Climate Change
- Thread starter Bigblu
- Start date
Yeah, right...nice story, would make a good movie too.
Wow TF, from that comment it appears you have an issue with more than just the science of meteorology but also one or more of the following...
- Palaeontology
- Geology
- Radiocarbon dating
- Mass Spectrometry?
- the list could go on for pages but that will do for now...
Tell me, do you believe in dinosaurs?
Or are religious texts the only form of scientific evidence you will accept?
This may help explain an awful lot of what has been going on with this discussion...
Sure, when the impeding ice age was coming.
Laughable at best is any hogwash that came out of those studies.
Even Tim Flannery was called a "professor".
I like meteorology and it's scientists. Seems that nearly half of them are deniers though with only 52% believing that climate change is happening and humans are mostly the cause.
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00091.1
The discussion at line 406 is interesting:
We found that perceived scientific consensus was the factor most strongly associated
407 with AMS members? views about global warming. This suggests that scientists? thinking on
408 scientific topics may be subject to the same kinds of social normative influences that affect the
409 general public. Rather than rationally weighing the evidence and deciding for themselves, as
410 would be expected under more traditional ideas of scientific judgment, scientists may also use
411 the views of a relevant peer group as a social cue for forming their own views.
The science isn't settled for these guys apparently.
Hi Equity, you know nothing about me.
I just don't put myself in the pigeon holes that conventional wisdom constructs all the time. I'm curious and questioning.
You obviously have a problem with that, but that's yours not mine.
Of course there were dinosaurs, or at least some very large animals that roamed the Earth some time ago. I've seen the bones.
The weather, well I am a keen observer and have a passion for it as well.
But 4600 million years.....origin of Earth .....
Sure thing....
Oh, BTW, good post above Hoffy
I just don't put myself in the pigeon holes that conventional wisdom constructs all the time. I'm curious and questioning.
You obviously have a problem with that, but that's yours not mine.
Of course there were dinosaurs, or at least some very large animals that roamed the Earth some time ago. I've seen the bones.
The weather, well I am a keen observer and have a passion for it as well.
But 4600 million years.....origin of Earth .....
Sure thing....
Oh, BTW, good post above Hoffy
Krakatoa actually cooled the planet because of the aerosols and dust put into the atmosphere. Hmm....did you read Heaven and Earth: Global Warming ? the Missing Science by Ian Plimer?
Try this instead: http://www.skepticalscience.com/volcanoes-and-global-warming.htm
The burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide, according to the EIA. The fossil fuels emissions numbers are about 100 times bigger than even the maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes.
This is also interesting: http://www.earthmagazine.org/article/voices-volcanic-versus-anthropogenic-carbon-dioxide-missing-science?page=1
Published estimates based on research findings of the past 30 years for present-day global emission rates of carbon dioxide from subaerial and submarine volcanoes range from about 150 million to 270 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year, with an average of about 200 million metric tons,
These global volcanic estimates are utterly dwarfed by carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel burning, cement production, gas flaring and land use changes; these emissions accounted for some 36,300 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2008, according to an international study published in the December 2009 issue of Nature Geoscience. Even if you take the highest estimate of volcanic carbon dioxide emissions, at 270 million metric tons per year, human-emitted carbon dioxide levels are more than 130 times higher than volcanic emissions.
There was never any impending ice age when I was studying.
So any studies in any part of science from a number of years ago are to be written off as hogwash? Or only the parts if science where you disagree with the findings?
And Tim Flannery is actually a professor at Monash according to the Monash web site.
This a great post.
I have my own thoughts on population and pollution, which most people don't agree with either, and personally I don't really care.
Without immigration, Australian and Canadian families can have as many kids as they like, because it averages out to be a perfect balance.
I don't care what other countries do with their population, as long as they don't invade Aus and Can.
People should do more reuse, reduce, recycle..but that is a foreign concept to most (I didn't say all)
Countries should be more self reliant, and stop relying on imports or exports.
If that means we only need to raise xxx cows to feed our country, then so be it.
The one thing that riles a lot of people up, is when I say they should be concerned when 'poor, third world countries' become vibrant and strong.
Then you will really need to be concerned. They have the population to do whatever they want.
i truly couldnt disagree with that post any more than i do. i dont even know where to start with that
Chances are because I am referring to immigrants?
You and I never see eye to eye on anything anyways.
Probably because:
- It is well documented that increasing the wealth of poor countries significantly reduces their birth rate, thereby reducing the global population problem.
- If other countries end up too big because we don't help them and we don't have enough population growth through immigration to defend ourselves (now the US is nearly bankrupt), then it becomes our problem. Your assumption "as long as they don't invade" looks pretty shallow in the long term - they could well invade and if we just extend our middle finger to their genuine troubles from our air conditioned McMansions then they would have a very good reason to!
- Increasing foreign trade has been shown to be by far the best way to lift living standards across both developing and developed worlds.
Your post is contrary to the record of centuries of economic development across the world. I agree with sanj - it's so wrong it's very difficult to know where to start!
Anyway, back to Climate Change...
This fits in very well with climate change.
It seems our "developed country" over consumption seems to get blamed.
Increasing our population creates an increase in consumption.
It is all linked, if you believe the climate change crap.
This world is going to crap, and there will be another world war sooner, than later.
Reducing poor countries population will be done naturally, as in nature.
Animals do this all the time.
If we stopped giving aid, there wouldn't be population there is now. All it does it add to the problem, as does the generous welfare sysytem we have now.
It is all interconnected.
All the world needs more of is more junk produced for the Dollar Store.
yeah !!!
Let's these 'poor' countries reduce their numbers by having the one child rule.. In 100 years they will be much better off.
Why exactly do you think the USA is nearly bankrupt?
Too many immigrants, too much welfare, giving too much aid.
Allowing businesses to move their factories overseas, and then bringing back their products cheap.
Not worrying about supplying their own food. No one should be dependant on another country for their food...no matter how friendly we think they are, or how cheap the food is.
That makes us even..I'm ashamed of how our countries are running things now.
chances are because the entire post is full of nonsense.
a lot of what you are saying is factually incorrect, economics clearly isnt a strong point here and neither is empathy for fellow man
The West gets substantially more wealth from the "third world" than they give in so-called "aid"
Also;
1. Too much on the "War Machine" and
2. Too much on the space program. Yeah; it's good to spend a little bit, but let's cut it back a bit boys, and spend a bit more on our own Citizens who are drowning.
The Left always come back with "oh I would be ashamed" or "your post is full of nonsense" or "what you are saying is factually incorrect".
So, you reckon to keep up the aid then?
So, you reckon to keep up the aid then?
After all the Aussie flag burning and display of hatred I've seen on the teev of recent days - no.
But, that'd be a silly thing, and thankfully TA is adult enough to ignore it all.
interesting that you think im part of "the left"
