on record. Solar flare cycles had alot to do with the warming-cooler-average-all over again periods. But it is up to humanity not to alter the earth's natural ability to keep the climate not from becoming inhospitable to all life on this planet, including humans.

:innocent: The Truth is Out There - the X Files. :alien:

#9    Wickian

Wickian

    Doppelganger

  • Member
  • 3,831 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • Save it for Queen Doppelpoppellus!

Posted 13 June 2010 - 05:35 AM

View PostArchangel Michael, on 13 June 2010 - 04:55 AM, said:

Whoever is a global warming denier has failed to pass their school science class, but the sun has always been the #1 factor in influence over the Earth's climatic cycles in its' ancient history. The warmest periods in earth's recent history recorded in world weather records was in two parts of the 20th century: from 1900-1945 and again since 1980 continuing into the present time. The earth's temperature fluctuates every 10-12 years, but it seems to peaked at every 33 years: 1902, 1936, 1971 and 2006, which was the warmest year in average global temperature: 62 degrees fahrenheit (that is 3 degrees above the average 59F) on record. Solar flare cycles had alot to do with the warming-cooler-average-all over again periods. But it is up to humanity not to alter the earth's natural ability to keep the climate not from becoming inhospitable to all life on this planet, including humans.
You realize there are thousands of AGW skeptics that are college educated scientists don't you?


#10    NeoSavant

NeoSavant

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 159 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 June 2010 - 05:58 AM

View PostArchangel Michael, on 13 June 2010 - 04:55 AM, said:

Whoever is a global warming denier has failed to pass their school science class, but the sun has always been the #1 factor in influence over the Earth's climatic cycles in its' ancient history. The warmest periods in earth's recent history recorded in world weather records was in two parts of the 20th century: from 1900-1945 and again since 1980 continuing into the present time. The earth's temperature fluctuates every 10-12 years, but it seems to peaked at every 33 years: 1902, 1936, 1971 and 2006, which was the warmest year in average global temperature: 62 degrees fahrenheit (that is 3 degrees above the average 59F) on record. Solar flare cycles had alot to do with the warming-cooler-average-all over again periods. But it is up to humanity not to alter the earth's natural ability to keep the climate not from becoming inhospitable to all life on this planet, including humans.

Funny here is a list of scientists and educated people, who I'm sure passed science class.


View PostWickian, on 13 June 2010 - 05:35 AM, said:

You realize there are thousands of AGW skeptics that are college educated scientists don't you?

Thanks. The list I provided above is just a short example of educated people who dispute AGW.


#11    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,136 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 13 June 2010 - 06:42 AM

View PostNeoSavant, on 13 June 2010 - 05:58 AM, said:

Funny here is a list of scientists and educated people, who I'm sure passed science class.




Thanks. The list I provided above is just a short example of educated people who dispute AGW.

If you actually read that list you will realise;
a ) it is very small
b ) most of them accept AGW but dispute its overall significance to the aggregate effect

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 13 June 2010 - 06:43 AM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#12    NeoSavant

NeoSavant

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 159 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 June 2010 - 07:19 AM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 13 June 2010 - 06:42 AM, said:

If you actually read that list you will realise;
a ) it is very small
b ) most of them accept AGW but dispute its overall significance to the aggregate effect

Br Cornelius

I guess you missed the SHORT example part? They dont accept AGW it clearly says that if you read article, if three people (15%) out of the list are classified as disputing its overall significance instead of outright disputing it even occuring or being caused by humans how does that equal most?

Here is another signed petition/list by 31,000 US scientists and counting.

Edited by NeoSavant, 13 June 2010 - 07:26 AM.


#13    keithisco

keithisco

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,814 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rincon de Loix, Benidorm

Posted 13 June 2010 - 07:26 AM

View PostNeoSavant, on 13 June 2010 - 07:19 AM, said:

I guess you missed the SHORT example part? They dont accept AGW it clearly says that if you read article, if three people (15%) out of the list are classified as disputing it overall significance instead of outright disputing it even occuring or being caused by humans to the aggregate effect how does that equal most?

Here is another signed petition/list by 31,000 US scientists and counting.

I wonder if 99.9% of the signatures are actually giving an opinion that is completely outside of their area of expertise? Then it becomes JUST an opinion.Posted Image

NeoSavant: You do realise that there is thread covering this EXACT proposition? Just use the "search" function, so unless you are offering a new insight it seems a little pointless

Edited by keithisco, 13 June 2010 - 07:32 AM.


#14    NeoSavant

NeoSavant

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Banned
  • Pip
  • 159 posts
  • Joined:27 Apr 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 June 2010 - 07:47 AM

View Postkeithisco, on 13 June 2010 - 07:26 AM, said:

I wonder if 99.9% of the signatures are actually giving an opinion that is completely outside of their area of expertise? Then it becomes JUST an opinion.Posted Image

NeoSavant: You do realise that there is thread covering this EXACT proposition? Just use the "search" function, so unless you are offering a new insight it seems a little pointless

I must have missed the thread, and isn't that what Moderators are for anyways.

How about you Google a few of the people who signed it instead of throwing around useless statistics?


#15    Wickian

Wickian

    Doppelganger

  • Member
  • 3,831 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • Save it for Queen Doppelpoppellus!

Posted 13 June 2010 - 07:55 AM

View Postkeithisco, on 13 June 2010 - 07:26 AM, said:

I wonder if 99.9% of the signatures are actually giving an opinion that is completely outside of their area of expertise? Then it becomes JUST an opinion.Posted Image

NeoSavant: You do realise that there is thread covering this EXACT proposition? Just use the "search" function, so unless you are offering a new insight it seems a little pointless
Isn't the head of IPCC a mechanical engineer or something?





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users