So, you think Global Climate Change is a hoax.

[RickG]

Chances are you also believe the earth is only 6,000 years old as well.

 

[juvenissun]

Chances are you also believe the earth is only 6,000 years old as well.

Both cases are arguable. You can't win on either one.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Both cases are arguable. You can't win on either one.

Both are already won. Global climate change is a fact. The extent of anthropogenic global climate change may be arguable, but the fact that the climate is changing isn't. The 6000 year old Earth fairytale isn't a debate, it's just the lingering remnants of a redundant religious belief that is clung to by denialists and the uneducated.

If there is a link between the 2 topics in America, it is probably both political and educational, but I'm interested to know more. In Britain, where I live, the climate debate would be purely political, with no religious link that I'm aware of.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Both cases are arguable. You can't win on either one.

Except, of course, we already have .

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Chances are you also believe the earth is only 6,000 years old as well.

Source?

 

[RickG]

In Britain, where I live, the climate debate would be purely political, with no religious link that I'm aware of.

Ah then, you are familiar with Brittan's own, "Lord" (so he claims to be but Parliament says no he's not) Christopher Monckton. The self proclaimed climate expert, though he has no scientific training, has testified before the U.S. Congress sub-committee on climate change that global warming is a myth.

 

[tonybeer]

Sadly I meet all too many people who are climate change skeptics. Only one of which was a creationist. Then again creationists seem extremely rare in the UK from personal experience.

I think about 0.1% of peer reviewed papers find global warming to not mostly be man-made. People think this is closer to 30-50%, and are surprised when I tell them the true number. Sadly newspapers like the Daily Mail don't help. Also it seems to be a way people can rebel in a pathetic middle aged way to make themselves sound intelligent "I know more than the scientists".

This is 0.1% more than there are creationist peer reviewed papers!

 

[AV1611VET]

Then again creationists seem extremely rare in the UK from personal experience.

Your personal experience evidently doesn't account for the fact that London has one of the largest mosques in Europe, does it?

From your (and/or their) online bible:

Islam in England is the largest non-Christian religion, with most Muslims being immigrants from South Asia (in particular Pakistan, Bangladesh and India) or descendants of immigrants from that region.

SOURCE

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Your personal experience evidently doesn't account for the fact that London has one of the largest mosques in Europe, does it?

From your (and/or their) online bible:

SOURCE

Without any actual numbers, 'largest mosque' could be a broom cupboard, and 'largest non-Christian religion' could be a single individual. Beware unquantified superlatives, my friend.

 

[AV1611VET]

Without any actual numbers, 'largest mosque' could be a broom cupboard,

This is one doosey of a broom cupboard, then: Baitul Futuh

QV also: List of mosques in the United Kingdom

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Ah then, you are familiar with Brittan's own, "Lord" (so he claims to be but Parliament says no he's not) Christopher Monckton. The self proclaimed climate expert, though he has no scientific training, has testified before the U.S. Congress sub-committee on climate change that global warming is a myth.

I've heard of him but have to confess that I didn't know about his appearance before the U.S. Congress. A quick google shows that only last month he was kicked out of an international climate change conference in Qatar "after posing as a delegate" which I thought was quite amusing:

Christopher Monckton, a UK Independence Party activist and dogged critic of the environmentalist movement, has been turned out of an international climate change conference in Qatar after posing as a delegate.

Lord Monckton had intended to arrive in Doha, Qatar’s capital, in Arab dress and riding a camel called Aziz, but according to his blog, he tried to climb into the saddle after reciting a quatrain from the Rubaiyyat of Umar Khayyam in Aziz’s ear and the animal tossed him onto a nearby sand dune.

Lord Monckton kicked out of international climate change conference after posing as a delegate - UK Politics - UK - The Independent

I was actually thinking of a different Lord, Lord Lawson, who was Chancellor of Exchequer in Thatcher's government in the 80s. He has been a very vocal sceptic and has even formed a climate sceptic think tank called the Global Warming Policy Foundation funded by a Conservative Party donor:

Michael Hintze revealed as funder of Lord Lawson's climate thinktank | Environment | guardian.co.uk

Lord Lawson and his thinktank have had quite a bit of coverage in Britain as he had such a prominent political career, unlike Christopher Monckton. Although like Monckton, he has no scientific background.

 

[KWCrazy]

Global warming has already been proved a fraud. Scientists falsified information to get grant money. They manufactured a crises and rode the wave of hysteria to line their pockets. The e-mails proved it. It is a fraud. If it was real there would be no reason to falsify data.

Change is what climates do. Greenland was once a green land. For the last decade of global warming, the climate has been cooling. There are more polar bears than there were four decades ago.

Liberals are using the lie to grow the size of government restrict our freedoms and increase their power over us. Government now mandates that we drive smaller, less safe cars that leave our family members dead on the highways. To save our abundant energy, we are ordered to subject our families to poisonous mercury filled light bulbs. The government mandates toilets that won't flush and now wants to impose a "carbon tax" to further micro-manage our lives.

