Climate change issue heating up

Full story: Brattleboro Reformer

Science is under attack, and the consequences for human civilization could be catastrophic.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of44
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Feb 10

Arlington, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Mar 8, 2010
 
In the last 10 years over $79 billion dollars was spent on studying and advancing the arguments of AGW. It is estimated that only $53 million was spent looking at alternative theories. Is it any wonder then that now, when attention to the underlying science has become more focused, we have discovered that maybe we should take a closer look at the conclusions.

It would be easy to argue that, in fact, the teaching of AGW in our schools is a liitle like teaching creationism and not vice versa. Clearly the AGW movement has all the elements of a religion.

It is also interesting that you mention Al Gore's response to the criticism of AGW. Did you know that he said in that op ed that the heavy snow in DC was attributable to AGW even though the heavy snow was predicted last summer by meteologists using traditional prediction models which had nothing to do with "a warming climate causing evaporation from the oceans and thus more water in the atmosphere" like Gore wants to believe.

The criticism of AGW is not an attack on science. It is a verification of science and the scientific approach to learning.
Bob in Virginia

Hyattsville, MD

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Mar 8, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I there is no doubt that we are experiencing a climate change. However, you can find statistics to back up most any position if you look hard enough. The international climatologists seem to have and agenda, as evidenced by emails uncovered at the office of a noted international climate scientist. All "theories" should be taught. The question is whether the climate change is man made or not. There is a lot yet to be learned. Climate statistics over the last 100 years, or 500 years for that matter, represent a mere blink of an eye in the history of planet earth. That, said consistent progress on carbon emissions is a worthy pursuit for many reasons.
New Clear Waste

Brattleboro, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Mar 8, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

jaygem wrote:
The criticism of AGW is not an attack on science. It is a verification of science and the scientific approach to learning.
If you are paying attention to climate science, then you know that at least 95% of credible climate scientists connect the rising levels of human-generated CO2 and methane in the atmosphere with rising average global temperatures.

And you know that the criticism comes from those with political or industrial rather than scientific credentials. And you know that those stolen emails from the UK dispute methodologies, not results, which are no longer in any real doubt.

I realize that doesn't stop the Tea Bag people from resisting any kind of change, and those with a visceral antipathy toward greenies and hippies, from mounting their ideological attempts to discredit AGW.

Perhaps you haven't had the opportunity to observe first-hand some effects of climate change.
Adam Vergobbe

Keene, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Mar 8, 2010
 
If evolution and global warming are taught in schools, the schools most definitely must also teach the opposing theories. In my opinion that would be discriminatory to not teach creation alongside of evolution, then let the child decide which he/she would like to believe. Teaching one side of this issue is pretty closed minded, much like the article that is written above.
greenmachine

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Mar 8, 2010
 
we are not going to change a thing so stop wasting our tax dollars. changes have been going on on earth longer then any of us can imagine and i dont think we are going to change it for a second.

Since: Feb 06

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Mar 8, 2010
 
This decade is the hottest in the 21st century.
It is also the coldest.
It is also the wettest.
It is also the driest.
It is also the longest.
It is also the shortest.
Cold Stone

Broomfield, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Mar 8, 2010
 
No one will know for years wheather increasing temperatures are product of how we use natural resources, However, just say for a second you are correct. Why should we listen to the scientists but completely ignore the economists who clearly say that dumping money into global warming prevention will bankrupt our economy and every other economy that goes along with it.
If your enlightened, peace loving, greenies and hippies wanted to follow the money traill, you'd take note of the pathetic waste of jets, limos, and entourages that paraded through Copenhaggen. In the name of climate fixing, they will take my money and fly around in jets on their way to planting 1 tree. The list goes on and Government fixes nothing, they only spend our money while telling us lesser beings how to live. When was the last time you felt good about the $500 hammers or $20,000 toilet seats they are so good at buying. Al Gore is your master of ceremonies and you are his tool.
greenmachine

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Mar 8, 2010
 
thats what i am saying, we the people could live a little cleaner for our own sake and not screw the land up any more then we have, we know whats good and bad now, so stop spending our tax dollars doing study after study, and everytime one of those baffoons opens there mouth the price of everything goes up and the only ones who make out are the rich on there stocks and we just get poorer and poorer shrinking what middle class is left and making the poor starve to death, real p i s s e s me off these people that make over a million a year cant help the poor more then they do but they will saay they care and then the next year you see they are making record amounts of money still and have 10 time the write offs then i make all year

Since: Feb 10

Arlington, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Mar 8, 2010
 
New Clear Waste wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are paying attention to climate science, then you know that at least 95% of credible climate scientists connect the rising levels of human-generated CO2 and methane in the atmosphere with rising average global temperatures.
And you know that the criticism comes from those with political or industrial rather than scientific credentials. And you know that those stolen emails from the UK dispute methodologies, not results, which are no longer in any real doubt.
I realize that doesn't stop the Tea Bag people from resisting any kind of change, and those with a visceral antipathy toward greenies and hippies, from mounting their ideological attempts to discredit AGW.
Perhaps you haven't had the opportunity to observe first-hand some effects of climate change.
I haven't witnessed the affects of man made climate change first hand and neither have you. Or should I say neither have you so you would know if it was or not.

