Record European winter, hottest summer expected.

[Maximus Zeebra]

The winter in Europe is the mildest since they started measuring. The popular ski places of the alps were mostly shut and the temperature in Norway was about 5dC higher than average winter temperatures.

Last summer was the warmest summer in memory of those who experienced it, heatwaves struck Europe. Yet this summer is expected to get even warmer than last summer.

So who else is thinking that humans are too stupid to figure out the exact roatations of the earth, especially related to the sun and that this is just natural swings of the earths geology that goes so slow that humans have not noticed it until now? Maybe we are simply closer to the sun, maybe the sun is just having a cycle of extra warming, or maybe its because the tiny humans with their tiny machines have created this global warming?

Personally I love hot steamy days, so bring it on please. More more more, I want hot sun and sweathy summers and lightly dressed wet women in the streets. So yes, please pollute some more.

 

[Kandahar]

Personally I love hot steamy days, so bring it on please. More more more, I want hot sun and sweathy summers and lightly dressed wet women in the streets. So yes, please pollute some more.

You're probably going to be disappointed. The effects of global warming will likely make Europe much, much colder once a certain threshold is passed. The reason that Europe is so much warmer than North America at the same latitude is because of the North Atlantic Current. If Arctic and Greenlandic ice melts, it will eventually shut off the current, and Europe could become as cold as (or colder than) Canada.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

You're probably going to be disappointed. The effects of global warming will likely make Europe much, much colder once a certain threshold is passed. The reason that Europe is so much warmer than North America at the same latitude is because of the North Atlantic Current. If Arctic and Greenlandic ice melts, it will eventually shut off the current, and Europe could become as cold as (or colder than) Canada.

Yes, I do know that. Which would be pretty cruel. But for now, I enjoy record war springs, summers and autums.

May it be that climate change is caused by something humans dont understand? like tiny long time shifts between the sun and the earth that we havent figured out yet because we were only "smart enough" the last few HUNDRED years. What is there is some kind of rotation or relation between the sun and the earth that takes several hundred years? How do we know the exact temperatures 300 years ago? How can we possibly know and compare today with centuries ago. Isnt it a slight possibility that human caused environmental problems are just some theory we have that is not reality?

Maybe its a combination? Maybe its none of those things, but relations of things in our galaxy, or some kind of magnetic field that affects things. Maybe the core of the earth got warmer for some kind of reason related to the Sun. Or maybe the complete orbits and relations between the Sun and our earth is yet something we are not nearly able to figure with certainty.

 

[Kandahar]

Yes, I do know that. Which would be pretty cruel. But for now, I enjoy record war springs, summers and autums.

May it be that climate change is caused by something humans dont understand? like tiny long time shifts between the sun and the earth that we havent figured out yet because we were only "smart enough" the last few HUNDRED years. What is there is some kind of rotation or relation between the sun and the earth that takes several hundred years? How do we know the exact temperatures 300 years ago? How can we possibly know and compare today with centuries ago. Isnt it a slight possibility that human caused environmental problems are just some theory we have that is not reality?

Maybe its a combination? Maybe its none of those things, but relations of things in our galaxy, or some kind of magnetic field that affects things. Maybe the core of the earth got warmer for some kind of reason related to the Sun. Or maybe the complete orbits and relations between the Sun and our earth is yet something we are not nearly able to figure with certainty.

Well, we know that greenhouse gases warm the planet. We know that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. We know that the beginning of the Industrial Revolution was when we started pumping abnormally large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Logic would suggest that there is some relationship there.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Well, we know that greenhouse gases warm the planet. We know that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. We know that the beginning of the Industrial Revolution was when we started pumping abnormally large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

Logic would suggest that there is some relationship there.

If that in fact IS a 100% fact, then it might be a combination. How long have we studied the atmosphere btw to be so sure that carbon dioxide is the cause of greenhouse gas? Have we studied greenhouse gases and the atmosphere in relation to temperatures for hundreds(even thousands) of years to get some kind of REAL and 100% sure patter?
How can we by certainty say those things if the potential swings of the earth and sun that I am talking about is something that develops over 10000 years?

