Fact 1. Man removeth carbon from carbon sinks where in some cases the carbon has resided for 100's of millions of years. It combines with oxygen to form CO2.
Fact 2. The level of atmospheric CO2 is rising.
Fact 3. CO2 is the key factor behind Global Warming.
The climategate emails showed quite clearly the nature of the uncertainty where people were worried it was not warming up....
They showed no such thing despite deniers trying to turn it into some huge conspiracy. Your use of the word "climategate" itself shows you are trying to disparage the scientists involved through connotations of a conspiracy. Your intellectual dishonesty is simply disappointing.
You still have failed, despite being asked numerous times, to provide credible peer reviewed scientific papers that overturn the overwhelming consensus amongst the scientific community.
So I will ask again... please provide your peer reviewed papers in a respected journal that overturn the overwhelming scientific consensus.
Do not skirt the issue. Do not try to claim we are abusing you by asking this. Do not try to disparage climate scientists.
You cannot possibly believe that C02 is responsible for warming the planet from -15C to 15C?
And you cannot possibly believe that if the Earth was as warm today as 1000 years ago that is an insignificant factor in assessing the causes of the current warming
It's more -18 C to 15 C.
The next trick of our glorious banks will be to charge us a fee for using net bank!!! You are no longer customer, you are property!!!
Fact 1. Man removeth carbon from carbon sinks where is some cases the carbon has resided for 100's of millions of years. It combine with oxygen to form CO2.
Fact 2. The level of atmospheric CO2 is rising.
Fact 3. CO2 is the key factor behind Global Warming.
Count you the kind of person who predicts the future based on what we call faith.
Faith told you that the Euro area had some magical abilities to out perform the USA
Faith told you that the USA would have such a high level of doom that you had to change your name to avoid the shame
Faith told you house prices would fall in the USA this autumn
Faith tells you that governments are restricted in their money creating activities by a secret agreement created in 1988 where you apparently are the only person on the internet who has worked this out.
When i see that you are guided by reality I will see that you are not a person who is guided by faith
NotFooled
10 Dec 2012, 06:08 PM
You still have failed, despite being asked numerous times, to provide credible peer reviewed scientific papers that overturn the overwhelming consensus amongst the scientific community.
You seem unable to grasp that i am not saying the overwhelming scientific consensus is wrong
The overwhelming consensus is that humans are very likely to be warming the planet.
C02 must surely have some impact on our climate and it seems very unreasonable to deny it.
However if it is now as warm as it was 1000 years ago what kind of climate can we expect in the future?
It is still quite possible that we are in fact heading into a long term cooling and the warm periods of the last 5 thousand years are just blips on the way to an ice age. Nobody actually knows what will happen in the future.
If it gets colder no scientific facts will be found to be wrong.
C02 is however an essentially almost biologically harmless naturally occuring component of the atmosphere, that is essential for most forms of life on earth, and not something that can be said to be a pollutant. ... C02 has obviously been set up to be a kind of bogeyman where harmless pictures of clouds of water pouring from cooling towers are accompanied by a frightening message about a dangerous gas called C02.
You're repeating the claims of US Republican Michele Bachmann, claims which made her a laughing stock almost universally and which have been described as a "grand spectacle of stupidity".
Let me quote just one comment on this:
Quote:
She repeats over and over that CO2 is a natural gas. Yes, we know…no one is claiming otherwise. (Also, what would an “unnatural” gas be, anyway?) Nitrogen is also a natural substance, it helps plants grow, and we produce perfectly natural nitrogenous materials from our bodies — so does that mean that we should stop sewer services and allow everyone to wallow in their poop?
She claims that not one study has ever been produced to show that CO2 is harmful, and she goes further to claim that CO2 is a harmless gas. We could correct that in just a few minutes: give me a large tank of CO2 and a small room containing Michele Bachmann, and we’ll give her a personal experience.
The atmosphere is 3% CO2? Is she really that ignorant? It’s more like 0.03%. And again, no one is arguing that CO2 is evil — it’s that its concentration has distinct effects on the temperature of the planet, and that concentration is changing.
Count you the kind of person who predicts the future based on what we call faith.
Faith told you that the Euro area had some magical abilities to out perform the USA
Faith told you that the USA would have such a high level of doom that you had to change your name to avoid the shame
Faith told you house prices would fall in the USA this autumn
Faith tells you that governments are restricted in their money creating activities by a secret agreement created in 1988 where you apparently are the only person on the internet who has worked this out.
