Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Pseudoscience
 Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 11

Bill scott
SFN Addict

USA
2103 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  13:03:52  Show Profile Send Bill scott a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?

By Timothy Ball

Monday, February 5, 2007

Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition.Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg. . For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.


Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?


Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science.


So how has the world come to believe that something is wrong?


Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith.


Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus.


Even in University, where free speech and challenge to prevailing wisdoms are supposedly encouraged, academics remain silent.


The theory was accepted before testing had started, and effectively became a law.


"the consensus was reached before the research had even begun."


The normal scientific method is effectively being thwarted.


Meanwhile, politicians are being listened to, even though most of them have no knowledge or understanding of science, especially the science of climate and climate change. Hence, they are in no position to question a policy on climate change when it threatens the entire planet. Moreover, using fear and creating hysteria makes it very difficult to make calm rational decisions about issues needing attention.


Until you have challenged the prevailing wisdom you have no idea how nasty people can be. Until you have re-examined any issue in an attempt to find out all the information, you cannot know how much misinformation exists in the supposed age of information.


http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming020507.htm

"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-

"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-

The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-

Fripp
SFN Regular

USA
727 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  13:23:59   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Fripp a Private Message  Reply with Quote
So Bill, I assume that you looked long and hard, ignoring the literally THOUSANDS of peer-reviewed studies and papers that stated unequivocably that global warming is real, until you found the lone voice in the wilderness who wrote a viewpoint that agreed with your limited worldview. It's sad, really, when you have to quote an opinion piece from one (yes, one) climatologist printed from an obscure publication that supports your feeble viewpoint.

One question for you, Bill. And if you answer with another question, without directly answering my question, let it be clear that you pussed out again.

My question: If you don't believe that current OVERWHELMING evidence supports global warming, what WILL convince you? And when we see your level of "convince-ment", what if it's too late? Additionally, even if global warming wasn't happening, do you not think that MINOR lifestyle choices (such as phasing out fossil fuel use, more renewable energy, better and more efficient homes and cars, compact flourescent lightbulbs instead of incandescent) are the right thing to do anyway? What possible reason can you have that condones living the typical American over-consumption/over-waste lifestyle?

"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"

"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"

"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?"
Go to Top of Page

furshur
SFN Regular

USA
1536 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  13:29:04   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send furshur a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Bill, I hope you closed your eyes before you stuck your head in the sand. You can always find someone who disagrees with a position. My question is, "why are you looking so hard to find someone to disagree with the obvious?"

The Bush Whitehouse even agrees that the global warming exisist and human activity is a major cause. It is getting harder and harder to find any nah sayers. Good luck, Bill.



If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know.
Go to Top of Page

Bill scott
SFN Addict

USA
2103 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  13:52:33   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Bill scott a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Fripp



quote:
So Bill, I assume that you looked long and hard, ignoring the literally THOUSANDS of peer-reviewed studies and papers that stated unequivocably that global warming is real, until you found the lone voice in the wilderness who wrote a viewpoint that agreed with your limited worldview.


Yes, I missed the Al Gore movie.



quote:
It's sad, really, when you have to quote an opinion piece from one (yes, one) climatologist printed from an obscure publication that supports your feeble viewpoint.


He did mention personal attacks in the peice and their nature.


quote:
One question for you, Bill. And if you answer with another question, without directly answering my question, let it be clear that you pussed out again.


Blah, blah, blah



quote:
My question: If you don't believe that current OVERWHELMING evidence supports global warming, what WILL convince you?


I don't debate GW. The debate is the cause of the GW. BTW, whatever happened to the globial cooling debate from the 70's?


quote:
And when we see your level of "convince-ment", what if it's too late?


Then it's to late.



quote:
Additionally, even if global warming wasn't happening, do you not think that MINOR lifestyle choices (such as phasing out fossil fuel use, more renewable energy, better and more efficient homes and cars, compact flourescent lightbulbs instead of incandescent) are the right thing to do anyway? What possible reason can you have that condones living the typical American over-consumption/over-waste lifestyle?


I don't have a problem with any of these.

"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-

"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-

The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-

Go to Top of Page

perrodetokio
Skeptic Friend

275 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  14:46:45   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send perrodetokio a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Here's the thing: Let's assume for a minute that global warming is not caused by humans and their doings. Fine.

What's not fine however is that industries (fed by an over-consumption/over-waste lifestyle) have poisoned land and water in many places.


The north of Argentina floods every year because forests in the south of Brazil have been cut-down.
On the other hand, on the northeast of Argentina 2 rivers have been dried-out because of copper-mining industries (imagine the consecuences).

In Chile, there's this American company (linked to GW Bush and his cronies) that want to extract gold from a glacier which will cause the poisoning of this great water resource (not to mention its beauty).

