jump to last post 1-13 of 13 discussions (66 posts)

GLOBAL WARMING: Fact or Fiction?

  1. gitachud profile image87
    gitachudposted 2 years ago

    If the earth is really getting hotter, why is it so cold-- and wet? Extreme weather is being reported all over the world-- from the the unusually cold winters to the unusually warm winters. It is also raining when it should not in many places. Is the earth really heating up?

    1. 0
      RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this


      1. Paul Wingert profile image80
        Paul Wingertposted 2 years ago in reply to this


        1. Earl Noah Bernsby profile image88
          Earl Noah Bernsbyposted 2 years ago in reply to this


          1. jonnycomelately profile image87
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Please God give me a raise so I can get some heat in this place.

            1. Earl Noah Bernsby profile image88
              Earl Noah Bernsbyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Just park your car in the garage, close the door, and leave the engine running — that's about the equivalent of what we're doing to the planet anyway, so you might as well be nice and toasty before the end comes.

              Note: Don't actually leave your car running in the garage!  That would just be reckless — whether you believe the carbon monoxide would really kill you, or you think it's a leftist conspiracy to curtail the profits of fossil fuel refineries.  After all, why take the chance?

        2. Silverspeeder profile image61
          Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I have noticed that both scientists and politicians have stopped calling it global warming and are now calling it climate change, not sure why but it seems to be a cover your a$$ strategy.
          The leaders of all main parties in the UK have come out with the statement that the recent bad weather here is due to climate change, the facts are irrefutable, the recent bad weather IS DUE to climate change however whether it is man made is refutable.

          1. 0
            RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            ...or it could be be because global warming is now generally consider a specific type of climate change, while the term "climate change" would be more encompassing.

            http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/featur … _name.html

            1. Silverspeeder profile image61
              Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Yes its more encompassing which makes it more easier to tax it. Both your NASA and the MET office are funded by the government I believe.

              Now lets get it straight, I can see how man has contributed to climate change, I can see how the increase in fossil fuels and the dependency on such fuels can change eco systems, I will not deny that we have changes in climate and I also accept that it isn't a government conspiracy.
              What I don't accept is that scientists can give such accurate accounts as to why the weather has changed but dismissed the fact that all of this has happened before without mans intervention.
              Also why do governments insist on taxing on the basis that it is happening but are taking no steps to stop it, the amount governments have invested into alternative energy is small compared to the amount collected in tax connected to climate change. There seems to be a mantras of reducing carbon emissions whilst selling the unused credits to the pollution based countries like China and India, surely it would be best to not use them at all? It would be best to limit commerce with those countries? Surely it would be best to stop the ownership of all vehicles that they say is contributing to climate change?

              So instead of preparing for the impending doom and gloom governments use their scientists to tell us its all our fault and we must change our ways but in the mean time we will tax you.
              Lets face it governments are not adverse to banning things that are not good for us, but it seems this particular cash cow is too good to lose.

              1. 0
                RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                "What I don't accept is that scientists can give such accurate accounts as to why the weather has changed but dismissed the fact that all of this has happened before without mans intervention."

                Why don't ya try to verify this before yo try to present it as a factual statement.


                1. Silverspeeder profile image61
                  Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Why don't you post something of worth without trying to blast us with your intellect.

                  I accept my grammar is not up to your standards, does this make my point any less relevant? I suppose in the eyes of the great intellect that you are it does.

                  I like the photo thought, its very intellectually demeaning.

                  1. 0
                    RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    The 1900s called; they want their debate back.

                    As I stated in my post, rushed comments usually have more errors and are generally more difficult to read (i.e., more grammatical errors). This suggests that the content of the comment was likely also rushed, introducing flaws that may not have even been present in the sources used. It may not be a direct correlation, but can be considered a general trend.

                    Feel free to keep arguing, the forum hasn't had much action lately. I'll just be over here making an aerosol bonfire with money gained from taxes.