 

[Flea]

Global Warming is a joke and most of the "science" behind it is flat out gibberish.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Global Warming is a joke and most of the "science" behind it is flat out gibberish.

At least we should keep our minds open to all possibilities, not just lock ourself into possible theories and take those as facts.

 

[Flea]

I am open. the earth is warming ie "global warming" but not in the context that the alarmists indicate IMO. The earth has natural warming/cooling cycles, and we are in one now. Is man accelerating the issue? maybe, but not to the degree that Gore and his con man tactics suggest. He is a crook. Head of a "carbon emission credit" corp and then he scares the **** outa people so that they go buy credits? :rofl

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

I am open. the earth is warming ie "global warming" but not in the context that the alarmists indicate IMO. The earth has natural warming/cooling cycles, and we are in one now. Is man accelerating the issue? maybe, but not to the degree that Gore and his con man tactics suggest. He is a crook. Head of a "carbon emission credit" corp and then he scares the **** outa people so that they go buy credits? :rofl

I like the carbon emission for other reasons. In Europe for example this is good for the air we breathe, its simply reducing dangerous pollution for the air. Most places walking outside in city air is as damaging as smoking.

 

[Flea]

Oh, it is a great idea, but it is being promoted by con men so that they can line their own pockets. But, anything that promotes environment is good.

 

[Kandahar]

I am open. the earth is warming ie "global warming" but not in the context that the alarmists indicate IMO. The earth has natural warming/cooling cycles, and we are in one now.

Which one of the non-controversial statements I listed above do you dispute?

A) That the greenhouse effect causes the earth to warm.
B) That carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas.
C) That humans are responsible for a large amount of the carbon dioxide being put into the atmosphere.

Or do you accept all three of them, and still dispute the logical conclusion?

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Which one of the non-controversial statements I listed above do you dispute?

A) That the greenhouse effect causes the earth to warm.
B) That carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas.
C) That humans are responsible for a large amount of the carbon dioxide being put into the atmosphere.

Or do you accept all three of them, and still dispute the logical conclusion?

None of those things are certain in the big context. We base those claims on a few decades of knowledge about it, knowledge we overrate. Global cycles may be centuries, milleniums or many milleniums old. Greenhouse gasses is not the certain cause of warming. We have no really clear picture of how more carbon dioxide affects the atmospheric layers, we dont have much to compare it to.

The greenhouse effect may just be the easiest explenation we have to something we dont understand.

 

[Flea]

Originally Posted by Kandahar
Which one of the non-controversial statements I listed above do you dispute?

A) That the greenhouse effect causes the earth to warm.
B) That carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas.
C) That humans are responsible for a large amount of the carbon dioxide being put into the atmosphere.

Or do you accept all three of them, and still dispute the logical conclusion?

A) I agree
B) I agree
C) I agree

Agreeing to all three does not mean that the conclusion you support is correct or logical.

There are many variables up to and including personal agendas by people who stand to make a profit from the fear generated by "Global Warming".

The Earth has natural warming and cooling cycles. What caused the Little Ice Age in Europe in the 1400's or the Medieval Climate Optimum that preceded it?

Is man totally to blame here?
Are we but a minor factor contributing to something larger?
Can something Interstellar be contributing? Pulsars can wipe out atmospheres, perhaps something less destructive can poke a hole in one? A few years ago a bunch of satellites were wiped out around Earth due to interstellar winds.

Gore and his movie are just playing on fear and agendas.

 

[Sauwan]

A) I agree
B) I agree
C) I agree

Agreeing to all three does not mean that the conclusion you support is correct or logical.

You cannot be serious. Let me put it in logical form.

1. If G then W. (G=greenhouse gas, W=Earth warms)
2. All C's are G's (C=carbon dioxide)
3. If C then W. (From 1 and 2)
4. C (you accept humans produce C)

------
Therefore W

That's about as logically sound as you can get granting you accept the premises.

There are many variables up to and including personal agendas by people who stand to make a profit from the fear generated by "Global Warming".

Conspiracy bullshit. Even if true, this doesn't negate AGW.

The Earth has natural warming and cooling cycles. What caused the Little Ice Age in Europe in the 1400's or the Medieval Climate Optimum that preceded it?

What does it matter what caused those? You've already accepted the premises that show we are warming the earth. Past fluctuations have little to do with what we're talking about.

For example: Take the temperature of a block of aluminum sitting on my back porch. During the summer it is warm, during the winter it is cold. Now if I apply a heat flux of 10,000 W/m^2 to this block, telling me that because the block has naturally fluctuated in temperature in the past doesn't tell me much. That applied heat flux is what we're interested in.

In the case of GW, the exact heat flux quantity is questionable, however it is increasing due to the reflection of radiated heat that normally would be exiting the system of the earth and its atmosphere. It is only amplified by the fact that as CO2 raises temperatures, more water evaporates and enters the atmosphere. (FYI water vapor is a much stronger greenhouse gas)

Is man totally to blame here?
Are we but a minor factor contributing to something larger?
Can something Interstellar be contributing? Pulsars can wipe out atmospheres, perhaps something less destructive can poke a hole in one? A few years ago a bunch of satellites were wiped out around Earth due to interstellar winds.

More raising of questions rather than examining the science and giving credible answers. Looks an awful lot like a conspiracy theory to me...

Gore and his movie are just playing on fear and agendas.

:roll: The conspiracy theorist is strong in you child.

 

[Flea]

You cannot be serious. Let me put it in logical form.

No thanks. :2razz:

Your "logic" and interpretation is irrelevant to the issue at this juncture.

I am open. the earth is warming ie "global warming" but not in the context that the alarmists indicate IMO. The earth has natural warming/cooling cycles, and we are in one now. Is man accelerating the issue? maybe, but not to the degree that Gore and his con man tactics suggest. - Johnny Utah (Yesterday 01:09 PM)

What is his logical conclusion? It is illogical to attack my statement if you do not know what his logical conclusion is now, isn't it?

Conspiracy bullshit. Even if true

"even if true"

That just resonates, doesn't it?

Did Gore make a movie that theorized doom and catastrophe for our planet if we do not alter our present course? Yes.
Does Gore say that Carbon Emissions are one of the major problems? Yes.
Is Gore profiting from Carbon emission Credits? Yes.

I don't care about what you think regarding this. This is not a conspiracy either. It is right out in the open. Would I rather have him make a profit while the world population realizes that we are ruining the planet and we attempt to heal it...YES. So?

Stop assuming is the advice that I would give you! :2razz:

I know more about this than you would like to think, I am sure. I am not here to debate science, because people have science that can back up either side. I am here to tell you that I think that the science that supports global warming is taken out of context in an effort to scare people and there will be less harm than is conveyed.

I have already admitted that the Earth is in a warming cycle. I admit more than you seem to want to face. I am balanced. You are the one that is blinded and attacking. Typical. If a person doesn't agree wtih ALL that you say then they must be this or that, huh? :lol:

There are a lot of variables. You are not able to answer the hows or whys, you are only able to regurgitate the Goosestep Agenda apparently.

:2wave:

 

[Sauwan]

What is his logical conclusion? It is illogical to attack my statement if you do not know what his logical conclusion is now, isn't it?

Anyone familiar with logic need not know what his conclusion is, but what the conclusion is. That was not my interpretation, it was just what logically followed.

I know more about this than you would like to think, I am sure. I am not here to debate science, because people have science that can back up either side. I am here to tell you that I think that the science that supports global warming is taken out of context in an effort to scare people and there will be less harm than is conveyed.

