I realize this topic has been debated ad nauseam; but I found the observations of Patrick Moore, co-founder of Green Peace, quite informative. See the link. .....JB
Patrick Moore is discredited...
by ZihuaRob
, Zihuatanejo, México, Saturday, July 02, 2016, 12:12 (3787 days ago) @ Johnny Briefcase
I realize this topic has been debated ad nauseam; but I found the observations of Patrick Moore, co-founder of Green Peace, quite informative. See the link. .....JB
http://prageruniversity.com/Environmental-Science/What-They-Havent-Told-You-about-Climate-Change.html#.Vc4sj_lViko
And Elvis has left the arena...
Global Warming discredited.
by El león, Tuesday, July 05, 2016, 09:07 (3784 days ago) @ ZihuaRob
What a bunch of crap..........nothing you or I will do is going to change the progression of climate change one way or another.
It will happen in it's on time according to the laws of physics. The undenialbe truth......................this planet will ultimately die and become just so much cosmic dust! No one on the globe today will see it happen nor will the milleniums of people to follow us.
Cautious conservency is a good idea and should be practiced but at the end of the day it's like spitting in the ocean and expecting to see the ocean rise.
Life is better spent enjoying what we have rather than worrying about something we can never control.
Global Warming Deniers Discredited
by ZihuaRob
, Zihuatanejo, México, Tuesday, July 05, 2016, 12:14 (3784 days ago) @ El león
What a bunch of crap..........nothing you or I will do is going to change the progression of climate change one way or another.
It will happen in it's on time according to the laws of physics. The undenialbe truth......................this planet will ultimately die and become just so much cosmic dust! No one on the globe today will see it happen nor will the milleniums of people to follow us.
Cautious conservency is a good idea and should be practiced but at the end of the day it's like spitting in the ocean and expecting to see the ocean rise.
Life is better spent enjoying what we have rather than worrying about something we can never control.
There is nothing so shameful as those who deny the atrocities they commit. The oceans are dying, the ecosystems are dying, the species are dying, and it is in large part attributable to the Industrial Revolution including the wasteful consumption of over a quarter of the earth's resources by barely 4.4% of its population (that would be the USA for the informationally challenged).
Your response to our species' responsibility for the damage to this planet's climate is what is crap, and I find it sad that so-called educated people can still deny the blatant evidence and the incontrovertible science. The highest levels of carbon dioxide that have ever occurred in the history of the planet have recently been recorded.
"Enjoy what we have" and "don't worry about what we can't control" you say. A typical "me-first" science-denying response. It appears you don't want to change your over-consumptive planet-destroying lifestyle because you'd rather avoid the guilt and the inconvenience of having a personal role in its destruction. But see, we CAN control it by changing lifestyles and by not destroying the forests and the oceans and the rivers and the lakes just so that you can enjoy the "conveniences" of unfettered capitalist exploitation of Earth's finite resources.
A recent example that we CAN reverse the harm is that the ozone hole in the atmosphere above Antarctica appears to be on the mend because we changed our harmful ways and stopped using the harmful substances that had been found to erode it.
You like patterns because they give simple explanations for simple minds unable or unwilling to assimilate or accept complex concepts. Nevertheless, even what appear to be simple straight-forward patterns turn out to be no such thing when a larger view is taken.
For folks more open-minded with their thinking, ready to accept new information that may change their view of the world I hope they'll take a few moments to read the science that says deniers like you are simply wrong.
Global Warming
(the section on Natural Cycles may be particularly illuminating for the discussion at hand)
Climate Change
by Bill Fun, Saturday, July 02, 2016, 13:26 (3787 days ago) @ Johnny Briefcase
Greenpeace - Now that is an unbiased opinion. It is like asking Trump about Mexican to US immigration.
Antarctic Ice Core Sampling
by mexicowanderer, Saturday, July 02, 2016, 16:37 (3787 days ago) @ Bill Fun
![[image]](http://appinsys.com/globalwarming/GW_PART5_GREENHOUSEGAS_files/image013.gif)
IMHO it is foolish to amplify a problem. What if it does not rain in the USA wheat and corn belt? Or have twenty feet of rainfall?
Chinese coal burning for energy is acidifying the Pacific Ocean. And guess where the currents are taking the low Ph water?
Canada was a steaming swamp, then thousand foot thick glaciers reigned. Then there is the present.
But there weren't five billion people to feel the effects. Our food supply not only is incredibly concentrated but the distribution networks are fragile.
Again my opinion: Two billion Chinese are creating five times the amount of carbon dioxide as compared to the US. Where does China stand on the abatement of criminally negligent creation of CO2? The USA and all of Europe could be converted to 100% rain forest and it would not resolve the global issue of CO2 saturation.
This is an all-or-nothing issue. BTW a severe drought has virtually killed the Amazon rain forest in prehistoric times which generated five times the level of what CO2 is today. It wouldn't take much to place the entire human race in peril. Forget rising oceans - that is drama. Ponder 50% chopping of basic food supplies. Hopefully I will be feeding a tree by then 
Climate Change
by dhunsber
, ¡Dondequiera que voy, estoy aquí!, Monday, July 04, 2016, 16:34 (3785 days ago) @ Bill Fun
Greenpeace - Now that is an unbiased opinion. It is like asking Trump about Mexican to US immigration.
Sorry to spoil your fun Bill, but Patrick Moore apparently thinks Greenpeace is a worthy reference to use in bolstering his claims to expertise on such matters. His aligning with Prager's "university" tells me that he's a shill for big money, which is much more problematical than Rob's use of a Greenpeace statement.
