Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 391

Thread: Odds That Global Warming [Climate Change] is Due to Natural Factors: Slim to None

  1. #21
    swamped Midget Division
    fletch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Too far from MSG
    Posts
    3,774
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by H-Dreamer View Post
    Overall, as long as 500 years seem. Compared to how long this planet is around it's a tiny sample size.
    That said, alternative means to get energy should be top priority regardless.
    How large of a sample size do you need to know that falling from great heights is hazardous for humans?

    The weight of evidence behind climate change is similarly overwhelming. It's why only scientists funded by the petrochemical and other industries argue climate change isn't happening. It's the same playbook (from largely the same people) who sowed doubt about smoking, acid rain, and the ozone hole. Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes & Erik Conway is one good source to hear about how big business obfuscates the truth.
    "We're all f*cked. It helps to remember that." - George Carlin

    "How many Cups you've got?" - Esa Tikkanen

    "Hatred can keep you warm when you run out of liquor" - Ray Ratto, Dan Patrick show 1/20/2017

  2. #22
    Sighing Dutchman BSBH Prospect
    Jules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    19,057
    Rep Power
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by CCCP View Post
    Who paid for those panels?
    He did.
    Nothing is true, everything is permitted.
    Hidden Content

  3. #23
    Senior Member Junior Division
    ZebraDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    A rink near you
    Posts
    7,645
    Rep Power
    33
    I'm late to the party. I have no doubt that there is climate change. But I am not a believer that it's due to anything mankind does. Rather, I believe that it's related to the planetary orbits of the solar system and the earth's tilt axis. A minute change to orbit paths or the angle of tilt can have dramatic impacts to our climate. But there's no real commercial value to this theory, so it doesn't get much press.

    PS - it's May 1st and still in the 40's in the morning. When does Global Warming kick in anyway?

  4. #24
    Sighing Dutchman BSBH Prospect
    Jules's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Princeton, NJ
    Posts
    19,057
    Rep Power
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by ZebraDude View Post
    I'm late to the party. I have no doubt that there is climate change. But I am not a believer that it's due to anything mankind does. Rather, I believe that it's related to the planetary orbits of the solar system and the earth's tilt axis. A minute change to orbit paths or the angle of tilt can have dramatic impacts to our climate. But there's no real commercial value to this theory, so it doesn't get much press.
    Do you have any further explanation or data on this? I'm interested in any and all theories, but I can't really put together how planetory orbits or the Earth's axis are related to the blatant issues like water pollution and smog, which are proven parts of the climate change issue and very man-made.

    PS - it's May 1st and still in the 40's in the morning. When does Global Warming kick in anyway?
    I love how this joke is an actual argument for so many people, but when Summer and Fall were hotter than ever that suddenly didn't prove a thing.
    Nothing is true, everything is permitted.
    Hidden Content

  5. #25
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Puck Head View Post
    Was this a big surprise to anyone?
    No, because most of the academic elite are biased and manipulate the data to arrive at preconceived results. That's what the big fraud known as "the hockey stick" was all about.

    Most of you guys are too young to remember "The Coming Ice Age" in the 1970's. I do.

    They don't even call it 'global warming' anymore -- now it's 'climate change.'

    Are you guys aware that 20,000 years ago the entire Midwest was covered by an ice sheet 9,000 feet thick ? You know what happened since then ? Yup....IT WARMED !!!

    Volcanic activity, solar activity, global orbital dynamics (precission, axial oscillation, Kondratief Cycles, etc.) can easily cause huge changes over long periods of time that dwarf any minute measurements like over decades.

  6. #26
    Former Moderator BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    74,851
    Rep Power
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersRule2 View Post
    No, because most of the academic elite are biased and manipulate the data to arrive at preconceived results. That's what the big fraud known as "the hockey stick" was all about.

    Most of you guys are too young to remember "The Coming Ice Age" in the 1970's. I do.

    They don't even call it 'global warming' anymore -- now it's 'climate change.'

    Are you guys aware that 20,000 years ago the entire Midwest was covered by an ice sheet 9,000 feet thick ? You know what happened since then ? Yup....IT WARMED !!!

    Volcanic activity, solar activity, global orbital dynamics (precission, axial oscillation, Kondratief Cycles, etc.) can easily cause huge changes over long periods of time that dwarf any minute measurements like over decades.
    The reason they've transitioned to the words climate change (which happens when the overall average temperature of the planet trends up) is because during every snowstorm, someone would spout "what about global warming!!!"

  7. #27
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Jules View Post
    Do you have any further explanation or data on this? I'm interested in any and all theories, but I can't really put together how planetory orbits or the Earth's axis are related to the blatant issues like water pollution and smog, which are proven parts of the climate change issue and very man-made.
    Precession, axial oscillation, orbital eccentricity -- they all affect climate over tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of years. This is what causes Ice Ages and we could STILL be in an Ice Age (end of one) and just be having tiny bump-ups in temperature.

    Even a stock bull market has down days.

