Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
3 hours ago.
by Ithink
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

harryanderson

“Is there a basis for the claim that 97% of scientists agree that greenhouse gas is warming the planet. If there is, show me a study or poll that supports this exact figure.”

I already did, in the first post I made this morning. You ignored it.

Now I need to get back to work. Later.

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

97% isn’t excluded, as you suggest by claiming “no basis.” I've provided evidence that it's a very high percentage (essentially everybody), and that it even includes "the scourge of...alarmists."

Do you agree with the Weekly Standard that essentially everybody agrees that CO2 and greenhouse gases are warming the earth?

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

I don’t know what you mean by “current theory.” Since you concede that 97% of the climate scientists surveyed agreed man has a “significant role in climate change,” what activities of mankind do you think cause that change?

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

That’s a reasonable comment, luvthesouth. I’ve always said that it’s a solvable engineering problem.

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

“…there is nothing to support 97% of scientists agree that greenhouse gas is changing our climate.”

I don’t want to make a claim of a specific percentage of climate scientists who agree that greenhouse gas is warming the earth, since, to my knowledge, no studies have backed that up.

However, the quote from the Weekly Standard is consistent with a high percentage.

Again, it said, “Essentially everybody agrees.”

Posted 280 days ago.

luvthesouth

some interesting numbers concerning CO2. currently it is estimated that the worlds forests absorb 40-50% of the worlds total man-made extra CO2 produced by burning carbon based fuels. although what we produce is a small percentage compared to what the earth naturally produces, the extra CO2 that we produce can't be totally absorbed naturally. if the numbers are correct then it is evident that we either need to increase the number of trees, reduce our carbon output or choose a variant of both. personally i choose the latter if not for any reason other than i like trees.

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

On CO2,

As Kendall pointed out earlier...

...even Richard Lindzen, whom the arch-conservative Weekly Standard gleefully dubbed the “all-around scourge of James Hansen, Bill McKibben, Al Gore, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and sundry other climate ‘alarmists,’” is convinced anthropogenic CO2 warms the earth.

The Weekly Standard reports:

“The burning of oil, gas, and especially coal pumps carbon dioxide and other gases into the atmosphere, where they allow the sun’s heat to penetrate to the Earth’s surface but impede its escape, thus causing the lower atmosphere and the Earth’s surface to warm. Essentially everybody, Lindzen included, agrees.”

htt p://ww w.weeklystandard.co m/articles/what-catastrophe_773268.html?page=1

Essentially everybody agrees.

Essentially everybody agrees.

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

You’re right. It seems I need to read my own statements more carefully before attempting to answer!

I need to amend my later statement so that it’s consistent with the earlier, and write, “I’ve cited 2 studies to support my contention that 97% of climate scientists agree man’s activities are altering the climate.”

Greenhouse gases are another issue. Do you now wish to go into whether CO2 and some other gases, when added to ambient air, trap heat? We can do that if you like.

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

And it wasn’t I who brought up CO2 and greenhouse gases 2 days ago when you first took issue with my “97%” comment.

I’ll repeat my comment for your convience.

Ithink wrote, “I’ll leave that to the loons.”

I replied, “I’ll leave it to the 97% of all climate scientists who agree that mankind’s activities are causing climate change.”

In the future, I believe you would benefit if you read more carefully before attempting to answer.

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

I also suspect you didn't read the Doran study before posting. Otherwise you should have known the study contained “up to nine questions.”

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

Tiredofit, Sometimes I suspect you reply before reading my posts. Otherwise, you would have known that…

1. I didn’t cite a “cook study.”

2. I pointed out that you didn’t cite any study of climate researchers.

Posted 280 days ago.

harryanderson

I’ve cited 2 studies to support my contention that 97% of climate scientists agree greenhouse gases are altering the climate.

Tiredofit ignored the first.

He attacked the second on the irrelevant grounds that climate scientists are a relatively small subset of all scientists.

Here’s another study:

A 2010 study published by the National Academy of Sciences found that “97%-98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field fully support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

htt p://ww w.pnas****/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.full.pdf+html

Posted 280 days ago.

mythravere

Sorry I must elaborate on Tireofit a little.

There have been loads of serious and honest questions sent his way.

He refuses the majority of them and for some reason likes to focus on the details that really don't matter on this issue.

When asked to explain the falseness of a simple high school science experiment he refused. Citing Bill Nye's fame as a reason for not being worthy of consideration.

LOL!

Posted 281 days ago.

mythravere

What I find funny is that they have a very simple way of making a counter argument.

And this shows its political and profit based for them.

They could argue that the earth is warming naturally and that we should be preparing ourselves for the changes coming down the pipe.

And fossil fuels are the answer because we will need lots of energy to combat the changes and adjust our civilization to a changing climate.

Simple and concise with profitability intact.

Why aren't they saying that?

Posted 281 days ago.

mythravere

Here's the kicker in all of this for me personally.

All this arguing about polls and other crap.

Whats the point?

There is physical evidence out there that supports what the scientists are saying.

There are changes taking place that can not be totally laid at the feet of natural causes.

Posted 281 days ago.

mythravere

Kind of hard to debate an issue with someone like that isn't it?

But thats on of the key missions of those who do not want to see this world shifted to renewable energy.

So they use their propaganda to influence folks like Tiredofit to go forth and muck up the process.

You have got to hand it to them. They got a full fledged top to bottom process going on.

Posted 281 days ago.

mythravere

Everyone I appeal to you to ask yourselves this.

Why would someone who thinks they know the truth refuse to share that truth?

Whats interesting is the logic about Tiredofits crusade on here.

Global warming is viewed by him as a leftist/socialist cause. He can't resist that cause any other way but the way he is. Saying no just wouldn't work.

No he calls everything about it into doubt.

When tasked with explaining his position he flat out will not do so.

Rather shady of him to say that we must prove what we are saying but he has to do no such thing.

Posted 281 days ago.

mythravere

This issue and many others like it. Get labeled as a leftist cause. So you guys dig in and resist it.

The facts get laid out..you guys reject them..without providing any reason why....you say no no no no no no no.

Its all one big political game of us versus them.

Posted 281 days ago.

mythravere

Everyone will be able to see your posts and what I am saying about them and come to the inescapable conclusion that you really have no issue with the science of climate change(you know nothing about it nor do you care about the science).

You position stems from a current that as been running its course in the rightwing since at least Obama has been elected.

Resist anything from the left.

Posted 281 days ago.

mythravere

It matters not if you ignore me by the way.

The issues I raise about you are going to show the weakness in your argument and lay bare your motivations.

Posted 281 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or