In some cities (including many "first world" cities) it's not safe to jog at certain hours of the day (peak-hours mostly) and in a few cities taking a newly born baby on to the streets at peak-hours would cause the baby to die.

And on, and on, and on...

These are FACTS my friend.

Come visit me in Argentina and I'll give you the tour (a horrific tour, that is).

So, even if global warming is not real (as some people claim) we still have a problem with over-consumption/over-waste lifestyles. A BIG ONE!

We always had that problem, however because world population has increased and land and resources are limited, it's a lot worse now than 50 years ago.

So what are you going to do about it?

Salud!

"Yes I have a belief in a creator/God but do not know that he exists." Bill Scott

"They are still mosquitoes! They did not turn into whales or lizards or anything else. They are still mosquitoes!..." Bill Scott

"We should have millions of missing links or transition fossils showing a fish turning into a philosopher..." Bill Scott
Go to Top of Page

furshur
SFN Regular

USA
1536 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  14:47:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send furshur a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
I don't debate GW. The debate is the cause of the GW. BTW, whatever happened to the globial cooling debate from the 70's?
Yes, you clearly don't debate or even discuss. You have a rock solid position and it won't change. My question is who told you to have this position. Clearly it was not the climatologist who have had training in this field, so is it your church, the Drudge Report, some segment from Fox news or what?


If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know.
Go to Top of Page

Fripp
SFN Regular

USA
727 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  15:03:10   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Fripp a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Bill scott
Yes, I missed the Al Gore movie.


Instead of addressing the facts of THOUSANDS of scientists, you resort to an ad hominem attack. Typical

quote:
He did mention personal attacks in the peice and their nature.


Of course, the mythical, hearsay, personal attacks. Oh you poor persecuted people...

quote:
Blah, blah, blah


About the most intelligent response I've heard from you. Thanks for reinforcing my prediction.

quote:
I don't debate GW. The debate is the cause of the GW.


Then why did you post the article?

quote:
Then it's too late.


(whistles) Wow, Bill. Devastating logic.

quote:
I don't have a problem with any of these.


Then, as usual, your position lacks any internal logic. Why post an article that posits the opposite of what you've answered here?

"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"

"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"

"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?"
Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  15:43:42   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The Anarctic ice cores tell the story:
quote:
The graph below includes data from the Nature paper, plus data from other studies referenced below. Notice how CO2 concentration rises vertically at the end of the time series. The increase appears vertical because of the large time scale, but it actually occurs over the past 150 years, which corresponds to the age of fossil fuels (the modern industrial age). Notice too that there hasn't been a corresponding increase in temperature during this time period. This is probably due to the ability of the oceans to function as a heat sink, and thereby delay the increase in atmospheric temperatures. However, there are recent indications that the oceans are now warming, which will reduce their ability to act as a heat sink.



Neat, isn't it, this research thing...




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

Kil
Evil Skeptic

USA
13463 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  17:17:38   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Kil's Homepage  Send Kil an AOL message  Send Kil a Yahoo! Message Send Kil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Bill Scott:
Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science.


Gee, I'm pretty sure it was you Bill, who said that evolution is the greatest deception in the history of science. Of course, I'm paraphrasing. Anyhow, they can't both be the greatest deception so, which one is it Bill?


Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.

Why not question something for a change?

Genetic Literacy Project
Go to Top of Page

Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist

USA
4954 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  17:57:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Cuneiformist a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ugh. If you look through the Canadian Free Press, you'll see that it's nothing more than a mouthpiece for any Rush Limbaugh-like shill who's got a word processor and a basic understanding of English grammar. Half the paper is devoted to anti-global warming propoganda, and the other half is what Fox News would look like if it had a fraction of its budget and came from Canada.

As for Dr Ball-- is it really an accomplishment to be Canada's first climatologist? And what has he done in recent years besides tour the world giving standard "global warming is a hoax" talks to friendly audiences all on the dime of the oil industry? Besides white collate Exxon employees, does anyone care what he says??
Go to Top of Page

Original_Intent
SFN Regular

USA
609 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  18:58:06   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Original_Intent a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think the global warming point is moot.

To listen to the experts say what is needed if we are the cause makes it so. It's too late. You are not going o see any country crash their economy to fix it. I don'tthink you will see India or China slow down their growth to help to fix it.

Noone wants to conserve, especially big-business and government. Hell, even Gore wants his prvate flights, unlike Prince Charles who will walk the walk, even at the expense of yet more criticm from the Queen.

Which brings us to the heart o the problem, as perrodetokio pointed out and anyone with half a brain should have been working on since the 80's (probably before, but that was my time:
quote:

So, even if global warming is not real (as some people claim) we still have a problem with over-consumption/over-waste lifestyles. A BIG ONE!

