|
|
Global Warming is Causing Glaciers to Grow (Page 2)
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: retired
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status:
Offline
|
|
That picture does not involve a cat.
You lose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
The amount of ignorance in this thread is generally mind numbing. It is also why I won't return here. You people are 6 flavors of pathetic, and only a few posts in this entire thread are from people who 'get it'.
You would rather cite Penn and Teller than side with the majority of the worlds climatologists. Amazing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by spacefreak
Nothing can disprove global warming...
Hot temperatures: global warming
Cold temperatures: global warming
Lots o' hurricanes: global warming
No hurricanes: global warming
Melting glaciers: global warming
Growing glaciers: global warming
Mars getting warmer: Carbon emissions on Earth. Obviously.
|
- MacBook Air M2 16GB / 512GB
- MacBook Pro 16" i9 2.4Ghz 32GB / 1TB
- MacBook Pro 15" i7 2.9Ghz 16GB / 512GB
- iMac i5 3.2Ghz 1TB
- G4 Cube 500Mhz / Shelf display unit / Museum display
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Capital city of the Empire State.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by smacintush
Doesn't matter though, the article is completely illegitimate because it goes against the "consensus", and apparently, in modern science consensus is what REALLY matters.
In ALL science, consensus is what REALLY matters, dumbass!
That's how science works. If you announce a discovery, it has to confirmable by other scientists. Your data must be confirmed. Your experiments must be duplicatable by others. That's why we don't have cold fusion up and running (anybody remember that?).
If somebody came along with a CONFIRMABLE proof that humans are not contributing significantly to global warming, then AND ONLY THEN would the scientific consensus on global warming change.
|
/mal
"I sentence you to be hanged by the neck until you cheer up."
MacBook Pro 15" w/ Mac OS 10.8.2, iPhone 4S & iPad 4th-gen. w/ iOS 6.1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by malvolio
In ALL science, consensus is what REALLY matters, dumbass!
That's how science works. If you announce a discovery, it has to confirmable by other scientists. Your data must be confirmed. Your experiments must be duplicatable by others. That's why we don't have cold fusion up and running (anybody remember that?).
If somebody came along with a CONFIRMABLE proof that humans are not contributing significantly to global warming, then AND ONLY THEN would the scientific consensus on global warming change.
<Stephen Colbert>
... something about my gut feeling being superior
</Stephen Colbert>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Across from the wallpaper store.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by malvolio
In ALL science, consensus is what REALLY matters, dumbass!
Real nice Captain Maturity. Keep up the good work!
|
Being in debt and celebrating a lower deficit is like being on a diet and celebrating the fact you gained two pounds this week instead of five.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Why we don't let some ice melt occur and carve out large canals and rivers into desert regions where people are desperate for water I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Obi Wan's Ghost
Why we don't let some ice melt occur and carve out large canals and rivers into desert regions where people are desperate for water I don't know.
Characteristic for your intellect or just your geographical ignorance?
|
***
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: An asteroid remanent of Tatooine.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by badidea
Characteristic for your intellect or just your geographical ignorance?
Watch your mouth if you don't know who you're talking to.
The Himalayas, for example, is experiencing glacial retreat and is surrounded by arid regions where there is a need for fresh water.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by bgmark13
graphs are good proof of global warming...
Please don't quote FSM if you're completely oblivious to the irony of your statement.
|
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Salt Lake City, UT USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by malvolio
If somebody came along with a CONFIRMABLE proof that humans are not contributing significantly to global warming, then AND ONLY THEN would the scientific consensus on global warming change.
You really think at this point someone suggesting a difference of opinion to the global climate change stake would be taken seriously? There are far too much politics in the scientific world for this to be the case, IMO.
|
2008 iMac 3.06 Ghz, 2GB Memory, GeForce 8800, 500GB HD, SuperDrive
8gb iPhone on Tmobile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status:
Offline
|
|
Global Warming is a misnomer, it should be referenced as Global Climate Change as changes will incur more extreme temperatures on both ends during seasons, even if the average mean temperature is rising. Isolated climate zones will react differently than the entire climate as a whole.
|
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by olePigeon
Global Warming is a misnomer, it should be referenced as Global Climate Change as changes will incur more extreme temperatures on both ends during seasons, even if the average mean temperature is rising. Isolated climate zones will react differently than the entire climate as a whole.
Bingo, those who discard Global Warming by saying "well it's getting cooler here, nyah!!" don't understand climate change any more than a two year old.
Pumping CO2 into our atmosphere will result in a huge gamut of different outcomes. Ice will retreat from certain areas of the globe and form in others. The only problem is that this will most certainly change the weather as we know it. The thing is that it's impossible to accurately predict what EXACTLY will happen but the fact remains that the world's scientists agree we are changing our world.
Those who disagree with this overall sentiment of us doing harm against our precious environment need to actually understand science before badmouthing it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by SirCastor
You really think at this point someone suggesting a difference of opinion to the global climate change stake would be taken seriously? There are far too much politics in the scientific world for this to be the case, IMO.
Nobody who makes outlandish claims without any evidence is taken seriously. Why should they be?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: PDX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak
I think the thing about our climate changing is that we don't know what might happen as a result.
"What if?" was enough of a justification to spend billions on the Iraq war. The potential dangers presented by global warming, human-caused or natural, are greater than the actual danger we now know Iraq presented prior to the invasion.
Agreed. The supposed terror threat posed by Iraq, told to us by a few people in our government apparently had more credibility than the vast majority of the entire world's scientists on the effects of Global Warming.
I'm actually at a point where I just don't care anymore. I feel like if we're too stupid to see our own demise right in front of our faces, we deserve the consequences. And maybe that's the real problem. Humankind has yet to suffer any "real" consequences from the misuse of our natural resources. We just don't understand what will happen, so we dismiss it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Capital city of the Empire State.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by SirCastor
You really think at this point someone suggesting a difference of opinion to the global climate change stake would be taken seriously? There are far too much politics in the scientific world for this to be the case, IMO.
No, not opinion. Verifiable FACTS would be taken seriously.
The idea that the "scientific world" (whatever that is) is ruled by politics is one of the BS lies that the Bushies try to spread. Remember, they are the clowns who fill government positions (including science-related ones) based on political loyalty rather than ability or knowledge.
|
/mal
"I sentence you to be hanged by the neck until you cheer up."
MacBook Pro 15" w/ Mac OS 10.8.2, iPhone 4S & iPad 4th-gen. w/ iOS 6.1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Salt Lake City, UT USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by malvolio
No, not opinion. Verifiable FACTS would be taken seriously.
The idea that the "scientific world" (whatever that is) is ruled by politics is one of the BS lies that the Bushies try to spread. Remember, they are the clowns who fill government positions (including science-related ones) based on political loyalty rather than ability or knowledge.
I don't mean that the scientific world is ruled by governmental politics, I mean that it is largely political. Scientists, much like everyone else, tend to cling to their own philosophies about how things work. They have pet hypothesis which they've built themselves on. On top of that, they work for companies that want to make money, or Universities that want exposure and more students. If a scientist's findings go against the trend of their workplace or the beliefs of the guy who writes the paycheck, I tend to believe that their findings don't make it into the published journals or popular parlance.
|
2008 iMac 3.06 Ghz, 2GB Memory, GeForce 8800, 500GB HD, SuperDrive
8gb iPhone on Tmobile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by spacefreak
Nothing can disprove global warming...
Hot temperatures: global warming
Cold temperatures: global warming
Lots o' hurricanes: global warming
No hurricanes: global warming
Melting glaciers: global warming
Growing glaciers: global warming
You've noticed that too?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy
Oh man, you're stuck in 2005.
The name has been updated to "Climate Change"
(since the globe stopped warming)
I remember when it was called "Global Cooling" But that bit them on the ass. You'd have thought they would have named it "Climate Change" sooner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by C.A.T.S. CEO
Global Climate Change or "Global Warming" means that the heat extremes and cold extremes get a wider range. So one winter its extremely cold and the next summer its extemely hot (like this summer )
But our winter was mild, and so far this summer isn't any hotter...
Originally Posted by smacintush
Funny because that describes YOU pretty well.
.
I was thinking THE SAME THING when I read his post!
Originally Posted by tutelary
The amount of ignorance in this thread is generally mind numbing. It is also why I won't return here. You people are 6 flavors of pathetic, and only a few posts in this entire thread are from people who 'get it'.
You would rather cite Penn and Teller than side with the majority of the worlds climatologists. Amazing.
I stay at MacNN for the pretentious and condescending posts.
Thanks for making my MacNN experience a nicer one.
Originally Posted by olePigeon
Global Warming is a misnomer, it should be referenced as Global Climate Change as changes will incur more extreme temperatures on both ends during seasons, even if the average mean temperature is rising. Isolated climate zones will react differently than the entire climate as a whole.
Just like the Bible says it will....
That was a derail folks, lets get at it!
(
Last edited by Kevin; May 30, 2007 at 06:59 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status:
Offline
|
|
Why is it that this issue seems to be drawn across retarded partisan lines? Why is it so bloody predictable that Johnny Republican is going to be against the theory of Global Warming without knowing a damn about science, while Jack Democrat is going to be inclined to believe in these theories in good faith?
Look, UN representatives from around the world have come to the collective conclusion that global warming is happening and that we're contributing to it. This is probably the closest we'll come to a global consensus, and therefore for those who don't know a damn about science, logically this should be a little more persuasive than simply gut feelings.
If scientific consensus is the basis of facts, that means that there is an established reality, and it is up to us whether we want to jump aboard the reality train. Unfortunately, being able to pull up some articles of some people on the internet that refute the theory of Global Warming does not change these facts as we now know them.
It seems that the most scientifically grounded counter to GW is the sun flare theory. Regardless of what the cause of the climate change is, does it not seem logical that pollution is the cause of phenomenon such as smog and haze? Isn't smog poisonous gas that has been trapped? Is this not undesirable? So, aren't there other benefits to limiting the amount of pollution we let off into the air regardless of whether carbon emissions or sun flares are causing this climate change?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status:
Offline
|
|
I don't disbelieve/beleive besson. I simply say it doesn't matter.
