Man-made climate change is done for. Dead.

[vtec]

My responses in red below.

Science is imperfect, and I am not against debate about the details of climate change. My point is that the climate change deniers try and grab every scrap of material to push an agenda that climate change is not happening or is not man made. The stolen emails is a case in point. If the deniers had any real evidence - i.e. peer reiviewed, credible publications - against Anthropogenic Global Warming they would be trumpeting that, not some stolen emails which prove nothing. The deniers always want "more proof" so they can sit on their backside instead of contributing. [Firstly, an agenda is usually a hidden or different goal than they want people to believe, you haven't highlighted any agenda at all. We don't want more proof, we want enough evidence that we can call it proof beyond reasonable doubt, the evidence I have seen seems about 50-50 at the moment which means nothing. How do you know that the emails prove nothing, or have you dismissed them without further investigation because of your preheld faith/belief.]

I admit that I was guilty of the attitude that climate change wasn't a big deal or not something I needed to worry about. But now that my girlfriend is pregnant I have to start thinking about the future for our son or daughter.
[Don't let that woman cloud your judgement with fear, you're not approaching the science with a sound mind when you let feelings and fears get in the way. I think it's strange that you might think that I care nought about the future of the earth, this seems to be something that AGW believers seem to insinuate quite regularly.]

I think we won't know everything about climate change for some time. But that doesn't mean it's not happening. For instance, we don't know everything about cancer. But people die of cancer every day. We don't know completely why Rossi is so good. But Rossi wins. So at some point us non-scientists have to make up our minds and decide whether you want to do something about it. And, as far as I can tell, the sooner we act the less costly it will be for all of us.
[A big difference between Rossi and AGW is that there is proof that Rossi is or at least has been the best motorcycle racer in the world, until we know more about climate change, we won't know where the climate is going to get, hotter or colder, or if it is affected much by anthropological sources, and even then taking aggressive/evasive action is "a bad idea"TM in my opinion.]

I've talked to many people about AGW, including one Greenpeace worker that I sat next to on the plane back from Buenos Aires, he didn't even know that the claim for AGW was surrounding Carbon Dioxide. More education needs to be done, people need to understand the details more.

On another note, I was talking to another greeny (mid 20's male) who seemed that think that everytime we flushed the toilet or used the shower, the water blinked out of existence and was thus wasted and the world was going to run out of water. Holy shit, had trouble controlling my spasms of laughter when I worked out what he was suggesting. I then went on to explain how the water recycles itself and it's all going to be okay, he probably slept easier that night. I would have been so scared if I thought all the water was going to disappear.

[MisterD]

i.e. peer reiviewed,

What, "you review my work, I'll review yours and we'll hound anyone that disagrees with us out of the field"? That kind of thing?

You only have to look at what happened to David Bellamy for daring to say he thought there were more pressing, proven, environmental problems than CO2...but hey, they didn't come with the lovely financial wins for speculators and power-grabs for the socialists that infest the UN.

[Badjelly]

And if anything comes up that challenges your armour of denial, you can always say "only 1.9% of CO2 is emitted by man" like a medieval peasant holding up a cross to ward off a vampire. That should keep you safe.

Removed and sent as PM to the Science Bully hiding behind his Science

Damn! I've been thinking up that vampire line for days! It took a while before I could work it in. I suspect Quasi doesn't feel quite as bullied by it as you might think.

When I lived in America in the 1980s there was a marvellous 10-minute radio program called "Ask Dr Science". A question would be posed and Dr Science would give some bullshit answer. The byline was "Remember, he knows more than you do." Somehow I'm reminded of this. I can't think why.

[Badjelly]

Having been accused of being a science bully for (I think) ignoring most of what other people say I'm going to do it again by ignoring the rest of what you wrote in your post (for the time being anyway) and responding to this...

First point, it is some evidence towards CO2 not affecting temperature, because by the GHG CO2 devil theory...

Stop right there. There is no theory that says CO2 is the only climate forcing. None. None.

[Badjelly]

You only have to look at what happened to David Bellamy for daring to say he thought there were more pressing, proven, environmental problems than CO2...but hey, they didn't come with the lovely financial wins for speculators and power-grabs for the socialists that infest the UN.

I believe there are some timeline discrepancies in Dr Bellamy's complaints of persecution.

And, by the way, I don't think he every got around to acknowledging his trouble with the shift key.

[vtec]

Having been accused of being a science bully for (I think) ignoring most of what other people say I'm going to do it again by ignoring the rest of what you wrote in your post (for the time being anyway) and responding to this...




Stop right there. There is no theory that says CO2 is the only climate forcing. None. None.

Well Carbon Dioxide is the main focus of the emissions trading scheme, and all the media attention, and I assume that's because Carbon Dioxide is the devil behind AGW? So no need to "stop right there".

I'll take you not addressing the rest of my post as an agreement.

[James Deuce]

Stop right there. There is no theory that says CO2 is the only climate forcing. None. None.

You're ignoring the science media consensus that the general public are too thick to understand any other theory. Combined with the media storm on Carbon Trading which is going to cost every person in "Western Civilisation" a lot of money each so that polluters can keep polluting and you'll see where the confusion comes from.

If you want people to think something is bad, fine them for it.

[SPman]

........

The change the HAS to happen is philosophical and cultural, not physical or financial.

And that's it, in a trimmed out quote........

until we know more about climate change, we won't know where the climate is going to get, hotter or colder,

If the methane clathrates start to go, I think we can bet on hotter.....much hotter.

[Badjelly]

Well Carbon Dioxide is the main focus of the emissions trading scheme, and all the media attention, and I assume that's because Carbon Dioxide is the devil behind AGW? So no need to "stop right there".

Yes, CO2 is largely "the devil" (your word) behind the current concern with AGW, because its a significant greenhouse gas and it's long-lived. But it's not the only factor affecting climate and no-one has ever (to my knowledge) suggested it was.

Over the last few hundred thousand years (probably the last 2 million) the Earth's climate variation has been dominated by big swings between glacial and interglacial conditions. This has involved forcing from changes in the Earth's orbit, greenhouse gases, dust and ice. The orbital changes seem to have set the timing and the others have been feedbacks.

This is a bit different from the current situation where we are putting geophysically significant amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere.

I'll take you not addressing the rest of my post as an agreement.

Not a safe assumption. I just hadn't got around to reading it.

[Quasievil]

Thank god for tag team global warming debating.........

[Swoop]

It's like flipping a coin with heads on both sides and saying heads every time.

Close...
More like having $$'s on each side of the coin. Some cocksucker is making bazillions from the public, from all of this.


Yet the planet could not care less.

[mashman]

Ok, so if CO2 is such a bastard, why are we cutting down all the trees? Wouldn't you think a CO2 - O2 absorbing organism would be given "protection" by the powers that be? If CO2 is such a bad thing, plant more fuckin trees... not problem solved, but surely a start?

[Badjelly]

Thank god for tag team global warming debating.........

Great image! Sweaty bodies jumping in and out of the ring. Blood, snarling. I bags be Gorgeous George.

The best bit is when I break a chair over your head.

[Badjelly]

Thank god for tag team global warming debating.........

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_2fgn3xZDtk...28small%29.jpg

[Ducface]

do we still have to worry about the ozone hole cause those icebergs are getting really close