Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 5 of 8     «   Prev   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   Next
CoachB25

Registered:
Posts: 2,234
Reply with quote  #121 
When I hear a founding member of the group collecting all of the date for Global Warming say that he resigned his position because the testing data was being corrupted then I can't agree with their results.  When I hear people state that all of these scientists agree then I know that they don't know the facts:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/11/20/the-latest-meteorologist-survey-destroys-the-global-warming-climate-consensus/

To this date, there has not been one study to confirm that global warming is caused by humans.  NOT ONE!  Dewey or any other, please point us to the definitive study that proves without a doubt that global warming is human made.  You can't do it!
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #122 
CoachB - We can't even prove, to the satisfaction of the Right, the President was born in the US.  There is no study out there that the Right would accept as proof.  I'll stick with my logic.  Most young people don't spend their entire lives educating themselves to the max in order to explore and learn the answers to our being only to gain an opportunity to lie about what they learn for a few research bucks here or there.  If they were in it for the money, a lot more could be had as a Wall Street banker.  Btw, do you remember when the tobacco companies disputed all the evidence?  I can understand why some oppose what many believe to be facts.
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,466
Reply with quote  #123 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachB25
When I hear a founding member of the group collecting all of the date for Global Warming say that he resigned his position because the testing data was being corrupted then I can't agree with their results.  When I hear people state that all of these scientists agree then I know that they don't know the facts:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/11/20/the-latest-meteorologist-survey-destroys-the-global-warming-climate-consensus/

To this date, there has not been one study to confirm that global warming is caused by humans.  NOT ONE!  Dewey or any other, please point us to the definitive study that proves without a doubt that global warming is human made.  You can't do it!


May I ask who you are referring to?  Coleman at the Weather Channel?  Moore at Greenpeace?  Or who?  If it's either of these 2, I can certainly respond.

If you need definitive proof that global warming is caused by humans, you probably will continue to be a denier.  I doubt anyone could ever do a scientific study that would yield proof positive results to this end.  We are talking about planetary changes over vast land masses and oceans over hundreds (thousands?) of years with a myriad of contributing factors.  Scientific studies often do not come up with solid conclusions; they are usually hypotheses that are supported (or not) by the scientific experiments and research that the scientists did.  Climate change studies can't always prove a specific point, but they can contribute to a wealth of knowledge and the analysis of the findings can add valuable information to other studies.  And the trends shown by all these studies certainly show that the planet is experiencing effects of climate change.

I just don't see how anyone can turn his/her back on all the scientific studies carried out by numerous prestigious scientific organizations that have agreed that climate-warming trends are almost certainly caused by human activities.  Because a guy who used to espouse it and now is a lobbyist for nuclear energy says so?

I would recommend a brief viewing of some of these studies and conclusions here -

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/    

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

http://climate.nasa.gov/effects/


Just look at your own surroundings - can you say that the climate in your area of the country hasn't changed in the past 50 years?  It sure has in mine.  And in the area I grew up in.  Temperatures are much, much warmer.  Summer temperatures are routinely setting new highs.  Much less rain during some seasons, much more rain during others.  Many more days with temperature inversions.  Yes, some of this is cyclical, but when areas are having 100 year floods (and 100 year droughts) every couple of years, something is going on.  And how can all the garbage we put into the air (factory emissions, auto emissions, use of fertilizers and other chemicals, etc.) not effect our weather?  This, of course, IMO (BS).




 

__________________
Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.   ---   John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776
 
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,466
Reply with quote  #124 
Say what???

US Senate agrees that climate change is real in a 98 to 1 vote


__________________
Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.   ---   John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776
 
CoachB25

Registered:
Posts: 2,234
Reply with quote  #125 
So, did they vote that it was man made?  NO.  The vote didn't address that.  Sun spots?  Increased volcanic activity?  (BTW, increased to the point that new islands are being formed.) Part of a natural cycle?  (Hey, once upon a time wasn't the planet covered by dinosaurs?)

I heard one expert say the other day that the new claim of "warmest ever" was absolutely misleading.  The margin placing this past year in that category was .2 of a percent.  The margin of error was + or - 1.  So, within that margin of error, it could have been in they "typical year" readings.

DC, if the claim liberals are making that this is man made, then, yes I need positive proof.  I could probably find as much proof per opinions that this is caused by aliens. 
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #126 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachB25


DC, if the claim liberals are making that this is man made, then, yes I need positive proof.  I could probably find as much proof per opinions that this is caused by aliens. 


CoachB - It's a consensus from the scientific community and not a Liberal claim.  There are also some scientists who disagree.  Finally, there could never be proof that would be acceptable to many on the Right.  Like I said, we can't even prove the birthplace of POTUS.  Hopefully society will come together before too much damage is done.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 28,910
Reply with quote  #127 
If ALL the left believes that man causes global warming then yes you could say it's a left, right issue. Find a lefty who does not believe man causes global warming [not counting obamaphone lady]
It is not a consensus among the scientific community. You need to quit deceiving the readers.

You are correct however, we cannot prove the birthplace of barack obama.

__________________
"Getting your motor revved about taking our guns is going to be what undoes your efforts."

"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 13,117
Reply with quote  #128 
Climate change fraud at work.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/globalwarming/11395516/The-fiddling-with-temperature-data-is-the-biggest-science-scandal-ever.html



__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #129 
I still find it hard to believe all those smart kids went into science, spent years in education, and gave up their dreams of answering the questions of all mankind, so they could lie about their findings in order to get a free research buck somewhere.  They should have used their brilliance in the banking industry and made millions instead.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 13,117
Reply with quote  #130 
Religion can be very powerful.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
BillSmith

Registered:
Posts: 6,759
Reply with quote  #131 
Dewey- I don't know how familiar you are with the bold face lies researchers fold into their findings to advance research grants, but it is as bad as banking and sometimes as lucrative.

First off, can't tell you how many times I've experienced some scientist describing how up to 1/3 of data can be termed spurious and just thrown out. Could give some anecdotal remembrances of lab assistants waving off the notion that the power interruption to a laser on a bench meant anything. "No one cares, just adjust the numbers."

I get that you are defending the integrity of the scientific community, but from one that has peeked behind the backdrops, they aren't beyond reproach. Indiana Jones-like pursuit of knowledge for its own sake.

Just my opinion from afar, formerly near.

__________________
Sometimes you are the mole, sometimes the mushroom.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #132 
Bill - Every basket has its bad apples.  I have little choice but to go with the consensus and cross my fingers that most can be trusted.  If the asteroid is headed right at us, I want to take action.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 13,117
Reply with quote  #133 
Further to Bill's point, let's turn to the journalism profession.  It defies logic that a guy like Brian Williams, having reached the pinnacle of his career, has propagated so many lies on a variety of issues.  The evidence of journalists lying, bending the truth, hiding the truth, using language to twist a story is vast.  Should we believe that journalists are any more or less human than scientists?  
Don't forget also that many scientists work in research laboratories in our institutions of higher learning.  Yes, those same institutions that have become extremely liberal.  Don't scientists need to keep getting grants and isn't at all possible that those grants are dependent on finding the "right" answers?

__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
BillSmith

Registered:
Posts: 6,759
Reply with quote  #134 
Dewey- My basic nature is to believe a speaker until evidence to the contrary dictate otherwise.  But I've lived enough to be cautious.
__________________
Sometimes you are the mole, sometimes the mushroom.
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #135 
pabar - If a journalist finds the Lewinsky dress or the IRS memo, he/she will report it.  That's what I believe.

There's no doubt Government is capable of covert activities but I still don't believe the 9/11 birthers.  A birth certificate can and has been forged before but I still believe Obama is a citizen.  At some point, consensus has to take over.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 13,117
Reply with quote  #136 
Why no MSM coverage of POTUS comments at the prayer breakfast?  I disagree with you - they won't always report what they find.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,055
Reply with quote  #137 
Dewey will never admit the fraud perpetrated by the left that is global warming. This is one of the liberal cash cows as well as their ticket to increasing the size of government.

Official records systematically 'adjusted' to show heating...
Meteorologist: 'In the business world, people go to jail for such manipulations of data'...


PAPER: 'GLOBAL WARMING' BIGGEST SCIENCE SCANDAL EVER

__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #138 
NASA agrees there's warming but of course, despite the fact 50% of the folks don't like Obama and would embarrass him in a New York minute, NASA probably doesn't contain any of these anti-Obama types who might come out as whistle-blowers. 

Scientists can come out in thousands claiming global warming and many on the Right will ignore. Statisticians will supply labor reports and many on the Right will dismiss.  However, tell the Right measles came across the border, without any study, and it's hook, line, and sinker for many.  Politics, politics, politics.
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 13,117
Reply with quote  #139 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey
NASA agrees there's warming but of course, despite the fact 50% of the folks don't like Obama and would embarrass him in a New York minute, NASA probably doesn't contain any of these anti-Obama types who might come out as whistle-blowers. 

Scientists can come out in thousands claiming global warming and many on the Right will ignore. Statisticians will supply labor reports and many on the Right will dismiss.  However, tell the Right measles came across the border, without any study, and it's hook, line, and sinker for many.  Politics, politics, politics.


Substitute Left for Right, pro-Obama types for anti-Obama types, and other issues for the ones you've cited and your statement is still true.  As you say - Politics, politics, politics.

Except in this case, the scientists have been shown over and over again to have changed the data.  How is that explained?

__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #140 
pabar - I know of the email incident everyone speaks of, and the lone blogger who called out NASA, but can you name and link another data scandal to substantiate your over and over accusation?  As for the email controversy, that was completely overblown while the lone blogger accusation was found to be mostly misleading.  I find it hard to believe 18 scientific associations would accept findings and fall into the global warming category if they believed these accusations had merit.  Anyway, do you have a third example?
GrizzlyFan

Registered:
Posts: 2,055
Reply with quote  #141 
Follow the money Dewey. Confirming global warming is a multi-billion dollar business. In other words people are being paid to find (or create) the desired results. Money corrupts, just ask Harry Reid and his Vegas pals.
__________________
If Obamacare is such a good thing, why did he have to lie about it to get it passed?
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #142 
Grizzly - Are you suggesting there isn't enough money in oil to buy off these so called crooked scientists? 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 13,117
Reply with quote  #143 
They're not driven by money.  They're driven by religion.  Far more powerful.
__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
Dewey

Registered:
Posts: 24,419
Reply with quote  #144 
Maybe the Magic Rabbit can change some minds.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 28,910
Reply with quote  #145 
Embedded image permalink
__________________
"Getting your motor revved about taking our guns is going to be what undoes your efforts."

"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 28,910
Reply with quote  #146 
Bias from Cronkite

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/julia-seymour/2015/04/03/famous-journalists-70s-ice-obsession-glaciers-down-mason-dixon-line

__________________
"Getting your motor revved about taking our guns is going to be what undoes your efforts."

"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 13,117
Reply with quote  #147 
Duke University study says that global warming has slowed, that climate models are wrong and variations in climate are more attributable to natural variability.  Exposing the lies of the global warming crowd.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3052926/Our-climate-models-WRONG-Global-warming-slowed-recent-changes-natural-variability-says-study.html

The key part of the article:

'Statistically, it's pretty unlikely that an 11-year hiatus in warming, like the one we saw at the start of this century, would occur if the underlying human-caused warming was progressing at a rate as fast as the most severe IPCC projections,' Brown said.

__________________
Will I Wynn is a poster who used to go by the name of Dewey.  He used to criticize people who did that.

"Once you open your eyes, it's impossible to be a Democrat." - CJ Pearson
DietCoke

Registered:
Posts: 2,466
Reply with quote  #148 
No, sorry.

Duke Researcher Denounces Rush Limbaugh's "Ridiculous" Distortion Of His Global Warming Study

Blog ››› 6 hours and 6 minutes ago ››› KEVIN KALHOEFER

Rush Limbaugh grossly distorted a new study from Duke University, claiming it shows that "there isn't any [global] warming going on." But one of its authors noted that the study actually confirms humans' role in driving global warming and said that Limbaugh's claim is "ridiculous.

On the April 22 edition of his show, Limbaugh touted the Duke University study as "[b]ad news for the climate change crowd" and claimed the Duke researchers are part of a "consensus" of people who think "there isn't any warming going on." He went on to assert that the study, which examines temperature records over the past 1,000 years, shows that "there's no evidence whatsoever to suggest that long-term warming over the next 100 years is going to be anything even noticeable, abnormal."

But the study itself said nothing of the sort. Rather, the study stated that, out of the range of warming projections outlined by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), temperature records suggest that at present time the "middle-of-the-road warming scenario" is more likely than the most severe warming projections. One of the study's authors, Duke doctoral candidate Patrick Brown, confirmed as much in an email to Media Matters, and called Limbaugh's assertion "ridiculous":

The idea that there 'isn't any warming' is ridiculous. Over the past century there are countless datasets indicating warming (weather stations, sea level, ice mass, ocean temperatures, etc.).

[...]

Our study shows that we are probably not on the worst-case IPCC scenario but that we may be on an IPCC middle-of-the road scenario. The IPCC does not make predictions they make hypothetical projections. So this result does not contradict the IPCC conclusions at all.

The study also stated that natural variability "can slow or speed the rate of warming from decade to decade," and cited this as a reason not to be over-reliant on "short-term temperature trends."

Limbaugh claimed this meant the study was saying that "the sun" could be responsible for recent global warming. But the vast majority of scientists would say otherwise. Indeed, Brown explained to Media Matters that Limbaugh is "wrong" to attribute recent warming to solar activity, and added that human activity is a much bigger contributor to warming in the past century than natural variation:

[O]ur study confirms that the warming of the past century could not have happened without human-caused increases in greenhouse gasses. This is because the warming over the past century is much larger than what could have come about due to natural variation.

[...]

Rush is wrong in his interpretation. The solar contribution to recent temperature change is probably minimal and/or negative (i.e., the sun has probably caused cooling, but human increases in greenhouse gasses have overwhelmed that small cooling to cause a net warming).

Science writer Greg Laden wrote that the Duke study will receive "criticism from climate scientists" because it includes language that suggests it is assessing the likelihood of different warming scenarios by predicting the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that will occur in the future, which it can't possibly know. However, Laden noted the study doesn't actually "say that one or another scenario is likely or less likely" and "says nothing about the validity of climate models." Rather, according to Laden, the Duke researchers "have provided an insight, if their work holds up, on how random wanderings of reality from projections, in both directions (cooler than expected, warmer than expected) will emerge depending on what we do with our greenhouse gases."

Laden concluded that the study's findings do not provide a "change in how we think about global warming," but rather a "refinement." But he warned that the results are likely to be "abused by denialists" and are being misrepresented, "willfully or through misunderstanding, by climate science contrarians." Limbaugh is a case in point in this regard.

Limbaugh, who frequently attempts to deny climate change, concluded his segment by claiming that he was helping Brown get his message out: "We've gotten your message out for 25 years, the message that there isn't any warming, and there isn't in the specifically past 18 years. There isn't any, and we've gotten that message out."

Limbaugh may have been spreading the same message for the last 25 years, but it's clearly not the message of Patrick Brown -- or the rest of the 97 percent of scientists who agree on man-made climate change.


__________________
Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.   ---   John Adams, Thoughts on Government, 1776
 
ForeverInBlue

Registered:
Posts: 10,356
Reply with quote  #149 
How the new Ice Age treating everyone?

Thirteen predictions from the first Earth Day -

https://ricochet.com/13-ridiculous-predictions-made-earth-day-1970/

Today is Earth Day — an annual event first launched on April 22, 1970. The inaugural festivities (organized in part by then hippie and now convicted murderer Ira Einhorn) predicted death, destruction and disease unless we did exactly as progressives commanded. Sound familiar? Behold the coming apocalypse, as predicted on and around Earth Day, 1970:

“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — Harvard biologist George Wald

“We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.” — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner

“Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” — New York Times editorial

“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich

“Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born… [By 1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” — Paul Ehrlich

“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day

“Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions…. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter

“In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half.” — Life magazine

"At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

“Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” — Paul Ehrlich

“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

“[One] theory assumes that the earth’s cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun’s heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born.” — Newsweek magazine

"The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” — Kenneth Watt
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 28,910
Reply with quote  #150 
God bless the earth
__________________
"Getting your motor revved about taking our guns is going to be what undoes your efforts."

"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.