Hurricane Sandy

[pb21]

Not all scientists do agree that the increases in CO2 are as important, in repsect of climate change, as some make out it to be, as others have pointed out.

The number of scientists working globally concerning climate change must be phenomenominal!

Yep, don't you worry about a thing, the majority of the human race doesn't and it has gone from 1 billion to 7 billion in the last 120 years (during the time of unprecedented man made climate change!) so it doesn't seem to be a species on the brink of catastrophe to me.

Not all, but at a guess I would say 99%

All 'good' scientists will have been able to make an informed, reasoned analysis and conclusion of the science regardless of whether they are directly involved in that field.

If we are not 'on the brink of a catastrophe' at the moment that presumes you know what one would be like. So what would one be like?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Well I answered all the questions in post 95 didn't I?

You agree then that the scientists keep on changing their mind about the situation. So what is to say they are right now, what is their story going to be in 2030 I wonder?

The last 100 years have supposed to have been the worst man made climate change ever according to you and other doom sayers....yet the human race has gone from 1 billion to 7 billion. Catastophe, man made or otherwise, what catastrophe?

All you do each time is ask questions. You're like my 6 year old son, only he has a more open mind.

Your final points to both me and [MENTION=16399]pb21[/MENTION], without you realising are the most pressing - how do we feed, power, water, a population that has accelerated from 1 to 7bn in little over 100+years!? Do we just sit back and think f*** it, it will be fine, or do we PLAN for the future? You've got to be a complete moron not to want to have some kind of projection of crop performance, water supplies, food requirements, power needs, housing etc. if you know and can predict population levels in 10, 25, 50 years time. And what about the rest of the species and habitats on this planet, we just don't give a shit because we're all right!?

It's not being doom sayers, it's about being prepared, it's about making the right choices. f*** me, it always seems to me that denialists appear to revel in ignorance, a celebration in sticking your head in the sand. Probably the same type of people that tortured Galileo because he said the earth was revolving!!

 

[simmo]

Not all, but at a guess I would say 99%

All 'good' scientists will have been able to make an informed, reasoned analysis and conclusion of the science regardless of whether they are directly involved in that field.

If we are not 'on the brink of a catastrophe' at the moment that presumes you know what one would be like. So what would one be like?

Are scientists "good" in your eyes because they agree with man made global warming.
These scientists must all be "bad" then, I guess.....don't tell me...they must be all paid by oil men, eh.

List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


A catstrophe to me would be say.....

Approximately 1/4 of the known worlds population dying, like say occured in the 1340's due to the black death.

Not like has happened during the last 100 years (in this age of global warming) where the opposite has occured and the earths population has increased more than four fold.

 

[GingerBeerMan]

View attachment 35656

ha quality, looks like Lualua has been having some fun.

Also this is pretty funny ;

EarthCam - Webcam Network

Keep watching and every few minutes some idiots march across like the Beatles, it's hilarious.

 

[CHAPPERS]

ha quality, looks like Lualua has been having some fun.

Also this is pretty funny ;

EarthCam - Webcam Network

Keep watching and every few minutes some idiots march across like the Beatles, it's hilarious.

Thanks. Gonna be watching that all day now.

 

[pb21]

Are scientists "good" in your eyes because they agree with man made global warming.
These scientists must all be "bad" then, I guess.....don't tell me...they must be all paid by oil men, eh.

List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


A catstrophe to me would be say.....

Approximately 1/4 of the known worlds population dying, like say occured in the 1340's due to the black death.

Not like has happened during the last 100 years (in this age of global warming) where the opposite has occured and the earths population has increased more than four fold.

No, I am sure some ‘good’ scientists do disagree about the extent of human contribution to climate change. A ‘good’ scientist is just that.

So that list you link to has maybe 30 names on it, there must be hundreds of thousands of scientists worldwide. How many scientists do you think would be on a list of those who agree that humans are contributing to climate change?

A quarter of the population dying sounds more like you are in the middle of a catastrophe, not on the brink. What would a brink look like?

 

[brightonrock]

Well I answered all the questions in post 95 didn't I?

You agree then that the scientists keep on changing their mind about the situation. So what is to say they are right now, what is their story going to be in 2030 I wonder?

That's just the point though - science is evolving and developing as more is discovered. It's a good thing that theories are re-evaluated and revised over time, so relevant solutions can be found for what is happening. Closing your eyes and ignoring the evidence is short-sighted to say the least.

The last 100 years have supposed to have been the worst man made climate change ever according to you and other doom sayers....yet the human race has gone from 1 billion to 7 billion. Catastophe, man made or otherwise, what catastrophe?

What has birth rate and medical advancements to prolong our lives got to do with the weather?

 

[CHAPPERS]

Referencing Wikipedia eh? A sure fire way to make yourself look desperate.

 

[CorgiRegisteredFriend]

ha quality, looks like Lualua has been having some fun.

Also this is pretty funny ;

EarthCam - Webcam Network

Keep watching and every few minutes some idiots march across like the Beatles, it's hilarious.

It is pretty funny. Enjoying the number of taxis that totally ignore that fact that someone is crossing the road.

 

[simmo]

No, I am sure some ‘good’ scientists do disagree about the extent of human contribution to climate change. A ‘good’ scientist is just that.

So that list you link to has maybe 30 names on it, there must be hundreds of thousands of scientists worldwide. How many scientists do you think would be on a list of those who agree that humans are contributing to climate change?

A quarter of the population dying sounds more like you are in the middle of a catastrophe, not on the brink. What would a brink look like?

Well who knows what the brink of a catastrophe looks like? It is you whom think we are on a brink of catastrophe showing us whom don't what it should look like. I am pointing out that the evidence is there that the human race seems to be thriving to me (in this era of supposed unprecendented global warming)

 

[simmo]

Referencing Wikipedia eh? A sure fire way to make yourself look desperate.

Wall Street Journal good enough for you.

Sixteen Concerned Scientists: No Need to Panic About Global Warming - WSJ.com

How about....

SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims - Challenge UN IPCC & Gore | Climate Depot

Don't tell me oil companies etc, yawn.

 

[Notters]

Are scientists "good" in your eyes because they agree with man made global warming.
These scientists must all be "bad" then, I guess.....don't tell me...they must be all paid by oil men, eh.

List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


A catstrophe to me would be say.....

Approximately 1/4 of the known worlds population dying, like say occured in the 1340's due to the black death.

Not like has happened during the last 100 years (in this age of global warming) where the opposite has occured and the earths population has increased more than four fold.

There are more scientists in my office that are convinced of anthropogenic climate change than there are people on that list.

 

[simmo]

What has birth rate and medical advancements to prolong our lives got to do with the weather?

We are told by some people that we are going through a man made climate change catastrophe....or words to that effect.

Why in this era of man made climate change catastrophe is the human race climbing exponentially. Surely millions if not billions of people should be dieing?

The answer is because we are NOT going through a man made global warming catastrophe.

 

[simmo]

There are more scientists in my office that are convinced of anthropogenic climate change than there are people on that list.

As many as this list?

.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.

Just a little snipet

Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem has authored almost 70 peer-reviewed studies and won several awards. "First, temperature changes, as well as rates of temperature changes (both increase and decrease) of magnitudes similar to that reported by IPCC to have occurred since the Industrial revolution (about 0.8C in 150 years or even 0.4C in the last 35 years) have occurred in Earth's climatic history. There's nothing special about the recent rise!"

 

[CHAPPERS]

Why in this era of man made climate change catastrophe is the human race climbing exponentially. Surely millions if not billions of people should be dieing?
.

I'm sorry but WHAT?

 

[goldstone]

This debate/argument about climate change by you guys on this thread is becoming very very boring.

Those that believe it is man-made are not going to be convinced otherwise, particularly I would have thought by a poster on NSC. Same for those that believe it's a natural recurring cycle.

So can we please get back to some comments about what is happening on the East Coast. Much more interesting to read updates from NSCers in the storm area.

 

[crodonilson]

Oh Sandy...

Well you came and you gave without taking
And I sent you away, oh Sandy
And you kissed me and stopped me from shaking
And I need you today, oh Sandy

 

[simmo]

I'm sorry but WHAT?

Well some people would tell you we are in the middle of man made climate change that is going to have catastrophic consequencies for us all and it patently isn't the case if you use the population of our species as a yardstick.

The human race, as a whole, thrives and yet the doomsayers are saying we are all on the brink of armagedon due to (man made) global warming.

 

[pb21]

Well who knows what the brink of a catastrophe looks like? It is you whom think we are on a brink of catastrophe showing us whom don't what it should look like. I am pointing out that the evidence is there that the human race seems to be thriving to me (in this era of supposed unprecendented global warming)

Eh, I haven't said, anywhere that I think we are on the brink of a catastrophe. You said we aren't, implying you know what a brink would look like and I so asked you what it would.

Then you say the fact that the human population has increased (exponentially as you would expect) is evidence that we are not on the brink! I realise this is semantics somewhat, but its important because I'm not really sure you understand or have a grasp of what you are talking about.

As far as I see it there are some facts:
1. CO2 concentration is increasing.
2. Humans are contributing to that.
3. CO2 is a 'greenhouse gas'.

Then some theory:
1. The increase in CO2 is going to change the climate in a negative (from a human perspective) way.
2. If that increase in CO2 was not as significant the negative effects wouldn't be as significant.

 

[simmo]

Eh, I haven't said, anywhere that I think we are on the brink of a catastrophe. You said we aren't, implying you know what a brink would look like and I so asked you what it would.

Then you say the fact that the human population has increased (exponentially as you would expect) is evidence that we are not on the brink! I realise this is semantics somewhat, but its important because I'm not really sure you understand or have a grasp of what you are talking about.

As far as I see it there are some facts:
1. CO2 concentration is increasing.
2. Humans are contributing to that.
3. CO2 is a 'greenhouse gas'.

Then some theory:
1. The increase in CO2 is going to change the climate in a negative (from a human perspective) way.
2. If that increase in CO2 was not as significant the negative effects wouldn't be as significant.

To cut a long story short, so what if the CO2 level has risen from 280ppm to 380ppm in the last 150 years or so.

It is totally incorrect in my opinion to assume that this is the (sole) reason that the global temperature has risen 0.74C in the last 100 years.

I personally think that this CO2 rise has a negligable effect on the environment (if it really was important it should have risen a figure to be concerned about say 3C) and that natural factors are far more important with respect to climate change. I also think that there are natural cycles of climate change throughout earth's history (ice age, roman warm period, medieval warm period, little ice age), which this present period of increased warming can be explained by.