I will also differ with you as I have been reading and studying AGW for years and find that the alarmists pull political arguments out of the bag with equal readiness to anything the deniers do.

As for the credentials of the people criticizing AGW...I think you will find they are equally intelligent and equally credentialled. Scientific American wrote and article last year which concluded the same thing. This is not just politically driven. As Richard Lindzen PhD, MIT climatologist said. We have some evidence of rising temperatures and some evidence of rising CO2 levels and some loose correlation thereby but we have no science which establishes a verifiable connection between the two and in fact some science which connects rising temperatures to the ability of the atmosphere to retain more CO2.

There is an interesting web blog called something like "Climate Deniers" which was created a couple of years ago to challenge everything the deniers could dredge up. The result was hilarious as the participants with the most credibility wound up all being deniers.

The problems with the AGW theories are not in the data. The subject editorial talks about the "scientific data". The data is ok in general. It is the conclusions which are drawn from the data that need to be debated.

You need to tune in to ClimateDepot.com and you will have plenty of proof that it is more than industrialists and politicians who are demanding that the debate be reopened.

If you follow the money you will find that much more money has been invested in proving AGW than has been invested in disproving it.

We don't need to throw it all out as bunk but we do need to have a healthy debate free from the politics. Doesn't it seem a little strange to you that the debate, even among scienctists, breaks down along political lines. That alone should give you pause about defending the "science".
The more you know

Concord, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Mar 8, 2010
 
jaygem wrote:
Tired and lame defense of AGW deniers
Jay, it pains me that you are VY supporter. Hopefully, you will come around on the AGW issue.
John Edwards

Brattleboro, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Mar 8, 2010
 
You must be the STUPIDIST person alive. There is NO CLIMATE CHANGE YOU MORON !!! Its all done by the sun and sunspots. This is about GOVERNMENT USING THE Green Religion to control people. Look up " Al Gore calling for global governence " on utube. Look up " Biden asking john roberts about microchipping " on utube. Why do you think there pushing for universal healthcare. This is about controlling the world population with vaccines that sterilize people. Look up Bill Gates calling on vaccines to sterilize people. Theres plenty of land for farming, plenty of land for chickens, whatever. But they plant corn for gasoline and starve people because it makes them MORE money. Checkout " infowars.com or prisonplanet.com " and look up the MAINSTREAM news articles on global warming and the real reason for it. Yes I'm a tea bagger, and damn proud of it you filthy idiot.
New Clear Waste wrote:
<quoted text>
If you are paying attention to climate science, then you know that at least 95% of credible climate scientists connect the rising levels of human-generated CO2 and methane in the atmosphere with rising average global temperatures.
And you know that the criticism comes from those with political or industrial rather than scientific credentials. And you know that those stolen emails from the UK dispute methodologies, not results, which are no longer in any real doubt.
I realize that doesn't stop the Tea Bag people from resisting any kind of change, and those with a visceral antipathy toward greenies and hippies, from mounting their ideological attempts to discredit AGW.
Perhaps you haven't had the opportunity to observe first-hand some effects of climate change.
Suzy Someone

Morrisville, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Mar 8, 2010
 
I simply think that we need to be teaching the theory of Global Cooling in our schools. That's what was taught when I was a kid! We were actually taught that a new Ice Age was coming. Baby Boomers have simply wanted to rebel against everything their elders taught them. What brats!
Tea Party of No

Brattleboro, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Mar 8, 2010
 
John Edwards wrote:
You must be the STUPIDIST person alive. There is NO CLIMATE CHANGE YOU MORON !!! Its all done by the sun and sunspots. This is about GOVERNMENT USING THE Green Religion to control people. Look up " Al Gore calling for global governence " on utube. Look up " Biden asking john roberts about microchipping " on utube. Why do you think there pushing for universal healthcare. This is about controlling the world population with vaccines that sterilize people. Look up Bill Gates calling on vaccines to sterilize people. Theres plenty of land for farming, plenty of land for chickens, whatever. But they plant corn for gasoline and starve people because it makes them MORE money. Checkout " infowars.com or prisonplanet.com " and look up the MAINSTREAM news articles on global warming and the real reason for it. Yes I'm a tea bagger, and damn proud of it you filthy idiot.
<quoted text>
OK I admit it, you're better at this than I am
Jock Shockley

Adelaide, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Mar 8, 2010
 
New Clear Waste
"... at least 95% of credible climate scientists connect the rising levels of human-generated CO2 and methane in the atmosphere with rising average global temperatures."
Source please. Observation indicates that "scientists" are trying to desert this sinking manmade climate change ship in droves. The "science" indicates that CO2 has very little causal effect on atmospheric temperatures - perhaps you should read the science and not the activist press.

