Rubbish. He believes the debate is over. Of course, he can come on and defend himself rather than you, however he's flat out said it before. The Church of Al Gore is open for business, Cypress is the altar boy.
Shout Out from Dr. Stephen Hawking
- Thread starter Cypress
- Start date
Of course you do, however being a physicist doesn't make you any more conversant in a different field than being a VP made Al Gore an expert.
I think all this alarmist BS doesn't help at all. We need to get off oil but not because we need to save the world, we need to get off oil because we can't produce enough for our own consumption. We already have a viable alternative, we just ignore it because it is not politically expedient to give those same companies money to produce NG for our cars rather than gasoline. While we are doing that we can make a concerted effort to make even better technologies for energy, ones that we can manufacture and sell. All this will make us safer and make the need for us to muck about in the ME almost non-existent.
Science-Denier Alert:
Key Findings from NASA’s June 2010 Analysis of GISS Surface Temperatures:
-The 12 month running global mean temperature is at a Record High
-These record temperatures occurred during the deepest solar irradiance minimum seen in a century, meaning the solar output should have had it’s maximum cooling effect during this time.
-January to June 2010 is the Hottest winter-spring on Record
-2010 will likely be the hottest year on record, although there is some uncertainty on this. Temps could trend down later in 2010 if there is a substantial La Nina event.
Key Findings from NASA’s June 2010 Analysis of GISS Surface Temperatures:
-The 12 month running global mean temperature is at a Record High
-These record temperatures occurred during the deepest solar irradiance minimum seen in a century, meaning the solar output should have had it’s maximum cooling effect during this time.
-January to June 2010 is the Hottest winter-spring on Record
-2010 will likely be the hottest year on record, although there is some uncertainty on this. Temps could trend down later in 2010 if there is a substantial La Nina event.
Why do you get angry at me, when all I do is post what the US National Academy of Sciences say? They say it's a "settled scientific fact".
Is there uncertainty in the science of climate change? Of course there is. Science can never give you a 100%, rock solid guarantee. I've stated that like ten billion times on your board, with respect to climate science. We've studied gravity for 400 years, and nobody has a rock solid, 100%, unimpeachable guarantee for what exactly the causes and mechanisms are of the gravitational force.
Are there alternative theories that explain the current warming trend? Nope. There are no plausible alternative theories. As the US National Science Academy states, the evidence and data are overwhelming. The earth is warming, and it is highly likely that it is due mostly to human activities. It is so well established at this point, that it has moved from a theory, to a settled scientific fact in the eye of the Academy. That's as good as it gets in science - a settled conclusion that reaches a very high level of probability.
Are there guesses, speculations, and hypotheses about other causes of global warming? Without a doubt. Cyber space, rightwing blogs, and editorial columns are replete with guesses and speculations about cooling trends, and how natural variation is causing all this. Is all this guesswork and speculation actual scientific theories? Nope. There hasn't been any plausible, credible, and peer reivewed scientific research that has even come remotely close to explaining the current warming trend, better than the current accepted scientific fact: that humans are very likely, most responsible for the warming
Last edited:
Wow, confirmed! You are so stupid you don't even know who your standing alongside
Ha! Calm down bro. My bad. I would have thought comments like this
And all the times you egged on, provided cover for, cheered, or high fived the comedic climate gate conspiracy rantings of Tinfoil, Bravo, Asshat, and other hilarious extreme fringe posters meant somehow you were emotionally invested in the climate gate/science denier contingent of wingnuts.
Good to see you backpedaling away from the climate gate conspiracy comedy!
"Debate" is a loaded and ambiguous word often used by creationists and science-deniers to give the impression that there is substantial and widespread disagreement about the theory of evolution, or the state of modern climate science.
It depends what you mean when you use the word "debate.
There is certainly "debate" about whether or not humans are influencing climate in cyberspace, on message boards, in editorial pages, and on rightwing blogs.
In the realm of scientific research, the word debate, in the scientific sense, commonly implies that there are a bevy of competing theories about a natural phenomena.
There are no competing theories on climate science. The theory that humans are influencing climate has been so thoroughly tested, replicated, and verified through decades of research from thousands of scientists, from around the world, as to elevate the theory to one of general scientific acceptance.
As with any well established theory - e.g., evolution and gravity - there will always be ongoing "debate" to resolve uncertainties, and refinements. But until some scientists can come up with an alternative theory that plausibly and credibly explains the rapid rise in temperatures of the last half century - one that doesn't involve human sources, and that can be tested and routinely verified - the "debate" is going to center around refining the uncertainties in the current state of knowledge.
Last edited:
My position has never changed.Ha! Calm down bro. My bad. I would have thought comments like this
And all the times you egged on, provided cover for, cheered, or high fived the comedic climate gate conspiracy rantings of Tinfoil, Bravo, Asshat, and other hilarious extreme fringe posters meant somehow you were emotionally invested in the climate gate/science denier contingent of wingnuts.
Good to see you backpedaling away from the climate gate conspiracy comedy!
Well, there ya go....of course....
Its that old, " If you don't believe me, just ask me,".....magic.
If you don't believe its settled fact...just freakin' ask me....
What a load....Peckerhead.
There you have it, folks. More braying, clucking, and hollering. But not a credible scientific link, or substantive, verified, and plausible scientific comment in sight!
The Science Denier Chronicles…Part Deux
As the comical follies of this thread – and many others –unequivocally demonstrate, the science deniers have nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch.
Oh, you will see a lot of foot stomping, braying, and squealing like stuck pigs. You will see insults hurled like “cypress is a moron”, “climate scientists are liars!”.....,. and passionate speculations, guesswork, and assertions that climate science is either bogus, highly dubious, or completely unsettled.
But, you will never find one of these Climate Gate comedians provide substantive links to credible and reputable scientific sources that support their hilarious assertions that this is all natural climatic variation, or that devious climate scientists are lying for fun and profit.
In addition to the reputable sources I linked previously on the thread, here are some more highly reputable, credible, and definitive sources on climate change, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the UK Hadley Center, the International Energy Agency, the U.S. Global Change Research Program, the National Science Foundation, the Smithsonian Institute, NASA, and US Environmental Protection Agency, et. al
One wonders if the science denier contingent will ever provide any substantive, credible, and internationally recognized links to support the assertions they holler out. I’ve been waiting in vain for months for a credible link from them, but hope still springs eternal!