Is global warming/climate change a crock?

[BDunnell]

Scientists say our sun will run out of fuel, collapse and take us with it someday, so......who cares? Then we have the astroid group that swears we are going to be smacked at any time by an object from space large enough to render us obsolete and there's nothing we can do about it.

I think it's hard for people and especially governments to accept that there are things out there we don't and can't control. "Why do our weather patterns no longer fit within our linear projections?" To say the climate is doing what it does naturally, in short, it's changing because it can and does, is far too simple and helpless for some to accept.

But thats whats going on and why.

May I ask why you believe this view and not that of the many scientists who think otherwise?

[Daniel]

because the weather has been warmer and colder than it is now. The thames froze over in the 17 or 1800's so it obvious that things change. The thames even froze over in 1963. I find it hard to believe that in 40 years it's changed so much because of carbon dioxide.

[Hondo]

because the weather has been warmer and colder than it is now. The thames froze over in the 17 or 1800's so it obvious that things change. The thames even froze over in 1963. I find it hard to believe that in 40 years it's changed so much because of carbon dioxide.

Thank you. The climate on this planet has undergone many changes, before man, while man was here, while man was beginning industrialization, and it will continue to change, or evolve if you like.

Thats why it's called nature. It does these things naturally, is doing these things naturally, and will continue to do these things naturally, and nature doesn't give a damn whether you like it or not.

From another standpoint, trying to force the weather from it's natural progression back into a pattern that you consider pleasant and proper is pompous and arrogant as hell.

BD, you're a natural born politician.

[MadCat]

and it will continue to change, or evolve if you like.

Thats why it's called nature. It does these things naturally, is doing these things naturally, and will continue to do these things naturally, and nature doesn't give a damn whether you like it or not.

That is exactly what I think. Climate Change/Global Warming is the biggest load of tripe i've heard.

Are they using it to try and scare people into becoming more aware of the 'energy' they use I sometimes wonder??

As if the amount of carbon emissions a car produces will decrease the speed of earths natural 'evolution' ... I pity those who have fallen for it.

Although, like Daniel says, there's no harm in "doing our bit for the environment" like recycling.

[BDunnell]

Thank you. The climate on this planet has undergone many changes, before man, while man was here, while man was beginning industrialization, and it will continue to change, or evolve if you like.

Thats why it's called nature. It does these things naturally, is doing these things naturally, and will continue to do these things naturally, and nature doesn't give a damn whether you like it or not.

From another standpoint, trying to force the weather from it's natural progression back into a pattern that you consider pleasant and proper is pompous and arrogant as hell.

So, without the benefit of having done any scientific research of your own, why are you willing to believe that those who have and concluded that global warming as a phenomenon does exist are wrong?

BD, you're a natural born politician.

With respect, I don't think this has anything to do with it. I'm merely asking what I think is a reasonable question.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

That I posted may be a little deceiving.

In the past 400,000 years Co2 has varied from 180ppmv to 300ppmv, worryingly in the past view decades it has risen to near 480ppmv which is unnaturally high amount.

However I've heard before that it's temperature that controls the amount of C02 in the atmosphere due to the effect it has on plant life :\ ......not the other way round

[tinchote]

So, without the benefit of having done any scientific research of your own, why are you willing to believe that those who have and concluded that global warming as a phenomenon does exist are wrong?

Because of opinions like this one:

Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and Professor of Geology at Carleton University in Canada: "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years. On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"

You can find that opinion and many others here

[Hondo]

Because there seems to be just as many scientists that say the change is natural. And, as has been stated many, many times before, the earth's climate has changed just like it's doing now before man was a factor in anything. If the climate had fit our linear expectations of the seasons throughout the planet's history, then I would be open to the man-made argument.

I am not a scientist, nor do I have any training in climate and weather patterns. I look at the situation and ask myself "does this make sense?". That no more disqualifies from forming an opinion than if I was sitting on a jury and the prosecution presents their DNA expert and evidence and then the defense presents their DNA expert who swears with just as much holy zeal that the prosecution has it all wrong. The fact that I know nothing about DNA does not excuse me from being on the jury or release me from my responsibility to make a decision as a part of that jury. So, from the 2 experts testimonies, I have to decide which one makes the most sense to me. Many times, the simple answer is the correct answer,

[BDunnell]

Of course, I understand that there are contrary opinions. However, I would reckon that there is a majority of relevant scientific opinion that does believe in global warming, and I am prepared to concur with it. Obviously, I can't claim to have undertaken any research by myself, but from what I have read and heard I believe the latter to be right. On a very simple basis, I do not understand how carbon emissions can have had no meaningful effect over the last century or more, just as it is obvious that smoking does damage to one's health, or that a smoggy atmosphere in urban areas is hardly as good as clean air.

Believe me, I would be delighted if I could be convinced that global warming didn't exist and that there is no need to take any action at all, but as things stand, this isn't my view. Even if it was, I am sure I would still think that now is a good time to clean up our act.

[Daniel]

Of course, I understand that there are contrary opinions. However, I would reckon that there is a majority of relevant scientific opinion that does believe in global warming, and I am prepared to concur with it. Obviously, I can't claim to have undertaken any research by myself, but from what I have read and heard I believe the latter to be right. On a very simple basis, I do not understand how carbon emissions can have had no meaningful effect over the last century or more, just as it is obvious that smoking does damage to one's health, or that a smoggy atmosphere in urban areas is hardly as good as clean air.

Believe me, I would be delighted if I could be convinced that global warming didn't exist and that there is no need to take any action at all, but as things stand, this isn't my view. Even if it was, I am sure I would still think that now is a good time to clean up our act.

Yes but once upon a time when "scientists" had only been making maps for a while and studying the planets for a while we thought the sun went around us and that the earth was flat. Scientists are always learning. It just seems that every strange bit of weather that happens is blamed on "climate change" we don't even know if we CAN impact upon the weather

I've never said we can't but there is a lot of evidence to say that weather is a very dynamic thing. When it was clearish when I got out of my car but raining when I got into work I didn't blame climate change, I simply understood that weather is unpredictable. There have always been droughts and floods and storms and cold snaps and heat waves. Why all of a sudden does it come down to climate change?

For all we know it could be down to the fact that there are more dachshunds around than there have ever been? If there are more dachshunds around next year and the weather is stranger next year then that must be the cause. Of course my argument is absurd because I've not provided historical proof that in times of abnormal weather (what is normal weather?) there were high numbers of dachshunds. I could just show some graph showing the last 40 years or so of weather and of the dachshund population and show that there is correlation between the two. Now of course that is absurd but in 10 or 20 years if the warming cycle ends even in the face of further CO2 gas emission then perhaps these scientists will look as silly as the ones who said that the earth was flat and the sun orbited us?


This was published in June this year.

OMFG PERTH IS GOING TO DIE BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE A DRY WINTER!!!!!!!!!!!



So what happened? In August Perth got a crapload of rain and the dams are now at their highest level for this time of the year for the last 5 years or so. Perth had a dry Autumn...... blamed on global warming so I heard and then it was equalled out by a wet late july and wet august. Probably blamed on global warming too.

It seems that forecasters are chasing their tails. They can't predict what the weather's going to be like as well as they used to in times of more "average" (I prefer that term to "normal") weather and they've found a convenient cause.

At the end of whatever period we're currently in temperatures will start to drop and scientists will find some clever way of having it tied in with climate change and CO2 emissions just you mark my words. They'll probably argue that it's just a blip and that temperatures are still on their way up

It's not that I don't believe that it's possible we're having an impact such as this it's just that a lot of evidence such as ice core samples and so on are pointing to the fact that CO2 has little to do with the temperature of the planet. Yet scientists hold up graphs of how temperature has risen since the industrial revolution. That's only a small part of the earth's 4.5 billion years of history. It makes as much sense as me branding you as an environmentalist nut because you posted something about global warming in this thread when we all know there's much more to you than just what you posted on the forum on this thread.