JZ says that he didn't learn about AGW because his school taught science. Whaaaaaaaaaaaat? He got an engineering degree from a school that did not teach thermodynamics or IR spectroscopy?
Peter J did not answer the question. He said to look at the predictions that "alarmunists" make over time that supposedly fail. He did not provide a source as to where such predictions come.
Hey Dook, Baccheus and Jeff M actually get their information from reliable scientific sources and get TDed to oblivion, though my own thumbs up rescued Jeff M from being hidden, for now.
For a while, YA seemed to have the bug fixed when I asked questions. But the bug seems to be back with a vengence. For my latest question, I didn't even post links until it had been open for a whole day. I had to avoid posting additional details to get it to show up.
http://ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/ind...
The deniers are less likely to provide any sources at all.
Most of their sources are fairly easily traceable to the fossil fuel industry myths of the 1990s that have long since been debunked, see here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument...
Realists use a variety of sources, the one common denominator being that they are usually not from fossil fuel industry astroturfs, and their 2nd, 3rd or 4th generation copy/paste/re-BS-ize variants.
Your link was too rotten. I had to go back to my answers to see it. Climate cultist, we were taught thermodynamics. I must say that of all of my classes, Thermo has probably been about the most useless in the real world. I never use it in my present career in environmental consulting. In geophysics, we were taught many things but IR spectroscopy isn't high on the list. My comment was tongue in cheek but it was serious too. We were taught science. By having a science background and good basic knowledge, I was not as susceptible to scams like "global warming".
You're a fear monger! What the hell is link rot? Post the link. Too many code words.
----------------------------------
Error 404?
----------------------------------
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
Here's what I really think of "Global Warming/Climate Change"!
----------------------------------
"C:3 Climate Change" gives very detailed information about the Global Warming/Climate Change debate. WUWT also gives very detailed information also and they both back it up with very detailed information.
Science is the "study of" something. Science journals are politically motivated and are perpetuated by government funding.
Hi Chem, yes I have problems with link rot, the answer to your question is I look everywhere, science journals NASA NOAA blogs anywhere that's talks about it, I even read skepticalscience although it makes me feel sick when I do it. I take in all available information and discard what feels like B.S. what is incorrect or exaggerated.
My present feelings about AGW are whether it is real or not is fairly irrelevant, it is shaping up to be a minor problem and there are much more important problems to solve.
I'm having link issues as well.
You may want to get a copy of Professor Plimer's book!
Ian Rutherford Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide , and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies. He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology.
Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From?
Professor Ian Plimer could not have said it better!
If you've read his book you will agree, this is a good summary.
PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The volcanic eruption in Iceland . Since its first spewing of volcanic ash has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet - all of you.
Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress - it’s that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life.
I know....it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of
your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad,
Nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs.....well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days.
The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days - yes, FOUR DAYS - by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time - EVERY DAY.
I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in all its years on earth.
Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over
One year - think about it.
Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy-feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of solar and cosmic activity and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which
keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change.
And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.
Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the bogus 'human-caused' climate-change scenario.
Hey, isn’t it interesting how they don’t mention 'Global Warming'
Anymore, but just 'Climate Change' - you know why?
It’s because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming bull artists got caught with their pants down.
And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme - that whopping new tax - imposed on you that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer.
It won’t stop any volcanoes from erupting, that’s for sure.
But, hey, relax......give the world a hug and have a nice day!"
A few days ago, I asked people to indicate where they knew about and/or got information about AGW from. (the post is here: answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap 5EAZg6cxtUJHJpCk0lCqDty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20 130711112512AAYBkeO please paste and remove the spaces, I fear link rot, and I'd appreciate if someone would post a real link)
So, what do you think about the listed sources, both realist/alarmist and skeptic/denialist? Which ones are primary or reliable secondary sources? Which ones are scientific vs opinion pieces? Any other thoughts?
