Global Warming - Page 17

greatamerican128 · #**161** (**permalink**) 01-25-2008, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

OK. Relativity is no longer being debated. There is no longer any debate that the sun is powered by fusion. There is no longer any debate that rocks fall from the sky. Continental Drift is beyond debate. Bacteria is the source of infection and no scientists are debating it. So yes; sometimes the scientific debate is over.

the debate is over

The debate isn't over when over 400 prominent scientists disagree with Al-Gore and the UN's position on climate change

MannieD · #**162** (**permalink**) 01-26-2008, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greatamerican128

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

OK. Relativity is no longer being debated. There is no longer any debate that the sun is powered by fusion. There is no longer any debate that rocks fall from the sky. Continental Drift is beyond debate. Bacteria is the source of infection and no scientists are debating it. So yes; sometimes the scientific debate is over.

the debate is over

The debate isn't over when over 400 prominent scientists disagree with Al-Gore and the UN's position on climate change

First off, let's leave Gore out of this. Gore is not my source for accepting AGW. The political debate is not over. Imhofe and the rightwingnutjobs, with their lack of understanding of the scientific method, are keeping the political debate alive.
The scientific debate is over. Don't provide me links to FauxNews or Rightwing nutjob blogs about 400 scientists. Provide me links to the research these 400 scientists have done and to their data.

On the political side, even the former poster boys for the deniers, Rex W. Tillerson Chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobil Corporation is now accepting AGW.

Quote:

While our scientific understanding of climate change continues to improve, it nonetheless remains today an extraordinarily complex area of scientific study. Having said that, the potential risks to society could prove to be significant, so despite the areas of uncertainties that do exist, it is prudent to develop and implement strategies that address the potential risks.

link
They still don't accept the science, but at least they are willing to admit that something needs to be done. ExxonMobil has also stopped funding the AGW denial machine, the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Blade · #**163** (**permalink**) 01-26-2008, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

OK. Relativity is no longer being debated.

That comment shows your non-grasp of science. At one time, Newtonian physics was "no longer being debated". When general relativity came along, NR was shown to be wrong for speeds close to light or in the presence of strong gravitaional fields. Some day, relativity may be shown to be only an approximation. I never heard any scientist say "the debate is over" - he would be laughed out of any symposium.

Quote:

There is no longer any debate that rocks fall from the sky.

An observed phenomenon, not a scientific theory.

Quote:

continental drift

ditto.

Quote:

the debate is over

A historian, not a scientist.

Blade · #**164** (**permalink**) 01-26-2008, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by greatamerican128

The debate isn't over when over 400 prominent scientists disagree with Al-Gore and the UN's position on climate change

Sorry, votes don't count as science, even votes by scientists.

MannieD · #**165** (**permalink**) 01-27-2008, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

OK. Relativity is no longer being debated.

That comment shows your non-grasp of science. At one time, Newtonian physics was "no longer being debated". When general relativity came along, NR was shown to be wrong for speeds close to light or in the presence of strong gravitaional fields. Some day, relativity may be shown to be only an approximation. I never heard any scientist say "the debate is over" - he would be laughed out of any symposium.

There was no debate about Newtonian gravity at the time relativity was proposed. Relativity was a refinement of Newtonian gravitation just as quantum gravity will refine relativity. Show me any physicist that says the debate over relativity is not over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

There is no longer any debate that the sun is powered by fusion.

Ya missed this one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

There is no longer any debate that rocks fall from the sky. Continental Drift is beyond debate.

An observed phenomenon, not a scientific theory.

Irrelevant. So is climate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

Bacteria is the source of infection and no scientists are debating it.

Ya missed another one. Show me any reputable scientist that says the debate is not over for the above statements and his/her data as to why the debate is not over.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

the debate is over

A historian, not a scientist.

He has a degree in physics

BroncoBilly · #**166** (**permalink**) 01-27-2008, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

There was no debate about Newtonian gravity at the time relativity was proposed. Relativity was a refinement of Newtonian gravitation just as quantum gravity will refine relativity. Show me any physicist that says the debate over relativity is not over.

Ya missed this one. Irrelevant. So is climate. Ya missed another one. Show me any reputable scientist that says the debate is not over for the above statements and his/her data as to why the debate is not over. He has a degree in physics

The reality of this enviro movement doesn't really matter whether we caused GW or not, and I agree to some extent, we need to be better stewards of our planet, but the agenda of those pushing this, is that the door is open, and they need to keep it open, and using this computer data to do that is all that matters. Are half truths the way to push it? Maybe, if everyone cooperates and we can harness in countries that have total disregard for our environment. The other reality is at what price to we pay. Do we need to go back to the horse and buggy? Put restrictions on commuting distances? I don't know, maybe living in a cave would be nice, you wouldn't have to worry about tracking in mud.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=59329

"Of course I believe in global warming, and in global cooling – all part of the natural climate changes that the Earth has experienced for billions of years, caused primarily by the cyclical variations in solar output," said research physicist John W. Brosnahan, who develops remote-sensing instruments for atmospheric science for clients including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.