    2. tsadjatko profile image88
      tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this


      Weather fluctuates all over the world and we all should know by now it is very unpredictable. There has been climate change from the beginning of life on earth but the notion of man made global warming is a figment of the imagination of politicians, scientists and businessmen all of whom have an agenda, to get power and money by propagating the lie and  it has been proven they falsify and manipulate the data to make their point.
      The latest scandal, sparked by an in-depth analysis of the data by independent analyst Steven Goddard at Real Science, relies on official records to suggest that federal agencies have been fudging temperature measurements to make past decades seem colder and recent years appear warmer.
      http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/envi … al-warming

      http://www.thesleuthjournal.com/global- … ks-video/#

      1. 0
        RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Faith in Humanity -17 points

        (reads comments in above link FiH +4 points)

      2. jonnycomelately profile image87
        jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        You present to us a picture of yourself that doubts the findings of the scientists.  You distrust politicians, scientists and business people.  Do you trust yourself, in every aspect of your life?   Are you a trustworthy person in your own business affairs?

        Can you look around you and see where we as the human population are "doing it wrong?"

        As just one example, presumably you live close to a large town or city.  Observe the great tidal sweep of vehicles travelling into the town each morning rush hour; then repeat for the evening exodus.  Give a few minutes to working out a rough estimate of how much fossil fuel is consumed during those peak periods.  Consider the waste heat fumes given out to the air as a consequence. 

        That scenario is copied, repeated, every day of the year in every city, even smaller towns, throughout the world. 

        Then consider the huge amount of sea shipping and aircraft traversing the world, every moment, 24 hours per day, every day of the year.  These are all using fossil fuels - megatons, spewing out megatons of CO2.   Thereby changing the flow of wind and water currents so much more rapidly than has ever happened before in the history of our own biological evolution.  This is what changes our climates and, for your grandchildren, the weather patterns for their lives. 

        We have been so successful with our science and technology, that our species is beginning to overcrowd the world.  We move around so much more than 100 years ago, because we have the means to.  It's also easy for us.  We have these wonderful machines to carry us.  We also want to live in comfortable homes, heated in the winter, air-cooled in the heat.  All of this too uses fuel of one kind or another.  I cannot give you instructions as to how we can change this situation, only point out the realities.   

        If you cannot work this out for yourself, and see that such emissions are bound to have an effect upon our climate, then simply pass the job onto "the scientists."   They have done the job for you and told you the truth of the matter.

        If you can't trust "the scientists," how come you so readily use a computer to communicate with me and the world?   How come you happily drive a motor vehicle?   What about those medicines you give to your children when they are sick?   If you have ever traveled international on a jet aircraft, how do you suppose they work out the most direct route to take?  Science enables them to do so! Science and the fruits of it are all around you.  You trust them to get it right.   

        If your mind is such that it can only consider prayer to give answers and solutions to our problems, then there can be little hope for our planet's life, let alone our own lives and those of all the other life forms.

        I implore you to think about this much more deeply.  You will see the logic of it.

        1. tsadjatko profile image88
          tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          As  usual comelately you totally avoid looking at any of the facts about the issue of man made global warming and pontificate about things that have nothing to do with the known facts about man made global warming...you don't comment on the study from a reputable researcher about the scientists fudging the data, (let alone what we learned from "climate gate") or the evidence everywhere that the climate is cooling or the fact that it is really all about power and money. Most of the carbon being put into the atmosphere is created by developing countries like China and India who are putting jobs and their economy ahead of worrying about "climate change" No matter what we would do it it would have no effect given the amount of carbon they are and will increasingly be creating which tells you this is a HOAX or instead of targeting the US the doomsayers would be targeting these countries, not a chance and btw global warming is a distant last in polls of what issues the American public is concerned about, hwy? because it is a HOAX and by now most people know that.

          1. 0
            RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Are you seriously referring to an international community of scientists as "doomsayers"? You're not that far off from being one yerself.

    3. Marisa Wright profile image92
      Marisa Wrightposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Why are people so suspicious of scientists?   What do people think is their hidden agenda?

      If scientists want to make big money, the best way to do it is to work for the big corporations.   Why struggle along on a tiny grant studying climate change impartially, when you can get a big fat grant from a mining company that wants you to disprove it, or a mobile phone company that wants you to prove radiation is safe? 

      Most big business, and governments, would much prefer us to forget about global warming - because our entire global economy depends on us constantly buying stuff.  If we all started growing our own vegetables, mending clothes instead of throwing them away, building smaller houses and recycling, the whole house of cards would come crashing down.

      So, if you want to talk conspiracy theories, ask yourself who has the most to gain from fooling the population -  the academics or big business?

      1. tsadjatko profile image88
        tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Right, so big business wants to create green house gases to purposely destroy the world while they make money. So what happens to big business when the world begins to drown and crumble and all their customers are dying...yeah that's exactly what big business wants? Big business is not that short sighted and if they had reason to believe there was any truth to the man made myth they'd be first to jump on the band wagon. No businesses will benefit if man made global warming is not a HOAX but if it is there are a lot of businesses that are benefiting now and  who are promoting the HOAX and that is exactly why they promote it. Maybe you didn't hear, we have record unemployment, and too many scientists. Scientists live for grants nowadays because they can't get jobs with corporations, hense the ruse in the scientific community.

        Why are suspicious of anything? Because there isd evidence to feed their suspicions and there is more than just evidence here, there is proof to be suspicious. When they, anyone, declares" the debate is over", you can rest assured the debate is actually raging and they are losing the debate.

    4. Earl Noah Bernsby profile image88
      Earl Noah Bernsbyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      My understanding of the global warming phenomenon is this: Trapped greenhouse gases within the earth's atmosphere create an environment where more sunlight is allowed in, but less is allowed out.  This, in turn, creates a surplus of heat (the "global warming") which causes the polar ice caps to melt.  As the ice caps melt, ocean tides and currents are affected by the excessive influx of cold water, which serves to generate irregularities and extremes in weather patterns worldwide. 

      These extremes can be either in heat or cold, drought or blizzard, rain or shine.  Furthermore, many scientists believe that if we (humanity) do not stop pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, we will trigger an extinction level event by ushering in a new ice age — i.e., Imagine an avalanche crashing down the side of a mountain.  Now imagine the polar ice caps crashing down on the planet ... metaphorically speaking, of course.


      Hope this helps,

    5. Jodah profile image87
      Jodahposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Check this video by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology.
      https://www.youtube.com/watchfeature=pl … Us31hVFeSA

      1. jonnycomelately profile image87
        jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Unable to access that YouTube video.... is correct address?

        1. Jodah profile image87
          Jodahposted 2 years ago in reply to this
          1. jonnycomelately profile image87
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Thank you.  That worked.

            All those associated video clips are interesting and concerning.... and they all point to good, careful, disciplined science taking place, not just this year, but for decades past and continuing into the future.

            What the politicians or the CEOs of big business want to make of it we cannot determine, because they seem to be a law unto themselves.  But when they are backed up by sloppy thinkers and upstarts like we see in this forum, that is a dangerous path for this planet and all the life it contains.

            True, we don't know all there is to know.   True, some people do get it wrong, on both sides of the table.  True, there are some people who deliberately muddy the picture for their own benefit. 

            But there is a very large body of workers getting on with the job of finding out the facts about our human influence on climate change.  Let's support them and listen to them.

  2. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    Google is your friend

    1. gitachud profile image87
      gitachudposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      According to Google, some scientists claim that the cooling is temporary and heating up will continue in a few years time.

      1. psycheskinner profile image82
        psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        And others disagree.  So if you really want to develop an informed opinion, you have to look at the evidence and decide for yourself. Then you are equipped to have a discussion about specifics rather than just the usual mud slinging forum stoush.

        1. gitachud profile image87
          gitachudposted 2 years ago in reply to this


      2. Castlepaloma profile image25
        Castlepalomaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I lost my winter snow sculpture bussiness over Global warming. Also visit the Arctic for the last 25 year, it's lost 25% of the ice since. That is the size of Alaska and Texus combimed.

        Yes, there is Globle warming from first hand experience.

        1. tsadjatko profile image88
          tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Anecdotal evidence? Cute but evidently the facts are quite different
          http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/ … 40x365.jpg

          I wonder is that first hand experience you tout or left handed propaganda?

          1. Earl Noah Bernsby profile image88
            Earl Noah Bernsbyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            That photo is actually misleading, as the density of the ice caps have decreased year over year.  What you are really seeing is the ice breaking up and spreading out into the ocean — in essence, you are seeing the ice caps "melt," while they reduce the temperature of the adjacent ocean water (which is the root cause for planetary weather extremes).

            EDIT: I just noticed your second post, as well as the links you cited (i.e., The New American and The Sleuth Journal?).  I have not heard of these organizations, but based on the gist of your argument on this matter, I would suggest seeking more credible sources of information — The National Enquirer would be a step up, or perhaps the scribblings on a used kid's menu at Denny's?