"And you know that the criticism comes from those with political or industrial rather than scientific credentials. And you know that those stolen emails from the UK dispute methodologies, not results, which are no longer in any real doubt." Again, sources please. Your assertion does not seem to meet the facts of the matter - it is the results that are in doubt, along with the methodologies and the intent - look up Ravetz's ideas about science if you are in doubt.

"I realize that doesn't stop the Tea Bag people from resisting any kind of change, and those with a visceral antipathy toward greenies and hippies, from mounting their ideological attempts to discredit AGW." And just who is getting politically bent out of shape here?

"Perhaps you haven't had the opportunity to observe first-hand some effects of climate change." Nobody doubts that the climate is changing. The theory of manmade global warming has failed to identify the causes of any of the major changes of normal climate change, and has singularly failed to demonstrate that mankind's emissions of CO2 are the cause of the general atmospheric temperature rise since the Little Ice Age. If you know your science, you will know that atmospheric temperatures dropped from the 1940s to the 1970s.

Watch out for the academic fraud proceedings coming your way.
PeterK

Saskatoon, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Mar 8, 2010
 
1922 Flash Back | AP Story Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt.
Associated Press story published in the Washington Post, November 2, 1922.[page 2]
Arctic Ocean Getting Warm; Seals Vanish and Icebergs Melt.
The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway.
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.
Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
greenmachine

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Mar 8, 2010
 
thats what they tell you but it will freeze again im sure, cycles happen just like in i believe the 1700s there was the year without a summer where many died for the crops all died it was snowing and freezing in july august
Jock Shockley

Adelaide, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Mar 8, 2010
 
Just like 1922, eh? Before the main impact of the Post War 2 industrial boom.
Just like the Medieval Warm Period, too, when people sailed around Eurasia and around North America. Also before industrial activity.
Spare a thought before you write, eh?
greenmachine

Bellows Falls, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Mar 9, 2010
 
The Year Without a Summer (also known as the Poverty Year, Year There Was No Summer and Eighteen Hundred Froze to Death it was 1816, in which severe summer climate abnormalities destroyed crops in Northern Europe, the Northeastern United States and eastern Canada.
sorry wrong on the date but i had said i believe it to be not i know, should have looked it up i know how technicle you all are , none the less things like this have happened for millions of years, wheres fosil fuel come from? isnt it plant and organic matter thousands of feet below the surface, why? what happened all those years that are covered by the earths surface? i am sure it was hot cold hot cold ect, i realy dont think we are big enough to change any of it, and you cant fool with mother nature or predict her, heck theres how many weather men that are wrong half the time trying to do so.
The Last of the Mohicans

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Mar 9, 2010
 
The article suggests "the consequences for human civilization could be catastrophic"...There is nothing mankind can do about it as climate change is not Anthropogenic (caused by man)...It is a natural phenomenon...
New Clear Waste

Brattleboro, VT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Mar 9, 2010
 
Jock Shockley wrote:
Just like 1922, eh? Before the main impact of the Post War 2 industrial boom.
Just like the Medieval Warm Period, too, when people sailed around Eurasia and around North America. Also before industrial activity.
Spare a thought before you write, eh?
If you knew about the Medieval Warm Period, then you'd know that temperature fluctuations were nowhere near as fast as they are now, nor did they coincide with human-produced CO2 or other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Sunspots and El Niņo can account for smaller variations, but nothing like the long-term trend and environmental consequences we're seeing now.

Rising sea levels, disappearance of glaciers, and changes in precipitation aren't things that might happen if we don't change our ways; they're already happening. And they're happening at the same time that we've put all these gases into the atmosphere that trap solar radiation.

But that's science. I can tell that some people aren't impressed by science - they form their opinion first, and then cherry-pick their information (or make it up) to suit that opinion.

If you hate hippies or Al Gore, or work for an oil company, or don't want to hear about changing consumption patterns, then tune into Faux News and hear what you want to hear. No sense in being pestered with information.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of44
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••