Industries polluting have to have some negative effects. Add to that the land clearing for all the new homes being built (taking away the trees and grasses) adding more concrete and assphalt. building more roads to accomodate more drivers....all of those things have to affect the climate in a negative way. For us to think that the population can continue to grow and not have adverse reactions is ignorant....most of us dont care because it doesnt affect us directly and probably wont in our lifetime and that is irresponsible. I believe all of this has affected the climate but maybe not the way scientists and politicians would have us believe.....conservation will never be motivation over money that is the only thing I know that is a lock!
-
Comment -
Justin7Comment -
the whole thing with co2 being a poison is just funny to me.. normal co2 ranges from about 350 ppm in the middle of the ocean to about 380 ppm in big cities.. plants have been scientifically proven to perform photosynthesis more than twice as fast at 1500-2000 ppm (which is why industrial greenhouses use co2 generators to increase crop yields and speed up cycling times) not to mention it takes about 5000-10000 ppm to flat out kill a person.. but if you think about it, we add co2 into the air, plants perform photosynthesis faster, and produce oxygen at a faster rate, canceling out the offset.. now sure if we kill off all of the plants that is a different story but there are already movements to replant forests and add grass n shit to the roofs of buildings for better insulation and oxygen production.
not to mention that it is also proven that the sun flips its poles about every 11 years causing solar cycles of increasing and decreasing relative temperatures.. throw in the fact that the earth itself has shifted its poles on at least 5 occasions, been through multiple ice ages/desertification cycles as well as that carbon is one of the building blocks of all matter and it boggles the mind that these people are trying to convince us that our carbon is causing all the drama..
as been stated before this is nothing but a scheme to tax our asses on everything that we do.. if they succeed it will cost you money to breathe.. and probably a surcharge for working out or yelling at the tv during while your team tries to cover the spread LOLComment -
Justin7Comment -
Global warming is real in the pharmaceutical catastraphical aspect of things. So that would be my input on the biological assumption of hermeneutical opinionated scope of the ideology that we are part of this bind, and we must be ever demeaning to the cause.Comment -
May you all give me 6 points for this educated and inferential post!Comment -
Does anyone want to change their vote now?
Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995
By Jonathan Petre
Last updated at 5:12 PM on 14th February 2010
- Data for vital 'hockey stick graph' has gone missing
- There has been no global warming since 1995
- Warming periods have happened before - but NOT due to man-made changes
Data: Professor Phil Jones admitted his record keeping is 'not as good as it should be'
The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping is ‘not as good as it should be’.
The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.
Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.
The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.
Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as director of the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit after the leaking of emails that sceptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.
The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster efforts by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
More...
Following the leak of the emails, Professor Jones has been accused of ‘scientific fraud’ for allegedly deliberately suppressing information and refusing to share vital data with critics.
Discussing the interview, the BBC’s environmental analyst Roger Harrabin said he had spoken to colleagues of Professor Jones who had told him that his strengths included integrity and doggedness but not record-keeping and office tidying.
Mr Harrabin, who conducted the interview for the BBC’s website, said the professor had been collating tens of thousands of pieces of data from around the world to produce a coherent record of temperature change.
That material has been used to produce the ‘hockey stick graph’ which is relatively flat for centuries before rising steeply in recent decades.
According to Mr Harrabin, colleagues of Professor Jones said ‘his office is piled high with paper, fragments from over the years, tens of thousands of pieces of paper, and they suspect what happened was he took in the raw data to a central database and then let the pieces of paper go because he never realised that 20 years later he would be held to account over them’.
Asked by Mr Harrabin about these issues, Professor Jones admitted the lack of organisation in the system had contributed to his reluctance to share data with critics, which he regretted.
Enlarge
But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises were predominantly man-made.
Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: ‘There is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations have come from but it’s probably not as good as it should be.
‘There’s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We have improved but we have to improve more.’
He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.
He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend.
And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.
Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high temperatures in northern countries.
But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only applying to the northern part of the world.
Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: ‘There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.
‘For it to be global in extent, the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere. There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
‘Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.’
Sceptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with the IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming Period could have been global, and therefore the world could have been hotter then than now.
Professor Jones criticised those who complained he had not shared his data with them, saying they could always collate their own from publicly available material in the US. And he said the climate had not cooled ‘until recently – and then barely at all. The trend is a warming trend’.
Mr Harrabin told Radio 4’s Today programme that, despite the controversies, there still appeared to be no fundamental flaws in the majority scientific view that climate change was largely man-made.
But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy Foundation, said Professor Jones’s ‘excuses’ for his failure to share data were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and ‘mates’.
He said that until all the data was released, sceptics could not test it to see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change advocates.
He added that the professor’s concessions over medieval warming were ‘significant’ because they were his first public admission that the science was not settled.Comment -
Do you actually expect the Liberal Al Gore brown nosers to change their minds?Comment -
Justin7Comment -
WTF is the point of continuously posting this?Originally posted by 1st and TenComment -
Who is Justin7?Originally posted by 1st and TenComment -
global warming maybe needed , do we want to live in world where we use as much energy as bangladeshComment -
energy is the backbone of the economyComment -
people don't realize how much energy we use everyday , the things we call the basics of life , are energy suckersComment -
laundryComment -
the microwave ovenComment -
the biggest energy sucker air conditionerComment -
Nah it's all bullshitComment -
Goin for 1K here man?Originally posted by thespeculatorComment -
canadian don't realize they are the biggest energy users, with their ice rinksComment -
yup almost thereOriginally posted by whatsgood5
Comment -
read my thread on george foreman vs brock lesnarComment -
in a street fight at cowboy stadiumComment -
i think i am done for the day,posting is not as easy as people might thinkComment -
-
You're an embarassment to the art of power posting
Comment -
me and him went back and forth a year or two ago about this. Biggest Sham of science EVER.....I will continue posting, indecent or not.Originally posted by IndecentComment -
He hasn't posted in this thread. How should anyone know why you were doing it?Originally posted by 1st and TenComment -
dont be so hard on justin , he also thought y2k would cause the planet to explodeOriginally posted by 1st and TenComment -
There is evidence of global warming, it was just embellesed for the personal gain of a few. Do I think it's gonna kill humanity? Not for several hundred thousand more years. What we need to be concerened about is the reversal of the poles. This is serious shit that no one seems to care about. It happens about every 750,000 years. It has happened many times but not while homo sapiens have inhabited the planet. There is already parts of the Atlantic ocean above Antarctica that have a strong reversal field & is causing problems in airplane operation. This will happen, it's not an if, and in some of our lifetimes. Lets quit worrying about a fukin polar bear at the moment & get to work on this. It will totally shut down life as we know it!Comment -
...Comment -
...Comment -
hello geeks, keyboard gansta wannabes & partisan hacks. how's the ego boost today?Comment -
Almost 60 degrees in Nashville today. Al Gore will be back out any day now.Comment -
so what happened between 1910-1940? because that jump is 120% larger then the jump from 1940-2000.Originally posted by DrStale
Comment