Well Gore does this, yes. He is a politician and he understands the apathetic nature of people. The problem is that people take Gores "alarmism" as reason to be apathetic.

I have already admitted that the Earth is in a warming cycle. I admit more than you seem to want to face. I am balanced.

Saying it doesn't make it so. For example: Fox News.

You are the one that is blinded and attacking. Typical. If a person doesn't agree wtih ALL that you say then they must be this or that, huh? :lol:

I'm not attacking you in particular. Your way of "dealing" with the issue while trying to look scientifically knowledgeable is just another step in the evolution of the skeptic. "Agreeing" with the science while maintaining your original skepticism is still largely unscientific. You can continually modify the skeptics position to agree with the science, but why not just agree with the science?

Much like when a creationist admits that the world is much older than they previously believed. They then modify their original position so that it fits with modern science by saying things like "Oh, well, a 'god' day is thousands of years long so the creation actually took that long" or "God has created carbon dating to test our devotion".

There are a lot of variables. You are not able to answer the hows or whys, you are only able to regurgitate the Goosestep Agenda apparently.
:2wave:

I agree there are a lot of variables and this makes it difficult to predict exactly what is to come. Utilizing this fact to maintain your skepticism is known as an argument from ignorance.

 

[BodiSatva]

Sauwan
I agree there are a lot of variables and this makes it difficult to predict exactly what is to come. Utilizing this fact to maintain your skepticism is known as an argument from ignorance.

You agree that there are a lot of variables yet you think that it is ignorant to remain skeptical because there are unknown variables...?

I came in late...
What is it that you are contending Sauwan?

 

[BodiSatva]

Johnny_Utah
What is his logical conclusion? It is illogical to attack my statement if you do not know what his logical conclusion is now, isn't it?

I am not sure that you need to know what his conclusion is in order to understand the logic...

What are you saying...that there is so much that is unknown that it is illogical to assume that the issue is as severe as the alarmist make it out to be?

Johnny_Utah
I am open. the earth is warming ie "global warming" but not in the context that the alarmists indicate IMO. The earth has natural warming/cooling cycles, and we are in one now. Is man accelerating the issue? maybe,

You seem unusually open :rofl What are you drinking?

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

You cannot be serious. Let me put it in logical form.

1. If G then W. (G=greenhouse gas, W=Earth warms)
2. All C's are G's (C=carbon dioxide)
3. If C then W. (From 1 and 2)
4. C (you accept humans produce C)

------
Therefore W

That's about as logically sound as you can get granting you accept the premises.

Conspiracy bullshit. Even if true, this doesn't negate AGW.

What does it matter what caused those? You've already accepted the premises that show we are warming the earth. Past fluctuations have little to do with what we're talking about.

For example: Take the temperature of a block of aluminum sitting on my back porch. During the summer it is warm, during the winter it is cold. Now if I apply a heat flux of 10,000 W/m^2 to this block, telling me that because the block has naturally fluctuated in temperature in the past doesn't tell me much. That applied heat flux is what we're interested in.

In the case of GW, the exact heat flux quantity is questionable, however it is increasing due to the reflection of radiated heat that normally would be exiting the system of the earth and its atmosphere. It is only amplified by the fact that as CO2 raises temperatures, more water evaporates and enters the atmosphere. (FYI water vapor is a much stronger greenhouse gas)

More raising of questions rather than examining the science and giving credible answers. Looks an awful lot like a conspiracy theory to me...

:roll: The conspiracy theorist is strong in you child.

So lets flip this around then..

You are saying that its certain global warming is caused by humans and nothing else? Its certain that its because of more carbon dioxide in the athmosphere the earth is warming? And its certain that its the greenhouse effect that is the cause of earth warming and nothing else?

How can you be so certain when you are so tiny and the universe is so big? How can you be so certain when our little earth and our milky way is such a tiny piece of something so big that you or no humans have no idea?
So, when scientists claim something and have a THEORY, you take this as certainty? The whole world is based on theories, the whole human knowledge, only a few things are certainties.. Theories change as we learn more, thats why facts change.