We always had that problem, however because world population has increased and land and resources are limited, it's a lot worse now than 50 years ago.


This I find far more disturbing to then global warming. Global warming will make parts of the earth inhospitable, but even inhospitable places can bear life. Places poisoned by nuclear waste, heavey concentrations of heavey metals, and other chemical agents will not.

Face it, for the near future it's moot. There are other concerns.

Peace
Joe
Go to Top of Page

Ricky
SFN Die Hard

USA
4907 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  20:10:23   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Ricky an AOL message Send Ricky a Private Message  Reply with Quote
A geology professor summed up the entire debate quite well for me when I took geology. The following is paraphrased:

We know, for a fact, that a higher concentration of CO2 will cause more energy to be absorbed. We know, for a fact, that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has been increasing over the past 100 years. We know, for a fact, that the average temperature of the earth has been increasing over these past 100 years. What we can't say is whether or not this temperature increase is due to the earth's natural variations. But the question is, are you willing to take that risk?

Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov
Go to Top of Page

moakley
SFN Regular

USA
1884 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  20:25:31   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send moakley a Private Message  Reply with Quote
When I first started reading the link provided by bill Scott I had the distinct impression that I was reading something by Jonathan Wells or Bill Dembski on ID. So I wondered what others were saying about Dr. Ball.
The first canadian PhD in Climatology. Wow two peer reviewed papers in 35 years. He must be exhausted.

Nice source Bill.

Life is good

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26007 Posts

Posted - 02/05/2007 :  21:39:01   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The comments to that article are even more devestating, moak:
From this it is pretty safe to say that Dr. Ball has spent the majority of his academic career teaching basic science to undergrads. In a nutshell, his scholarly accomplishments are few and that which he has accomplished is not highly regarded by his peers.
And the thing that struck me first about Ball's editorial was what Bill quoted:
But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition.
Which says, of course, nothing more than "I'm smart. I'm really really smart. Why won't anyone believe me when I say I'm smart?" That, of course, would be followed by the sound of Dr. Ball stamping his little feet in frustration at being stuck teaching what he's teaching, where he's teaching it, and calling down persecution upon himself just to get noticed. All publicity is good publicity when no publicity means that you die inside, ain't it, doc?

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 02/06/2007 :  00:06:27   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
"I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology"

Never trust version 1.0. It's bound to have bugs, or in this case, bats. Bill's kind of guy!

Hey, Bill, how does the hypothesis of global warming by human activity even show up on your evil-detecting radar? I mean, how does noticing this apparent situation contradict scripture or defy your god? I can't figure the connection between you fundies and global warming denial. Maybe fundies are funded with petrodollars? Maybe just don't give a shit, since the Rapture's coming? Or maybe they actually believe in, but WANT the disaster, in order to fulfil prophecy? I can't choose between these.

Come on, Bill, what's your take on this?


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Go to Top of Page

Ghost_Skeptic
SFN Regular

Canada
510 Posts

Posted - 02/06/2007 :  00:18:21   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Ghost_Skeptic a Private Message  Reply with Quote
As the tragic case of Valery Fabrikant ("worthy" of inclusion in Filthy's signature) shows, having a PhD and being a professor at a Canadian Univerisity is no guarentee that an individual is not bat shit insane.

Ricky described the concern best - the consequences of acting and CO2 turning out to not be a problem are lot less severe than the consequences of doing nothing and finding out that the CO2 was the problem.

Global Warming is a hell of a lot more dangerous than the effects of toxic chemicals or nuclear waste because to the risk of posiive feedback "tipping points" these are:

The arctic ice cap melts resulting in the less sunlight being reflected.

The permafrost in Siberia and Northern Canada melts releasing more greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.

The tropical rainforests dry out and burn removing a CO2 sink and releasing sequestered CO2

If temperatures get high enough, hydrates in seafloor sediments melt releasing large amounts of methane into the atmosphere.

I have heard "experts" say smoking doensn't cause cancer, BSE (mad cow) is not transmitted through the food chain, seat belts are dangerous, the World Trade centre was brought down be controlled demolition, The Nazis never killed all those Jews and others etc. etc. You can always find a publicity seeking nutbar with PHD to say almost anything.

By the way Bill - I am not some tree hugging lefty
I am a fiscal conservative who makes his living in the upstream oil and gas industry.

"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink. / You can send a kid to college but you can't make him think." - B.B. King

History is made by stupid people - The Arrogant Worms

"The greater the ignorance the greater the dogmatism." - William Osler

"Religion is the natural home of the psychopath" - Pat Condell

"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the supreme being as his father in the womb of a virgin, will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter" - Thomas Jefferson
Edited by - Ghost_Skeptic on 02/06/2007 07:34:14
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 11 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.55 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000