The Left loves the idea because they are dedicated to destroying the West in general and the USA in particular. Getting the developed world to wreck its own industrial base is something they want. Having the West simultaneously give free guilt-money to countries like North Korea & Zimbabwe would just make it better.
The politics of the issue are a problem because we really do need to understand how the Earth works so we can anticipate, predict, and adjust. We also need to reduce actual pollution that is poisoning our environment, and countries like China & India should not get a free ride.
It’s clear global warming/climate change is real. It’s equally clear the > current < warming cycle has been going on since the last ice age and that’s why the Sahara was grassland 10,000 years ago but is desert today + has been desert for centuries. The fact the current warming trend started long before there was any industry and when there were hardly any people is good evidence humans are not the cause. It also means humans are not the solution.
The Earth goes through constant climate change cycles and has done so throughout its history. The exact mechanism is not completely understood but appears to be related to solar activity and the axial tilt of the Earth as it orbits the sun - not human activity. Note that the Earth is apparently at the end of the current warming cycle and should begin cooling soon (“soon” in geological terms).
All of the carbon tax/carbon offset BS is just robbery or extortion disguised as science. Countries like China and India LOVED the idea of carbon taxes/carbon offsets – but only when they could pretend to be “undeveloped”. Once it was pointed out both are horrific polluters of > every type < they suddenly weren’t so keen on the idea. Only the global Left and countries like North Korea & Zimbabwe still love the idea of carbon taxes.
Zippi,
I think you need to be a bit more specific, the Hubble observations are not cosmoclimatological ones and as such there’s no crossover between them and climatologies.
I’m not sure from your question whether you’re claiming that cosmology is conjecture, or that climatology is, or both.
In fact, both are based on hard evidence, observations, physics, empirical evidence and the like.
When you look at anything you’re looking back in time. The light reflecting from, or being emitted by, any object takes time to reach your eyes. Given that light travels at almost 300 million metres a second means that the image our brains create of the things around us happens almost instantaneously.
When you look at something further away then there’s a lag between when the light started its journey and when you see it. For the Moon it’s about a second, for the Sun it’s eight minutes, for the next nearest star it’s 4 years and 3 months, for the nearest galaxy (excluding satellites of our own galaxy), it’s 2 million years.
Hubble is now ‘seeing’ light that has spend the last 13.2 billion years travelling across the universe, given that the universe isn’t that much older means that we’re now looking back through time to a point when the universe was only half a billion years old.
Both the cosmological images we are seeing and the existence of global warming are governed by the laws of physics – different laws but still invariable and universal laws that can never be changed.
As for peer-reviewing past climatic observances, if they’re submitted for publication then they’ll be subjected to the same peer review process as any other submission.
I would say it is more than conjecture, but not really proven.
Peer review basically is putting a study out where people can know about it, and comment on it, it does not have to be a paper in a scientific journal, I mean ancient Greek science was peer reviewed, sometimes by word of mouth of course it was written down otherwise we would not know about it.
So even a study shown on an internet blog can be peer reviewed.
Look at 'C': "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" Their peer review is wrong. Their climate models are wrong. Their predictions are wrong. They get stuck in the ice in the Summer time. The Earth has cooled for around 17 years, according to the latest IPCC report. And they expect us to ignore all that.
We can easily see that they do know that it is all horrible science but they continue to plod on with their scam.
Quote by Ottmar Edenhoffer, high level UN-IPCC official: "We redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy...Basically it's a big mistake to discuss climate policy separately from the major themes of globalization...One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore."
They have to say those things or they will lose their cushy jobs.
Quote by Nobel Prize Winner For Chemistry, Kary Mullis: “Global warmers predict that global warming is coming, and our emissions are to blame. They do that to keep us worried about our role in the whole thing. If we aren't worried and guilty, we might not pay their salaries. It's that simple.
Quote by Martin Keeley, geology scientist: “Global warming is indeed a scam, perpetrated by scientists with vested interests, but in need of crash courses in geology, logic and the philosophy of science.”
Global Warming ended in 2012. The weather your getting now is like it was in the 1970's before Global Warming. Mike
This has nothing to do with earth or GW
As to peer review Someone publishes a paper, people read it and react to it
When you young earth creationist understand that your god, like all other gods, is man made, science will become a little clearer.
My question is based on this latest observation of astronomy: http://news.yahoo.com/long-shots-galaxies-13-2-billion-years-ago-194124843.html
Does science really believe what it says? ... or is it really conjecture?
