This discussion is like religion if you wait for agreement before choosing one you will never decide.

okay. I think that what i'm going to do is find a lot of raw data like the graph posted on the other page, and make a new thread titled "Global warming ~ continuation from Junk Science" or just "Global Warming". then, you may all feel free to cuss it out between yourselves.

Originally Posted by Insomniac

okay. I think that what i'm going to do is find a lot of raw data like the graph posted on the other page, and make a new thread titled "Global warming ~ continuation from Junk Science" or just "Global Warming". then, you may all feel free to cuss it out between yourselves.

I will make life easy for you then and recommend that you get a subscription to JSTOR (If you attend a tertiary institute you may find they have a subscription) as they are a very good source of data on almost everything.

http://www.jstor.org/

They maintain archives of actual scientific reports not the TV guide rendition.

Originally Posted by MontyB

You got any thing in that data that proves this theory of yours?

There are two completely different wave patterns with the change point being noticeable and spot on the period when the I.R is acknowledged to have started. Unless these patterns are repeatable through history (which the graph doesn't show us) you have to look at the points of change and investigate why.

I stated clearly and unequvocably that the minor variations play no part in a trend that may last many centuries. The trend has not changed since it's start well before the period of the Industrial Revolution.

This doesn't require a knowledge of science, math, climatology or in fact anything more than an inquiring mind and the ability look at data impartially.

Precisely!! That's what I'm doing without running around with my hands over my head shouting "We're doomed, We're doomed, we're all gunna die"

Do you ever monitor your gas millage or learn the vehicle you drive so that you know when something changes (sudden increase in fuel usage, rpm surges, occasional misfires) if so when something like this happens do just pass it off as natural aging or ignore it because you cant remember whether it was like that 5 years ago or not or do you pop the hood and see if it is going to be a problem or not?

If my car has achieved a certain MPG since new and it starts backfiring or whatever, but the mileage stays the same, I will certainly investigate the cause of the backfiring, but I won't use a non existant change in the mileage rate to try and justify the backfiring.

You guys really scare me not because you might be right (hell if you are right great we have no problems) but because you have no interest in finding out for yourselves whether you are right or not.

Many things scare me Monty, but I'm afraid but I don't worry about things beyond my control. And so far there is no where near enough evidence to prove that climate change is man made.

In the mean time I will continue to evaluate the available evidence.

So far in South Australia we have only broken one weather record in the last 30 years. Last year was our driest year ever, but the previous driest year in 1906 was only a few millimetres of rain more. Over 100 years ago. This year so far, is below average but much wetter than at this time last year, even the farmers are happy, heavy rain is forecast again for the weekend.

To be perfectly honest I think you are pulling a fast one.

I stated clearly and unequvocably that the minor variations play no part in a trend that may last many centuries. The trend has not changed since it's start well before the period of the Industrial Revolution.

And I will state once again that your evidence does not show that, you can not expect anyone to accept with no data that these are just minor variations in a pattern when the pattern you provided changed 4 times within the data provided.

You cannot draw conclusions from the data provided without first investigating the events surrounding those pattern changes.

Precisely!! That's what I'm doing without running around with my hands over my head shouting "We're doomed, We're doomed, we're all gunna die"

No instead you have decided to back the three monkeys approach to science which is equally as bad.

I feel same way Monty (last sentence first part addressed to me that is, Post 89).

Originally Posted by MontyB

To be perfectly honest I think you are pulling a fast one.]

That in itself is a "fast one" implying that I am trying to hide something or distort the facts. Not so at all, as the evidence is there: "There has been no significant change in the mean rate of temperature rise since the beginning of the industrial revolution".
Yes I can show variations within the time period just as I can show variations from day to day. And even if you were correct in your interpretation it is not proportional with the rise in production of man made pollution in that same period. If it is true it is so minor as to be insignificant in relation to the amount of man made pollution generated in that time.

And I will state once again that your evidence does not show that, you can not expect anyone to accept with no data that these are just minor variations in a pattern when the pattern you provided changed 4 times within the data provided.

To you.... You say the glass is half empty, I say it is half full. If we wish to go down that path why not break it down into daily, weekly or monthly variations,?? There's any amount of variation there, no, ... because it is of no importance, only the mean rate matters.

No instead you have decided to back the three monkeys approach to science which is equally as bad.

No,... but I refuse to be panicked by people who have their their own agenda. If what they claim was true, they wouldn't need to bang their drum so loudly, the public would be well and truly aware of it, after all not even the scientific community are all in agreement on the cause of climate change and those that are convinced use terms such as "We believe".

I'm just stating that I don't believe.

It's started pouring rain as I type this. Heavy.

Originally Posted by MontyB

This discussion is like religion if you wait for agreement before choosing one you will never decide.

I refer to agreement among those academic bodies so respected as leaders of scientific expertise. This is not happenning yet, but the industry and empires precede them, already leading political imposition on our quality of life, and upon the pockets of the poor and vulnerable. I have no problem with decision making. Which is why I rate the discussion taking place here, because guys like you have been following closely the unfolding drama.

At the moment I choose to stay off the band-wagon with a careful eye upon my freedoms, eroded as they already are.

Originally Posted by Del Boy

I refer to agreement among those academic bodies so respected as leaders of scientific expertise. This is not happening yet, but the industry and empires precede them, already leading political imposition on our quality of life, and upon the pockets of the poor and vulnerable. I have no problem with decision making. Which is why I rate the discussion taking place here, because guys like you have been following closely the unfolding drama.

At the moment I choose to stay off the band-wagon with a careful eye upon my freedoms, eroded as they already are.

The same statement applies to waiting for science to agree it just wont happen because every day we learn something new.

Paleontologists have a saying "I expect everything I discover to eventually be disproven" not because the dinosaur is suddenly going to turn out as a hoax but because we do not know the finer points of the species (colour, sounds etc.) and therefore every piece of the puzzle we find increases our knowledge and makes some other aspect of the puzzle defunct.

Global warming is exactly the same we know global warming/cooling is happening ALL sides agree that it is a natural process and it is this that mankind needs to protect itself from by investigating whether there are any man made causes contributing to this issue.

Lets assume there is no man made contribution to global warming the fact still remains that the "natural process" will continue now given that knowledge what effect are increased/decreased temperatures going to have on the worlds populations from food production to commerce, most of our arable land is in temperate climates, most of our major commercial areas and population centers are built on the coast.

This is not about panicking people into making changes it is about getting as much information as possible as soon as possible so that nations can plan for these changes and reduce the impact in future, now I am not saying there are not panic merchants in the process but these people exist in all areas of life and they are just as dangerous as the "lets ignore the problem" crowd that make up the other end of the spectrum.

Originally Posted by senojekips

To you.... You say the glass is half empty, I say it is half full.

yes, but are you filling the glass or emptying it?