Screw the earth. Save the people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Capital city of the Empire State.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by SirCastor
I don't mean that the scientific world is ruled by governmental politics, I mean that it is largely political. Scientists, much like everyone else, tend to cling to their own philosophies about how things work. They have pet hypothesis which they've built themselves on. On top of that, they work for companies that want to make money, or Universities that want exposure and more students. If a scientist's findings go against the trend of their workplace or the beliefs of the guy who writes the paycheck, I tend to believe that their findings don't make it into the published journals or popular parlance.
You are mostly wrong. "Pet" hypotheses go NOWHERE unless they can be verified by observation or experiment.
And guess what. Companies that try to use inaccurate science create products that don't work, and therefore they don't make money. Universities that promote inaccurate science get BAD publicity (except among some religious fundamentalists).
Beliefs are largely irrelevant to the scientific process.
There are a few examples of "dueling hypotheses" in areas of science that are extremely arcane, such as the debate between advocates of String Theory and M Theory as to whether space-time has 10 or 11 dimensions. Climate change does NOT fall into this category.
|
/mal
"I sentence you to be hanged by the neck until you cheer up."
MacBook Pro 15" w/ Mac OS 10.8.2, iPhone 4S & iPad 4th-gen. w/ iOS 6.1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Capital city of the Empire State.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Kevin
Screw the earth. Save the people.
By doing the first, you make the second impossible.
|
/mal
"I sentence you to be hanged by the neck until you cheer up."
MacBook Pro 15" w/ Mac OS 10.8.2, iPhone 4S & iPad 4th-gen. w/ iOS 6.1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by malvolio
There are a few examples of "dueling hypotheses" in areas of science that are extremely arcane, such as the debate between advocates of String Theory and M Theory as to whether space-time has 10 or 11 dimensions. Climate change does NOT fall into this category.
"Global Warming" is big business however.
Originally Posted by malvolio
By doing the first, you make the second impossible.
Not at all
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Kevin
Not at all
Ladies and gentlemen, people all over the world, please listen!!
Kevin has the solution!
|
***
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status:
Offline
|
|
Naw, I said something that a few people didn't understand. Not that it's above their thinking. It's not.
Not the first time I've said it in here either.
The earth is doomed. Save the people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern VA - Just outside DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
There was a concensus that the world was flat, based on observable data. They were wrong when they TESTED the theory.
The predictions of mass distruction by GW don't work. The climate models, when actual historical data is plugged in don't match the current weather. The Theories ARE being tested NOW, but no real conclusions are out yet. The Solar Astronomers have a good case that the SUN is to blame, and the numerous cycles it goes through. The climate models didn't take into account the changing positions of the continentsover the last 1500 years either.
GW is sloppy science, or "Pop Science" take your pick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Listen folks, it's real easy.
They invented/hyped up the terrorist threat to scare the right-leaning masses into accepting more government control (in the name of fighting terrorism).
They invented/hyped up climate change to scare the left-leaning masses into accepting more government control (in the name of environmental protection).
Now, I'm trying to cook some kind of scenario up which will threaten us all with global destruction if all hot 18-40 year old women don't walk around topless all the time. I'm stumped. Any ideas?
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Y3a
There was a concensus that the world was flat, based on observable data. They were wrong when they TESTED the theory.
Are you under the impression that Columbus discovered that the earth was round? You're wrong. There was never a concensus that the earth was flat.
The Solar Astronomers have a good case that the SUN is to blame
Wrong again...
The climate models didn't take into account the changing positions of the continentsover the last 1500 years either.
Where are you getting this stuff?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Rockville, MD
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Doofy
Any ideas?
Shirts cause breast cancer. And wrinkles. And make you fat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Kevin
Screw the earth. Save the people.
And how are you going to do this? Is there a giant ultra-lightspeed spaceship under construction that I haven't heard of yet?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: A House of Ill-Repute in the Sky
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm sure it was some type of religious statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Kevin
The earth is doomed. Save the people.
I packed my stuff and am ready to enter Battlestar Galactica - when do we start?
(
Last edited by badidea; Jun 1, 2007 at 03:53 AM.
Reason: typo)
|
***
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Doofy
Now, I'm trying to cook some kind of scenario up which will threaten us all with global destruction if all hot 18-40 year old women don't walk around topless all the time. I'm stumped. Any ideas?
Well, since more and more people become gay these days, that's the most powerful weapon women have against this trend -> more naked breasts, less gayness, no downfall of humanity!!
^that's humor, obviously!!!
|
***
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by badidea
Well, since more and more people become gay these days, that's the most powerful weapon women have against this trend -> more naked breasts, less gayness, no downfall of humanity!!
Wait, I think you might be on to something...
|
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Northern VA - Just outside DC
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton
Where are you getting this stuff?
NASA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by TETENAL
And how are you going to do this? Is there a giant ultra-lightspeed spaceship under construction that I haven't heard of yet?
Originally Posted by Dakarʒ
I'm sure it was some type of religious statement.
Originally Posted by Doofy
Wait, I think you might be on to something...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|