Global Warming "Deniers"

[uhnoesanoob]

We all know that Global warming is a tad bit overblown. However, one thing I was shocked to find out is that Al Gore calls ANYONE who differs from his global warming idea a "denier". I learned this recently, after my uncle got me a book called "The Deniers", by Lawrence Solomon. The book gives a list of people Mr. Gore calls the deniers, and the most interesting part of it is that the deniers are actually pretty credible scientists. I find it odd that these people are called the deniers, shouldn't they at least have the dignity of being called skeptics?

[arxarts]

many people (especially way right christians, no offence) believe it is natural.

Mr. Gore is a brilliant man, but like all brilliant men and women, he is arrogant, and therefore thinks he has the power to call other people "ignorant", "deniers", etc.

However, global warming is happening, even though our most influential activists are complete jackasses.

[SuperDeagle]

At 7/2/08 12:23 PM, arxarts wrote: Mr. Gore is a brilliant man

Boy that's not opinionated, the man is anything but brilliant.

[uhnoesanoob]

At 7/2/08 12:23 PM, arxarts wrote: many people (especially way right christians, no offence) believe it is natural.

Mr. Gore is a brilliant man, but like all brilliant men and women, he is arrogant, and therefore thinks he has the power to call other people "ignorant", "deniers", etc.

However, global warming is happening, even though our most influential activists are complete jackasses.

Well, yes it IS happening, but the big question is is it manmade, and is it natural. Remember, the "little Ice age era" ended about 10 decades ago, so the warming of the earth may in fact be a natural process. And Al Gore is far from brilliant, if anything he is a glorified mouth piece for those scientists who believe in global warming.

[Memorize]

We've been cooling for the past 10 years and have another 10 or so years left of it.

Also. Yes, warming is a natural trend (around the time of AD 1000 the global temperatures were almost double of what today's are), but the real question is if people are accelerating it.

Interesting 2004 article

But still there are others that say the Sun has a minute affect, if any, on global temperatures as far as Global Warming is concerned.

I guess this can explain it a little better (beware: Lots o reading!): JunkScience

[KeithHybrid]

This global warming is not natural. Anyone who says otherwise is just using that arguement as an excuse to continue driving their emmisions-belching 10-gallons-per-mile SUV...unless they actually do believe it's natural, in which case they're stupid.

[arxarts]

At 7/2/08 01:52 PM, KeithHybrid wrote: This global warming is not natural. Anyone who says otherwise is just using that arguement as an excuse to continue driving their emmisions-belching 10-gallons-per-mile SUV...unless they actually do believe it's natural, in which case they're stupid.

that's why I try to avoid talking about global warming, people give idiotic arguments. but, hey, its the politics forum, its fun to be hated by suv-owning people....

[Bookman60]

At 7/2/08 01:52 PM, KeithHybrid wrote: This global warming is not natural. Anyone who says otherwise is just using that arguement as an excuse to continue driving their emmisions-belching 10-gallons-per-mile SUV...unless they actually do believe it's natural, in which case they're stupid.

There is no such thing as global warming. Anyone with half a brain (I can use ad hominem attacks too), realizes that temperature fluctuates over the years. Look at the stats. Global warming is a myth perpetuated by the environmentalists to make the regular person feel guilty.

By the way Al Gore's house uses about as much energy as an entire subdivision. Hypocrite? Yup.

[InsertFunnyUserName]

At 7/2/08 01:52 PM, KeithHybrid wrote: This global warming is not natural. Anyone who says otherwise is just using that arguement as an excuse to continue driving their emmisions-belching 10-gallons-per-mile SUV...unless they actually do believe it's natural, in which case they're stupid.

Well, it could be partly natural.

However, global warming is far more perpetuated by pollution of the oceans and deforestation than gas emissions.

[n64kid]

The greenhouse effect still isn't a fact, and it still hasn't been connected to global tempuratures. Yet this seems to be the focus of all global warming discussion. What a waste of tax dollars just to lie to people to get them to pollute less. Now I drive a prius.... but that's just because I like driving 700 miles between fill-ups.

[Chavic]

At 7/2/08 12:23 PM, arxarts wrote: many people (especially way right christians, no offence) believe it is natural.

Mr. Gore is a brilliant man, but like all brilliant men and women, he is arrogant, and therefore thinks he has the power to call other people "ignorant", "deniers", etc.

However, global warming is happening, even though our most influential activists are complete jackasses.

Al Gore is insane. How could anyone call the man who claimed to have invented the internet brilliant. Do you realize how much money he makes every time he gives a speech on "global warming"?

Do you realize how much BS carbon credits are? Its ok to pollute if you pay for it?

[JoS]

I believe Global warming is a natural occurrence. I am not right-winged, nor am I a Christian, nor do I drive a SUV.

[slipknotfan591]

Global warming happened back in the Ice Age.

Nuff said.

[SmilezRoyale]

"Deniers"

All Gore needs to do know is add the word holocaust to the end and we can invoke the writ [right] of godwin's law.

[zoolrule]

There is no such a thing as "creditable scientists" who deny Global Warming.

There are just Scientists that were paid high enough by the corporations.

[the1stguy1]

a recent petition by the national science foundation reveals the truth about global warming, its insignificant, it was signed by 19000 of the nations top scientists. you can check out the supporters here: http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p333.htm

i dont want to argue to much about this though, there is no point, people will stick to their opinions to the grave on this one...

[the1stguy1]

At 7/2/08 01:52 PM, KeithHybrid wrote: This global warming is not natural. Anyone who says otherwise is just using that arguement as an excuse to continue driving their emmisions-belching 10-gallons-per-mile SUV...unless they actually do believe it's natural, in which case they're stupid.

anyone who thinks that humans can lower greenhouse emissions (or that that matters) hasnt looked at the facts

in 10 years, simply the increase in China's coal use will put out more emissions than 3 billion ford trucks driving 10000 miles a year

of course this is irrelevant as it wont have an affect on the temperature anyways...

[JoS]

At 7/4/08 02:22 AM, the1stguy1 wrote: a recent petition by the national science foundation reveals the truth about global warming, its insignificant, it was signed by 19000 of the nations top scientists. you can check out the supporters here: http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p333.htm

While I do not believe GW is a result of human activity, I do feel the need to point out some of the criticsm against that petition. While many of them hold phD's or MA, it does nto say what field. They could have a PhD in English. Secondly, some names appear multiple times for the same individual, and there is no system of verifying these peoples identities. I could send in the card saying I have a PhD or make someone up.

At 7/4/08 12:54 AM, zoolrule wrote: There is no such a thing as "creditable scientists" who deny Global Warming.

There are just Scientists that were paid high enough by the corporations.

Not really.

Numerous scientists from a variety of Universities, including schools such as Harvard, as well as government and academic research centers and national space agencies believe it is a result of natural occurring elements, nto human activity, most notably solar radiation. Unless the Russian and Danish Space Agency are secretly controlled by large corporations. If you include individuals who believe it is unknown, added in Los Alamos as a corporate mouthpiece.

Lets not forget there is a shitload of money to be made by "green technology" companies too. They have an equally important, if not more important stake on research saying what they want it to say. Lets face it, no matter what scientists say, oil companies will still be making money. But if scientists say GW is not occurring, good buy green technology companies. Lets remember they are still corporations, not some benevolent entity. They want to make money too, but their paychecks are tied heavily to the outcome of research.

According to the scientists in the movie, there is an intolerance of dissent on global warming. Official government sanction of global warming opened the floodgates of funding to climate researchers, who previously worked in obscurity.

NASA scientist Roy Spencer says in the program that climate scientists need for there to be problems to get more funding. IPCC contributor John Christy says of climate scientists, "We have a vested interest in creating panic because money with then flow to climate scientists." University of London biogeographer Philip Stott says that "If the global warming virago collapses, there will be an awful lot of people out of jobs."

