Global Warming? are humans to blame?

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by hansp77, Sep 11, 2006.

?

Do you believe

  1. Global Warming is occuring as a direct result of Human Activity.

    106 vote(s)
    51.7%
  2. IF Gloabal Warming is occurring it is as a result of Non-Human or Natural Processes.

    99 vote(s)
    48.3%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    It's interesting that NASA keeps putting climate satellites into the sea. I wonder if they are afraid of what they will find.
     
  2. Pericles
    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posts: 2,015
    Likes: 141, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1307
    Location: Heights of High Wycombe, not far from River Thames

    Pericles Senior Member

    There is agreement that 97% of men ********** and the other 3% are liars,

    Boston,

    Here is evidence that it has been cooling for some time as well you can see. Since 1979, NOAA satellites have been carrying instruments which measure the natural microwave thermal emissions from oxygen in the atmosphere. The signals that these microwave radiometers measure at different microwave frequencies are directly proportional to the temperature of different, deep layers of the atmosphere. See attachment.

    Now, I know these facts conflict with, rather than confirm your world view, but you need to get with the programme or your Cognitive Dissonance will have a very damaging effect on your health. Living a lie is not good science.

    Check how the global temperatures are measured at link below.

    http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/01/daily-monitoring-of-global-average-temperatures/
     

    Attached Files:

  3. Pericles
    Joined: Sep 2006
    Posts: 2,015
    Likes: 141, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1307
    Location: Heights of High Wycombe, not far from River Thames

    Pericles Senior Member

  4. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    um
    ya
    Pericles I think you forgot to add the trend line
    and to mention that the statistical viability of a two or three year period in climate studies is just about zero, check out how there are eight lows and about 8 highs in the study period all of which can be averaged within variability and shows clearly an increase in temps over the study period.

    you might notice the trend is a distinct and steady rise in temps

    [​IMG]
     
  5. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,386
    Likes: 1,042, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    Maybe a tad short of 97.3% of respondents here have a pronounced tendency to 'normalcy bias', which gives people not-necessarily-justified confidence that because something hasn't happened in their fairly long lifetimes, it ain't gonna happen. They've heard the little boy cry wolf about the Y2K bug, they've read about ratbag cults that predicted the end was nigh, only to see the deadline pass harmlessly, so all warnings about unprecedented dire future happenings are similarly not to be taken seriously, right ?
     
  6. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    its about the largest consensus enjoyed by any scientific theory

     
  7. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,386
    Likes: 1,042, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    The scientists may be convinced, but they have to convince the masses, it is a bit like telling a teenager to stop smoking, a tough job to put an old head on young shoulders, or with global warming, convince the public the wider long term world interest must take priority over short term selfish concerns. I first became aware of the CO2 atmospheric warning connection circa 1971, to most people in their daily lives, it still means little. That is very slow progress.
     
  8. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    "Very likely" isn't proof. It is a guess, or maybe even wishful thinking. It is all about who controls power. That's all it has ever been. You very likely think someone is going to give you a slice of the big green pie when green rules. You are wrong. They will be done with their useful idiot and will give you nothing.
     
  9. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    the issue of the term proof in regards to a scientific concept has been gone over time and time again on the climate change thread. Basically you don't get proof, instead you get what is most likely to be true and what isn't. I believe the consensus is 97% with a 90% certainty within the data. Again its about one of the largest consensus view ever.

    there is really very little arguing it from a scientific point of view as pretty much all data shows support for the theory

    even Periclese NOAA satellite data where he misread the oscillation as showing a drop in temps is clearly showing an increasing trend

    [​IMG]
     
  10. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    It is still just a theory. I have an opposing theory. Our warm/cool cycles match Mars warm/cool cycle. No humans on Mars.
     
  11. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    gravity s just a theory
    light is just a theory
    time is just a theory
    none of which enjoy the 97% consensus that climate change does
     
  12. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    Gravity is a law.
     
  13. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    gravity can be calculated however there are several theories as to how or why it works
     
  14. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    Light in itself is not a theory. Light is a manifestation of energy. There are numerous theories to explain its behavior. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LightQuantum electrodynamicsMain article:

    Quantum electrodynamics
    The quantum mechanical theory of light and electromagnetic radiation continued to evolve through the 1920s and 1930s, and culminated with the development during the 1940s of the theory of quantum electrodynamics, or QED. This so-called quantum field theory is among the most comprehensive and experimentally successful theories ever formulated to explain a set of natural phenomena. QED was developed primarily by physicists Richard Feynman, Freeman Dyson, Julian Schwinger, and Shin-Ichiro Tomonaga. Feynman, Schwinger, and Tomonaga shared the 1965 Nobel Prize in Physics for their contributions.
     

  15. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.