When i see that you are guided by reality I will see that you are not a person who is guided by faith
What a dumb argument. There is a difference between facts and opinions. Who is better between Europe and US is mainly opinion.
Following on from this thread, I was wondering how many anthropogenic climate change alarmists also believe in a god?
The anthropogenic climate change theory is more like a religion than science. Everyone knows the climate has always been influenced by natural forces, and has been changing for billions of years, before humans were around. Any impact of humans on climate change is unknown and can't be measured in isolation from those natural causes. Therefore it is impossible to demonstrate that current changes in the climate (temperature, sea levels, ice caps, extreme weather events etc) are caused predominantly by humans rather than other natural forces. There is no evidence. All the alarmists have is their faith... it's like a religion.
Climate change alarmists talk about a 'consensus' by which they really mean a majority opinion. There is no true consensus on anthropogenic climate change any more than there is a consensus on the existence of a god (the majority of people also believe in some form of a god, despite the lack of evidence).
I don't see how it would be possible for a climate change alarmist to also believe in a god. Because those who believe in a god generally believe the god is responsible for everything, which would have to include responsibility for the climate - i.e. humans can't be causing climate change if a god is responsible for it. Alternatively they might argue that god is responsible for what humans do, therefore climate change is god's will.
Personally I don't believe in a god, and I believe climate change is natural. Humans may contribute to it, but humans are a part of nature too, and our influence is probably tiny compared to the massive influence from non-human sources. Any influence we may have on the climate will also change naturally as we inevitably move to alternative energy sources. Regardless of what humans do, nature will continue to adapt to changes in the climate (while also causing changes to the climate) as has been the case for billions of years. Humans can't prevent this from happening... we will simply continue to adapt along with the rest of nature.
I am an atheist because the science supports that position.
I accept AGW because the science supports that position.
You are a know nothing on the interweb. You have provided no reason for anyone to accept your baseless assertion that AGW is more like a religion than science, only your perosnal bias and ignorance.
Do a little more research and see how many climate skeptics are also creationists.
Andrew Judd is a pure, unadulterated nutter who is blind to the overwhelming evidence against his anti anthropogenic climate change belief. I have to wonder if he also believes that the 2nd coming of Jesus is imminent.
Actually, Andrew has a better understanding of the science than most of the people I know, skeptic or non-skeptic. Perhaps he takes a bit of the stuff on some of the skeptic blogs a little too much at face-value, but most people take the rubbish that comes out of the media at face value as well.
The post from the media is pure scenario porn. It bears almost no relationship to where climate science is today. It talks about 6-degree warming whereas the smart-money prediction (which is also a prediction, not fact) seems to be around 2 degrees by 2100. In fact a bunch of research came out in the last week saying that the sensitivity may be overstated and 1.2 degrees may be closer to the mark. To get to 6 degrees we would need to cross a yet-to-be-discovered tipping point. It's possible, but then so is an ice age.
The truth will set you free. But first, it will piss you off. --Gloria Steinem AREPS™
You're repeating the claims of US Republican Michele Bachmann, claims which made her a laughing stock almost universally and which have been described as a "grand spectacle of stupidity".
Let me quote just one comment on this:
C02 is an essentially almost biologically harmless gas.
Currently we are burning fossil fuels to ensure plants in greenhouses have sufficient C02 where C02 is essential for life on earth as we now know it.
And quite obviously C02 is being portrayed as some kind of bogeyman where vast clouds of water coming from cooling towers are being pictured along with the alarming C02 doom stories
What the science says... Direct observations find that CO2 is rising sharply due to human activity. Satellite and surface measurements find less energy is escaping to space at CO2 absorption wavelengths. Ocean and surface temperature measurements find the planet continues to accumulate heat. This gives a line of empirical evidence that human CO2 emissions are causing global warming.
This is of course bullshit. Exactly the same amount of energy is escaping to space at CO2 and H2O absorption wavelengths.
Or at least, if less energy was escaping at the absorption wavelengths, it would be a sign that either the albedo of the earth had increased or insolation had reduced, which would tend to cause cooling, not warming.
Brought back to basics, the AGW thesis is that the same amount of energy is escaping at these wavelengths, but it has been through more molecules (scattered more times) on the way out and the average final emission occurs at a higher altitude.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy
