This. Very serious problems.
[quote]Eli B wrote:
[quote]phaethon wrote:
[quote]Eli B wrote:
I think to be a leading expert in something you should spend years studying it. You should also publish research in peer-reviewed journals with the express purpose of having other knowledgable folks try and pick out and expose flaws. In such ways are careers made in the scientific community
But hey, scientific method hasnt done anything for us in the last 200 years. Nope, totally useless.
[/quote]
Look at the end of the day these scientists do know a lot about the topic. And they can give us insights into the problem. However, the models they use as predictions are extremely basic. They even admit as much.
They are trying to predict what will happen to the climate system in 50-100 years time. At the same time we cannot even predict with high reliability the weather for next week! Will it be rainy or sunny? 18 Degrees or 24 Degrees? We don’t really know. This is because the earth is an extremely complex system.
Secondly climate study is a lot closer to economics than it is to classical science. Simply due to the complex nature of the beast. Just because something happens in a micro-climate study does not mean you can assume it will happen at a macro scale.
Finally, from the peer reviewed material I have read, we would basically have to cut emissions by 20-50% across the board to make a significant difference. Again these are scientists who know plenty about science but little about public policy or areas outside their research niche.
When it comes to public policy, in my opinion, we would be better off assuming that warming was going to happen and then building in safeguards to ensure that if it did we would still thrive. E.g. Netherlands should be pumping money into its dyke system, not into renewable energy.[/quote]
to me thats a better attitude than ‘scientists be lying an’ shit.’
But I think theres a host of problems other than sea levels rising associated with climate change. And Western/developed countries will probably be fine which is kind of ironic since they’re the ones who have done most of the polluting but will now suffer the least.[/quote]
no one said they are lying, peer reviewed exactly what does that mean, well if publishing in a journal that deals with global warming/climate change it means submitting your paper to someone who has similar hypothesis as you. This is one of the major flaws I see with the structure of journals in modern scientific literature. It removes some of the more valuable insights to the research.
I have done work both in academic research, gov’t research and now work in regulated industry. I have seen the good and bad of those different perspectives.
It’s a damn shame I have to read this so much
[quote]florelius wrote:
2. I believe that human action is responsible for the global warming, but I am not a big fan of the green movement because of the reasons I listed above. remember I am not green, but red.
[/quote]
There is no belief.
We DO influence the climate. Are we the last straw to break the camel’s back or just one of thousand tiny factors?
What a ridiculous debate.
We BETTER have something to influence the weather directly pretty soon.
This whole “scam”-thing shows me only what a joke a two party democracy really is. A compromise cannot be ever reached under such circumstances.
Either you go to the moon or not. You wage war or not.
Half assing with decisions of that magnitude bites you in the ass bigtime.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
It’s a damn shame I have to read this so much
[quote]florelius wrote:
2. I believe that human action is responsible for the global warming, but I am not a big fan of the green movement because of the reasons I listed above. remember I am not green, but red.
[/quote]
There is no belief.
We DO influence the climate. Are we the last straw to break the camel’s back or just one of thousand tiny factors?
What a ridiculous debate.
We BETTER have something to influence the weather directly pretty soon.
This whole “scam”-thing shows me only what a joke a two party democracy really is. A compromise cannot be ever reached under such circumstances.
Either you go to the moon or not. You wage war or not.
Half assing with decisions of that magnitude bites you in the ass bigtime.[/quote]
So HOW do we influence the climate? What should we do to reduce that influence?
[quote]ReignIB wrote:
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
It’s a damn shame I have to read this so much
[quote]florelius wrote:
2. I believe that human action is responsible for the global warming, but I am not a big fan of the green movement because of the reasons I listed above. remember I am not green, but red.
[/quote]
There is no belief.
We DO influence the climate. Are we the last straw to break the camel’s back or just one of thousand tiny factors?
What a ridiculous debate.
We BETTER have something to influence the weather directly pretty soon.
This whole “scam”-thing shows me only what a joke a two party democracy really is. A compromise cannot be ever reached under such circumstances.
Either you go to the moon or not. You wage war or not.
Half assing with decisions of that magnitude bites you in the ass bigtime.[/quote]
So HOW do we influence the climate? What should we do to reduce that influence?
[/quote]
De-industrialize, and hand over massive amount of control to the UN.
You just need to nevermind the fact that as tech improves it uses more and wastes less. something the enviro-nazi’s want you to forget.
And remember if Global Warming was so important, why would Al Gore buy a multi million dollar house right by the ocean?
As the old saying goes, follow the money.
[quote]ReignIB wrote
So HOW do we influence the climate? What should we do to reduce that influence?
[/quote]