Is Al Gore's global warming theory harder to convince people of when the climate is actually cold?

Occams Barber said:

The Online Etymology Dictionary has articles on all three words. Basically, they all developed locally and well and truly predate international naming conventions and the concept of Meteorological Bureaux. (OED entries can often be ‘opened up’ to see more detail by clicking on the entry word).

Cyclone was invented in 1848 by a British East India chappie as a name for a particularly vicious storm in India in 1789. He based the word on a Latinised form of a Greek word meaning ‘moving in a circle’ (think 'cycle', 'cyclic').

Typhoon is from an Arabic word passed on to Portuguese sailors by their Arab pilots in the mid-16th century. It comes from the Arabic tufan which, in turn, may have earlier Greek origins. There’s also a possible link to the Cantonese tai fung (big wind). Al-tufan is the term used in the Koran for Noah’s Flood.

Hurricane. A Spanish rendering of a West Indian word for sea storm, from the 1550s. Originally something like furacan. The word went through numerous spelling iterations before settling down to its modern form. Used by Shakespeare as hurricano in a couple of his plays.

OB

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

I've visited threads in that section and have had lengthy discussions with people who are convinced that the earth is flat, there is no gravity, radiation is not real, NASA is a big lie, satellites don't orbit the earth, rocket launches only end up splashing down in the ocean, the shuttle landings were down with a "jet powered" fake shuttle, all astronomical photos are CGI creations, and astronauts on the space station are filmed in a studio. Trust me, I've gotten to know these people very well. Here's one of their most recent threads: There IS no gravity.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

I've visited threads in that section and have had lengthy discussions with people who are convinced that the earth is flat, there is no gravity, radiation is not real, NASA is a big lie, satellites don't orbit the earth, rocket launches only end up splashing down in the ocean, the shuttle landings were down with a "jet powered" fake shuttle, all astronomical photos are CGI creations, and astronauts on the space station are filmed in a studio. Trust me, I've gotten to know these people very well. Here's one of their most recent threads: There IS no gravity.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

I've even tried reasoning with those people as best I could, thinking that it must be easy to show someone that the earth is round. Showing them photos taken of celestial objects, the space program, satellite imagery, the GPS system and satellite TV. They have some weird response to all of it, and they don't mind sticking to it no matter how ridiculous it sounds. They'll even post Youtube videos by some guy smoking weed giving explanations for their beliefs. It was entertaining for a few months, but the circular conversations have gotten too stale for me.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

I can see where you're coming from. But my issue with GW comes from the fact that man-made causes is the only thing that is being focused on, while ignoring solar cycles, varying distances of earth from the sun during orbit around the sun, problems with the way earth temperature readings have been acquired. Not to mention how countries are using "Carbon Taxes" as a way to get money out of people for things they admit won't do much to help even if they were to do everything they want. Many of the measures the GW people want are actually more harmful than helpful, such as electric cars that simply use electricity from coal-fired power plants rather than burn their own gasoline, and have a bigger environmental impact in their manufacturer than gas powered cars.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

But normal earth changes aren't, and they are far bigger than anything we can do.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

Well, considering the fact that even if we do all of it and it supposedly still wouldn't be good enough to overcome natural changes, it's not worth doing the things that are more detrimental to freedom and financial well-being. Things like not littering, doing recycling when possible, cutting down on pollution (up to a point), and using wind and solar when and where viable are fine. But taxing people up the wazoo to fund schemes that have negligible effect is going too far. So is the idea of forcing power plants to close like Obama did by taxing them out of existence. So is requiring power plants to liquify their CO2 and then bury it underground. Those things are excessively expensive and raise energy costs, but have hardly any positive effect.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

If patching up the roof would cause so much expense that it wouldn't be worth staying in that house, then it would be best to come up with temporary fixes. However, your analogy is flawed in that we're not trying to "stop the rain" any more than we're trying to stop volcanoes from erupting, or stop the sun from going through its cycles, or change the orbit of the earth.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

But normal earth changes aren't, and they are far bigger than anything we can do.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

Why do those who believe in human-caused global warming always assume they are right about it (and everything else), but can't seem to fathom that they might actually be wrong?

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

According to whom?

Click to expand...