Global warming - a Bollockquilism

less than 10% failed

  • yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • no

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
Chris_Robb

Chris_Robb

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 Jun 2001
Messages
8,075
Location
Haslemere/ Leros
Visit site
How can Carbon Dioxide - present only as a trace gas in the atmosphere lead to global warming. Its only 375 ppm of the atmosphere.

So a 35% increase of what was bugger all to what is still bugger all, baffles me as to having any relevance at all.

OK the world may be getting warmer - but it has done the warming and getting cold bit many times in the last millenium.

By all means don't waste fuel etc - but can some one explain to me - without excluding all the counter arguements that are ingnored because they are not convenient - why our current situation is different
 
I think they are starting to include other gases to try and make their flimsy case.
The jump from "Global Warming is Happening" to "Man Caused It" is the problem they have.

Made worse because it's not true.
 
But didnt they find thru ice samples that levels of CO2 have always fluctuated along with the global temp? Question is which is the cause and which is the effect...

Anthony
 
I've consistently argued that, and no, I don't think man made CO2 is the cause of global warming. There are other possible candidates for man made global warming including deforestation but on the whole the tiny input of man wouldn't seem to be enough.Someone will no doubt say that all those great scientists at the UN conference couldn't be wrong. What you have to remember is that those scientists are chosen for their conformism to MMGW views. Anyone who cares to find out about these things will come to know that there are some truly bad scientists around only too willing to toe the line for a job and some research money.

I'm sure I could see Gordon Brown grinning as he announced more anti global warming measures (ie taxation) yesterday.
 
[ QUOTE ]
and other crap we pump out, stop the heat getting out. Simple.

[/ QUOTE ]
Except that the aerosols of sulphur that we have cleaned up were stopping heat getting in. Simple.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The extra CO2 in the atmosphere and other crap we pump out, stop the heat getting out. Simple.

[/ QUOTE ]

But is it? - I stress that the quantity of CO2 is only a trace element in the atmosphere. I have never seen this mentioned in any global warming case - why do they suppress this info??
 
Just because it is at relatively low levels doesn't necessarily mean that the level is unimportant.

How much arsenic can your body cope with before you die - trace only.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I have not seen that info suppressed, I thought it was well known.

[/ QUOTE ]

Never seen it mentioned.

What has happened to the aerosol and fridge gasses that were causing global warming, and the hole in the Ozone?. Also has this sealed? as it has not been mentioned recently since we went onto carbon being the cause.



Brian
 
CO2 is not the main "greenhouse gas" - not by a long shot.
It's methane.

What's the main source of methane in the atmosphere? animal farts!
So, what are we going to do?
- Put all animals on low fibre diets?
- Make vegetarians do their bit for the planet and force-feed them steak?

Climate change is nothing new - there have been several cases of dramatic climate change in Earth's history.
What is new, is that all of a sudden it's our fault.

Last major case of climate change was when Krakatoa went up - average global temperature dropped by 2°C in the next decade.
Man adapted - and nature sorted itself out.
No-one tried to solve it by having a volcano tax.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Just because it is at relatively low levels doesn't necessarily mean that the level is unimportant.

How much arsenic can your body cope with before you die - trace only.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am not argueing that it is not relevant - just wondering why the proponants of greenhouse gases just don't put forward any information that might be awkward to their case..... I really would like to understand how such a trace gas can be so spectacularly important. Is it just seems more de ja vu? - he who pays the piper type evidence.
 
Oh for goodness sake - what will your grandchildren say about you?

Wh oh why do you all think you know better? Nothing to do with worry at having to change your own profligate lifestyles I suppose?

The brand new report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was approved on Friday by representatives of more than 140 governments meeting in Valencia, Spain. The report says that global warming is "unequivocal" and that humans' actions are heading toward "abrupt or irreversible climate changes and impacts."

Of course I can trawl the web and find several apparently learned articles which 'debunk' the theory of man made global warming - but then I can point you to dozens of pages which clearly show that God was an astronaut, that the Holocaust never happened and that the world was created in seven days - but these are minority opinions, and the fact of their existence does not make them true.

I am afraid that to some observers the little anti-GW clique on here could appear like a bunch of selfish overindulgers who don't want to give up their toys. I'm sure this is an oversimplification, but I do wonder what your grandchildren will have to say about you in fifty years time.
 
Re: Oh for goodness sake - what will your grandchildren say about you?

They will say the same about us as we say about Malthus.
 
Re: Oh for goodness sake - what will your grandchildren say about you?

I suppose that some people are assuming the legendary position of an ostrich:
deny the evidence, and reality will revert to a cosy climate.

At least, the rest of us can die trying, instead of using the BOHICA principle.
 
Re: Oh for goodness sake - what will your grandchildren say about you?

What evidence?

There's no-one left to trust.
There's "evidence" that climate change is man-made. There's "evidence" that it isn't.
Should we just believe those who cry the loudest? Or the perceived majority view?
There was only one Galileo once.

Whenever I hear arguments (from both sides) I try to figure out "What's in it for them?"
Who funded their "research"?
And why is taxation the only possible solution for anything?
Eg: plastic bags at supermarkets - you can have one if you pay extra. If supermarkets truly wanted to make a difference -> no more plastic bags.
Why should there be an extra green tax on fuel (for cars), but an exemption for airlines?

As to evidence of man-made global warming:
Over the last 30 years there has been an increase in the average temperature on Earth. There has been an equal increase in temperature on Mars!! (I posted the links in another thread).
Martian made global warming?

Webcraft: it's not thinking "we know better", it's thinking for yourself.
 
Re: Oh for goodness sake - what will your grandchildren say about you?

People will look back in a few hundred years and say that all those backward people believed the earth was flat, that there were four elements, they burnt witches, there was eternal damnation and CO2 created man made global warming.
They will wonder why we were all so stupid and why we allowed ourseles to be so misled. They will conclude we were all in the grip of mass hysteria generated by leaders and vested interests who were using it to protect their power.

It is in fact interesting that religious leaders have been very silent on these matters. It would I imagine intrude into their are a bit too much plus there is a general philosophy of the primacy of man within most religions.

I would point out that I have yet to see a fully worked model of how CO2 MMGW actually happens. I have seen a statistical "proof" which isn't able to distinguish between cause and effect but not any kind of facts showing how the tiny amount of CO2 there is interacts with the climate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top