IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".
Got a breaking news topic or want to post the most recent issues for sensible, on-topic discussion? This is the forum for you.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
-
- Reputation:
- Exalted and Worshipped Member
- Location: Milan, Italy
- Posts: 1,084
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".Which?(Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
Humans have already:[LIST][*] Caused the largest mass extinction in history. -
- Reputation:
- Adored and Respected Member
- Location: Stratford-Upon-Avon
- Posts: 500
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".Please, learn what an unbiased source is. Your first link is a site that clearly exists to try and debunk global warming, whilst the second link is to an opinion column. A little googling and you can get sources to prove anything....(Original post by el scampio)
http://www.climatechangedispatch.com...ooling-arrival
http://www.seattlepi.com/local/opini...re-1295247.php
Scientists are now making their voices heard regarding the scientific fallacy of man made climate change, in favour of an extended period of low solar activity, leading to a global cooling event.
C02 is not a pollutant, it cannot hold more heat than water vapor. The sun and our relative position on the galactic plane are what causes changes in temp, not humans.
The earth warms and cools over milenia, humans are so tiny on this earth it is impossible for us to change the temperature in either direction. This is why I laugh at global warming nuts, you cannot do anything to change the earth on a global scale, its impossible.
If we are now saying "Officialy" that man made climate change doesn't exist, and the sun is solely responsible for climate change, then what is going to happen to all that lovely revenue from this scam? Surely carbon taxes are defunct and higher taxes on fuel are not necessary? Of course it depends how much money they are making and who is making it (they might not want to let it go, you know what psychopaths are like).
Who is going to be held accountable for this fraud? Unfortunately there is too much money to be made from 'fear' for this to end here. I await next weeks lies and scarmongering.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/
GUYS, ITS OFFICIAL, THE EARTH IS FLAT. YEARS OF LIES AND PROFITEERING ARE OVER! FLAT EARTH THEORY IS HERE AND SPHERICAL EARTH THEORY HAS FAILED. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Warning points: 1000
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".Thats cool bro(Original post by JamesLanek)
I'll join you!
Spoiler:Showpun intended
-
- Reputation:
- TSR Legend
- Location: West Yorkshire
- Posts: 12,359
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".I am not going to debate whether global warming is man made or not as there is ultimately no way to prove it one way or the other right now.
What i will say is that anybody who thinks that the globe is cooling needs their head checking...
FACTS...
2010 contained the 2nd strongest La Nina on record.
2010 was still the joint warmest year on record.
2011 has seen every single month record La Nina values.
2011 is still running in the top 10 warmest years.
At best you can say that stabalisation has occured.
Localised cooling in the UK does mean that global temperature is not still extremely high and even being UK centric, we actually had the hottest spring on record along with the hottest April.
As for the calls for long term global cooling, it is true that we will see the Gleissenburg Minima over the next 50 years or so however there is no consensus on how big an impact that will have. -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,519
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".You take issue with my claim that extrapolation is unreliable.(Original post by DorianGrayism)
No, not necessarily. It can be unreliable. I am not sure how you can make such a blanket statement.
If something 'can be unreliable', that is to say that it is unreliable some of the time, then it cannot be relied upon all of the time, and is thus unreliable all of the time Q.E.D. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Posts: 3,256
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".No, I didn't say that it is unreliable some of the time.(Original post by chrisawhitmore)
You take issue with my claim that extrapolation is unreliable.
If something 'can be unreliable', that is to say that it is unreliable some of the time, D.
That isn't the same as saying something "can be unreliable". -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,519
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".Ignoring the somewhat pointless splitting of hairs, it can easily be shown that extrapolation is unreliable some of the time, and thus is unreliable all of the time. I provided an example in my first post, but here it is again http://xkcd.com/605/(Original post by DorianGrayism)
No, I didn't say that it is unreliable some of the time.
That isn't the same as saying something "can be unreliable".
(Love xkcd) -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Posts: 3,256
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".Well, the "pointless splitting of hairs" is where you are wrong and the point of my previous post.
So, unless you want to address that, instead of repeating what you wrote before, then I am not interested in what you have to say any longer because I already know it.Last edited by DorianGrayism; 30-10-2011 at 18:47. -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,519
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".Please, if you will quote, do so in full, rather than cutting out the bits of my post where I make the point in order to make it seem like you have won the argument. Fact is, extrapolation is not a reliable method of making predictions. Statisticians have long ago conceded this point, and I'm really unsure as to why you're bothering to argue it. I can provide, and have provided, examples of wildly mistaken extrapolations, and, considering that extrapolation becomes more unreliable the more complex the system is, any uses of extrapolation on something like the earth should be taken with a pinch of salt.(Original post by DorianGrayism)
Well, the "pointless splitting of hairs" is where you are wrong and the point of my previous post.
So, unless you want to address that, instead of repeating what you wrote before, then I am not interested in what you have to say any longer because I already know it.
More bad extrapolations:
Usain Bolt ran the 100m in 9.56s a speed of 10.46m/s as such by extrapolation it would take him just 14 hours 11 minutes to run from London to Edinburgh
A toyota prius takes 3.5 seconds to get from 0-30 mph by extrapolation it will reach the speed of light in just over 2 years. -
- Reputation:
- Banned
- Posts: 3,256
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".No. I didn't do it seem like I won the argument.(Original post by chrisawhitmore)
Please, if you will quote, do so in full, rather than cutting out the bits of my post where I make the point in order to make it seem like you have won the argument..
I did it because you had already written something incorrect.
Furthermore, the rest of your previous post was a repeat of what you had written before.
(Original post by chrisawhitmore)
Fact is, extrapolation is not a reliable method of making predictions. Statisticians have long ago conceded this point, and I'm really unsure as to why you're bothering to argue it. I can provide, and have provided, examples of wildly mistaken extrapolations, and, considering that extrapolation becomes more unreliable the more complex the system is, any uses of extrapolation on something like the earth should be taken with a pinch of salt.
More bad extrapolations:
Usain Bolt ran the 100m in 9.56s a speed of 10.46m/s as such by extrapolation it would take him just 14 hours 11 minutes to run from London to Edinburgh
A toyota prius takes 3.5 seconds to get from 0-30 mph by extrapolation it will reach the speed of light in just over 2 years.
I didn't say that using extrapolation in all cases regardless of context is reliable. I said it can be unreliable.
I am not sure why this distinction still isn't clear to you. -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Posts: 2,519
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".Because a thing is either reliable or unreliable, there is not a sliding scale. If it does not work 100% of the time, it is not reliable, as it cannot be relied upon. I think we should probably agree to disagree, as we are rather clogging up a contentious thread with a semantic argument.(Original post by DorianGrayism)
No. I didn't do it seem like I won the argument.
I did it because you had already written something incorrect.
Furthermore, the rest of your previous post was a repeat of what you had written before.
I didn't say that using extrapolation in all cases regardless of context is reliable. I said it can be unreliable.
I am not sure why this distinction still isn't clear to you. -
- Reputation:
- Junior Member
- Posts: 36
Re: IT'S OFFICIAL: Scientists announce "Global Cooling".It was big in the 70s.
http://youtu.be/5ndHwW8psR8
I can continue to pollute the atomsphere