However, he said, "I have not seen any sort of definitive, scientific link to man-made carbon dioxide as the root cause of the current global warming, only incomplete computer models that suggest that this might be the case.

"Even though these computer climate models do not properly handle a number of important factors, including the role of precipitation as a temperature regulator, they are being (mis-)used to force a political agenda upon the U.S.," he continued. "While there are any number of reasons to reduce carbon dioxide generation, to base any major fiscal policy on the role of carbon dioxide in climate change would be inappropriate and imprudent at best and potentially disastrous economic folly at the worst."

Blade · #**167** (**permalink**) 01-27-2008, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannieD
OK. Relativity is no longer being debated.

That comment shows your non-grasp of science. At one time, Newtonian physics was "no longer being debated". When general relativity came along, NR was shown to be wrong for speeds close to light or in the presence of strong gravitaional fields. Some day, relativity may be shown to be only an approximation. I never heard any scientist say "the debate is over" - he would be laughed out of any symposium.

There was no debate about Newtonian gravity at the time relativity was proposed. Relativity was a refinement of Newtonian gravitation just as quantum gravity will refine relativity. Show me any physicist that says the debate over relativity is not over.

"Refinement"? Newtonian physics was wrong.

And there WAS a debate all through the nineteenth century about Newtonian physics, eg, that it made wrong predictions for the rate of rotation of the line of apsides for Mercury. And the issue is not a debate over relativity, it's whether general relativity will be shown in the future to be shown to only be an approximation, just as Newtonian physics was shown to be.

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannieD
There is no longer any debate that rocks fall from the sky. Continental Drift is beyond debate.

An observed phenomenon, not a scientific theory.

Irrelevant. So is climate.

No, "climate" is not a theory. The athropogenic cause of global warming is a theory.

Quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blade
Quote:
Originally Posted by MannieD
the debate is over

A historian, not a scientist.

He has a degree in physics

So do I.

But I develop software, and he's an engineer.

MannieD · #**168** (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BroncoBilly

The reality of this enviro movement doesn't really matter whether we caused GW or not, and I agree to some extent, we need to be better stewards of our planet, but the agenda of those pushing this, is that the door is open, and they need to keep it open, and using this computer data to do that is all that matters. Are half truths the way to push it? Maybe, if everyone cooperates and we can harness in countries that have total disregard for our environment. The other reality is at what price to we pay. Do we need to go back to the horse and buggy? Put restrictions on commuting distances? I don't know, maybe living in a cave would be nice, you wouldn't have to worry about tracking in mud.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=59329

"Of course I believe in global warming, and in global cooling – all part of the natural climate changes that the Earth has experienced for billions of years, caused primarily by the cyclical variations in solar output," said research physicist John W. Brosnahan, who develops remote-sensing instruments for atmospheric science for clients including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.

However, he said, "I have not seen any sort of definitive, scientific link to man-made carbon dioxide as the root cause of the current global warming, only incomplete computer models that suggest that this might be the case.

"Even though these computer climate models do not properly handle a number of important factors, including the role of precipitation as a temperature regulator, they are being (mis-)used to force a political agenda upon the U.S.," he continued. " While there are any number of reasons to reduce carbon dioxide generation, to base any major fiscal policy on the role of carbon dioxide in climate change would be inappropriate and imprudent at best and potentially disastrous economic folly at the worst."

Why do you choose to take the word of an 1 engineer who builds instruments over many climatologists, who do the research and interpret the evidence?

Blade · #**169** (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MannieD

Why do you choose to take the word of an 1 engineer who builds instruments over many climatologists, who do the research and interpret the evidence?

You take the word of a historian.

"Many" climatologists haven't done the "research" - a relative handful did, and the rest just "voted" for it.

MannieD · #**170** (**permalink**) 01-28-2008, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

"Refinement"? Newtonian physics was wrong.

And there WAS a debate all through the nineteenth century about Newtonian physics, eg, that it made wrong predictions for the rate of rotation of the line of apsides for Mercury. And the issue is not a debate over relativity, it's whether general relativity will be shown in the future to be shown to only be an approximation, just as Newtonian physics was shown to be.

No, "climate" is not a theory. The athropogenic cause of global warming is a theory.

So do I.

But I develop software, and he's an engineer.

1) Physicists already know that general relativity is an approximation because it does not model gravity at quantum levels. Newtons' equations work just fine when determining the orbits of satellites and asteroids, so the Newton's equations can't be wrong.

2)never said climate was a theory. I posted that climate is being observed, just as rocks falling from the sky are being observed.

3)You asked for a scientist that said the debate is over. I provided a name. What degree you have or do for a living is irrelevant.

4) So you agree that scientists can sometimes claim that the debate is over?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode