• 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!

Is Global Warming a myth?

Is Global Warming a myth?

  • Total voters
    115
Catawba said:
Still sticking with the cooling theory huh?

Then how do you explain this?

"Preliminary mass balance values for the observation period 2007/08 have been reported now from more than 90 glaciers worldwide. The mass balance statistics (Table 1) are calculated based on all reported values as well as on the data from the 30 reference glaciers in 9 mountain ranges (Table 2) with continuous observation series back to 1980.

The average mass balance of the glaciers with available long-term observation series around the world continues to decrease, with tentative figures indicating a further thickness reduction of 0.5 metres water equivalent (m w.e.) during the hydrological year 2007/08. The new data continues the global trend in strong ice loss over the past few decades and brings the cumulative average thickness loss of the reference glaciers since 1980 at about 12 m w.e. (see Figures 1 and 2). All so far reported mass balance values, given in Table 3, are tentative.

World Glacier Monitoring Service
Click to expand...

Still trying I see? You know it's just like conspiracy theorists... No matter how much factual data you put in front of them they will only believe what they want to believe. :mrgreen:
 
Catawba said:
But he has blogs and a youtube video that says that it has cooled! ;)
Click to expand...

I see this is a religion for you and no one can tell you or prove to you it is wrong. Facts do not matter.
 
ptif219 said:
So when you get facts it is right wing. You have no credibility if you can not prove the facts wrong.
Click to expand...

You are entitled to your own conspiracy theories but not your own facts. :roll:
 
Catawba said:
What about it? Some hacked emails that puts a small amount of methodology by one organization into question, where no wrongdoing has been charged, does not disprove all the other scientific work done all over the world by the planets major scientific organizations.
Click to expand...

You have to realize something here. I believe in Global Warming.

I believe that Global Warming is real. I believe that it is happening, and it will continue to happen.

I believe that it is part of a cycle that started roughly 35,000 years ago towards the end of the last period of glaciation, and will continue for another 5-15,000 years. That eventually all of the Northern Polar Ice Cap will dissapear, and likely most of the Southern Polar Ice Cap will also dissapear.

Sea levels will rise by probably another 10 meters. Growing seasons will lengthen, forests will move further north, some sections will turn into desert while many more regions will become wetter and more humid.

Because this has all happened before, and will happen again. No matter what humans do, it will happen.

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eemian_Stage]Eemian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

I am one of a number of people that believe that the current warming-cooling period is simply another Dansgaard-Oeschger event.

So you see, I am one of a large number of people (and scientists) that do believe in Global Warming. I just refuse to accept that it is man made.
 
Oozlefinch said:
You have to realize something here. I believe in Global Warming.

I believe that Global Warming is real. I believe that it is happening, and it will continue to happen.

I believe that it is part of a cycle that started roughly 35,000 years ago towards the end of the last period of glaciation, and will continue for another 5-15,000 years. That eventually all of the Northern Polar Ice Cap will dissapear, and likely most of the Southern Polar Ice Cap will also dissapear.

Sea levels will rise by probably another 10 meters. Growing seasons will lengthen, forests will move further north, some sections will turn into desert while many more regions will become wetter and more humid.

Because this has all happened before, and will happen again. No matter what humans do, it will happen.

Eemian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am one of a number of people that believe that the current warming-cooling period is simply another Dansgaard-Oeschger event.

So you see, I am one of a large number of people (and scientists) that do believe in Global Warming. I just refuse to accept that it is man made.
Click to expand...

Very reasonable post although I respectfully disagree in that man has no effect on it. With my science background I can't fathom how the billions of tons of greenhouse gases over the years can't be at least accentuating the warming. Hell we even effected the ozone layer with CFC's. If we can do that we sure as heck can increase the greenhouse effect with all the greenhouse gases we are releasing. I'm sure you know China is adding a new coal fire plant every week?
 
Oozlefinch said:
You have to realize something here. I believe in Global Warming.

I believe that Global Warming is real. I believe that it is happening, and it will continue to happen.

I believe that it is part of a cycle that started roughly 35,000 years ago towards the end of the last period of glaciation, and will continue for another 5-15,000 years. That eventually all of the Northern Polar Ice Cap will dissapear, and likely most of the Southern Polar Ice Cap will also dissapear.

Sea levels will rise by probably another 10 meters. Growing seasons will lengthen, forests will move further north, some sections will turn into desert while many more regions will become wetter and more humid.

