Hum Dinger
Gold Member
- Aug 19, 2008
- 11,556
- 4,178
- 315
THAT is true. The fact that there might be "other" causes, standing alone, certainly does not rule out additional causation including man-made causes.
However, the scientific "evidence" that MIGHT show that there is some diabolical connection between the increase in carbon emissions in our atmosphere and ANY change in our global climate is virtually non-existent. The science has been undermined by poor data, poor data collection, deliberate distortions in HOW data is gathered, piss-poor application of scientific method, deliberately altered data, bad math, etc., etc., etc.
No. That's pretty much a myth perpetrated by the wingnuts. Global Warming and it's relation to carbon emissions has been studied for over a hundred years, by thousands of scientists. It has been supported by every major scientific institution throughout the world for quite some time - including NASA.
Not only has the empirical data shown that there is a direct relationship between carbon emmissions and the rate of global warming, but to anyone who is at all educated in the topic could tell you that increased carbon content in the atmosphere causing an increase in the heat held by the atmosphere is exactly what would be expected.
The 'bad' math that is alluded to by the wingnuts was just one memo refering to a mathematical trick - which was just a mathematic shortcut - still a totally valid mathematical method.
Denying Global Warming is just plain silly. It's only being attacked becuase a bunch of industrialists don't want to be forced into replacing their power plants with the industrial equivalent of 'Energy Star' efficient power plants.
I really wish that all you wingnuts would stop allowing yourselves to be lead around by the nose by anyone that has a few bucks in their pockets.
No, the bad math refers to a simple calculation thet the Royal Society made that gives a incorrect residence time for CO2. The only problem is they did it wrong. You might want to look at some other sources than the lefty wingnut sites that perpetually posit the exact same thing with no evidence to support it.
As far as the money goes I suggest you look at the "green" money being invested that will only come to fruition if the governements pass onerous laws that cripple the econmies of the free world.
Then again you may just wish to keep your head in the sand, the choice is yours.
So even if what you say is true, one miscalculation found at the Royal Soceity negates thousands of correct calculations which have been done by thousands of scientists all over the world for the past hundred years? At scientific institutions, like the one I work at, calculations are done in the thousands every day and you think that becuase some industrial goons were able to find one questionable calculation at one institute, all else is wrong?
Not very bright!
As far as 'crippling the economies of the free world':
You've got to be kidding! They said the same thing about the American chemical industry after the Love Canal decision. "Oh, how can we compete if we can't poison everyone that lives near our plants!"
Guess what, the Chemical Industry, which is just aboiut the most regulated and restricted industry in the world, changed it's way of operating, learned to abide by the new regulations and has become more profitable than ever.
Industrialists may whine, becuase they're too cheap to put up the bucks to transform their power plants, but if we can ever get cap & trade passed, these idiots are going to find that the new 'Green' energy plants not only save the environment, but lower their operating costs as well.