Global Warming:The Politics and Science of Fear

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by madanthonywayne, May 13, 2007.

  1. madanthonywayne Morning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    Common sence and logic coming from where I'd least expect it, a college profesor!
    One of his students attests to the effect of propaganda such as Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth.
    Both of these movies present facts, some distorted perhaps, but they each present one side of the debate. Yet it is only one side that is being forced down the throats of students all over the world. It's even popping up in art class! One University requires that its students watch Al Gore's movie to graduate!

    This kind of consensus science propaganda is dangerous. These are the same methods used by the eugenics scientists and we all know how that worked out. Science is a process. Calling those who disagree with your conclusions "Global Warming deniers" and fascists is intimidation not science.
    http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Local/newEAST01ENV051207.htm
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,293
    Gore's movie is not science, but rhetoric. He is attempting to persuade. But he sticks closely to honest reason and evidence, and what he presents supports his conclusions in the original.

    The Great Global Warming Swindle is not honest, does not reason honestly or stick closely to evidence, and appears to be a politically motivated con job.

    There are good reasons for squinting at Gore's movie, qualifying some of the assertions in it, etc. The Swindle movie does not present any of them honestly. Presenting them as two equivalently supported and opposing views would be intellectually dishonest.

    I don't know whether Gore will be shown correct in his urgency or specific warnings, in fifty years. But uncertainty about one position does not mean any old scam assuming some "other" position deserves equal time.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    There is something very important to remember here. The vast majority of scientists and others who support the concept of global warming actually have very little to gain by supporting their position.

    On the other hand, there are HUGE numbers of people and corporations that have an awful LOT to gain by denying it.

    So, the first question would be, what do you know about the sponsors and producers of the "Great Global Warming Swindle?" Could it be either directly or indirectly (to hide their identities) that much of the money used for it's production came from parties that have a lot to save if they can forestall action that would hurt their profits?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. sandy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    7,926
    We have bigger problems right now than alGore's global hot air.
     
  8. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
    If u want to say , say it, why make us guess
     
  9. Nickelodeon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,581
    Mooslims?
     
  10. sandy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    7,926
    I'm not going there. I'm not going to get all p!ssed off again. You already know what America's two biggest problems are.

    alGore's fiction is not one of them

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. Nickelodeon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,581
    Bush and Cheney?
     
  12. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Hello, Sandy,

    I've not had occasion to speak to you before - just worked out that way - and I was hoping our first encounter might be on topic upon which we agreed. But, apparently, no such luck.

    Since it seems you don't believe that Global Warming / climate change is real, I was just wondering - are you qualified to challenge all the professionals who think it is? The mounting evidence certainly seems to indicate that they just might know what they're talking about.

    What basis do you have to disbelive it?
     
  13. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    Fine, don't get all scared and vote for Democrats. Just adapt to climate change. Oh, wait, you're not, because you're in the pockets of big oil? I guess we're all screwed, then.
     
  14. madanthonywayne Morning in America Staff Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    Right. I'm in the pocket of big oil.

    Gore's movie is full of crap. He claims sea levels will rise twenty feet in the next hundred years, when the actual maximum prediction is twenty inches! That's a pretty big fuckin' difference! That's the whole basis for his claims of cities being flooded, mass population relocation. etc.

    Twenty inches in a hundred years is nothing, and that's the max predicted if we do nothing. Did you know sea levels rose two or three feet in the last hundred years? Does that fact stand as one of the worst trajedies of the twentieth century? Were you even aware of it?

    I believe the earth has warmed about one degree in the past hundred years. I also know that there's not shit we can do about it.

    The treatments suggested (kyoto) would do far more harm then good. The sea rise of the last hundred years was no problem, why should an equivalent rise in the next hundred be one?

    If you want to talk about using compact flourecent litebulbs, increasing spending on alternative fuels, building nuclear power plants, etc; I'm with you. But forcing us to limit energy use to 1990 levels while our population is growing is not going to happen. Not without a massive cost and a decreased standard of living. All for what?

    The point is, the global warming crowd seeks to stifle all debate and paint those who dare question their othodoxy as heretics. If science is really on their side, why the bully tactics? Why must we shove this crap down the throats of captive audiences (school children and college students)? Why is this movie being shown in art class?

    It's propaganda pure and simple.
     
  15. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    24,293
    That would be a disaster, just in its effects on river delta rice farming.

    Not in the version of the movie I saw.

    Because they care, and they're worried. You're not?

    The science debate is there for anyone interested. Few people read the journals, and fewer still believe reports from them retailed by others. Having he science on their side hasn't done the anti-GM foods crowd much good, has it. It hasn't led to sound environmental policies with regad to forest fire or antibiotics or lakeshore development or logging practices. Gore is a politician - that's his field.
     
  16. sandy Banned Banned

    Messages:
    7,926
    alGore needed a cause. His presidential campaign didn't go as expected.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    The problem is he picked a cause that no one cares about and no one is taking real seriously. (Weren't the liberals the ones telling us in the 70's that if we didn't do something, we'd have a huge FREEZE?)

    We have MUCH bigger problems in this world right now than worrying about global hot air.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
    Ya i agree.

    We should not wait for billions to die.
     
  18. Singularity Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,287
    People like u r destroying our planet and u r responsible for 1000s already dieing and million that will now follow.

    Since u have no idea about global dimming, i recommend u to watch some videos from torrents and then come back.
     
  19. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,799
    That's the basic problem, isn't it?
     
  20. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    I do believe in Global Warming, what I and many people are skeptical about is the cuase. We have a combination of cuases out there ranging from the sun's overactive cycle to our record breaking closness to the sun. However all these have been denied by so called "climatologists". They weren't even simulated in their models, just discounted entirely. That is just plain crappy science.
     
  21. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    From all that I've read they do take solar cycles into account but I've not seen anything about us being in a period of solar "overactivity" nor about our "record-breaking closeness." Do you have references for each of these?
     
  22. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    Only what I read at the NASA sites.

    Oh and they do factor the sun in, but their model has it as a constant not a variable. It also does not include methane emission from fuana.

    Beside Mars has had global warming as well, to the point we now know those caps are water, not CO2. Obviously no human CO2 emissions there.
     
  23. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    30,519
    ... Except Gore had been going on about climate change long before he ran for President.

    You're woefully out of touch with the real world. I assume you live in one of the "fly over" states.
     

Share This Page