Because this has all happened before, and will happen again. No matter what humans do, it will happen.

Eemian - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am one of a number of people that believe that the current warming-cooling period is simply another Dansgaard-Oeschger event.

So you see, I am one of a large number of people (and scientists) that do believe in Global Warming. I just refuse to accept that it is man made.
Click to expand...


I see that, but in any case........

I addressed this here:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/66084-global-warming-myth-53.html#post1058571300
 
EnigmaO01 said:
Very reasonable post although I respectfully disagree in that man has no effect on it. With my science background I can't fathom how the billions of tons of greenhouse gases over the years can't be at least accentuating the warming.
Click to expand...

Your lack of creativity is not my problem. I can fathom many different ways in which its effects (CO2 emissions) were negligible or vastly overshadowed by some other factor or group of factors working in combination. Perhaps it's part of a cosmic cycle, or a solar cycle, or an oceanic cycle, or a geological cycle, or all four superimposed on one another. There's no real reason to think human CO2 emissions are a better explanation for the longterm warming we have experienced.

This doesn't even adress the fact that the IPCC's climate models are no longer credible; one because there has been no statistically significant warming in the past fifteen years, a fact the alarmist Jones has begrudgingly admitted, and two because they've shown themselves to be incompetent and untrustworthy. The entire operation is illegitimate in my eyes. These people are not scientists.

Hell we even effected the ozone layer with CFC's. If we can do that we sure as heck can increase the greenhouse effect with all the greenhouse gases we are releasing. I'm sure you know China is adding a new coal fire plant every week?
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no reason at all to jump to the conclusion that human CO2 emissions are having or have had a significant impact on average global temperatures. The correlation exists but that does not even remotely prove anything.
 
Ethereal said:
I can fathom many different ways in which its effects (CO2 emissions) were negligible or vastly overshadowed by some other factor or group of factors working in combination. Perhaps it's part of a cosmic cycle, or a solar cycle, or an oceanic cycle, or a geological cycle, or all four superimposed on one another.

There's no real reason to think human CO2 emissions are a better explanation for the longterm warming we have experienced.
Click to expand...

I applaud your imagination and we would be happy to take a look at the kind of scientific confirmation on any one of those theories, as have been established for AGW, as outlined here:
Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming

This doesn't even adress the fact that the IPCC's climate models are no longer credible; one because there has been no statistically significant warming in the past fifteen years, a fact the alarmist Jones has begrudgingly admitted, and two because they've shown themselves to be incompetent and untrustworthy. The entire operation is illegitimate in my eyes. These people are not scientists.
Click to expand...

As someone else pointed out on this thread, if you don't trust the IPCC data, look at the data from the hundreds of other scientific organizations that independently confirmed AGW.

There is absolutely no reason at all to jump to the conclusion that human CO2 emissions are having or have had a significant impact on average global temperatures. The correlation exists but that does not even remotely prove anything.
Click to expand...

No one jumped to conclusions, the scientific consensus took decades of study to confirm AGW. To ignore it risks future life on the planet.

I'm a firm believer in the hiker's code, "pack it in, pack it out!"

What right do we have to knowingly gamble with future generation's lives?
 
Ethereal said:
Your lack of creativity is not my problem. I can fathom many different ways in which its effects (CO2 emissions) were negligible or vastly overshadowed by some other factor or group of factors working in combination. Perhaps it's part of a cosmic cycle, or a solar cycle, or an oceanic cycle, or a geological cycle, or all four superimposed on one another. There's no real reason to think human CO2 emissions are a better explanation for the longterm warming we have experienced.

This doesn't even adress the fact that the IPCC's climate models are no longer credible; one because there has been no statistically significant warming in the past fifteen years, a fact the alarmist Jones has begrudgingly admitted, and two because they've shown themselves to be incompetent and untrustworthy. The entire operation is illegitimate in my eyes. These people are not scientists.






There is absolutely no reason at all to jump to the conclusion that human CO2 emissions are having or have had a significant impact on average global temperatures. The correlation exists but that does not even remotely prove anything.
Click to expand...

Sir I don't now how to say this in a tactful so here goes...

You're full of bull****!
 
Face it. It's over...it's only a matter of time before people look at AGW alarmists in the same light as 9/11 Truthers and Birthers. I look forward to your future irrelevance.
 
Ethereal said:
Face it. It's over...it's only a matter of time before people look at AGW alarmists in the same light as 9/11 Truthers and Birthers. I look forward to your future irrelevance.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion!

