|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
 Posted - 09/25/2007 : 17:10:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Ricky
Anyone who would accept global warming because the continental US had it's hottest year on record almost 10 years ago is a moron. |
This is how advertising and propaganda works. Accentuate information in a manner in which it furthers your agenda. Ignore or belittle information which argues against your goals.
I find your premise that 1998 was used as a point to convince the public lacking evidence. I've read quite a bit on global warming, and I had no idea that 98 was claimed to be the hottest year for US before this news broke out.
|
Your relating of your knowledge of the year 1998 holding significance for the MMGW propaganda machine is not relevant. |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
 |
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2007 : 17:13:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by furshur
Jerome,
Perhaps we could return to the original topic and leave for a moment the best placement of the zero point on the axis of a graph (I sure was way off the mark when I said you might just change the subject).
Your title:
NASA-1934 Warmest Year on Record!
Yes, this is correct, 1934 was the warmest year in the US. Interesting data. It would be a good area of study to understand why it was so hot and dry in the dust bowl years.
Do you feel this has any relevence to global warming. Since there is a clear trend to increasing global temperatures it would seem that it does not.
As for scientist not blaring this data in headlines - perhaps the thought was that it would just confuse a science deficient population, which it appears was the case with you.
|
How about that. You accuse me of being off topic in the same post in which you ask an off topic question.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2007 : 17:18:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by perrodetokio
We know so little yet some people would rather draw the conclusion that all´s ok rather than cut down on pollution just in case it´s adding to GW when cutting down on pollution would be so beneficial to other aspects besides GW.
|
People are drawing conclusions about the effect man is having on the environment based on admittedly incomplete information.
To do something just to feel like you are doing something could be much more harmful than doing nothing until the knowledge allows an informed choice.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2007 : 19:34:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
People are drawing conclusions about the effect man is having on the environment based on admittedly incomplete information. |
This, obviously, cuts both ways.| To do something just to feel like you are doing something could be much more harmful than doing nothing until the knowledge allows an informed choice. |
To do nothing in the face of a threat just because you'd prefer to disbelieve that there is a threat will definitely be harmful. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2007 : 07:22:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
People are drawing conclusions about the effect man is having on the environment based on admittedly incomplete information. |
Why shouldn't they? No science will ever have totally complete information about its subject.
The weather-man says it's going to rain. But meteorology is a science with admittedly incomplete information. Do you take the umbrella with you when you go for that one mile walk?
Scientists suddenly announce that drinking your daily coffee will shorten your life by 20 years, but they say this announcement is made on admittedly incomplete information, but they are still 90% sure they are right. Will you still drink you daily coffee? Or will you follow the scientist's guideline to reverse the effects as much as possible?
| To do something just to feel like you are doing something could be much more harmful than doing nothing until the knowledge allows an informed choice. |
Could be, yes. However, that would depend on what you do. If you exchange your CO2 emissions with methane, yes that would be more harmful. Increasing mean global temperature is a serious threat to our way of life. Hell, our way of life is a serious threat to our way of life.
Just because scientists admit that their science is incomplete does not mean they are totally clueless, as you allude by saying "To do something just to feel like you are doing something could be much more harmful than doing nothing until the knowledge allows an informed choice."
The science we have today does allow us to make informed choices.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
melb_me
New Member
1 Post |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 16:58:45 [Permalink]
|
FACT: The surface temp of the earth is always going up and down. It NEVER stays the same.
FACT: If the surface temp was on the same gradual slide downward right now instead of upward their would RIGHT NOW be mass global hysteria. (Please review surface temps over the last 10,000 years before commenting) |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 17:37:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by melb_me
FACT: The surface temp of the earth is always going up and down. It NEVER stays the same.
FACT: If the surface temp was on the same gradual slide downward right now instead of upward their would RIGHT NOW be mass global hysteria. (Please review surface temps over the last 10,000 years before commenting)
|
Welcome to SFN. melb_me!
I'm not sure what your point is. Is this an attempt to deny MMGW? If so, where is your evidence?
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 11/10/2007 19:51:50 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 19:22:30 [Permalink]
|
melb_me:
FACT: If the surface temp was on the same gradual slide downward right now instead of upward their would RIGHT NOW be mass global hysteria. |
Fact? Perhaps you missed our mission statement on your way in. Let me help you out with that:
| The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise. |
Your job now is to substantiate your claim to a “fact” with solid evidence that supports your claim, or, take it back, admit that your claim is not really a fact, and you were just using hyperbolic language to get our attention.
Since you are new here, I'm giving you this chance…
By the way, welcome to SFN.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 19:33:27 [Permalink]
|
Nonono, Kil, it really is a fact that the global average temperature goes up and down. It even does so cyclically.
However, anyone (including melb_me) who pretty much ends an AGW argument at that point wants us to infer that because natural cycles exist, it means that the current warming is just part of a natural cycle.
There are, of course, mounds of evidence that suggest that making such an inference would be the wrong thing to do.
What public hysteria has to do with science is anyone's guess. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2007 : 20:27:21 [Permalink]
|
Dave:
What public hysteria has to do with science is anyone's guess. |
How that supposed hysteria qualifies as a fact is what I am wondering about..?
Never mind cycles. We (here at sfn) all know that. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2007 : 22:14:47 [Permalink]
|
Since the older I get the more I seem to dislike winter if there was global cooling instead of global warming I'd be a little ticked off, but hysteria - nah.
Course that is just me.
welcome melb_me |
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
 Posted - 11/12/2007 : 04:56:41 [Permalink]
|
When I saw this clunker of a thread reemerge like a turd that won't flush, I thought: oh please, lets not do this again!
But y'know, I've found there's a lighter side to it -- the so-called global warming 'skeptics' are as big a bunch of suckers as you're likely to find this side of a three-card monte table: OSLO (Reuters) - A hoax scientific study pointing to ocean bacteria as the overwhelming cause of global warming fooled some skeptics on Thursday who doubt growing evidence that human activities are to blame.
Laden with scientific jargon and published online in the previously unknown "Journal of Geoclimatic Studies" based in Japan, the report suggested the findings could be "the death of manmade global warming theory."
Skeptics jumped on the report. A British scientist e-mailed the report to 2,000 colleagues before spotting it was a spoof. Another from the U.S. called it a "blockbuster."
Blogger skeptic Neil Craig wrote: "This could not be more damaging to manmade global warming theory ... I somehow doubt if this is going to be on the BBC news."
|
Ya gotta love it! The only fault I can find is that they didn't play the gaff on April 1st.
Hey, this one even caught that porcine prevaricator & pill-junkie, Rush Limbaugh's forked tongue in the mangle!
Research fellas, research! Always hunt for the most info available before you run your mouth. A quick google confirms that the Journal of Geoclimatic studies is nonexistant. How hard is that?
Heh, some of the righty blogs are pretty upset about it, which makes my day.
Now then, I'll lay a little wager if anyone'd like to call me on it: I'll betcha a Canadian dollar against a bent nickle we've not heard the last of this and it will appear here again in the guise of evidence that MMGW is a crock.
Any takers?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
 |
|
NASA-1934 Warmest Year on Record!
