Poverty is due to moral lacking

[Thorne]

Sorry but I don't think the evidence supports this theory in the least. Think it more hubris than science.

Well, when 98%+ of the CLIMATE scientists (You know, those people who actually STUDY the science) tells you that AGW is the most likely culprit, I'd have to say that they have way more credibility than all the talk-radio hosts and Fox News talking heads out there. When the doctor says you are sick, you don't go to an astrologer for a second opinion.

[lucy]

Well, when 98%+ of the CLIMATE scientists (You know, those people who actually STUDY the science) tells you that AGW is the most likely culprit, I'd have to say that they have way more credibility than all the talk-radio hosts and Fox News talking heads out there. When the doctor says you are sick, you don't go to an astrologer for a second opinion.

No, the real stupid ones go to an astrologer or even a haruspex and never visit the doc in the first place. At least I wished that was the case since it would considerably lower the percentage of idiots.

[Thorne]

No, the real stupid ones go to an astrologer or even a haruspex and never visit the doc in the first place. At least I wished that was the case since it would considerably lower the percentage of idiots.

Yeah, we should probably let them promote homeopathy and all those other fake cures. At least it would help reduce the level of stupid in the world. Eventually.

[DuncanONeil]

But the issue is there is no assurance that number is correct. Also there was a point in time when all the appropriate scientist thought the earth was the center of the cosmos.

Well, when 98%+ of the CLIMATE scientists (You know, those people who actually STUDY the science) tells you that AGW is the most likely culprit, I'd have to say that they have way more credibility than all the talk-radio hosts and Fox News talking heads out there. When the doctor says you are sick, you don't go to an astrologer for a second opinion.

[Thorne]

But the issue is there is no assurance that number is correct. Also there was a point in time when all the appropriate scientist thought the earth was the center of the cosmos.

That's the great thing about science, though. The more we learn, the better our understanding of reality. Given the equipment (or lack of it) that scientists had to use, their observations were logical. Later study proved them wrong, so they revised their hypothesis. It was the conservative elements, mostly the Church, which resisted the reality.

The same holds true now. Maybe the numbers aren't correct, quite. Maybe this is a statistical anomaly. The thing is, though, that ALL of the numbers indicate that Global Warming is occurring, and most of the numbers show that mankind is playing a significant role. The only thing the deniers have to offer is their constant harping over repeatedly debunked claims. They have no evidence that the scientists are mistaken, or are misinterpreting. They only deny because of their "feelings". Led, again, by the conservatives for political reasons (big oil, anyone?) and by fundamentalists who don't believe their god will let them down.

[Snark]

That's the great thing about science, though. The more we learn, the better our understanding of reality. Given the equipment (or lack of it) that scientists had to use, their observations were logical. Later study proved them wrong, so they revised their hypothesis. It was the conservative elements, mostly the Church, which resisted the reality.

The same holds true now. Maybe the numbers aren't correct, quite. Maybe this is a statistical anomaly. The thing is, though, that ALL of the numbers indicate that Global Warming is occurring, and most of the numbers show that mankind is playing a significant role. The only thing the deniers have to offer is their constant harping over repeatedly debunked claims. They have no evidence that the scientists are mistaken, or are misinterpreting. They only deny because of their "feelings". Led, again, by the conservatives for political reasons (big oil, anyone?) and by fundamentalists who don't believe their god will let them down.

The global warming fanatics claim accuracies of detail far beyond any possibility of verification. Perhaps 1.5 degrees celsius of warming has occurred. Claims of accuracies to within 1/10 of a degree are ludicrous. Instrumentation to consistently deliver such accuracies have only been available in the last 70 years; reading them with such accuracy by thousands of individuals over such a time is impossible. Accurately reading a thermometer to 1/10th of a degree in a range from 0-120 degrees would require thermometers in excess of 48". Every reading must be made precisely from the same angle. Calibrations must be confirmed. Readings within 5 degrees from tree core samples in one location of the Earth? Even considering such as accurate "data" confounds belief. And we are supposed to disrupt our entire economy over this? Greenland was once much warmer than it is now, as was Europe and the UK. There is ample evidence of a very slight increase in temperature; there is little verifiable evidence that it is beyond normal planetary fluctuations nor that the activities of men have enough to add to it that we should throw our country away. There has been no verification of any data, no corroboration by public organizations. Only conjecture by organizations with huge amounts of money being thrown at them to "prove" a theory that funds the panic industry. To top it off,when the light of disclosure was shined on the instigators and the raw data was demanded the response was "it was accidentally deleted". File cabinets of manual records? Deleted? Follow the money. This isn't "feelings". Interpolations and averages do not deliver such precise measurements and the fraud demonstrated repeatedly in the "global warming" industry is enough to make anyone skeptical. Junk science is still junk. Consensus is NOT science; it is conjecture. Only the same results can be demonstrated by independent analysis can anything approaching science be considered.

[DuncanONeil]

"They have no evidence that the scientists are mistaken, or are misinterpreting."
The penultimate data used is the data set from East Anglia. The original data is not available. The data set is from a very limited pool. Both of these call the data itself into question. The hockey stick graph has been evaluated to determine it is just as likely that CO2 is following the increase in temp as the other way 'round.
Be advised I have never claimed the world was not warming. But there is also evidence that the world itself is cooling, has been for much of a decade.
So the question remains; What is really happening?

That's the great thing about science, though. The more we learn, the better our understanding of reality. Given the equipment (or lack of it) that scientists had to use, their observations were logical. Later study proved them wrong, so they revised their hypothesis. It was the conservative elements, mostly the Church, which resisted the reality.

The same holds true now. Maybe the numbers aren't correct, quite. Maybe this is a statistical anomaly. The thing is, though, that ALL of the numbers indicate that Global Warming is occurring, and most of the numbers show that mankind is playing a significant role. The only thing the deniers have to offer is their constant harping over repeatedly debunked claims. They have no evidence that the scientists are mistaken, or are misinterpreting. They only deny because of their "feelings". Led, again, by the conservatives for political reasons (big oil, anyone?) and by fundamentalists who don't believe their god will let them down.

[Thorne]

The penultimate data used is the data set from East Anglia.

This was only the beginning of the data. Since then there have been multiple sets of different data, all pointing in roughly the same direction. Ice core samples, tree ring data, etc, etc. Sure, some data show variations, for various reasons. Most of them explainable, except to those who insist that such variations are proof of the opposite. The facts are there. The interpretations are where the problems lie. But any interpretation which cherry picks among the facts is virtually useless.

The hockey stick graph has been evaluated to determine it is just as likely that CO2 is following the increase in temp as the other way 'round.

It has been evaluated by whom? By those who don't like the idea of AGW! And one other point to consider is the fact that Global Warming does, indeed, increase the release of naturally occurring greenhouse gases. CO2 which has been trapped in permafrost for millenia is now being released due to the thawing of that permafrost. The same with methane gases.

Be advised I have never claimed the world was not warming. But there is also evidence that the world itself is cooling, has been for much of a decade.

There are, of course, natural cycles overlaid upon the Global Warming trends. Sure, there can be several years in a row where the global temperature may drop, slightly. But the overall, long-term trend is towards warming. The highs are higher than historical, generally, while the lows are not as low as historical, generally.

So the question remains; What is really happening?

What is happening is that the world is getting warmer. Not too much question about that. And even if you insist that mankind is not the CAUSE of the problem, man's actions are certainly making the problem worse. Reducing our CO2 emissions may not stop the problem, not anymore at least, but it certainly could help to reduce the ultimate impact. And lets face it, finding cheap, alternative forms of energy, preferably non-polluting, would ultimately help everyone. Denying the problem and blindly carrying on as if there's nothing wrong only makes things worse.