  8. #28
    The Dolphin Whisperer BSBH Rookie
    Morphinity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    28,314
    Rep Power
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersRule2 View Post
    Precession, axial oscillation, orbital eccentricity -- they all affect climate over tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of years. This is what causes Ice Ages and we could STILL be in an Ice Age (end of one) and just be having tiny bump-ups in temperature.

    Even a stock bull market has down days.
    Please, show us your sources.

  9. #29
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    The reason they've transitioned to the words climate change (which happens when the overall average temperature of the planet trends up) is because during every snowstorm, someone would spout "what about global warming!!!"
    Could have used some of that warming this past winter and saved my fellow homeowners a Special Assessment for snow removal and salt !!

  10. #30
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Morphinity View Post
    Please, show us your sources.
    Umm.....the internet ????

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession

    Here's the best stuff, BTW, I was wrong it's MILANKOVITCH Cycles not Kondratief, I got my Russian's mixed up.

    http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/imag...lankovitch.htm

  11. #31
    Former Moderator BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    74,851
    Rep Power
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersRule2 View Post
    Could have used some of that warming this past winter and saved my fellow homeowners a Special Assessment for snow removal and salt !!
    Well when the ice caps melt, you'll have bigger issues.

  12. #32
    The Dolphin Whisperer BSBH Rookie
    Morphinity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    28,314
    Rep Power
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersRule2 View Post
    Umm.....the internet ????

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precession

    Here's the best stuff, BTW, I was wrong it's MILANKOVITCH Cycles not Kondratief, I got my Russian's mixed up.

    http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/imag...lankovitch.htm
    Great, now I understand the mechanics of precession. Now show me the scientific papers that prove it affects the Earth's current climate change.

  13. #33
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by fletch View Post
    How large of a sample size do you need to know that falling from great heights is hazardous for humans?
    The weight of evidence behind climate change is similarly overwhelming. It's why only scientists funded by the petrochemical and other industries argue climate change isn't happening. It's the same playbook (from largely the same people) who sowed doubt about smoking, acid rain, and the ozone hole. Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes & Erik Conway is one good source to hear about how big business obfuscates the truth.
    Right.....and we should trust the Big Businesses and Political Agenda of those who benefit equally from the other side, right ?

    Because their predictions the last 40 years have been right on the mark.....Great Society & Black Family.....Global Cooling.....$200 oil by 1990....etc etc. etc.

    All Club Of Rome misfits.

  14. #34
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    Well when the ice caps melt, you'll have bigger issues.
    I thought it already melted according to AlGore.....or was that Himalayan Peaks like Everest ?

  15. #35
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Morphinity View Post
    Great, now I understand the mechanics of precession. Now show me the scientific papers that prove it affects the Earth's current climate change.
    Orbital dynamics affect the Earth's climate over many tens of thousands of years. Within the larger trend, you can have ups-and-downs that are 'statistical blips' on the way to the designated target.

    In other words.....if the Earth is going to cool by 10 degrees Celsius over 10,000 years.....but during a few hundred years the temperature kicks up by 1 or 1 1/2 degrees....that does NOT indicate "global warming."

    To put it in easier terms: If next year The Rangers are on pace for a 120 point season but I tell you they lost 3 games over a week that they WON in the same time frame the previous year, you wouldn't tell me "The Rangers stink this year, they're doing much worse."

    This is why The Hockey Stick Fraud was so important.

  16. #36
    Moderator BSBH Prospect
    Puck Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    10,537
    Rep Power
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersRule2 View Post
    Right.....and we should trust the Big Businesses and Political Agenda of those who benefit equally from the other side, right ?

    Because their predictions the last 40 years have been right on the mark.....Great Society & Black Family.....Global Cooling.....$200 oil by 1990....etc etc. etc.

    All Club Of Rome misfits.
    RangersRule2,

    "Big" business would be the first to lobby AGAINST global warming per human influence.
    You are making their argument for them.

    There is only one scientific organization to my knowledge that does not agree with human affects on global warming......
    And guess who that is....
    Last edited by Puck Head; 05-28-2014 at 10:17 PM.

  17. #37
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Puck Head View Post
    RangersRule2,"Big" business would be the first to lobby AGAINST global warming per human influence.You are making their argument for them.There is only one scientific organization to my knowledge that does not agree with human affects on global warming......And guess who that is....
    There is no PROVEN side either way. I believe the evidence lies AGAINST MMGW. I don't claim it's a certitude.

    The agenda of the pro-MMGW crowd is clear. Ideologically, they control the media, the scientific organizations, the journals, and academia. You and I both know that the leftist skew in these circles is probably 10:1 in favor of MMGW.

    As an amateur scientist who has lectured on scientific topics and sees how things are treated in the media/press/academia, I can say with absolute certainty that if an article DID PROVE that MMGW wasn't true, it would not be published in an academic journal. This is related to the ClimateGate emails and the current lawsuit against National Review and Mark Steyn.

    I am all for debate and am not closed to the possibility of man affecting the climate, though I think it is infentissimally small (a single volcano throws out more pollution than 400 power plants produce in a year). Beyond that, most of the advocates of MMGW want to impose costs on the economy that will NOT be borne by them.

