Gore's climate claims melt under scrutiny...

Sidestepped indeed! When you and Moen get the question right, there isn' t much use to discussing this with you smart ................... persons. Like so many of us have said all along;
It's the cause that is under consideration, and not the 'fact' as you call it of global warming.

The real reason all this is under debate is because not everyone in in the hip pocket of Al Gore or the group who is putting in the big bucks to see that this farce is carried through.
The CAUSE is the phony part

 

I WARNED YOU

 

Here is a quote that you may want to pay attention to;

 

Sorry, I was only trying to make a point.

 

You did. You demonstrated to everyone just how much class you have.

 

Yeah, zero like most of the other posters!

 

Sidestepped again! I will try to ask this question as plainly as possible. Is there any evidence you would accept that would convince you that currently observed global climate warming is largely the result of human activities? I have specified a set of conditions under which I would gladly admit that the models are wrong and concede the argument. Under what conditions would you be willing to admit that you are wrong on this issue?

 

From any qualified source that is NOT in some manner associated with ARM, IPCC, UN or the NRDC, or any political party or person. In other words someone who has no irons in the fire or money to be made.

I'm afraid you are laboring under a misapprehension again. I'm not trying to get you to change your mind on anything, as this is your choice to make and not mine. I'm just curious as to why you don't allow me the same curtisy.

I would guess when that time comes, if it does, I will know it and you will be the first to know. Until then, you can save your breath and peddle your so called evidence elsewhere.

Oh by the way, here is a fellow who might be trusted, and I''m sure he's not in with big business or some politicians pocket. Your might be interested. But then probably not...

 

Cuprum, I would say such evidence would have to be provided without the use of models. The models have a poor track record of forecasting conditions months into the future. It is unlikely that they will do better as the number of unanticipated factors multiplies exponentially over longer periods of time. I think you would have to start by disproving all of the things posted at the very beginning of this thread that indicate global warming is not occurring. You would have to prove that the Middle Ages Warm Period never occurred. You would have to prove that the increase in energy output from the sun which has been measured has not warmed the ocean recently or in the history of the earth. You would have to prove that the observed historical relationship between the amount of solar energy and temperature of the earth was untrue. You would have to prove that the increase in carbon in the atmosphere is a CAUSE of warming and not an EFFECT of the warming of the oceans which causes the release of carbon into the atmosphere, as was posted earlier. You would have to come up with a new theory, and demonstrate that it is true, as to why the increase in the amount of carbon in the atmosphere lags the rise in temperature instead of leads it. You would have to prove that the relatively tiny amount of carbon in the atmosphere has a greater greenhouse effect than the massive amount of water vapor, the greenhouse gas nobody talks about because you can't do anything about it. You would have to prove that human-caused greenhouse gases are greater in quantity than the natural production of carbon from plant decay and the water vapor from natural evaporation from the oceans. You would have to prove that the gradual rise in sea levels by about 1/16th of an inch per year since the end of the last ice age was due to human activity before there were large numbers of humans and virtually no carbon production by humans.

Do that, and then we get back to the starting point of considering that humans might be causing global warming. Then we can move to step two, determining whether or not the warming is on balance positive or negative. The last time temperatures cooled by a few degrees, Europe was ravaged by famine and disease. Now there are many more billions of mouths to feed, requiring longer and more favorable growing seasons.

 

Cloudy, never mind any of the evidence on either side of the debate. Never mind which authorities say or don't say what you want to be true. Never mind everything you've heard to this point and consider just this one point....Who are the people in this forum that are "siding" with you on this issue and how do they usually approach an issue in which you are more often than not opposed to their narrow-minded opinions? That alone would be enough to make me reconsider my entire world view let alone the issue of global warming. You know the fellas I'm referring to and you now find yourself in agreement with their ilk. Gotta be something wrong here buddy.

 

Moen, I consider it to be irrelevant who agrees or disagrees with me on any topic. I'll be correct if my facts and reasoning are correct regardless of what others think. On the topic of human-caused global warming, I don't think there is even a 1% chance that it is based in fact after listening and thinking about both sides of the argument. This is pure power politics, not science. I think the folks who believe in human-caused global warming are probably well-meaning for the most part, except for the leaders of the movement. They also probably find meaning in their lives to be participating in the battle to save the planet. It just happens to be fiction.

I think it's well worth the effort to conserve resources and reduce pollution. It's the only way the current and growing human population will survive with a high standard of living. They are good goals. But clouding the issue with global warming fears only serves to delay and damage the effort to make progress by introducing science fiction into the debate.

 

Cloudy; We have had our fiferences in the past and will no doubt have more of them in the future, but this one time I can say we agree 101% on what does and what does not cause Global Warming. Like you I believe the issue isn't that it's getting warmer at this time, but what is causing it and what to do about it is the real issue.
Here is an article you may not have read and it speaks to this issue of Global Warming and it's cause.
Read it and I believe you will find a lot of what you have been saying all along.

http://nov55.com/gbwm.html (Global Warming is not caused by Carbon Dioxide)

 

Thanks Old Dan, I'll read it. Life would be boring if everyone agreed on everything. To me, this whole issue is the 21st century equivalent of snake oil but on a grand scale. Someday, folks will look back and laugh at how gullible people were. People who believe in human caused global warming have no right to laugh at the Heaven's Gate people waiting for Hale-Bopp.

 

Old Dan, very informative link. I had heard about the idea that the earth's core is a major contributing factor to warming the oceans. It sounds like a more reasonable hypothesis than the CO2 scam, but needs more investigation. Hopefully, there is some funding available since scientists have a hard time obtaining funding for projects that cross the UN political mandate that human-caused global warming be accepted as a matter of undisputed doctrine.

 

O.K. here is one who isn't dependant on funding through the UN political platform.

That the research wasn't well received doesn't come as any surprise to me, but rather gives it credance to holding at least some truth.

 

That's interesting, and is a bit more evidence in favor of the solar explanation and against the earth core explanation [as well as helping refute the human-caused global warming]. How long will people deny the mounting scientific evidence and accept the political agenda?

 

He just won the Nobel Peace Prize... Global warming is true...believe it

 

Yes, but was this Prize for the Global Warming issue or for his inventing the "internet", which he claims he did? Both of these topics fall within the same guidelines with Al Gore.

 

The Nobel Peace Prize lost all credibility when they gave it to Arafat the Terrorist.

Hell, Even Jimmy Carter, whom is laughable at best, and a man personally responsible for Iran's bullcrap at worst.