Story Comments
Posted by: bigurn 1 year, 3 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
45%
bigurn1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh, posh. There are significant numbers of titled scientists who are skeptical about the nature, extent and causes of global warming. No one seriously doubts that temperatures have gone up, but there are significant data errors regarding the amount of that rise. The causation for the rise is very seriously debated, and man's contribution to the change is also rigorously debated.
Reply
What a truly scurrilous article, and a waste of my time to read.-
75%
Tangent0011 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually there are what effectively amounts to a handful of scientists with appropriate credentials that disagree with the consensus. Many of those have had their studies funded by, guess who? Large oil and coal companies.
Reply
Further, one has to look at motive. What possible motive is there for manufacturing a scientific lie? Funding? There is not much environmental funding available in the first place, and agreeing with the consensus simply dilutes the pool. Prestige? Science is all about proving your peers wrong or coming up with the Next Big Thing. This is not a pack of thumb-sitters.
The Earth is warmer and there is a greater amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. If the sun were simply getting warmer then the upper stratosphere (the layer above the reach of CO2) should be warming as well. It isn't In fact, it's cooling, due to a greater amount of heat reflected back to the Earth
Increased CO2 is also showing up as increased acidity levels in the oceans. Excess CO2 that cannot be 'fixed' by organisms is turned into carbonic acid, changing the delicate pH balance of the seas and potentially disrupting the food chain.
Frankly, I HOPE the consensus is wrong, but I see little data that points to the contrary.-
Locky12Comment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
50%
buckncindykill1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Please:
Reply
1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming.
3. The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980).
4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.
Instead, what do we get? The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990 and yet there is no evidence that carbon emissions are actually causing global warming! It's a fraud. A fraud to enrich Gore, and a fraud designed to form the basis for repeated attacks on capitalism and free market economies. -
-
-
-
loading ...
Klarissa
Locky12
reasonable1
buckncindykill
Ratskii
miklkit
juvel
Dionys
bluetexasvalley
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.