Is Global Warming a Natural Phenomenon?

[Paul mabbott]

I was looking at another thread - http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/fo...-moves-us.html - and wondering why there was nothing by Simon and Garfunkel (or Zymon and Carbuncle as they were known in some circles) and coming to this thread one Paul Simon song echoed through my mind ... in parts.

Paranoia strikes deep in the heartland
but I think that it's all overdone;
Exaggerating this, exaggerating that,
they don't have no fun.

I don't believe what I read in the papers,
they're only out to capture my dime.
I ain't hurrying, I ain't scurrying
I'm just having a good time ....

Maybe I'm laughing my way to disaster
Maybe I'm blind to the fate of Mankind
but what can be done?
............................
Just have a good time ...

So God bless the US of A
God bless our standard of living
lets keep it that way
and we'll all have a good time.

Sound familiar?

[griffgrouch]

Originally Posted by Greengardener?

Sorry Griffin Grouch, I have just had a very quick look into the site you link to. What has John Mclean Published, or the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition (where he seems to get his information from) published in scientific journals that has been open to peer review? The IPCC may be flawed, but they base their evidence on scientific papers that have been published and have been subjected to rigorous scrutiny. I have only had a very quick look at these sites, but I am not sure I could say the same for either, I'm afraid.

We are all entitled to our viewpoints, but I would urge you to scrutinise your sources. There are many out there, but some are less transparent than others.

Enjoy that bottle of red, I think I will go and do the same.

GG?

It isn't one of my sources, just an overview. The IPCC is a political driven machine, no doubt about that. SOME scientists have sold their integrity for funding.
If we use real world data does it show a anthropogenic signal above the noise of natural variation? The answer is no, and nobody can argue with that.
You believe what you want but the IPCC is as corrupt as the the governments of Europe. There will be a lot of eggs on a lot of faces soon enough. If I'm wrong you can be the first to say, "I told you so" But I won't be.

Eventually there will be another ice age that will have a devastating affect on the human population, we cannot avoid this and it will be here in such a geologically short time. It will be much more harmful that a climate optima that we have been having up to now; called that for a reason. I would imagine that an ice age would probably wipe out 80% of the world's population and put us all back to a medieval existence. You have to wonder why when you hear emotive terms like "we must protect the world for our children", nothing wrong with that mantra by the way, that we seem to ignore the impending doom of an ice age. Let's face the truth, there isn't much of a world for our children to inherit in the long term.

I think I'll leave it there or else this will turn into an attrition loop. Cheers all. I'll be in the birdy forum if you want a chat.

[Paul mabbott]

Do we detect a little political prejudice here .....

Originally Posted by griffgrouch

.......... but the IPCC is as corrupt as the the governments of Europe. There will be a lot of eggs on a lot of faces soon enough. If I'm wrong you can be the first to say, "I told you so" But I won't be...........

Corrupt governments in Europe unlike those in USA, China, Africa ??????

[griffgrouch]

Originally Posted by Paul mabbott

Do we detect a little political prejudice here .....



Corrupt governments in Europe unlike those in USA, China, Africa ??????

I agree with you fully.

[Neil Jones]

The scientific consensus is that anthropogenic climate change is a real and happening.
There are however conspiracy theorists who claim it isn't. Yes, it has to be a conspiracy theory because the number of people who would have to be deliberately lying would be enormous. The sensible thing, given the size of the predicted disaster, is to listen to the expert advice.

The anti-climate change lobby stems from the anti-nature conservation movement in the USA. Bent and crooked people who tell lies. One of the best examples of this is one of the prime movers against protection of health and the environment the tobacco industry.
They helped start the anti-conservation movement because they saw the links between people being concerned about their personal health and the health of the environment.

This video from BBC's newsnight where the Royal Society is criticising this kind of thing and shows the infamous clip of the leading cancer stick drug pushers denying that nicotine is addictive.

YouTube - Royal Society says to CEI: Cease and desist your lies!

Interestingly one of the anti-climate changers featured is also a creationist. That is to say a person who doesn't understand biology and the scientific method. You have to be like that to fall for creation science and particularly intelligent design . It is a clear and obvious scam.

The climate sceptics and creationists are often the same people and they use the same conspiratorial, cognitively deficient, methodology. People who believe as they do are being discriminated against. They can't get their stuff published. It is a conspiracy!
This is a brilliantly written piece of spoof from an excellent anti-creationist website, but it could just as well be written about anti-climate changers.
It is from

reDiscovery Institute


"The U.S. Patent Office has never issued a patent for gravity or for anti-gravity. Why is this? According to natural law and homeopathy, everything exists in opposites: good-evil; grace-sin; positive charges-negative charges; north poles-south poles; good vibes-bad vibes; etc. We know there are anti-evolutionists, so why not anti-gravitationalists? It is clearly a matter of the scientific establishment elite protecting their own. Anti-gravity papers are routinely rejected from peer-reviewed journals, and scientists who propose anti-gravity quickly lose their funding. Universal gravity theory is just a way to keep the grant money flowing."

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by griffgrouch

. SOME scientists have sold their integrity for funding.
.

indeed they have - but not those on the IPCC. Those "scientists" (using the term losely as many of their scientific credentials are shaky at best) who argue against anthropogenic global warming are largely funded by either the oil companies or the american far right, this hardly puts them in a good position to give an unbiased and objective view.