Global warming?

[blackeagle603]

I'm stealing that last bit Greg and plagarizing/adapting liberally. Good stuff.

[Jered]

Last year, Mars was warming up and the polar ice caps were melting. Almost like the sun has something to do with climate change.

[scipioafricanus]

Watch Bill Whittle's latest: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_RuverrEZ4

I always like to use: "You have a glass of ice water, what happens when the ice melts?"

[skb12172]

The Mars thing has been known since the late 90s.

According to two pranksters who actually got their paper published in a journal, your penis is the cause of global warming. Go check out my new thread on the topic.

[NVGdude]

Climactically the earths cooling caused the desertification of north africa.

The Desertification of North Africa occurred when the continental gap between North and South America closed. This changed the paths of the main large ocean currents. (which are warm).

So correct that it was a lack of warm water, but it had far more to do with ocean current changes that global cooling.

[Vonz90]

ll that, the shenanigans they have played and continue to play, with our actual recorded temperature data, seems almost trivial. But by itself it's enough to show that these people are scammers not scientists. Scientists don't hide, alter or destroy data.

Nah, of course they do - they are people and that is the kind of stuff people do. I have seen similar stuff happening when engineers do research or problem solve. It is easy to focus on one solution and group think takes over. No doubt they believe their data "corrections" are valid. It is very easy to assume away data that does not agree. What really makes it dangerous is that sometimes it is valid to do it.

[Greg]

I'm stealing that last bit Greg and plagarizing/adapting liberally. Good stuff.

By all means. I'm just summarizing things I remember reading, there should be reasonable cites for all if that available too if you want to be thorough.

[Greg]

ll that, the shenanigans they have played and continue to play, with our actual recorded temperature data, seems almost trivial. But by itself it's enough to show that these people are scammers not scientists. Scientists don't hide, alter or destroy data.

Nah, of course they do - they are people and that is the kind of stuff people do. I have seen similar stuff happening when engineers so research or problem solve. It is easy to focus on one solution and group think takes over. No doubt they believe their data "corrections" are valid. It is very easy to assume away data that does not agree. What really makes it dangerous is that sometimes it is valid to do it. It

Oh sure they do.

But if they do that sort of thing, they have veered away into scammerdom and need to be corrected.

And when you get into situations where important data is entrusted to you, you alter it and 'lose' the originals and retain only your altered version with no clear explanation of exactly how you've altered it and why..... That's much worse than skewing a sample or fudging a curve fit or something.

[HTRN]

Global warming is real, the question is, how much of it is caused by humans? Ive heard that mankind is only responsible for 3% of the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and that carbon dioxide is only 20% of the greenhouse gas effect, the vast majority of it is due to water vapor in the atmosphere.

There is also the fact that we've only been out of the little ice age since 1850, and temp averages have been climbing steady since then.

[randy]

There is also the fact that we've only been out of the little ice age since 1850, and temp averages have been climbing steady since then.

Hell, it's only been about 10,000 years since the end of the last full ice age. That's almost nothing in geological terms.

Interesting how so many people that are so " "informed" and "reality based" seem to either not know that or consider it irrelevant.

Some of my skepticism that the powers that be actually have a handle on what's happening, let alone why, is remembering reading all of the studies and articles (in places like Scientific American) about the impending return of the glaciers. NYFC was supposed to be under a mile of ice by now. The trends did not change that fast (a mere 40 years or so) so they a. wrong then, b. wrong now or c. all of the above.