• 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!

The truth of Global Warming

Status
Not open for further replies.
ptif219 said:
So ignore Obama giving supporters a pass and come up with an idiotic polar bear story
Click to expand...

Obama giving supporters a pass is politics as usual, and has nothing to do with global warming.

A polar bear that can't find an ice floe to use to hunt seals has nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with global warming.

I thought this was a thread about global warming, not about partisan politics. Of course, if you want to bash Obama, you could start an Obama bashing thread. It would no doubt be a popular one.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Obama giving supporters a pass is politics as usual, and has nothing to do with global warming.

A polar bear that can't find an ice floe to use to hunt seals has nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with global warming.

I thought this was a thread about global warming, not about partisan politics. Of course, if you want to bash Obama, you could start an Obama bashing thread. It would no doubt be a popular one.
Click to expand...

So allowing some company a pass on GW regulations is not a GW issue? |226|




get The Smilies @ https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/14455
 
ptif219 said:
So allowing some company a pass on GW regulations is not a GW issue? |226|




get The Smilies @ https://addons.mozilla.org/addon/14455
Click to expand...

Finally, in all of this rather long thread, you've come up with a correct statement.

No, whether or not Obama gives a pass to some company on GW issues is not a proof that GW is not real, is not man made, or anything else. It is proof that politics still dominates Washington DC. Now, were you to start a thread to argue that politics dominate Washington, DC, then it is quite likely that you could prove your point. Arguing that AGW is not real, and alternately that it is, but is not man made, is a losing proposition, and why?
Simply because there is nothing to support that position, that's why.

Now, why not pick on something you can actually show to be true?

Politics dominates Washington might be too easy. The "No (bleep!) Shirlock!" response might not be seen as a rebuttal.
 
CLIMATE SCIENTIST WARNS WORLD OF WIDESPREAD SUFFERING IF FURTHER CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT FORESTALLED.

COLUMBUS, Ohio – One of the world’s foremost experts on climate change is warning that if humans don’t moderate their use of fossil fuels, there is a real possibility that we will face the environmental, societal and economic consequences of climate change faster than we can adapt to them.
It is the first time in a published paper that he has recommended specific action to forestall the growing effects of climate change.* During the last three decades, Thompson has led 57 expeditions to some of the world’s most remote high altitude regions to retrieve cores from glaciers and ice caps that preserve a record of ancient climate.
In the past Thompson has let his research data and conclusions speak for him but in this paper, intended for social scientists and behavior experts, he voiced his concern regarding the risks that ignoring the evidence of climate change may bring.

“Unless large numbers of people take appropriate steps, including supporting governmental regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, our only options will be adaptation and suffering,” he wrote in the concluding paragraph.

“And the longer we delay, the more unpleasant the adaptations and the greater the suffering will be.”

In the paper (available here), Thompson said that virtually all climate researchers “are now convinced that global warming poses a clear and present danger to civilization.”
His opinion isn’t hyperbole, he said, but instead is based on a “very clear pattern in the scientific evidence documenting that the Earth is warming, that the warming is due largely to human activity, that warming is causing important changes to many of the Earth’s support systems, and that rapid and potentially catastrophic changes in the near future are possible.

“Such future scenarios,” he says, “emerge not, as is often suggested, simply from computer simulations, but from the weight and balance of the empirical evidence as well.”
He says that there are currently no technological quick fixes for global warming.

“Our best hope,” he says, “is to change our behavior in ways that significantly slow the rate of global warming, thereby giving engineers and scientists time to devise, develop, and deploy technological solutions where possible.”

Thompson prefaced his advice with examples of the Earth’s diminishing ice cover, examples that constitute some of the strongest supporting evidence of the current threat of global climate change:

-- The ice fields atop Mount Kilimanjaro have lost 85 percent of their coverage since 1912;

-- The Quelccaya ice cap in southern Peru – the largest tropical ice field on Earth, has retreated 25 percent since 1978;

-- Ice fields in the Himalayas that have long shown traces of the radioactive bomb tests in the 1950s and 1960s have since lost that signal as surface melting has removed the upper layers and thereby reduced the thickness of these glaciers;

-- All of the glaciers in Alaska’s vast Brooks Range are retreating, as are 98 percent of those in southeastern Alaska.* And 99 percent of glaciers in the Alps, 100 percent of those in Peru and 92 percent in the Andes of Chile are likewise retreating;

-- Sea levels are rising and the loss of ice coverage in the North Polar region continues to increase annually.

