If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
"Martin Hotze" wrote in message ... On 6 Apr 2007 20:13:28 -0700, Jay Honeck wrote: It's amazing how gullible some of the supposedly smartest people in ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the world can be. Of course, this is happening in a society that ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ spends $7 BILLION dollars annually on...bottled *water*. you're referring to people in the US. There *are* people with a clue - both within and outside the US. And Martin is definitely not one of them, the goosestepping nazi. |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
In article ,
Martin Hotze wrote: On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 12:49:35 -0700, Matt Barrow wrote: There *are* people with a clue - both within and outside the US. And Martin is definitely not one of them, the goosestepping nazi. well, as an American you shouldn't cry and whine too much about nazis and about environment. shouldn't that post have killed the thread? (pardon my english, I'm an engineer) -- Bob Noel (goodness, please trim replies!!!) |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
"Tony Cox" wrote: "The Great Global Warming Swindle" is known load of bs which some of those same scientists have called "pure propaganda," complaining that their comments were taken out of context and deliberately distorted. The producer, Martin Durkin, has been caught pulling this trick before, and the tabloid UK Channel 4 (not BBC, which would have nothing to do with this bozo) has had to apologize for the other program of his that it aired. http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/0...aganda_the.php The "hatchet job" tone of your note & the reference you site is *exactly* the problem that many of us have with the entire "Global Warming" pseudo-debate -- people like you politicize the whole mess to discredit people who disagree with your religious orthodoxy. Religious orthodoxy? You sound very much like a creationist attacking the theory of evolution. What are your views on Intelligent Design, BTW? I have not made up my mind, but the more I see of this kind of crap from the deniers, the more I am moved towards the other side. Durkin is a "bozo" and Channel 4 is "tabloid". "Many scientists", you say, have called it "pure propaganda", as if we're supposed to agree that "truth" can somehow be decided by majority vote. Durkin *is* a bozo. He has been caught lying and quote-mining before, and Channel 4 has had to apologize publicly for running a program he produced, remember? Of course, being Channel 4, they certainly didn't let that little episode stop them from running another piece of sensationalized Durkin codswollop to get some ratings buzz. The "expose" you quote goes on to say that eight of the scientists interviewed "are linked to American neo-conservative and right-wing think-tanks, many of which have received tens of millions of dollars from Exxon", as if that tenuous connection (if even true) right there makes them irrelevant. It makes them subject to obvious conflict of interest. Remember the tobacco company "scientists?" I took the trouble to view TGGWS on Google to see if what your link says about the program is true.Their critique is quite simply a nonsense. 1) Their fundamental claim is that Durkin says increasing CO2 is itself the result of increasing temperature. This claim was never made. 2) They claim Durkin is "deeply deceptive" by portraying a decline in temperature between 1940 and 1975, where their supposedly-countering graph shows almost the same drop (where GW orthodoxy predicts a rise). 3) They claim recent global warming related to CO2 is true simply by reference to authority (the IPCC report), which ought to be a red flag to anyone. Even to you. Why is it a red flag to you? Do you buy the talk radio line that politicians control the science behind the IPCC report? Or are you one of the conspiracy theorists who claim that almost all the world's climatologists are in on a big scam? Deniers are fond of attacking the IPCC report because it is a political document, ignoring the fact that their are two stages to the report: the initial scientific findings and then the final report that is "tweaked" by politicians. In fact, it is the politicians who are attempting to *tone down* the language of the latest scientific findings. The scientific authors are angry that the politicians have tried to dilute the seriousness of their results by altering the language: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ereport08.html 4) Their explanation of the 800 year CO2 lag is nothing new. That's completely consistent with what the program claimed. 5) They confuse solar energy output with sunspot activity. Durkin made no claim that solar energy output was changing or affecting "global warming", so setting this up as a straw man to be viciously dissected means, quite simply, squat.. The review then degenerates into carefully documenting the supposed sinister links between the scientists interviewed and the oil companies. It then quotes various "Scientainers" who bloody well ought to know better for being outraged that their ill-considered musings are being called into question. No doubt you'll counter by helpfully pointing out that one of the scientific challengers to this new secular religion was once hauled up before his university authorities for sexual harassment. "Hauled up?" Is that equivalent to "proven guilty?" How about a cite? Or do you have something more relevant and substantial to offer? I offer the suggestion that serious thinkers should avoid twaddle like "An Inconvenient Truth" and "The Great Global Warming Swindle." Balanced, rational sources are out there if that's what you're really looking for, instead of something to stroke your prejudices. http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2326210.ece -- Dan "The opposite of science is not religion; the opposite of science is wishful thinking." -John Derbyshire |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