Climate Change
by Bill Fun, Tuesday, July 05, 2016, 07:28 (3784 days ago) @ dhunsber
The point I was making was that Greenpeace is noted for their blatant cherry-picking of facts to support their pre-determined conclusions and that anyone who quotes them for an objective evaluation of issues is misguided.
Climate Change
by dhunsber
, ¡Dondequiera que voy, estoy aquí!, Tuesday, July 05, 2016, 20:31 (3784 days ago) @ Bill Fun
The point I was making was that Greenpeace is noted for their blatant cherry-picking of facts to support their pre-determined conclusions and that anyone who quotes them for an objective evaluation of issues is misguided.
I disagree, and even if there were some truth in what you say, the same would still be true for anyone who would turn to Patrick Moore or Prager on this topic, just more so because they are paid shills for big money.
Climate Change
by Bill Fun, Wednesday, July 06, 2016, 08:15 (3783 days ago) @ dhunsber
Fair enough, but everyone who disagrees with these guys in some areas isn't a shrill just because they have an alternate view.
Climate Change
by dhunsber
, ¡Dondequiera que voy, estoy aquí!, Saturday, July 09, 2016, 12:49 (3780 days ago) @ Bill Fun
Agreed.
I'm often reminded of the quote at the end of "Three Days of the Condor" every time the topic is presented that climate change is "a hoax" or, even if it's real, there's nothing that can be done about it.
Higgins: Today it's oil, right? In ten or fifteen years, food. Plutonium. And maybe even sooner. Now, what do you think the people are gonna want us to do then?
Turner: Ask them.
Higgins: Not now — then! Ask 'em when they're running out. Ask 'em when there's no heat in their homes and they're cold. Ask 'em when their engines stop. Ask 'em when people who have never known hunger start going hungry. You wanna know something? They won't want us to ask 'em. They'll just want us to get it for 'em!
Climate Change
by Johnny Briefcase
, Tuesday, July 05, 2016, 12:31 (3784 days ago) @ Sunlight Dancer
It seems to me that most people agree that there is climate change. What is in dispute is the degree to which man made emissions are responsible. I'm no scientist; but it appears to me that both sides have large bodies of evidence to support their views. I'm left with the feeling that the issue won't be resolved easily or any time soon. ....JB
Climate Change
by ZihuaRob
, Zihuatanejo, México, Tuesday, July 05, 2016, 12:41 (3784 days ago) @ Johnny Briefcase
It seems to me that most people agree that there is climate change. What is in dispute is the degree to which man made emissions are responsible. I'm no scientist; but it appears to me that both sides have large bodies of evidence to support their views. I'm left with the feeling that the issue won't be resolved easily or any time soon. ....JB
No, both sides do not have large bodies of evidence to support their views. The jury is no longer out. The overwhelming evidence is agreed on by the overwhelming majority of scientists. I've posted the evidence before, including NASA's excellent website with worldwide science committees as approving sources. But apparently overwhelming evidence still isn't enough for a certain group of folks intent on avoiding at any cost the cognitive dissonance associated with their having to admit their own lifestyle is part of the problem.
So here is another non-NASA source with references and cumulative irrefutable studies on every aspect of the related science. Pick a section that interests you or read the entire thing. The evidence is definitive. There is no longer a credible scientific debate on the matter. There is now consensus.
Climate Change
by Bill Fun, Tuesday, July 05, 2016, 12:51 (3784 days ago) @ ZihuaRob
I thought most climate scientists conceded that about half of global warming was due to humans.
Don't forget that 10,000 years ago sea levels were 300 feet lower and that ice covered most of the continents. This is only a further progress of this natural heating trend.
Climate Change
by ZihuaRob
, Zihuatanejo, México, Tuesday, July 05, 2016, 13:03 (3784 days ago) @ Bill Fun
I thought most climate scientists conceded that about half of global warming was due to humans.
Don't forget that 10,000 years ago sea levels were 300 feet lower and that ice covered most of the continents. This is only a further progress of this natural heating trend.
Oops, you replied without even perusing the source I posted. All your doubts and your recent comments are touched on.
Half? Still looking for an escape? It's an all or none matter. We either are or we aren't. To the degree that we are, we can modify our behavior. And to the degree that we aren't, we can still modify our behavior to lessen the negative impact. Doing nothing or doing too little too late is the fool's option. 
Climate Change
by Canadian Rainbirds
, Victoria BC and Zihuatanejo, Wednesday, July 06, 2016, 01:39 (3784 days ago) @ ZihuaRob
I thought most climate scientists conceded that about half of global warming was due to humans.
Don't forget that 10,000 years ago sea levels were 300 feet lower and that ice covered most of the continents. This is only a further progress of this natural heating trend.
Oops, you replied without even perusing the source I posted. All your doubts and your recent comments are touched on.Half? Still looking for an escape? It's an all or none matter. We either are or we aren't. To the degree that we are, we can modify our behavior. And to the degree that we aren't, we can still modify our behavior to lessen the negative impact. Doing nothing or doing too little too late is the fool's option.
In a nut shell. (No pun intended)
One definition of "Doing Too Little"
by mexicowanderer, Wednesday, July 06, 2016, 16:02 (3783 days ago) @ ZihuaRob
Is to fool one's self into thinking there would be a lessening of CO2 emissions without full cooperation of China. Yes, indeed. This is an All Or Nothing protocol.
It is amazing to me that environmental groups went nuts when a scientific study was attempted to see the effect of algae and plankton feeding in ocean waters. This is a valid method of drastically reducing atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide.
My engineering discipline is one other than astrophysics. But to rabidly oppose research goes beyond my understanding.
I now label this subject: CLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE PORN
It has become 100% antler rutting opposed to real and objective study and reaction.
Sorry

