• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Leading French Scientist Recants GW position

Stinger

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,423
Reaction score
619
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
"With a wealth of data now in, Dr. Allegre has recanted his views. To his surprise, the many climate models and studies failed dismally in establishing a man-made cause of catastrophic global warming. Meanwhile, increasing evidence indicates that most of the warming comes of natural phenomena. Dr. Allegre now sees global warming as over-hyped and an environmental concern of second rank."

Allegre's second thoughts

So much for the consensus.
 
This whole climate change debate needs to go back to the drawing board or have i just missed the conclusive scientific prove that global warming is down to c02.
 
mikhail said:
This whole climate change debate needs to go back to the drawing board or have i just missed the conclusive scientific prove that global warming is down to c02.
Click to expand...

I don't know but there doesn't seem to be concrete proof that we are causing the planet to warm up and that it is not just the normal cycle of the planet.
 
Stinger said:
"With a wealth of data now in, Dr. Allegre has recanted his views. To his surprise, the many climate models and studies failed dismally in establishing a man-made cause of catastrophic global warming. Meanwhile, increasing evidence indicates that most of the warming comes of natural phenomena. Dr. Allegre now sees global warming as over-hyped and an environmental concern of second rank."

Allegre's second thoughts

So much for the consensus.
Click to expand...

This guy's only claims to fame appear to be that A) he was in the pocket of Lionel Jospin and therefore has political ties, and B) he was one of 1500 scientists to formerly sign a petition warning of the dangers of global warming. When the other 1499 are on board, let me know.
 
Just Me 2 said:
I don't know but there doesn't seem to be concrete proof that we are causing the planet to warm up and that it is not just the normal cycle of the planet.
Click to expand...

Which part do you deny - That the earth's temperatures move in tandem with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, or that humans are putting lots of additional CO2 into the atmosphere?
 
Kandahar said:
Which part do you deny - That the earth's temperatures move in tandem with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, or that humans are putting lots of additional CO2 into the atmosphere?
Click to expand...


I don't deny anything. I wonder if what the Earth is doing is what is has done for thousands of years. It goes through cycles of warming and cooling.
 
Just Me 2 said:
I don't deny anything. I wonder if what the Earth is doing is what is has done for thousands of years. It goes through cycles of warming and cooling.
Click to expand...

Yes, but CO2 levels are the highest that they've been in 650,000 years, and the change has taken place in a matter of decades as opposed to the millennia it usually takes. Does this look like a natural cycle to you?

graph-for-web.gif



You can also see how CO2 levels correlate with temperature:

2.jpg
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Yes, but CO2 levels are the highest that they've been in 650,000 years, and the change has taken place in a matter of decades as opposed to the millennia it usually takes. Does this look like a natural cycle to you? It's scientifically proven that burning fossil fuels and slash-and-burn deforestation emits CO2.

graph-for-web.gif



You can also see how CO2 levels correlate with temperature:

2.jpg
Click to expand...


Who was keeping track of CO2 650,000 year ago? Come on that is just ridiculous I doubt they even knew what CO2 was never mind kept track of it.
 
Just Me 2 said:
Who was keeping track of CO2 650,000 year ago? Come on that is just ridiculous I doubt they even knew what CO2 was never mind kept track of it.
Click to expand...

Scientists today can measure what the CO2 levels and temperatures were in the past, from measuring the properties of the ice in Antarctica. Don't ask me how.
 
Kandahar said:
And how much scientific expertise do you have on this subject?
Click to expand...

None which is why I never said my opinion was right as some of these scientist have. It is my opinion just as what happened 650,000 years ago is theirs.
 
Just Me 2 said:
None which is why I never said my opinion was right as some of these scientist have. It is my opinion just as what happened 650,000 years ago is theirs.
Click to expand...

...except they have extensive knowledge of the subject, whereas you do not.
 
Just Me 2 said:
None which is why I never said my opinion was right as some of these scientist have. It is my opinion just as what happened 650,000 years ago is theirs.
Click to expand...

A high school with no science curriculum? What a shame.

Thankfully, there are some good universities out there capable of teaching you should you ever so desire.
 
Kandahar said:
This guy's only claims to fame appear to be.............................
Click to expand...


Claude Allegre received a Ph D in physics in 1962 from the University of Paris. He became the director of the geochemistry and cosmochemistry program at the French National Scientific Research Centre in 1967 and in 1971, he was appointed director of the University of Paris's Department of Earth Sciences. In 1976, he became director of the Paris Institut de Physique du Globe. He is an author of more than 100 scientific articles, many of them seminal studies on the evolution of the Earth using isotopic evidence, and 11 books. He is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the French Academy of Science.



Sorry your simple dismisall out of hand doesn't work.
 
Just Me 2, if you are skeptical of man's impact on global warming then you are just a fool, and an idiot. Only the people who are willing to accept that mankind is responsible are enlightened enough to know the real truth.

You see you are like me, you are not truly convinced of it but neither do you rule out the possibility of it being true. But because you question it, you are no better than those who outright reject it.
 
Just Me 2 said:
I'm really skeptical of that.
Click to expand...
When ice freezes it traps small bubbles of the air of that time within it. Scientists can then go take ice cores hundreds of feet down which correspond to certain years. This gives us an actual sample of the air from that time.

As for the article, I'm not sure what this is supposed to tell us. It just says that some French guy has recanted his views that there will be catastrophic global warming.

Calling the arguments of those who see catastrophe in climate change "simplistic and obscuring the true dangers"
Click to expand...

This actually has done nothing but reinforce my views...
 
Sauwan said:
When ice freezes it traps small bubbles of the air of that time within it. Scientists can then go take ice cores hundreds of feet down which correspond to certain years. This gives us an actual sample of the air from that time.

As for the article, I'm not sure what this is supposed to tell us. It just says that some French guy has recanted his views that there will be catastrophic global warming.



This actually has done nothing but reinforce my views...
Click to expand...

Ok so they can get a sample of air but how do they know what affect time, cold/warm and whatever else could have caused on it.

I am not saying the GW is not happening I am just skeptical that we are the main cause. I don't think the Earth is that sensitive that it can't correct itself.
 
Just Me 2 said:
Science is not perfect, mistakes and wrong information is given all the time.
Click to expand...

This is true. However your skepticism is not based on anything in particular that you regard as a potential mistake or wrong information. Your skepticism is based on nothing more than a hunch that they're wrong...an opinion for which you have absolutely no scientific qualifications for holding.
 
Just Me 2 said:
Ok so they can get a sample of air but how do they know what affect time, cold/warm and whatever else could have caused on it.
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you're asking here. They can measure the temperature and the CO2 level and show how strongly correlated they are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom