[luke warm]

here
and here

and here

and many more... and here i just bought some carbon offsets... well at least they got one thing right - warming causes co2, not the other way 'round

[jocdelevat]

Yeah thats why some of us trust In God because Science mess up with contradictory results.

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jan 14 2009, 02:17 AM, said:

here
and here

and here

and many more... and here i just bought some carbon offsets... well at least they got one thing right - warming causes co2, not the other way 'round

Anyone else find it amusing watching Jimmy quote Pravda...

[luke warm]

hrothgar, on Jan 13 2009, 09:22 PM, said:

luke warm, on Jan 14 2009, 02:17 AM, said:

here
and here

and here

and many more... and here i just bought some carbon offsets... well at least they got one thing right - warming causes co2, not the other way 'round

Anyone else find it amusing watching Jimmy quote Pravda...

i do, i do!!

what makes this sad is, it won't even slow down the ridiculous taxes coming... maybe it'll be somewhat worth it if it puts to bed the silly man-made warming stuff

[helene_t]

Don't worry, most climate scientists don't read Pravda, let alone take it seriously.

You are really amazing, Jimmy. I thought I had a bad habit of talking about issues that I have zip knowledge about (such as ACBL system regulations, or global warming).

[luke warm]

but helene, if we all only talked about issues we actually know something about there'd be far fewer posts... so far i haven't seen anyone actually dispute the pravda article, so i'll just ask you... do you personally think there's more of a chance of global warming due in part or whole to man's activities or of a cooling of temperatures due to cyclic patterns?

[jdonn]

luke warm, on Jan 14 2009, 07:12 PM, said:

so far i haven't seen anyone actually dispute the pravda article, so i'll just ask you...

Personally I'm sick of saying your sources are consistently dumb, so I just wasn't going to reply. Apparently Richard and even Helene!!! feel no similar qualms.

[helene_t]

luke warm, on Jan 15 2009, 01:12 AM, said:

but helene, if we all only talked about issues we actually know something about there'd be far fewer posts

true but I would personally try (yeah it's hard) to be a little bit humble when talking about issues that I have zip knowledge about.

I think it's fair enough to say
- this theory doesn't appeal to me
- this theory has far-reaching political implications and I can't help notice that it's strongest proponents belong to a particular political wing

While it's hard to take phrasings like "this can't be true" or "silly" seriously when they come from a non-expert.

Since you ask me for my personal opinion, maybe I shouldn't say anything since I have zip knowledge about the issue. But I will try anyway
- There seems to be almost 100% scientific consensus of the general idea of man-made global warming, although there are huge disagreements about the extent of the problem etc.
- It is not an established theory, though. Most scientists seem to acknowledge that it could be seriously flawed.
- Scientists have an obvious interest in over-stating the problem as it will allocate more money and prestige to their research.
- It is obviously the pro-environment wing that shouts the loudest. But I read Bjorn Lomborg's book (he has the opposite bias I would say) and he acknowledges the phenomena, although he says that it probably won't have disastrous impact on the global economy.
- I have seen environmentalist hypes being wrong before so instinctively I am very skeptical.
- I am concerned about the militant attitude of many of those involved in the debate. Even Scientific American IMHO discredited itself by making its review of Lomborg's "The Skeptical Environmentalist" look more like an ad hominem attack. Although bad arguments for an idea does not logically invalidate the idea I can't help thinking that if they really had a good cause it wouldn't be necessary to drag the debate to that level. Then again, I know some people who feel genuinely desperate about the prospects of our planet so it is understandable that they get angry when faced with certain politicians and lobbyists neglect of the problem.
- I haven't seen a single serious argument against the hypothesis of man-made global warming. Of course I could have missed one or two.
- I am personally more concerned about acidification of the oceans than I am about the rising sea level and climate change, but that may just be my irrational feelings for coral reefs.
- As for cyclic patterns, I haven't read anything recently.
- I do read a number of semi-popular science journals and websites regularly so if an important revision of the scientific consensus came up I would here about it I think. I feel no need to follow links from here to Pravda or other partisan websites.

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Jan 15 2009, 03:12 AM, said:

but helene, if we all only talked about issues we actually know something about there'd be far fewer posts... so far i haven't seen anyone actually dispute the pravda article

Jimmy, it took all off 30 seconds to find a section of the IPCC report that

1. Discusses Milankovitch cycles
2. Explains why these cycles can't explain the climate patterns that we're seeing today

Please note: This is part of the bloody FAQ... It doesn't take much time or effort to show that the analysis in Pravda is severely flawed.

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar...g1_faq-6.1.html

If you search on Milankovitch cycles on Real Climate you'll find all sorts of additional information.

As Josh mentions, its pretty easy to show that the crap that you continuously cycle through has little to no relation to reality. However, it gets tedious doing so repeatedly.

[Phil]

The over and under on this thread is set at 11 pages.

[Lobowolf]

How much can I get down on the over?

[Trinidad]

I think that the world will get a lot warmer.
Except of course for Russia where it will get a lot colder.
Because Pravda says so.
And Pravda means 'Truth'.
But only in Russian...

Rik

[Al_U_Card]

Truth is relative.....reality is another thing

[Winstonm]

Quote

Truth is relative.....

And in some cases a very distant relative

[rona_]

Our not so distant relatives.

http://www.newser.com/story/13572/kangaroo...rb-warming.html

Rona

[matmat]

hahahahaha