Global Warming My Ass!

[Christians4LessGvt]

Headlines from across the nation today:

Vegas: Biggest Snow in 30 years...
Spokane shut down by snowstorm...
WATCH: NYC May Get 6 Inches Tomorrow...
Chicago: One Foot...
FREAK: SNOW IN MALIBU...
Major Winter Storm Parade...

LOL@"Global Warming"

Oh and yes I've seen the moronic leftist argue
oh it's getting so much colder because of global warming 
Global Warming = Excuse To Exercise Control Over People....in other words Liberalism!

[sirs]

shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh........................didn't you get the memo CU4?  It's now "Climate Change", as if there was none before.  I mean, when's the last time you saw some major meeting of fringe leftists attending a Global Warming conference?

[Xavier_Onassis]

You seem to think that Global Warming means that no one will ever have a winter again. It does not work that way. Winters will be slightly warmer each year on average, and summers will also be warmer by a degree or two.

Even a change of several degrees will change what will grow and when and where.

[Michael Tee]

When most reputable scientists concerned with the issue say that the world is warming due to mankind's actions, I don't argue with them.  Since every winter  has snow days and warm days, I would expect that even during an overall warming trend, there will be unusually cold and snowy days, just not as many now as, say, 20 years ago.  Cherry-picking the odd snowy day is a method of "reasoning" that seems to appeal to right-wing anti-state nutbars, but hasn't convinced any groundswell of qualified scientists to change their opinion as far as I'm aware.

[Xavier_Onassis]

It seems that "Conservatives" tend to prefer the anecdote to the well-processed statistic most of the time. Find one bogus welfare mother that is proof that all welfare mothers are cheats. One very cold day or bad snow, and Global warming is a farce. Strangely, one more collapse of a deregulated market and it's time to blame the "libtards". Only they are pure, only they never make mistakes.

Wars, on the other hand, they seem to fancy.

[Amianthus]

It seems that "Conservatives" tend to prefer the anecdote to the well-processed statistic most of the time.

Of course, the "well-processed statistic" of the past several years seem to indicate a downward direction to global temperatures. Even some of the data for the '90s has been revised recently.

[kimba1]

but does this mean it`s ok to pollute or not?
the whole point about global warming is not pollute and if or when found false can we be allowed to throw trash in the streets again?
most time I hear the word global warming brought up is when somebody drops something on the floor.
does anyone notice the opposition to global warming never once say people should still not litter?
I don`t give a damn about global warming myself I`m just glad the streets don`t have trash on them.

[Amianthus]

but does this mean it`s ok to pollute or not?

That's silly. Most effects of pollution have nothing to do with global warming.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"When most reputable scientists concerned with the issue say"

yeah and  up until about 2003 "most reputable scientist" thought ulcers were connected to bad diet or a stressful lifestyle........WRONG! WRONG!

Two scientists, Barry Marshall and Robin Warren, confronted significant opposition to their hypothesis that peptic ulcers are caused by the spirally-shaped bacteria Helicobacter pylori. They collaborated for over two decades to prove their case for this simple, yet overlooked cause of the disease.

In 2005 these two scientists, Barry Marshall and Robin Warren, that went against the grain of current opinion won the Nobel Prize.

[fatman]

That's silly. Most effects of pollution have nothing to do with global warming.

What about CFC's?  It was my belief that those had a direct effect on global warming due to the fact that they lessen the ozone layer.  Or am I missing something?

I'm not in favor of pollution, I don't think that anyone wants to see huge swaths of forest and national treasures wiped out due to acid rain.  Nor do I think that anyone wants to see mercury in glaciers or in alpine lakes.  I do not have a problem with environmental regulations if they make good scientific and economic sense, such as making mining companies take out bonds to pay for their cleanup of old mine sites, so that the Federal and State governments don't have to take on the financial cost of their cleanup (which can run into the billions).  But as with anything else, there's a balance there.

[Christians4LessGvt]

does anyone notice the opposition to global warming never once say people should still not litter?

no but we do notice some of the biggest blowhards about so called "global warming" fly around
in private jets and have huge energy consuming homes/castles while people like President Bush
have a private home that is much more energy and ecological friendly.

[Amianthus]

What about CFC's?  It was my belief that those had a direct effect on global warming due to the fact that they lessen the ozone layer.  Or am I missing something?

Actually, the concern over CFCs was that they would bring on a new ice age, not global warming. Yeah, there are many other effects of pollution other than global warming - that's why I said that the thought that "it's ok to pollute if we're not worried about global warming" is silly. Most effects of pollution have nothing to do with global warming - pollution should be reduced because of these other effects, not because of global warming.

[fatman]

yeah and  up until about 2003 "most reputable scientist" thought ulcers were connected to bad diet or a stressful lifestyle........WRONG! WRONG!

Are you saying that peptic ulcers are totally unrelated to stress?  I can buy into the bacteria being another cause, or even the primary causative agent, but I don't believe that it is the sole cause.  New ways of looking at things are good, but they don't always refute the traditional ways even if they are correct.

Despite the finding that a bacterial infection is the cause of ulcers in 80% of cases, bacterial infection does not appear to explain all ulcers and researchers continue to look at stress as a possible cause, or at least a complication in the development of ulcers.

An expert panel convened by the Academy of Behavioral Medicine research concluded that ulcers are not purely an infectious disease and that psychological factors do play a significant role.[1] Researchers are examining how stress might promote H. pylori infection. For example, Helicobacter pylori thrives in an acidic environment, and stress has been demonstrated to cause the production of excess stomach acid.

A study of peptic ulcer patients in a Thai hospital showed that chronic stress was strongly associated with an increased risk of peptic ulcer, and a combination of chronic stress and irregular mealtimes was a significant risk factor.[6]

A study on mice showed that both long-term water-immersion-restraint stress and H. pylori infection were independently associated with the development of peptic ulcers.[7]

Peptic ulcers

[fatman]

Actually, the concern over CFCs was that they would bring on a new ice age, not global warming. Yeah, there are many other effects of pollution other than global warming - that's why I said that the thought that "it's ok to pollute if we're not worried about global warming" is silly. Most effects of pollution have nothing to do with global warming - pollution should be reduced because of these other effects, not because of global warming.

That makes sense, I'm not up to date on the science of it all.  From talking to you about this issue in the past I've concluded that while climate change, and even dramatic climate change is normal, how much of it man has contributed is kind of up in the air.  Is that an accurate representation?

[Amianthus]

That makes sense, I'm not up to date on the science of it all.  From talking to you about this issue in the past I've concluded that while climate change, and even dramatic climate change is normal, how much of it man has contributed is kind of up in the air.  Is that an accurate representation?

Yup, that's it in a nutshell. The consensus among scientists is that there is a global climate change happening, and it's fairly dramatic. Where there is no consensus is the amount of influence humans exert on the process.

The Earth has been much warmer in the past, and also much colder. And science has shown a couple of things: global climate changes in the past have occurred even more rapidly than is predicted for this current change (about 20 years in one case, IIRC) and that magnetic pole shifting has been involved in past climate changes (we're currently past due for a magnetic pole shift, which happen at fairly regular intervals).