But you little man, you are certain that humans are the cause of global warming? Humans might be geniuses on earth, but in a universal settings we are all still a bunch of retards, even collectedly.

 

[RightOfCenter]

The winter in Europe is the mildest since they started measuring. The popular ski places of the alps were mostly shut and the temperature in Norway was about 5dC higher than average winter temperatures.

Last summer was the warmest summer in memory of those who experienced it, heatwaves struck Europe. Yet this summer is expected to get even warmer than last summer.

So who else is thinking that humans are too stupid to figure out the exact roatations of the earth, especially related to the sun and that this is just natural swings of the earths geology that goes so slow that humans have not noticed it until now? Maybe we are simply closer to the sun, maybe the sun is just having a cycle of extra warming, or maybe its because the tiny humans with their tiny machines have created this global warming?

Personally I love hot steamy days, so bring it on please. More more more, I want hot sun and sweathy summers and lightly dressed wet women in the streets. So yes, please pollute some more.

Effective sarcastic humor from Maximus, that's rare.

At this point denying global warming is fairly futile and something needs to be done. I'm no scientist though so *shrug*

 

[Flea]

Originally Posted by Sauwan
Anyone familiar with logic need not know what his conclusion is, but what the conclusion is. That was not my interpretation, it was just what logically followed.

Oh, I am familiar with logic. :2razz:

What you don't understand is that we are not, nor can we be, purely logical.

Another thing you do not seem aware of is that there are infinite variables that influence conclusions. To think that you can input three or four of them and arrive at the "logical" conclusion is ridiculous. There are things happening in this universe that none of us can begin to fathom. I have mentioned a few, but go right ahead... stick to your little equation. LOL!

Well Gore does this, yes. He is a politician and he understands the apathetic nature of people. The problem is that people take Gores "alarmism" as reason to be apathetic

I think that people are just apethetic overall, as you say. People do not use Gore as an excuse to continue to be apethetic, but some of us that are not apethetic and are activists in the environmental movement (me) see him for the con man that he is. Just simple reality.

Saying it doesn't make it so. For example: Fox News.

Saying what doesn't make it so?

1. "I have already admitted that the Earth is in a warming cycle." Since I said this are you saying that the Earth is not in a warming cycle? No. This goes against your whole premise. So, hmmm...

2. "I admit more than you seem to want to face." I don't admit more than you want to face? You see what I admit and what? You face it and get me more than I do? what is it? You understand all my points and they are not worthy? LOL! Seriously. What is it?

Just seems like you aren't open to the possiblities, but perhaps you are. It is just not evident in your writing. You got it nailed down though, eh? No? hmmm...

3. "I am balanced." I am NOT balanced? I am sticking to one point and even though I am saying that I am open to all the possibilities, I am not?

Seems like you are just being a teeny little prick with that comment of yours, but who knows? Maybe I just misunderstand?

I'm not attacking you in particular. Your way of "dealing" with the issue while trying to look scientifically knowledgeable is just another step in the evolution of the skeptic.

Sure you are. Don't lie.

Where did the logic go? If you are attacking my way of "dealing" with the issue then you are attacking me in particular.

I am not "trying" to do anything. I am not a scientist, are you? I understand science though, being raised in a scientific family helped me there. But you know what is funny? I am not debating science, I never have and I have made that clear. I am debating the logic going into these pathetic "logical arguments" supporting Global Warming. Unless you ARE a scientist, just make yourself a new Hypocrite Patch and put it on your shoulder right now!

I agree there are a lot of variables and this makes it difficult to predict exactly what is to come. Utilizing this fact to maintain your skepticism is known as an argument from ignorance.

So in the end you appear to understand my point but then you just shoot it down in the next sentence and display where the true ignorance lies by making more ridiculous assumptions that will see you happily into the Realm of Oblivion! :lol: