tell me it isn't so......the sun??

[herbivor]

"The word 'incontrovertible' ... is rarely used in science because by its very nature, science questions prevailing ideas. "

Agreed 100%. "Incontrovertible" is a poor word to describe GW. "Majority Consensus" or "Overwhelming Evidence" is a better choice of words. Nothing is incontrovertible in science.

Giaever earned his Nobel for his experimental discoveries regarding tunneling phenomena in superconductors.

Is he a climate scientist? If not, I wouldn't take his dissent too seriously. I don't pretend to be an expert in electrical engineering because I'm a structural engineer. Scientists that are not involved in climate science research have no more expertise in GW than you or I, regardless of their stature in the scientific community. Most of the dissenters seem to fall in that category. Whereas 97% of people involved in climate science research are in agreement.

[gwb72tii]

i believe his major criticism was about the politicized nature of what is supposed to be "science"

[Fusion]

You guys are arguing over an IDEOLOGY.
The Earth is not some pansy ass nerd that gets hit by girls. The Earth is a die-hard motherfucker that has taken millions of years of beating from various shit flying through space. The Earth gets really piss drunk and vomits TWOfuckingTHOUSAND degree lava on itself. The Earth creates two or three huge hurricanes and shit at the same time, to fuck shit up, just because it's bored during the summer. And at the same time, Earth has to put up with that 5500° asshole - Sun, shining and spewing shit all over the place.

Do you really think Earth gives a shit about a couple degrees of fluctuation during a time-span that is equal to a thousandth of a second for the Earth? Are you seriously suggesting that Earth could be pissed off because you spilled oil on it? Stuff that is actually like the Earth's own puss?

[kronus]

that is such a shitty analogy that it actually hurts to read your post. You should look into the five or so known major extinction events the Earth has endured... and the ice ages.

[joshh]

that is such a shitty analogy that it actually hurts to read your post. You should look into the five or so known major extinction events the Earth has endured... and the ice ages.

You're just helping to prove his point.

[cale]

You're just helping to prove his point.

And his point still remains terrible. No one is making the claim that GW will cause the earth to implode. It's the life on earth which is affected, and that life IS susceptible to very small changes in temperate.

[joshh]

And his point still remains terrible. No one is making the claim that GW will cause the earth to implode. It's the life on earth which is affected, and that life IS susceptible to very small changes in temperate.

Then you missed his point.

Yes they pretty much are saying the earth will implode if we don't "do something". Which makes it all the more funny because cutting c02 down to what the GW believers think is going to make a difference means we all live in the 1800's again.

[cale]

Don't give yourself too much credit if you think we're incapable of understanding a poorly made point as though only you could. GW is said to affect the biosphere on a global level, the lifeforms in it are not that robust and are extremely fragile. Making the claim that they are capable of simply overcoming those forces is quite ignorant.

[joshh]

Don't give yourself too much credit if you think we're incapable of understanding a poorly made point as though only you could. GW is said to affect the biosphere on a global level, the lifeforms in it are not that robust and are extremely fragile. Making the claim that they are capable of simply overcoming those forces is quite ignorant.

You mean assuming GW is real...that is ignorance.

[kronus]

You assume that he "believes" that GW is happening in much the same way that you "believe" that it isn't.

And you missed my point.

[Fusion]

that is such a shitty analogy that it actually hurts to read your post. You should look into the five or so known major extinction events the Earth has endured... and the ice ages.

And his point still remains terrible. No one is making the claim that GW will cause the earth to implode. It's the life on earth which is affected, and that life IS susceptible to very small changes in temperate.

Check mate.

[kronus]

...no it isn't?

[mrsleeve]

^
we agree then ???

[Adrian_Visser]

Okay for all you ignoramuses out there on both sides of this argument.
Understand one thing: GLOBAL WARMING IS HAPPENING.

The polar ice cap currently sits at 60% of what it did in 1980 and virtually every glacier in the world is receding at an unprecedented rate.

The only uncertainty is whether or not it is caused by humanity and the industrial age or if it is natural.

[Fusion]

Than what's the point of the whole thing?
Either you're implying that humans are the only devistating entity on this planet, which isn't true because pretty much every substance or life form in the universe is "out to kill something", and which is easily debunked by the extintion of many species millions of years ago. Or you're saying some curent event (gw), suppposedly caused by us, is in the end leading to the extinction of everything. Than what gives humans the right to think we are so superior to nature to be 1) capable of such a thing and 2) to stop or revert the process? If so, than are we humans more/less devistating than millions of locusts eating/killing a vast area of vegitation?

Why is a rise in global temperatures so amazing? There NEVER WAS a stable global temperature. It has always, over millions of years, been fluctuating. During those millions of years, probably hundreds of species have died, but hundreds have developed. Is anything out of the ordinary going on? No.