    I would be most interested to see what the advocates of MMGW/climate change would say if THEY had to pay for the costs with their salaries, jobs, and financial assets.

  18. #38
    Former Moderator BSBH Legend
    Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    74,851
    Rep Power
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersRule2 View Post
    I thought it already melted according to AlGore.....or was that Himalayan Peaks like Everest ?
    If you thought Al Hire said that, you'd be mistaken. Are melting and have melted aren't the same.

  19. #39
    Moderator BSBH Prospect
    Puck Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    North Pole
    Posts
    10,537
    Rep Power
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by RangersRule2 View Post
    There is no PROVEN side either way. I believe the evidence lies AGAINST MMGW. I don't claim it's a certitude.

    The agenda of the pro-MMGW crowd is clear. Ideologically, they control the media, the scientific organizations, the journals, and academia. You and I both know that the leftist skew in these circles is probably 10:1 in favor of MMGW.

    As an amateur scientist who has lectured on scientific topics and sees how things are treated in the media/press/academia, I can say with absolute certainty that if an article DID PROVE that MMGW wasn't true, it would not be published in an academic journal. This is related to the ClimateGate emails and the current lawsuit against National Review and Mark Steyn.

    I am all for debate and am not closed to the possibility of man affecting the climate, though I think it is infentissimally small (a single volcano throws out more pollution than 400 power plants produce in a year). Beyond that, most of the advocates of MMGW want to impose costs on the economy that will NOT be borne by them.

    I would be most interested to see what the advocates of MMGW/climate change would say if THEY had to pay for the costs with their salaries, jobs, and financial assets.
    You do believe CO2 emissions do affect the ozone layer, thus affecting climate?
    But more importantly, what exactly did you take from "Climategate"?

    Just trying to get a baseline here.
    Last edited by Puck Head; 05-28-2014 at 11:16 PM.

  20. #40
    Senior Member Bantam Division RangersRule2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,178
    Rep Power
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Puck Head View Post
    You do believe CO2 emissions do affect the ozone layer, thus affecting climate?
    Marginally.....again, a single volcano throws out 20 million metric tons of Sulfur Dioxide.....a power plant puts out about 50,000 metric tons. Now add in all the other eruptions.....heat releases....geysers.....magna vents....etc.

    I just don't think spraying aerosol under my armpits with a can of deoderant compared to the Awesome Scale of The Earth ..... which itself is miniscule compared to a ball of hydrogen that is 1,000,000 times our size only 93 million miles away which we revolve around.

    But more importantly, what exactly did you take from "Climategate"?
    What I know from other scientific debates, notably Extinction Theory (which also involves the climate somewhat), is that what you SEE and HEAR is only a small portion of what is out there. The New York Times editorial page censored their own ScienceTimes editors/reporters (as they have done with other reporters, including the Sports guys) because the ST viewpoint didn't agree with the Editorial Page.

    The folks who control academic journals and academia are so biased and slanted it's not even funny. Have you ever heard of a liberal college speaker shouted down or prevented from speaking by conservatives ? I can't, going back 30 years. The shout-downs are all by The Left. Similarly, the bias and 1-sidedness is all in favor of the MMGW crowd.

    That's what the ClimateGate e-mails showed....a 1-sided monopoly by advocates for the cause not even ALLOWING DEBATE and systematically manipulating data and evidence by throwing out the entire Medieval Warm Period because it blows their MMGW theory to smithereens.

    These guys are saying that MMGW is settled, like the Earth being round. Sorry, it's not.

    Just trying to get a baseline here.
    See above....

    Not to be political here.....but take the current Donald Sterling Case. This guy is regularly being referred to as "Bigoted Clipper Owner Donald Sterling....." "Racist Clipper Owner Donald Sterling....." etc. etc. etc. It's almost like a fait acompli that the guy is a racist, like the KKK.

    Of course, all the guy did was say a few non-PC things regarding who his mistress should associate with. But he's being called a 'racist' by folks who have said and done FAR WORSE and are in no position to judge him whatsoever. A certain MSNBC host who referred to the Mayor of NYC as a "N***** Whore" is one of the main accusers. This guy is going to threaten the NBA and also moralize on TV about why the NBA needs to get rid of Sterling....while he, not only is NOT expunged, but is given an honored position as a TV commentator/newscaster as if he's the 2nd coming of Walter Cronkite. It'd be like Adolf Hitler sitting in judgement of anti-Semites.

    Such is the power of the media to twist, distort, and put out a POV that is synonymous with THEIR AGENDA and not a fair, balanced, objective view of the FACTS.


    Except....the debate about MMGW has been going on so long that some of the predictions haven't panned out in the last 15-20 years. So folks who were told things would happen are now wondering why they haven't. Hence, why the 'global warming' moniker is now 'climate change' so that if the weather is warmer, colder, or even UNCHANGED -- it's evidence we need to change.

    No matter what, the pro-MMGW wins: if it's warmer, they're right....if it's colder, they're right....if the temperature is unchanged, they're right !!!!!!!!!!

    You can't make this stuff up !!!!
    Last edited by RangersRule2; 05-29-2014 at 12:42 AM.

Page 2 of 20 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •