Why peoples don't believe in Global Warming...

Post Reply New Topic

I have read the journal articles. When I see science comparable to quantum electrodynamics then I will believe the results. I have high standards. Apparently you do not.

Statistical models are bullsh*t, plain and simple.

ruveyn

Yes, everything must come out to 15 decimal places or it's not science.

Ha.

It could be poor science or mediocre science. But statistical models with surrogate data cooked to order is no science at all.

ruveyn

IMO, global warming is caused by both human activity AND natural activity. I would say more so the latter than the former, but that doesn't we haven't messed up the planet at all. Even if global warming didn't exist, pollution does, and anyone who wants to help to lessen either of these has every right to do so!!

I get it

ruveyn is 73

He just wants to make the party last for 30 more years max.

theres a difference between, exactitude and precision.

*precision is having 15 decimals

*exactitude is having the correct answer

precision DOES NOT guarantee exactitude, i'm really sick and tiered of this noncence

you can have 30 decimal places results .... and still be wrong.

You can have a +/- 10 decimals of interval, or more, and still being correct.

Precision and exactitude aren't correlated.

If your model is rubbish, its 30 decimals are just rubbish

So far, every climate model is rubbish. On the other hand quantum field theory has produced the technology which you are only too happy to use. Look at your computer. It is the child of quantum electrodynamics. Look at nuclear physics. It is the child of quantum chromodynamics. If we have have a usable controlled fusion reactor this the the branch of physics that will produce it.

The correctness of physics is manifest in the experimental evidence that supports it and the technology it produces. What has climate "science" produced so far? Bogus Hockey Sticks.

ruveyn

There is both fact and fallacy behind global warming. I am not gonna go into specifics as it is getting late. Lets just say you cant truly accurately predict the natural forces of the world. My view is that there is a cooling and warming cycle, but our own influence has accelerated it, that is really about all I can say.

The open question is: to what degree has human activity affected the cycle of warmings and coolings? If human influence is not the chief driver of the current warming trend then giving up our "carbon footprint" and submitting to energy rationing will make us poor and cause us to suffer without solving the problem. I am being asked by the Eco-Phreaks to live the life primitive on their supposition (as yet unproved) that human activity is degrading the climate.

Please do not mistake my position. I am in favor of regulations which limit or prohibit pollution of the air we breath and the water we drink. This is a matter of public health and safety. No one has the right to poison the air someone else is breathing or the water someone else is drinking. The planet earth is the house we live in. It is the only house we have in the cosmos. It is in our interest to keep it livable.

ruveyn

We seem to be in agreement on that. What component of warming is due to human activity may be in doubt but that the poles are responding to heat and other phenomena occur in confirmation of climate change are being observed are absolute facts and we may or may not be able to modify the results. It looks dangerous to me.

Being alive, is being in danger. And no matter how careful we are and how wise, we will end up dead anyhow.

In the very long run (billions of years) our planet is doomed. In about 1.5 billion years the sun will be running so hot (after the hydrogen in its core is fused to helium) that the oceans will boil away. I doubt whether our species will last anywhere near that long. So far, mammal species go a max of 20 million years before becoming extinct. Insects do much better and one celled organisms the best of all.

ruveyn

Although fusion power seems eternally 30 years away I am confident that a time provision of 1.5 billion years will easily generate enough research to pull in an alternate sun or probably build one from scratch from discarded plastic bottles and rusty tin cans.

I am also in agreement on this, There still should be some regulation, but overdo the regulation and you are going to hurt humanity even more (IE: the prices of everything will skyrocket further, job wages will remain the same. Yes, the technology such as the air scrubbers they use for factories and power plants are VERY expensive at the moment. they should drop down in price to a more reasonable level, but the question remains, WHEN?.

I don't count myself as an eco-freak. I have to view both sides of the 'equation' with equal skepticism.

I believe in anthro-whatever global warming... (forgot the term.)

I also believe that it has been hijacked by corrupt politicians and closet aristocrats to be used as an agenda in their pursuit of more money/power. And as with every other cause which is hijacked, the rationale behind it gets corrupted with the purpose of more easily manipulating the masses for fun and profit.

The truth is so obscured by agenda that it's impossible to find. Even the scientists are corrupting the data.

In general there's no doubt the Earth is getting warmer. The argument is whether humans are contributing a significant part. Most scientists concur human activity is significant.

It's spring. There's a cherry tree blossoming outside my bedroom window. I find it sickening.

A cherry tree has no business being alive here in the high desert. Vanity put it here, and vanity will continue to feed it water which can be put to far better uses in the desert. I'd love to see it shrivel.

This in Carnantum.

Don't forget the cows!