Originally posted by DA Morgan:
Reconsider your position. The earth is absolutely warming: And a lot. The only question left at issue is the percentage contribution from human habitation.
And if you don't believe it is then kindly explain the photographic evidence accumulated during your lifetime. PhotoShop?
It depends on what exactly you are refering to.
Im sure you have heard of the little ice age that ended a couple centuries ago. If your refering to the fact that it has warmed up since the coldest part of the little ice age, then yes i agree that it has warmed up.
If on the other hand you are claiming as some has that man has raised the temperature of the world from its "standard" temperature, then first your going to have to figure out how to define the "standard" temperature.
One thing that i cant understand at all is how people make it like the earth is about to end or that our civilization is about to be destroyed. I will not say that we are not going to do so, but its not the co2 that is going to be a problem, nor the temperature.
name any other animal on earth that can live anywhere from the deepest, coldest polar region, to the hottest desert. man can even live beneith the waves or in space, a place that no other life form known to man has ever done so.
the global temperature has ranged from a point where the earth has been totally frozen, to a point where the hottest temperature man has ever faced would seem like a cool day. the earth will not be harmed if the temperature returns to that, and man will adapt with his normal ease to anything that comes along. we are not facing extinction, as many have indicated, even if the worse case scenario.
back to the point, the earth cycles from cold to hot with many things causing it. does this mean that we are having global warming, no, it means that were are having global climate changes, that are normal. are we near the top of the range, no, not even close. are we in danger of this? only if we panic and do something stupid like cause a global freeze that puts the entire world under ice.
you are so good at politics that at one point i could have sworn that you were a political instructor or even a professor of politics. This is one more example of why i thought so. Using the global "we agree" statements to make it look like everyone agrees with you is pure politics. Too bad you didnt go into politics, you could have been president with your skills.
show me the proof that the world temperature has risen, show me the raw uncorrected data, show me the data that has not been corrected to show the increase. I dont have to ignore any thing, because i look at everything. I dont let others spoon feed me my opinions. When they say that we have to beleive this or accept this, then i say, why, where is the evidence.
youve accused me of not seeing the tide go out as evidence of a tidal wave approaching, If i see the water recending, then yes, ill look to see what is there. on the other hand, if im setting on the beach, and people are running around claiming that a tidal wave is rapidly approaching, while my feet are in the waves, then ill have to have more proof.
many years ago, there were people who were terrified, because they had heard that there was a war going on, world wide, that we were losing and losing badly. In fact, we were losing so badly, because we did not have a single way of stopping the enemy. This enemy was not someone that wanted to take us over, and make us follow his orders, he wanted to kill us all. people were in a panic.
then they came on and said, "this is only a broadcast of Orsen Well's 'war of the worlds' and the martians are not landing". Personally, if i had been there, i would have gone out to look for the meteroid landings before i paniced.
as far as the evidence that you refer to. its possible to show a man holding up a 40 foot shark bare handed, without using photoshop. its a matter of prospectives.
an example: taking photos of one glacers and the evidence that it is retreating, while deliberately refusing to show any sign of the other 4 nearby glacers, all of which are advancing. by ignoring them, its very easy to make people believe that all the glacers in the world are retreating.
example 2: talking about how the glacers are disappearing in one areas, while at the same time ignoring the fact that in another area, only a short distance away, they are increasing.
example 3: talking about how during a record season, the ice has melted so much, yet ignoring the fact that on the cold years, the ice had increased.
example 4. choising the years in such a way that all of the records so it increasing in temp, decreasing in ice, or what ever.
example 5. using only short term data. such as a satelite record that is only 4 year long to prove that the ice is disappearing, when all it can show is that they ice has disappeared for 4 years, not what it was like before that.
the big proof that this is not a scientific study is that it uses the word dangerous as part of its title. what is so dangerous about the temperature rising in one year. how do they determine what is a dangerous level. its pure political hype.
