Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! Please login or register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
Quote: It is critical to keep a firm grip on reason and rationality, most especially when social invitations to frenzy are so pervasive. General Circulation Models are so terribly unreliable that there is no objectively falsifiable reason to suppose any of the current warming trend is due to human-produced CO2, or that this CO2 will detectably warm the climate at all. Therefore, even if extreme events do develop because of a warming climate, there is no scientifically valid reason to attribute the cause to human-produced CO2. In the chaos of Earth’s climate, there may be no discernible cause for warming. Many excellent scientists have explained all this in powerful works written to defuse the CO2panic, but the choir sings seductively and few righteous believers seem willing to entertain disproofs.
Quote: ...or that this CO2 will detectably warm the climate at all.
A Swedish scientist named Svante Arrhenius was to first to write about this (CO2 & global warming) back in 1896; it is not some new scare tactic pushed by the "liberal media" & United Nations. It is basic (& now well-understood) science. There is as much debate & doubt on this point within the scientific community as their is with Darwinian evolution.
Quote: phi1618 said: This is an article from Science that states that there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change.
There was also consensus that the earth was the centre of the universe. Doesn't mean it's right.
Look guys, call me cynical if you like, but in the 70's it was all "Oh we're overdue for an ice age, it must be coming. We're all going to die and it's out fault for putting smog in the atmosphere that's preventing the sunlight from getting to the surface." Now the temperatures go up and get hotter until 2007 and suddenly it's all global warming and we'll all have to kill ourselves and cut down trees (because trees expel CO2 at night) because our precious planet is going to die.
You know what I see? A bunch of climatologists with big government grants meaning they don't have to do real work, just as long as they can keep coming up with evidence to suggest that we're all fucked and must sacrifice everything for the greater good. Collectivism really turns me off, I know communists are keen on it, but when I think of places I want to live, China, Cuba and Russia are the three lowest on my list.
-------------------- In times of universal deceit, the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
The main flaw with your post is that you content that the U.S. government is somehow a collectivist entity committed to funding scientific studies that say that Americans must sacrifice for the greater good... when there is absolutely nothing in real life to support that this is the priority of the U.S. government. The same government that authorizing several hundred billion in military expenditures & has not once said anything about (let alone advocated the reduction of) the excessive levels of consumption among U.S. citizens, nor has it invested in any significant degree in the research, development & affordable application of solar technology... this is not an environmentalist entity; it is not even close.
If you meant to say that it is other governments are doing it... then I say, "good for them." People need to develop alternative, renewable & environmentally-friendly energy sources for the future. If the U.S. government has zero commitment to it, then thank god at least someone else does... even if it is only Finland or whoever (actually, I shouldn't say this. I saw an episode of Nova several months ago about climate change/eco-friendly energy, & it Germany was apparently doing some great things in solar energy). As for the money issue regarding environmentalism... there may be a little on the side of environmentalism, but as it relates to the global economy, it is a drop in an ocean as it relates to the money & power (& job security) on the other side. If scientists want to make the most money, then they employ their knowledge for a military contractor or the government directly (basically the same thing), or a transnational corporation (e.g. Monsanto or Dow Chemicals) whose markets are dependent upon heavy-handed government policy opening them up.
It's a widely believed fact that scientists and especially engineers tend more towards the conservative/neo-conservative/nationalist end of the political spectrum. My experiences at the local university are consistent with this belief.
I think what we really need is for more of the people who normally choose liberal arts majors going into science and technology instead. Sure, physics, chemistry, and engineering classes may not be as interesting to them as art, theater, music, anthropology, etc, but what they can actually do with the knowledge is much more interesting and capable of bringing about actual change.
Quote: The main flaw with your post is that you content that the U.S. government
What? When did I say I was a yank? Noo, this global warming hoax is a global problem. Our wannabe communist politicians are just as rabid over this as anyone else.
I'm giving out this link to anyone that is curious. I know there's a stigma with showing information from prisonplanet, but that's not my problem.
The major flaw with the theory that scientists are pushing global warming papers for the money, is that big industry (especially oil industries) are offering much more money than research journals for published papers refuting global warming. Heck, if you are just a scientist with a masters degree, you can get 10,000 dollars for a single paper up front (that's not including the hundreds of thousands you can get in grants. That is PERSONAL money).
Quote: I think what we really need is for more of the people who normally choose liberal arts majors going into science and technology instead. Sure, physics, chemistry, and engineering classes may not be as interesting to them as art, theater, music, anthropology, etc, but what they can actually do with the knowledge is much more interesting and capable of bringing about actual change.
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics HTML is disabled / UBBCode is enabled Moderator: Lana, Diploid, automan 1,114 topic views. 0 registered and 2 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic ] del.icio.usdiggFurlMyWebredditStumbleUpon
login or 
register to post messages and view our members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, encrypted messages, file attachments, board customizations, and much more!
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
