And the anti-science march continues

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Feb 15, 2012.

  1. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #1
    The propaganda machine in this country just keeps getting stronger and stronger.
     
  2. fox10078 macrumors 6502

    fox10078

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    #2
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

    There should not be any debate about the fact the climate is changing, because it is. Now whether you believe it was caused by humans or a natural cycle is were the argument is.

    Teach the kids about the history of the earths climate and the data instead of shoving viewpoints down their throats.
     
  3. h00ligan macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #3
    If you think that man's impact on climate change is well established and grounded, I'd suggest there's more reading to be done. It's in its infancy and it's a cash cow on both sides...

    TEach about climate change, discuss both sides of global warming. With facts.

    To state it's unscientific to believe evidence is inconclusive right now...well...there are scientists who don't agree.
     
  4. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #4
    Skepticism on this matter falls almost purely on partisan lines. That in itself ought to demonstrate that this issue is being argued across a political and even religious divide rather than as a pure scientific debate.

    The loudest voices of skepticism come from people who stand to financially benefit from injecting doubt over climate change.

    Teaching skepticism of certain subjects in schools is a way indoctrinate children into one political party or another. It has nothing at all to do with fair-mindedness or objectivity.
     
  5. MorphingDragon, Feb 15, 2012
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2012

    MorphingDragon macrumors 603

    MorphingDragon

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    The World Inbetween
    #5
    I don't see whats politically controversial of pumping oodles of carbon gases and dangerous and toxic fumes into the air and destroying the Ozone layer.
     
  6. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #6
    I'm afraid man's impact is well supported by the evidence. At a societal and political level there is "debate", at a scientific level there is not even close to a 50:50 split amongst scientists and the evidence.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Academies_of_Science
    Wiki has a good summary. The vast majority of Scientific Orgnisations support the notion and in studies less than 5% of published data is against human contribution.
     
  7. MorphingDragon macrumors 603

    MorphingDragon

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    The World Inbetween
    #7
    There is a growing hole in the Ozone layer above New Zealand, non native plants can literally burn to death here on a particularly hot day.
     
  8. h00ligan macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #8
    There are many reasons that may be the case, but moreover man's impact is not the point of contention. The undefined is the amount of impact.

    Black adder, I think that's an interesting theory, but I'm not sure I agree with it.

    Skepticism should be taught, one shouldn't believe unless evidence supports..of course that would rule out all religion.
     
  9. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #9
    What studies have been done in this area so far?
     
  10. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #10
    Yah, what the Hell is with that ****? :confused::confused::confused:

    It's a slam-dunk for God's sake.
     
  11. h00ligan macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #11
    Population correlation studies with stellite imaging....though they seem to add to the confusion as things don't align as expected.
     
  12. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #12
    Any study or studies in particular you could cite ?
     
  13. h00ligan macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #13
    I'll have to dig up the names and links.

    Anyway, I know I'm in a minority. My thoughts on it are like atheism in so much as, I'm not at this point able to assert anything.
     
  14. chrono1081 macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #14
    Anyone who thinks climate change isn't happening buried their head in the sand.

    NASA has plenty of info on their website regarding this, not to mention you can see it everywhere.

    I live in Pennsylvania, in the 80s and 90s snow covered the ground from November to March. Now we only get a handful of snows each winter. We either get nothing, or rain. Its been getting worse the past 10 years, with the last 5 years seeing the most change.
     
  15. h00ligan macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert
    #15
    Ten years is less than a grain f sand. NASA data is woefully incomplete.

    Climate change is happening. There's no debate.
     
  16. Happybunny macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    #16
    As the country where I live is under sea level, I think I'm entitled to worry.:(
     
  17. CalBoy macrumors 604

    CalBoy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    #17
    Not really. There's no economic gain for the climate scientists who have been measuring snow pacts, shorelines, etc for 4 decades. They're reporting the facts.
    There really isn't any credible opposing evidence. We can pretty readily measure the sheer amount of pollutants we put into the atmosphere and what ratio of greenhouse gases they represent.

    This debate only exists for those who think that science should only tell them what they want to hear.

    Ummm, what???:

    I don't think the anti-science crowd is here yet. To acknowledge that the debate is here would be to acknowledge the base fact that climate change is happening.

    There is plenty of evidence. Skepticism doesn't mean being a contrarian. When 95%+ of climate scientists have formed a consensus on the subject, it's ok to move beyond skepticism and into tacit assumption of truth.
     
  18. iStudentUK macrumors 65816

    iStudentUK

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #18
    Now I do believe in man-made climate change, but when people cite cases like this it makes me mad! One location over a short period of time is not significant at all. Either cite proper data (large areas going back centuries or millennia) or nothing.
     
  19. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #19
    Search on Dr. Roy Spencer. You will find he published a paper that shows NASA (for whom he works) satellite data disproves the theoretically attributed effects of CO2 on heat retention. Then look at some of the other links that point out the chasmic flaws in his model and analysis. You may even find a link to the letter from the editor of Remote Sensing announcing his resignation over the publication of Spencer's paper.

    In terms of real, practical science, those who seek to shoot down the idea of anthropogenic climate change offer the equivalent of those who seek to reveal the domestic conspiracy to bring down the world trade center towers, the other Kennedy shooters in Dallas or the space aliens who built the pyramids. They are grasping at straws.
     
  20. chrono1081 macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #20
    Its not a short period of time, its 14 years with less and less snow each year. Sure its not scientific observation but anyone living here knows its getting warmer and warmer. 20 years ago we'd have 3 feet of snow covering the ground all winter that led into the spring flooding season. Now theres nothing snow wise and there hasn't been in years. It doesn't take a scientist to know whats going on.

    And I hate to sound smug, but scientists can sometimes be some of the dumbest people out there.

    For more scientific evidence look here:

    http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
     
  21. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #21
    14 years is very short in climatic terms. Its very difficult to say its a trend or an aberration. If you had 40 or 50 or 100 or 1000 years sampled from many varied locations and still noticed a trend, then we could say something is happening (and this does appear to be the case). As to why its happening, that is the real question (but its probably us).
     
  22. mrsir2009 macrumors 604

    mrsir2009

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #22
    Yup. Kiwi sunburn is the worst :eek:
     
  23. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #23
    The climate changes, that we can be certain of.
     
  24. calderone macrumors 68040

    calderone

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle
    #24
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

    Skepticism? I think you mean critical thinking.
     
  25. h00ligan macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Location:
    A hot desert

Share This Page