We didn't create this planet and it's not in our authority to destroy it. It certainly won'r be destroyed by carbon, which is the building block of all life. The fact is, over 95% of greenhouses gas is water vapor. The amount cause by man is about .28% It's a LIE!

 

[Elendur]

Global warming has already been proved a fraud. Scientists falsified information to get grant money. They manufactured a crises and rode the wave of hysteria to line their pockets. The e-mails proved it. It is a fraud. If it was real there would be no reason to falsify data.

Change is what climates do. Greenland was once a green land. For the last decade of global warming, the climate has been cooling. There are more polar bears than there were four decades ago.

Liberals are using the lie to grow the size of government restrict our freedoms and increase their power over us. Government now mandates that we drive smaller, less safe cars that leave our family members dead on the highways. To save our abundant energy, we are ordered to subject our families to poisonous mercury filled light bulbs. The government mandates toilets that won't flush and now wants to impose a "carbon tax" to further micro-manage our lives.

We didn't create this planet and it's not in our authority to destroy it. It certainly won'r be destroyed by carbon, which is the building block of all life. The fact is, over 95% of greenhouses gas is water vapor. The amount cause by man is about .28% It's a LIE!

A nice image. Lacking of proper presentation though. It would need to specify what the numbers represent and it would be useful if it had the relative numbers of the impact of each gas.

Could you provide with the source for the original paper for the data? Assuming one exists.

(Looked at Plant Fossils of West Virginia , where you got the picture, but I couldn't find it)

 

[KWCrazy]

Could you provide with the source for the original paper for the data? Assuming one exists.

No. I made it all up.
Try this.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Global warming has already been proved a fraud. Scientists falsified information to get grant money. They manufactured a crises and rode the wave of hysteria to line their pockets. The e-mails proved it. It is a fraud. If it was real there would be no reason to falsify data.

Change is what climates do. Greenland was once a green land. For the last decade of global warming, the climate has been cooling. There are more polar bears than there were four decades ago.

Liberals are using the lie to grow the size of government restrict our freedoms and increase their power over us. Government now mandates that we drive smaller, less safe cars that leave our family members dead on the highways. To save our abundant energy, we are ordered to subject our families to poisonous mercury filled light bulbs. The government mandates toilets that won't flush and now wants to impose a "carbon tax" to further micro-manage our lives.

We didn't create this planet and it's not in our authority to destroy it. It certainly won'r be destroyed by carbon, which is the building block of all life. The fact is, over 95% of greenhouses gas is water vapor. The amount cause by man is about .28% It's a LIE!

Don your tin hats, folks, before the guv'm'nt's get you!

 

[Strathos]

I have been told that the majority of climate change deniers and studies that go against it are paid for and in the pocket of oil companies.

I don't know if this is true or not.

 

[Elendur]

No. I made it all up.
Try this.

Thanks for the link, however it's not a replacement for an actual paper. The advantage of having a peer reviewed paper (which most people call papers for short) is that one can be (relatively) sure it's not bull****.

 

[usexpat97]

The problem with constantly arguing whether GW is man-made or not is that it doesn't change the outcome: "Global warming is not man-made, so let's just sit comfortably and not do anything." I don't know about you, but if the planet can no longer sustain 6 billion people and billions die, it makes utterly ZERO difference to me whether it was caused "naturally" or not. Action to fight it must still be taken.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

The problem with constantly arguing whether GW is man-made or not is that it doesn't change the outcome: "Global warming is not man-made, so let's just sit comfortably and not do anything." I don't know about you, but if the planet can no longer sustain 6 billion people and billions die, it makes utterly ZERO difference to me whether it was caused "naturally" or not. Action to fight it must still be taken.

Ah, but that's the brilliant thing: if it's not man-made, then oil (etc) companies can continue to pump out noxious fumes to their hearts' content. The fact that the world is becoming more inhospitable doesn't cross their minds.

 

[KWCrazy]

Thanks for the link, however it's not a replacement for an actual paper. The advantage of having a peer reviewed paper (which most people call papers for short) is that one can be (relatively) sure it's not bull****.

One line I thought that was interesting was:
"The following table was constructed from data published by the U.S. Department of Energy (1) summarizing concentrations of the various atmospheric greenhouse gases, and supplemented with information from other sources (2-7). Because some of the concentrations are very small the numbers are stated in parts per billion. DOE chose to NOT show water vapor as a greenhouse gas!"

If you don't show water vapor as a greenhouse gas, then you're a liar and a fraud; just like the liars and frauds who were caught with the e-mails showing how to manipulate data. If people want to believe in a known fraud, it's their privilege. Just don't expect the rest of us to buy into your delusion.

Rather than react like petulant children, it would be interesting if people could actually produce real data that demonstrated a significant contribution of man made greenhouse gasses without excluding water vapor. Moreover, since greenhouse gasses protect us from much of the sun's radiation, they would need to explain why we don't need them.

It's all a moot point, however. If you look at the levels of pollution they say is toxic and look at what Mt. St. Helens put out in a single eruption, all of mankind must have been wiped out long ago. I guess since we don't exist, this is all a waste of time.