"Matt Barrow" wrote in message ... "Peter Dohm" wrote in message .. . Obviously, for the heat to traverse the interplanetary space, we are burning *way* too much fuel! OTOH, there seems to be some doubt whether the Earth's northern polar region is currently as warm as it was in Viking times. Some doubt? The Vikings planted crops, including vineyards, in Greenland, which unless you missed it, is completed covered in permanent ice. Exactly! The biggest effect of more CO2 in the atmosphere would really be faster plant growth and increased crop yeilds. I have heard that warmer temperatures would also be helpfull in the same regard. The figure I have heard stated as optimum is 8 degrees--although I don't know on which scale. I do find it ironic that the same people who claimed that parsimony was a vice when I was in school are now the ones who say we should shut down the western world--and of course become vegetarians. Notice that the never say adopt sound conservation practices, convert to nuclear power, or do much of anything else that actually works; as that would be parsimony. (End of rant) Peter |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
Peter Dohm wrote:
"Matt Barrow" wrote in message ... "Peter Dohm" wrote in message .. . Obviously, for the heat to traverse the interplanetary space, we are burning *way* too much fuel! OTOH, there seems to be some doubt whether the Earth's northern polar region is currently as warm as it was in Viking times. Some doubt? The Vikings planted crops, including vineyards, in Greenland, which unless you missed it, is completed covered in permanent ice. Exactly! The biggest effect of more CO2 in the atmosphere would really be faster plant growth and increased crop yeilds. I have heard that warmer temperatures would also be helpfull in the same regard. The figure I have heard stated as optimum is 8 degrees--although I don't know on which scale. I do find it ironic that the same people who claimed that parsimony was a vice when I was in school are now the ones who say we should shut down the western world--and of course become vegetarians. Notice that the never say adopt sound conservation practices, convert to nuclear power, or do much of anything else that actually works; as that would be parsimony. (End of rant) Peter If we could show Gore a way to make money for himself from advocating parsimony, he'd be on that band wagon in a heart beat. Matt |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
Scientists on global warming. If you find that it is warming you still have
a job, if you find there is no such thing and its all bull you have no job. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
Aluckyguess writes:
Scientists on global warming. If you find that it is warming you still have a job, if you find there is no such thing and its all bull you have no job. Everybody needs to pay the rent. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
In article ,
Martin Hotze wrote: On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 12:49:35 -0700, Matt Barrow wrote: There *are* people with a clue - both within and outside the US. And Martin is definitely not one of them, the goosestepping nazi. well, as an American you shouldn't cry and whine too much about nazis We don't: we killed a million of them; you welcomed them http://www.newenglishreview.org/cust...07&sec_id=5507 /excerpt When the Nazis marched into Vienna, to the delirious welcome of the crowd, and not very long before the Gestapo escorted him off the premises as it were, Freud wrote two lapidary words in his diary: Finis Austriae. And since then it is true that Austria has not featured very prominently, let alone favourably, in the mental horizons of most educated people even in Europe, much less in North America. Despite its great beauty, its marvellous historical and artistic heritage, and its ascent to great and near-universal prosperity, a pall even yet hangs over the country, for the most obvious reasons. When I think of modern Austria, here is what I think of: scenes from the film The Third Man, the writer Thomas Bernhard who so despised his native land that he directed in his will that none of his books ever be published there, and the diplomat Kurt Waldheim who covered up his own past, again for very obvious reasons. If pushed, I think also of a modernist artist whose brilliantly original idea was to cover everything in blood, and Elfriede Jellinek, the Nobel Prize winner whose view of her country is hardly more flattering than that of Bernhard. No doubt this is all very unfair, but we are seldom fair about anything. /end and about environment. Our environment is just peachy. Now, that sewer... |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
I have an opinion on global warming!
"Tony Cox" wrote in message ps.com... "Dan Luke" wrote in message news: ... In fact, it is the politicians who are attempting to *tone down* the language of the latest scientific findings. The scientific authors are angry that the politicians have tried to dilute the seriousness of their results by altering the language: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ereport08.html Oh now that's a good read. Tell me. If you come across a scientific paper that has for one of its conclusions that "Global warming could increase the number of hungry in 2080 by between 140 million and 1 billion, depending on how much greenhouse gas is emitted in coming decades.", doesn't that register on your BS meter? What is "could"? What is "hungry"? And what are the greenhouse gas levels we're talking about? Quite! Sounds like Dan is channeling Paul Erlich circa 1980. Dan your credibility just went to ZERO. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
lowrance 500 opinion | d&tm | Piloting | 2 | March 17th 07 06:57 AM |
Aviation Conspiracy: CBS Spotlights Aviation's Effect On Global Warming!!! | Free Speaker | General Aviation | 1 | August 3rd 06 07:24 PM |
Your opinion about helmets? | Dave Russell | Aerobatics | 8 | March 13th 04 02:32 PM |
Opinion on club share | Paul Folbrecht | Owning | 10 | January 8th 04 05:17 AM |
Opinion on this please | Frederick Wilson | Home Built | 11 | December 24th 03 06:01 PM |