            1. tsadjatko profile image88
              tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              You know nothing, so if the ice is breaking and melting deep why then is it freezing on top, after all if  we are still in global warming wouldn't the global warming heat come from above? Or are we in a cooling period as most credible researchers now believe?  I put that link because the pic came from there - if you noticed there are multiple articles from multiple sources on that link, however I understand you ignoring that fact and ignoring  the first link I posted because all you want to do is discredit the messenger. If you looked at all the evidence there is absolutely no truth to the myth that man creates global warming. It is a HOAX. You want to keep company with nuts like Algore according to whom the oceans should have risen to dangerous levels already be my guest, I prefer to think for myself.

              1. 0
                RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                "You know nothing, so if the ice is breaking and melting deep why then is it freezing on top, after all if  we are still in global warming wouldn't the global warming heat come from above?"

                I like how a statement that was blatantly aimed at discrediting the user was immediately followed by a demonstration of a lack of knowledge. Interestingly, you're essentially asking why water freezes on top. I didn't immediately know this off the top of my head, but...hmmm 5 minutes on Google and BAM! (The concept's actually really simple.)

                http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/ … n/1000209/

                Oh sure, I definitely don't think that Global Warming exists.


          2. Barbara Kay profile image85
            Barbara Kayposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            What is in it for the Democrats? The Republicans don't want to admit to a problem, because big business would have more regulations put on them and lots of changes to make.

          3. 0
            RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Two words come to mind: WHO CARES?
            I mean seriously, regardless of whether pplz think global warming is real or not, the countermeasures that are being proposed are generally beneficial for the environment and would have a long-term positive economic impact (a.k.a. sustainability). Whatcha gonna do? Light a forest on fire cause ya think global warming isn't real?

            Frankly, as long as the scientific community considers global warming to be an issue (considering that it's one of the most well-research topics ever), it doesn't matter if people try to create an argument for an issue that technically ended decades ago for the purpose of attention and a false feeling of knowledge-oriented authority.

            EDIT: If you're gonna try to slam another user, fix yer grammar. It detracts from the post. That post needs about 3 commas, 2 hyphens, and a period/colon. =A=

  3. Marisaupa profile image60
    Marisaupaposted 2 years ago

    I am shocked, shocked, to discover that the earth has dynamic weather patterns!

    1. Jodah profile image87
      Jodahposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Marisa and Castlepaloma have good points. Global warming is real and though not wholly cause by man's action he is definitely the major contributor. Extreme weather conditions are just increasing all over the world. Here in Australia we have had record heat waves in our southern states this year. Though the hottest temperature on record was recorded in South Australia in 1920 of 50 degrees Celsius. We have had 48.5 at a number of places this year and the amount of consecutive days over 40 degrees in a number of centres is a record.

      1. tsadjatko profile image88
        tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I don't understand how you conclude man is a major contributor . There is still a debate as to whether co2 even contributes to global warming as water vapor is the most powerful greenhouse gas which composes 95% of the gases - you expect me to believe co2 fluctuations is a major factor? Really, before you make statements like that you should research both sides of the opinion and that is all it is an an opinion, not a fact..

        1. jonnycomelately profile image87
          jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          "...you expect me to believe?...."

          This says it all about you.   Happy to place your opinions in "belief" rather than have the intelligence to look around you and assess your OWN impact upon the earth.

          Nothing I or anyone else says will change your mind until you open it up to good sense.

          Stop your silly blaming of India and China.  Take a hard look at your own country and it's commercial greed, fed by nonsense such as you have been writing.

        2. 0
          RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Technically, Evolution is still a theory so it's not considered a fact either. Regardless, I'm a descendant of airplanes and porcelain china, so there. =w=

          1. jonnycomelately profile image87
            jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            And yet, as a theoretical model, apparently the Theory of Evolution is providing convincing evidence that it is authentic.   Always open to new information and changes of opinion of course, as any good science will allow.

        3. jonnycomelately profile image87
          jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          This might be your problem.... you cannot find the good sense to look at the way you personally live and make useful changes to your habits.

          I have already described the way use of fossil fuels can be affecting our climate.   An individual like yourself, tsadjatko, can actually play an important part in protecting our planet from the excesses of the human species.

          You could look at the way you use electricity, water, transport fuel, food.   You could try using any item you buy a bit longer, so the energy that went into its manufacture is not wasted.  You could take care of your motor vehicle, your household machinery, your garden implements, and ensure they have a longer useable life.   You could try limiting your daily shower to less than 5 minutes instead of standing there wasting lots of hot water for 10-15 minutes.  Instead of turning up your central heating system when it gets a bit colder, you could put on a woollen jumper, instead of walking around the house in your daks.  You might install a more efficient toilet flush, that uses much less than the 2 gallons a time that it uses now.   You could store up your clothes for a weekly wash instead of a daily one.

          You could have a little more thought for your neighbour.    Realise that there is a limited amount of resources and that your "ration" is also limited; that your neighbour has a similar entitlement, and that if you take more than your fair share you are depriving your neighbour.   Do you apply yourself to this sort of "good practice" in life?   It would surely help to make the world go round more smoothly if you did.

          All the above would take up more of your time, but that would simply mean spending less time and energy worrying about "what the politicians and scientists say."

          1. Earl Noah Bernsby profile image88
            Earl Noah Bernsbyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            A blind man can see that mankind's influence has been more hurtful than helpful to the earth.  We are basically parasites who take and take and take without any semblance of balance.  Am I the only one who remembers that crying indian??


            Look, the bottom line is this (regardless of the bickering on either side of the aisle): If we don't make some changes, we are going to eradicate this planet, and ourselves in the process.

            Allow me to deflect the seriousness of this matter with humor, as I often do in all aspects of my life:


            EDIT: It was insensitive of me to use the term "indian."  I should have said "Native American."

            1. Jodah profile image87
              Jodahposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I agree totally with the last two commenters, and am doing all those things(or attempting to) that jonnycomelately suggests. Anyone who looks like David Suzuki is worth taking note of..lol.

              1. jonnycomelately profile image87
                jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Very funny!   Recently had a rough haircut - looking more like a sraggly Attenborough!.  Thx for the compliment but it would be difficult to reach the stature of Susuki, a most impressive man with his head screwed on straight!

  4. Janey Hood profile image87
    Janey Hoodposted 2 years ago

    So, this massive turbulent planet, hurtling through space, has ever changing, unpredictable weather patterns? Wow.

  5. cam8510 profile image94
    cam8510posted 2 years ago

    I just wrote a hub on the Polar Vortex and extreme weather.  During my research, I read only one article that linked any of the strange weather this winter on global warming.  The on article was written by an environmental journalist, not a scientist.  All other articles I read were by scientists.   I think you might enjoy my hub.  In the interest of not being self promoting, I will not post the link.  I'm sure you will have no problem finding it.

    1. 0
      RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I'm not sure where this is going... (the articles wasn't that hard to find, but one of the amazon links doesn't appear to be working). Just wondering, did you happen to note what sources the articles, in turn, used? Each article probably had its own set of credible sources, which would then also have their own credible sources and so on, until ya hit conclusions derived from research data.

  6. cheaptrick profile image75
    cheaptrickposted 2 years ago

    "Global warming:fact or fiction"
    ...It's Both!It is a fact that global warming is fiction...This is nothing more than another conspiracy of the Illuminati to get people to shed their clothing and engage in immoral sex acts and debauchery so as to install a one world government while we're all humping.Fight the good fight and don't give in...those of us who will be taking on the immoral sex and debauchery while the rest of you fight the evil Illuminate are counting on you to stay celibate...we have things firmly in hand so to speak.

  7. Jodah profile image87
    Jodahposted 2 years ago

    "Never argue with an idiot. He'll bring you down to his level and beat you with experience." - Mark Twain


    1. 0
      RandomCanidaeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Gosh darn it! They're manifesting though. =A=

  8. Rock_nj profile image91
    Rock_njposted 2 years ago

    Global warming is likely in a pause right now, and has been since about 1999, because the The Pacific Decadal Oscillation ( PDO) is in the negative phase right now.  The PDO was negative from the mid 1940s to the late 1970s, which was a period of global cooling.  The PDO should go positive again within 10 to 20 years, and then global warming will likely resume the upward trend.

  9. JonDIDit profile image60
    JonDIDitposted 2 years ago

    FACT!!!!  We have 8 more years in this cycle so just prepare yourself. As the waters continue to rise Miami which is at sea level, will look like Venice and the bottom half of Florida will be underwater.  I laugh when people say that those flooded out in Katrina knew they were below sea level and should have moved to higher ground. What about an entire city and half a state? Where do they go?  Laugh if you want but it will happen.

    1. Jodah profile image87
      Jodahposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Some small island communities in the Pacific and elsewhere have been experiencing rising sea levels for years and are almost totally underwater now, some having to relocate to other islands due to the melting ice caps. Tell them it isn't happening.

      1. jonnycomelately profile image87
        jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Writing from Tasmania, I see in today's Mercury Newspaper (www.themercury.com.au) an article by Peter Boyer.   Very relevant to this topic if anyone wishes to read it:  http://www.themercury.com.au/news/opini … 6829704214

      2. JonDIDit profile image60
        JonDIDitposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        JODAH you are so right and some of those islands are part of our territories and we are responsible for them and costs a lot of money to pay for these re-locations of 3-500 people and set them up in new homes. Any other  country (Britain and  France mainly) is having the same problem.

  10. janesix profile image73
    janesixposted 2 years ago

    It's not just the Earth, it's the entire solar system that's heating up.

    1. jonnycomelately profile image87
      jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      What gives you that impression?   Even if it was, in relation to what?  Hotter than the nearest star?  Hotter than last year, century, millennium?  And what effect would that have on life as we know it?

      I suspect it's the other way round..... the solar system will cool down as the hydrogen in the sun is gradually made into helium.  Ask the scientists.

      1. janesix profile image73
        janesixposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        http://www.livescience.com/1349-sun-bla … orlds.html

        Who knows? I'm not a scientist. Probably just a natural cycle.

        This is a 2007 article, but it's been getting even more intense over the past few years. If you want, I could find more articles on the different planets.

        I just think it might be a good idea to look at the problem as a whole. Trends on other planets or the sun could point to ways for us to deal with it maybe.

        1. jonnycomelately profile image87
          jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Ok.  The end of that report:  "...seems to be mostly a mess created by our own species."

  11. tsadjatko profile image88
    tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago


    The Fight Against Climate Science Corruption: Radio America’s interview with Dr. Tim Ball

    Powerful forces at the United Nations, in national governments and inside the scientific community make life very difficult for scientists disputing the conventional wisdom on climate change, both personally and professionally, even though the real science is on the side of the skeptics. That's the assertion of Dr. Tim Ball, a former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. He is also the author of The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science. In the first part of our coverage on this story, Ball detailed how the modern climate change movement finds its roots in the Malthusian notion that the population must be lowered to avoid running out of food and other resources. He says that theory led to the demonizing of industrialized nations and, in turn, fossil fuels and carbon dioxide in particular. He also explained how Maurice Strong used his position as head of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to set a political agenda towards purportedly backed up by the latest in climate science. Ball also says the UN then collaborated with the World Meteorological Organization to present the IPCC findings as settled science and shame or deny funding to any scientists who disagreed with their conclusions. For scientists bold enough to speak out anyway, finding any interest from scientists or the media in hearing opposing viewpoints proved very difficult. It made the counter-argument almost impossible because one of the things they started is that they defeated the scientific method. Scientists create hypotheses and the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis was that humans are producing more CO2. If you increase CO2 in the atmosphere the temperature will go up and therefore we can predict runaway global warming because humans are going to keep expanding their industries, said Ball. What would normally happen with a hypothesis is that other scientists would challenge that and those other scientists would challenge it as skeptics because all scientists are skeptics or should be, said Ball, who says the climate change activists turned that natural, professional skepticism into a public buzzword that branded Ball and others as part of an ideological fringe. We were marginalized in blocking the scientific method. And then, of course, we were marginalized because of public relations attacks based on who was funding us or what our agenda was, he said. Ball says while few scientists are willing to publicly denounce the conclusions of the IPCC, many agree that the science is faulty. I even had (Canadian) scientists say to me, 'Look, I'm a socialist and if I say I agree with you, then I'm immediately branded a conservative and I don't want that to happen to me.' I've also had a lot of scientists say, 'I've watched what you've gone through with lawsuits and everything else. I'm keeping my mouth shut.' So the intimidation factor has just been tremendous, said Ball. One of the most publicly compelling arguments on the conventional side of this debate, however, is there is near unanimous consensus that climate change is real and human activity is playing a major role in an increasingly volatile climate. Ball believes the real breakdown is closer to 50-50, but he says that whole argument is meaningless. I'm not in favor of these surveys and the consensus argument. As soon as they started using that, that proved to me this was political because consensus has no place in science. As Einstein said, 'I can have a hundred things that prove me right and only one thing to prove me wrong and that's the end of it,' said Ball. In addition to describing what he considers the long-term corruption of science, Ball also spends time in his book explaining what the full climate science record does tell us. The reality is the major change of climate change is the sun. They pretend to eliminate the sun but they only look at one portion of the sun, that is the electromagnetic radiation. There are many changes in the sun that cause climate change, such as the changing orbit, the changing tilt and the effect of the sun's magnetic field upon cosmic radiation coming into the earth, which then creates low clouds, which effects temperature. None of that is included in their IPCC reports, said Ball. I think it's important that if you're going to say they're wrong then you have to provide an explanation that covers what they're doing or what they're ignoring, said Ball, noting that the IPCC shows no interest in investigating ideas for the changing climate other than rising levels of carbon dioxide. This fight over climate science comes at a heavy price for those in disagreement with the IPCC and its allies. Ball is no different. He says the response to his outspoken opposition is taking a heavy toll. I've often thought if I had to do it again I wouldn't do it. Until you have experienced, like some are having with the IRS attacking them in the U.S. You cannot relate to other people exactly what it's like when you are sitting in your little condo and you've spent all of your savings on legal fees. And (when there's) a knock on the door at four o'clock on a Friday and your wife starts crying because she's afraid it's the sheriff delivering a legal summons. People have no idea what that's like. I'm not sure that I would do it again. I'm almost at the point where if the world wants to be fooled, let it be fooled. I'm not going to fight for it again, said Ball. That's why a lot of scientists said to me, 'We're not prepared to go through what you've gone through.' I sort of sympathize with that, but like Edmund Burke said, evil triumphs when good people stand idly by. That's really the challenge in an open democracy like you have in the United States with free speech, said Ball.

    1. jonnycomelately profile image87
      jonnycomelatelyposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      tsadjatko,  even a brief look into your profile gives little if any credibility to your arguments.

      First, you have not addressed my previous post about the effect of burning billions of tons of fossil fuel throughout the world.  The obvious is all around you, yet you can't turn you mind to sound logic.

      Secondly, you like to quote a crank who has been caught out lying about his "academic" history.  A person who loves public limelight, and who loves to fight just for the sake of it, because it raises his ego to untold heights.

      Thirdly, you are obsessed with the idea that everyone is caught up in corruption and lies and hoaxes.  You can't imagine that there are many individuals out there studying, observing, working hard to obtain precise data which will give us clear understanding of what is happening to our atmosphere.  Such people really do care about their chosen line of research.  It is when a few individuals get caught up by corrupt business people and institutions that the problems arise.   Go look at the companies growing and processing vegetable oil.  See how they use scientists to promote their product. 

      Finally, when I read your so-called funny story about an April Fool's Day joke, when some one cries out there's a fire in the building, that was when all your credibility went rock bottom in my book.

      Could there ever be a more irresponsible trick in this world?   It was a case of "crying wolf."  So what happens when there really is a fire in a building, and no one takes any notice because they expect a joke is being repeated?   When you realise that a fire in a bedroom can fill that room to make it a crematorium oven, in the short space of 30 seconds!   For you to laugh at such a joke shows your attitude to life is beyond belief.   

      It seems to me, on a positive note, that .if you could pull yourself away from the negative attitude:- that the majority of people in the world are evil and that the problems are all the fault of others - and instead call out the good in people, then you might be helping this world to be a better place in which to live.

  12. janesix profile image73
    janesixposted 2 years ago

    I blame it on cow flatulence.

  13. 0
    mbuggiehposted 2 years ago

    I strongly suspect the "global warming issue" is a lot like the "Obamacare Issue".

    Call it climate change and they're on board.

    Call it the Affordable Care Act and they're on board.

    Call it global warming and it's a liberal hoax.

    Call it Obamacare and it is the end of civilization as they know it.

    The sad truth for future generations of people living on the Earth is that the Earth's climate is, in fact, changing. And, it is changing quickly.

    Some 97% of scientists---regardless of who they work for, understand that climate change is real AND the result of a complex confluence of factors that includes human action. They are trying very hard to get this message out to the public.

    But for reasons inexplicable to me, it ain't working.

    I guess the only explanation is Al Gore's: Climate change and what that means for life including human life on the Earth is an "inconvenient truth" and one easier to ignore than to confront and deal with.