“Everyone will be affected by global warming,” Thompson wrote.* “But those with the fewest resources for adapting will suffer the most.”

A research scientist with Ohio State’s Byrd Polar Research Center, Thompson is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.* In 2007, he received the National Medal of Science, the highest honor the United States gives to American scientists."
Climate Scientist Warns World Of Widespread Suffering If Further Climate Change Is Not Forestalled
 
Dittohead not! said:
Finally, in all of this rather long thread, you've come up with a correct statement.

No, whether or not Obama gives a pass to some company on GW issues is not a proof that GW is not real, is not man made, or anything else. It is proof that politics still dominates Washington DC. Now, were you to start a thread to argue that politics dominate Washington, DC, then it is quite likely that you could prove your point. Arguing that AGW is not real, and alternately that it is, but is not man made, is a losing proposition, and why?
Simply because there is nothing to support that position, that's why.

Now, why not pick on something you can actually show to be true?

Politics dominates Washington might be too easy. The "No (bleep!) Shirlock!" response might not be seen as a rebuttal.
Click to expand...

You just proved it is politics and you are the one doing it. If it was Bush you would be screaming. You show if a democrat gives special passes it is ok. If you believe GW is real you should be mad if anyone gets a pass on GW regulations.


You prove my point. GW is about power, money and politics it has little to do with environment
 
Catawba said:
CLIMATE SCIENTIST WARNS WORLD OF WIDESPREAD SUFFERING IF FURTHER CLIMATE CHANGE IS NOT FORESTALLED.

COLUMBUS, Ohio – One of the world’s foremost experts on climate change is warning that if humans don’t moderate their use of fossil fuels, there is a real possibility that we will face the environmental, societal and economic consequences of climate change faster than we can adapt to them.
It is the first time in a published paper that he has recommended specific action to forestall the growing effects of climate change.* During the last three decades, Thompson has led 57 expeditions to some of the world’s most remote high altitude regions to retrieve cores from glaciers and ice caps that preserve a record of ancient climate.
In the past Thompson has let his research data and conclusions speak for him but in this paper, intended for social scientists and behavior experts, he voiced his concern regarding the risks that ignoring the evidence of climate change may bring.

“Unless large numbers of people take appropriate steps, including supporting governmental regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, our only options will be adaptation and suffering,” he wrote in the concluding paragraph.

“And the longer we delay, the more unpleasant the adaptations and the greater the suffering will be.”

In the paper (available here), Thompson said that virtually all climate researchers “are now convinced that global warming poses a clear and present danger to civilization.”
His opinion isn’t hyperbole, he said, but instead is based on a “very clear pattern in the scientific evidence documenting that the Earth is warming, that the warming is due largely to human activity, that warming is causing important changes to many of the Earth’s support systems, and that rapid and potentially catastrophic changes in the near future are possible.

“Such future scenarios,” he says, “emerge not, as is often suggested, simply from computer simulations, but from the weight and balance of the empirical evidence as well.”
He says that there are currently no technological quick fixes for global warming.

“Our best hope,” he says, “is to change our behavior in ways that significantly slow the rate of global warming, thereby giving engineers and scientists time to devise, develop, and deploy technological solutions where possible.”

Thompson prefaced his advice with examples of the Earth’s diminishing ice cover, examples that constitute some of the strongest supporting evidence of the current threat of global climate change:

-- The ice fields atop Mount Kilimanjaro have lost 85 percent of their coverage since 1912;

-- The Quelccaya ice cap in southern Peru – the largest tropical ice field on Earth, has retreated 25 percent since 1978;

-- Ice fields in the Himalayas that have long shown traces of the radioactive bomb tests in the 1950s and 1960s have since lost that signal as surface melting has removed the upper layers and thereby reduced the thickness of these glaciers;

-- All of the glaciers in Alaska’s vast Brooks Range are retreating, as are 98 percent of those in southeastern Alaska.* And 99 percent of glaciers in the Alps, 100 percent of those in Peru and 92 percent in the Andes of Chile are likewise retreating;

-- Sea levels are rising and the loss of ice coverage in the North Polar region continues to increase annually.

“Everyone will be affected by global warming,” Thompson wrote.* “But those with the fewest resources for adapting will suffer the most.”

A research scientist with Ohio State’s Byrd Polar Research Center, Thompson is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and a foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.* In 2007, he received the National Medal of Science, the highest honor the United States gives to American scientists."
Climate Scientist Warns World Of Widespread Suffering If Further Climate Change Is Not Forestalled
Click to expand...

So how much will temp change. He does not say because there is no proof it will change anything
 
ptif219 said:
So how much will temp change. He does not say because there is no proof it will change anything
Click to expand...

Numerous climate models have been shown to you. Not everyone is going to mention exact figures all the time, that is redundant.
 
ptif219 said:
No one ever mentions exact numbers when talking about how much man affects temp.

Here is what many think of GW

Reliable forecast under the weather - BostonHerald.com
Click to expand...

Really? You will believe an op-ed by a blogger without batting an eye but completely ignore one of the top climate scientists in the world, not to mention the rest of science community? Continue on there Ptif! Just don't expect the rest of us to place any credibility on these opinion pieces you proudly copy and paste up as if they are gospel.
 
Catawba said:
Really? You will believe an op-ed by a blogger without batting an eye but completely ignore one of the top climate scientists in the world, not to mention the rest of science community? Continue on there Ptif! Just don't expect the rest of us to place any credibility on these opinion pieces you proudly copy and paste up as if they are gospel.
Click to expand...



What credibility is there when they speak so general and do not say how much of the warming is from man and how much efforts proposed would change the temp?
 
ptif219 said:
What credibility is there when they speak so general and do not say how much of the warming is from man and how much efforts proposed would change the temp?
Click to expand...

We are talking about the climate, not an easy bake oven! No one knows exactly how many degrees it will rise in a given period, however, as the experts have determined, "there is a real possibility that we will face the environmental, societal and economic consequences of climate change faster than we can adapt to them."

What part of, "may change faster than we can adapt to them," is unclear to you?
 
Catawba said:
We are talking about the climate, not an easy bake oven! No one knows exactly how many degrees it will rise in a given period, however, as the experts have determined, "there is a real possibility that we will face the environmental, societal and economic consequences of climate change faster than we can adapt to them."

What part of, "may change faster than we can adapt to them," is unclear to you?
Click to expand...

Another words it is a fallacy and what we have is natural climate change
 
ptif219 said:
Another words it is a fallacy and what we have is natural climate change
Click to expand...

Perhaps this visual aide will help you explain that to everyone ~

07096.jpg
 
ptif219 said:
What credibility is there when they speak so general and do not say how much of the warming is from man and how much efforts proposed would change the temp?
Click to expand...

Because it's a news article and not a paper published in a science journal. The full body of scientific data behind global warming would fill thousands of pages. Do you want to read thousands of pages? Because I could link you to thousands of pages. You can't read one article and assume that it contains all of a person's knowledge and arguments.
 
Catawba said:
If I chose to risk future generations well being on opinion rather than science, I'm sure it would.
Click to expand...

But you are since they can not tell you how much warming is caused by man or how much temp will change if we follow their plans on polluting less
 
ptif219 said:
But you are since they can not tell you how much warming is caused by man or how much temp will change if we follow their plans on polluting less
Click to expand...

I already gave you this information but you ignored it.
 
Deuce said:
Because it's a news article and not a paper published in a science journal. The full body of scientific data behind global warming would fill thousands of pages. Do you want to read thousands of pages? Because I could link you to thousands of pages. You can't read one article and assume that it contains all of a person's knowledge and arguments.
Click to expand...



just tell me how much of the warming is caused by man and how much we can affect temp by polluting less and show proof
 
Deuce said:
I already gave you this information but you ignored it.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. If you did it should be no problem to show it again. Are you talking about your opinion that warming is 100% from man?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom