• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Global warming study finds no grounds for climate sceptics' concerns

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,734
Reaction score
19,199
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Climate sceptics' criticisms of the evidence for global warming make no difference to the emerging picture of a warming world, according to the most comprehensive, independent review of historical temperature records to date.

Researchers at the Berkeley Earth project compiled more than a billion temperature records dating back to the 1800s from 15 sources around the world and found that the average global land temperature has risen by around 1C since the mid-1950s.
This figure agrees with the estimate of global warming arrived at by major groups that maintain official records on the world's climate, includingNasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa), and the Met Office's Hadley Centre, with the University of East Anglia, in the UK.


Read more here: Global warming study finds no grounds for climate sceptics' concerns | Environment | The Guardian
 

Whoppletraps

Active member
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Messages
264
Reaction score
147
Location
Somewhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Christ, warmers just won't stop...

stretching_the_truth_scientic_global_warming_fake1.gif
 

Reg

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
987
Reaction score
167
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Where is the control group, i.e, the parallel planet where there were no humans or no industrialization?
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,734
Reaction score
19,199
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Where is the control group, i.e, the parallel planet where there were no humans or no industrialization?

The control group you are looking for is the paleo-climate record. However, your argument has nothing to do with this thread's topic. It has been an argument of skeptics that urban heat islands are to blame for increases in the earth's surface temperature record over the last century (instrument record). This study refutes that argument of the skeptics.
 
Last edited:

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
59,742
Reaction score
40,558
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
i get the skeptics' questioning whether this strong indication of warming is naturally occurring or due to mankind's activities
given that we have no where else to be, doesn't it make sense to do whatever we are able to NOW to mitigate these warming trends, no matter what may be the cause of such warming?
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
92,877
Reaction score
45,635
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Christ, warmers just won't stop...

At least we're contributing something substantive to the discussion. Every single post you make in this subforum is useless. Why do you even come here?

Where is the control group, i.e, the parallel planet where there were no humans or no industrialization?

Where's yours? You keep saying it's all natural. Where's YOUR control group that shows this?
 

Reg

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
987
Reaction score
167
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The control group you are looking for is the paleo-climate record. However, your argument has nothing to do with this thread's topic. It has been an argument of skeptics that urban heat islands are to blame for increases in the earth's surface temperature record over the last century (instrument record). This study refutes that argument of the skeptics.

No, the control group would be a parallel test with no humans and/or industriliazation.

You can't prove causality without it, merely correlation.

And it's not scuence.
 

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
28,734
Reaction score
19,199
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Is a denier like a heretic?

You seem to be arguing from ignorance. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. All things being equal, if you increase the concentrations of C02 in the atmosphere, the earth's surface and tropospheric temperature will rise. This is basic thermal physics and has been established science for a 100 years. The equation is:

ace17b55ef66fded15326b7d25827aa3.png


Do we need a control group to prove evolution? Do we need an alternate universe with different physical laws in order to test the physical laws of our universe?

This is science, not religion, heresy only applies to religion.
 
Last edited:

Reg

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
987
Reaction score
167
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You seem to be arguing from ignorance. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. All things being equal, if you increase the concentrations of C02 in the atmosphere, the earth's surface and tropospheric temperature will rise. This is basic thermal physics and has been established science for a 100 years. The equation is:

ace17b55ef66fded15326b7d25827aa3.png


Do we need a control group to prove evolution? Do we need an alternate universe with different physical laws in order to test the physical laws of our universe?

This is science, not religion, heresy only applies to religion.

No, you don't need a control group to prove evolution.

When you are making a case that something happens with man and industry that does not happen without man and industry, you need a control group to show what happens without man and industry.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
59,742
Reaction score
40,558
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The very word BERKELEY says it all. It's like asking the DNC to critic the job obama has done as president. What a joke you people are.
now, that was deep [/s]

scientific data and conclusions are discounted because the document bears the word 'berkeley' upon it

but you were correct in recognizing that certain forum members are a joke

please return when you actually have a point
 

Whoppletraps

Active member
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Messages
264
Reaction score
147
Location
Somewhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
please point our any bias/agenda you can identify so that we might be able to see it, too

The "global warming is going to be the end of the world and all skeptics are evil" agenda, its sticks out like a sore thumb in that article considering thats what its about.

And don't act like a global warming study from the little red schoolhouse wouldn't have an agenda.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Is a denier like a heretic?

Depends.

A denier who thinks that Co2 doesn't trap heat is an epic idiot. We have several here.

A denier who's getting paid to deny, like Exxon's team who later released a memo saying that the science behind man made climate change is irrefutable are hacks.

We know that emissions trap heat. The geological record has plenty of examples of massive increases causing mass extinctions. And since the Industrial revolution, we've added roughly a trillion tons of Co2 to the atmosphere. That's approaching the ice core samples that were times of massive heating and serious upheaval.

Right now the best we can do is slow it. The worst thing is that the deniers are going to basically be living in a world that the climate change people predicted and only then admit they were wrong. Cold comfort.

Say as much as you want, but when outdoorsmen who've been enjoying various forms of recreation outdoors since they were tiny tots start noticing all sorts of weird changes occurring every year, that's a serious wake up call.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
No, you don't need a control group to prove evolution.

When you are making a case that something happens with man and industry that does not happen without man and industry, you need a control group to show what happens without man and industry.

This is fail. We already have a benchmark. The geological record has periods of massive increases in Co2, Methane and other gases that caused major changes to the planet. It doesn't actually matter the source per se, it's just the total amount being added. Right NOW that is us adding lots. In the past it was various other sources. Doesn't change the outcome that it wasn't good for most of the organisms living on Earth at the time.
 

Reg

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
987
Reaction score
167
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Depends.

A denier who thinks that Co2 doesn't trap heat is an epic idiot. We have several here.

A denier who's getting paid to deny, like Exxon's team who later released a memo saying that the science behind man made climate change is irrefutable are hacks.

We know that emissions trap heat. The geological record has plenty of examples of massive increases causing mass extinctions. And since the Industrial revolution, we've added roughly a trillion tons of Co2 to the atmosphere. That's approaching the ice core samples that were times of massive heating and serious upheaval.

Right now the best we can do is slow it. The worst thing is that the deniers are going to basically be living in a world that the climate change people predicted and only then admit they were wrong. Cold comfort.

Say as much as you want, but when outdoorsmen who've been enjoying various forms of recreation outdoors since they were tiny tots start noticing all sorts of weird changes occurring every year, that's a serious wake up call.

The climatic periods of the earth are longer than the last time your dad took you hunting.

Thousands or tens of thousands of years.

Wake me up when you have that much data.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
The climatic periods of the earth are longer than the last time your dad took you hunting.

Which provide a great benchmark.

Thousands or tens of thousands of years.

Which again provide a great benchmark. We have ice cores for thousands of years all showing as certain gases increase as a percentage of the atmosphere, temperature rises.

Wake me up when you have that much data.

See above. Or are you one of those who thinks that Co2 doesn't trap heat?

HAHHAAHAH.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
13,406
Reaction score
8,258
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
sawyerloggingon said:
The very word BERKELEY says it all. It's like asking the DNC to critic the job obama has done as president. What a joke you people are.

This is absolutely hilarious.

This study was commissioned by skeptics, most notably Richard Muller, to prove that climate change scientists were wrong. It blew up in their (and your) face by proving them right.
 
Top Bottom