"According to radiative physics and decades of laboratory measurements, increased CO2 in the atmosphere is expected to absorb more infrared radiation as it escapes back out to space. In 1970, NASA launched the IRIS satellite measuring infrared spectra. In 1996, the Japanese Space Agency launched the IMG satellite which recorded similar observations. Both sets of data were compared to discern any changes in outgoing radiation over the 26 year period (Harries 2001). What they found was a drop in outgoing radiation at the wavelength bands that greenhouse gases such as CO2 and methane (CH4) absorb energy. The change in outgoing radiation was consistent with theoretical expectations. Thus the paper found "direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect". This result has been confirmed by subsequent papers using data from later satellites (Griggs 2004, Chen 2007).


Figure 2: Change in spectrum from 1970 to 1996 due to trace gases. 'Brightness temperature' indicates equivalent blackbody temperature (Harries 2001).

When greenhouse gases absorb infrared radiation, the energy heats the atmosphere which in turn re-radiates infrared radiation in all directions. Some makes its way back to the earth's surface. Hence we expect to find more infrared radiation heading downwards. Surface measurements from 1973 to 2008 find an increasing trend of infrared radiation returning to earth (Wang 2009). A regional study over the central Alps found that downward infrared radiation is increasing due to the enhanced greenhouse effect (Philipona 2004). Taking this a step further, an analysis of high resolution spectral data allowed scientists to quantitatively attribute the increase in downward radiation to each of several greenhouse gases (Evans 2006). The results lead the authors to conclude that "this experimental data should effectively end the argument by skeptics that no experimental evidence exists for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming."
Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming


"All available data indicate on the negative trends in development of glaciers and ice caps in polar regions during the last decades."
IPY: International Polar Year
 
Catawba said:
I applaud your imagination and we would be happy to take a look at the kind of scientific confirmation on any one of those theories, as have been established for AGW, as outlined here:
Empirical evidence that humans are causing global warming



As someone else pointed out on this thread, if you don't trust the IPCC data, look at the data from the hundreds of other scientific organizations that independently confirmed AGW.



No one jumped to conclusions, the scientific consensus took decades of study to confirm AGW. To ignore it risks future life on the planet.

I'm a firm believer in the hiker's code, "pack it in, pack it out!"

What right do we have to knowingly gamble with future generation's lives?
Click to expand...

There is climate change that runs in cycles no proof of man made GW
 
Today's weather report. Vancouver 55, Pensacola, Fla 44.
 
Catawba said:
Yes, it would be ironic indeed for some Conservatives to actually want to conserve their environment, wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

All Conservatives are wrong aand your right huh.......:rofl
 
EnigmaO01 said:
You're wasting your time. You can produce all the facts you want but these people will just say nanny nanny boo.

Don't be to hard on them though. The overpaid pundants they listen to are very good at convincing people with no scientific background.

GW is all a conspiracy perpetrated by Al Gore, that NASA and NOAA are in on don't you know? :wink2:
Click to expand...

That scumbag Gore made millions on his phoney movie which has been proven to have 59 errors in its statistics......
 
I don't think global warming is a myth but I do believe that the earth is also countering this, but ice caps are melting, or transitioning sides, and the earth is spiraling towards the sun at a miniscule. I also believe scientists are eating off salaries by stating counter-measures can be taken when (IMO) nothing really can b done, or has been done, at this point in time.
 
Navy Pride said:
That scumbag Gore made millions on his phoney movie which has been proven to have 59 errors in its statistics......
Click to expand...
Its that old adage -- if you tell a big enough lie often enough...
 
ptif219 said:
Global Warming: Not Caused by Man | Scienceray


The Cause of Global Warming is not Carbon Dioxide or Humans.

Scientist: Carbon Dioxide Doesn't Cause Global Warming - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)


Pete'sPlace: Top Earth Scientist Says Global Warming NOT Caused By Man

Global Warming, climate change facts, articles


E-Team | Warming Caused by Natural Cycle, Not Humans


Want more?
Click to expand...

Oh good, more blogs! :rofl


"National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 that states:

An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[1]

No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion since the American Association of Petroleum Geologists adopted its current position in 2007."
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change]Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
Catawba said:
Oh good, more blogs! :rofl


"National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 that states:

An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[1]

No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion since the American Association of Petroleum Geologists adopted its current position in 2007."
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Quotes from Scientist that you will not address because only the liars of the IPCC and NASA matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom