Mssr. Battle-Axes,Not merely your name but your demeanor on this board strongly suggestthat no piece of evidence nor any collection thereof will move yourunshakable faith that 'it's all bunk', so I do not expect to changeyour mind about anything. For those who put ideological Truthabove mere reality as explained by scientists, there is no hope.For those who want to hear what science has to say, and haveis the following..Global warming is real, it's just not got anything to do with humanity. Followed by In fact, there are several organizations that disagree. Try the Cato Institute:I'd hate to shock anyone, but the Cato "Institute" is not, sorry,a scientific body.I can't say I've seen anything on globalwarmingconsensusofallscientists.com yet either. Your consensus is bunk and media hype.How very funny and clever of you Battle-Axes. Now since the Cato institue is not a scientific society, let's turn our attention towhat some scientific experts have to say. Let's see whatthe US Geophysical Union has come to conclude, for starters."Leaders of one of the nation's top scientific organizations issued a new warning this week that human activities -- most notably the greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and other industries -- are warming Earth's climate at a faster rate than ever.The statement came from the 28-member council of the American Geophysical Union, whose 41,000 members include more than 10,000 experts on the planet's atmosphere and changing climate. Thursday, December 18, 2003You have have also heard of John Christy, director of the University of Alabama's Earth Systems Science Center frequently touted as a "skeptic". He is citedin this article as being "Critical" of the (minority) of scientistswho make predictions of "huge" temp increases or "tremendous" sea level rises (in fact it's not a minority but virtually zero: everyarticle I've seen indicates not "predictions" but observations of higherrisks -- e.g. faster arctic melting -- which make the possibility of'huge' sea level rises higher than it was before we had this evidence) but even Christy laughs at as idiotic, even nonsensitcal,the idea that humans don't have to do with it, here it isin the "climate skeptic's' own words:"It is scientifically inconceivable that after changing forests into cities, turning millions of acres into farmland, putting massive quantities of soot and dust into the atmosphere and sending quantities of greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course of climate change hasn't been increased in the past century.'so there's your actual 'skeptic' (as opposed to fake skepticswho are paid by ExxonMobil or shills for Cato) have to say.Of course we are assured that there is no scientific consensus (sounds like a president, "Read my lips, No Scientific Consensus!"don't it? ;-)So let's continue, shall we? We've already heard the testimonyof Thomas Karl, director of the National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration's National Climatic Data Center,to Congress, but here's whathe said in a joint statement..Thomas Karl together with Kevin Trenberth,head of the Climate Analysis Section at NCAR:No Doubt of Human Impact on Global Climate, Scientists SayIndustrial emissions are dominant influence on climate change, research showsthe press release you can find on news.google.com states in part,"There is no doubt that the composition of the atmosphere is changing because of human activities, and today greenhouse gases are the largest human influence on global climate," write Thomas Karl, director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center, and Kevin Trenberth, head of the Climate Analysis Section at NCAR.The scientists conclude that industrial emissions have been the dominant influence on climate change for the past 50 years, overwhelming natural forces. Levels of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas that traps solar radiation and warms the planet, have risen by 31 percent since pre-industrial times -- from 280 parts per million by volume (ppmv) to over 370 ppmv today.But there is no scientific consensus we are told,so let's ignore the 10,000 climate experts at theU.S. Geophysical Union, and let's ignore the conclusionsof the head of the Climate Analysis Section at NCARand of the director of the National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration's National Climatic Data Center..let try, umm,how about none other than the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)?They note there is "general scientific agreement"that temperatures are rising as a result of human activities such as fossil-fuel burning, which releases carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases. This warming has caused glacial melting and subsequent increases in sea levels worldwide of up to 20 centimeters, or 7.8 inches.That's the general press release from the AAAS itself, the world's largest general scientific society (aaas.org) butthere are also statements from individual distinguishedscientists likeMichael Oppenheimer, professor of geosciences and international affairs at Princeton Universit.Back to the press release by the AAAS, scientists generally agree that the temperature rise "is as a result of human activities such as fossil fuel burning" so let us move on.We are told that there is no scientific consensus so wemust now ignore the 10,000 climate experts at the U.S. GeophysicalUnion plus ignore the conclusions of the head of the Climate Analysis Section at NCARand ignore those of the Director of the National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration's National Climatic Data Center, and now we also needto play monkey "See no evil" and ignore what the world'slargest science body, and certainly among the most distinguished,the AAAS, has to say. Four not enough? How convenient, So longas doctrinate Truth is more important than the mere realityof what just about every major established top expert scientificbody has to say.Ok, how about the IPCC, theInter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change, the largestopen scientific peer review on this issue and one of the largestopen science peer reviews any scientific topic, ever? Same conclusion: human fossil fuelburning is a significant factor in the warming. Five not enough?How about the scientists at the US EPA under George W. Bush?Same conclusion (circa 2002) by the EPA: Humans are substantiallyresponsible for the temperature rises. Six not enough? How about the Bush Administration itself then, underthe signatures of its own top departments, signedby the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of Energyand by Bush's top Science Advisor all based on reportsand analyses by top science experts?People are responsible for the spike in global warming in the last 30 years, says a new US government report. The verdict, long accepted by most scientists, has encountered resistance from the Bush administration in the past, prompting experts to question if the president will now enact policies to curb greenhouse gas emissions.The report, titled Our Changing Planet, is part of a regular series that summarises recent and planned climate change research by 13 government agencies. It was released on Wednesday with a covering letter to Congress signed by the president's secretaries of commerce and energy, along with his science adviser.[I'll supply url for this one,http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6334find the rest yourself, unless you want to growup and state you will finally stop the silly denialif the urls for the rest are furnished]Re-read those words: People are responsible for thespike in temperature. What? Seven top sources not enough? Morelike 10, given the multiple sources for some of the above. Nothingwill ever convince people like Cato and, I fear, peoplelike Battle Axes. Cato says it just ain't so andother flat-earth market Fundamentalists and ExxonMobildenies it and a handful of Exxon-connected scientists getting paid by ExxonMobil...so never mind the monsterously long listabove, never mind the overwhelming list above, afterall, hey, there's only the top most expert scientists onthe planet, what they hell do THEY know?!?!? Listento Cato instead! And to Rush! And Liddy! That's the ticket!One can find less prestigious sources than the AAAS e.g.""There has been a strong warming trend over the past 30 years, a trend that has been shown to be due primarily to increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere," said James Hansen of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies in a recent story you can findvia news.google.com and so on...nothing will change theirminds, those who have fixed upon their fundamentalistpre-conclusions. Let those who do have open mindstake the above as a wake up call. And let historyrecord that those who made the denials, did so withoutbeing able to plead ignorance of the consensusof the top scientific bodies of the world had tosay; they'll have to find some other pathetic excuseto explain their "humans ain't got nothing to dowith it" mantras designed to keep business as usualgoing and which will keep society going towards the brink, nicejob...
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Rat