The film also debunks the IPCC claim that the 2,500 scientists contributing to its reports also support its alarmist conclusions. One key IPCC contributor for example, the Pasteur Institute's Paul Reiter, threatened to sue the IPCC if the group didn't remove his name from a chapter with which he disagreed.Story

Click me

The Founder of greenpeace doesn't even think that anyone has proven GW exists. Are you going to claim the guy who founded Greenpeace is just "working for the man"?

[Pontificate]

At 7/4/08 09:59 AM, LastSpartan wrote: The Global Warming industry has become another Holocaust industry. Those who accept it reap all the benefits (Jobs, money, international support), while the deniers are criticized, degraded, and literally threatened and attacked by radicals - much like what has happened with those who deny the Holocaust.

You accept it, you're the hero. You deny it, you're denounced and ostracised. Like an animal.

Not to the same extent and there's good reason for that. You see, there is credible evidence to suggest man-made global warming is not occuring while there is also credible evidence to suggest that it is. Hence academic controversy that has been exploited by two political sides to further their own ends. Evidently the pro-man made global warming partisans are winning in the public arena and so those who criticize it are demonised to a certain extent. That is where that comes from in regards to global warming.

Holocaust deniers, on the other hand, have no credible evidence that has not been debunked beforehand and inevitably are merely denying it to further their own ignorant, hate-filled agenda. This is why they are criticised and rightly so. Now if you want to get on your bigoted little soap box be my guest but kindly do it in a topic about the holocaust you irredeemably foul little sophist.

[xscoot]

Even if global warming is a myth, we should stop polluting the oceans and air, and try to find healthier resources than coal or nuclear power. Sure, it may not be heating up the earth, but it is destroying ourselves.

[Markface]

I don't deny it. I just don't care.

See, I'll be long dead before it starts making MINOR impacts.

[dySWN]

At 7/4/08 02:44 PM, xscoot wrote: Even if global warming is a myth, we should stop polluting the oceans and air, and try to find healthier resources than coal or nuclear power. Sure, it may not be heating up the earth, but it is destroying ourselves.

I lol'd when I saw nuclear thrown into the same category as coal. If done correctly, it's one of the most efficient forms of power there is.

[TheMason]

At 7/2/08 01:52 PM, KeithHybrid wrote: This global warming is not natural. Anyone who says otherwise is just using that arguement as an excuse to continue driving their emmisions-belching 10-gallons-per-mile SUV...unless they actually do believe it's natural, in which case they're stupid.

At 7/4/08 12:54 AM, zoolrule wrote: There is no such a thing as "creditable scientists" who deny Global Warming.

There are just Scientists that were paid high enough by the corporations.

Gotta love trolls who log on and make an ad hominem attack or some weak bumper-sticker slogan statement and then never rejoin the conversation in any meaningful way. They never defend their position or respond to counter-evidence. In the end this type of behavior undermines their position by making it appear weak and unsubstantiated.

But as a skeptic I hate the term "deniers". I do not deny GW or climate change exists, all I say is I do not know. I guess you could call me a climate agnostic. So while I do not think that the consensus is real (nor is any consensus "scientific"), I am not arrogant enough to believe that there is no way I (or the scientists arguing my position) could be wrong.

[uhnoesanoob]

At 7/4/08 12:54 AM, zoolrule wrote: There is no such a thing as "creditable scientists" who deny Global Warming.

There are just Scientists that were paid high enough by the corporations.

Prove that all scientists who deny global warming are paid by the corporations. Go.

[rayray88]

i would'nt trust old al gore hes abit of a hypocrite, did u know he drives a hummer and not enough ppl will really do anything to stop global warming untill it is too late

[zoolrule]

At 7/5/08 10:05 AM, uhnoesanoob wrote:

Prove that all scientists who deny global warming are paid by the corporations. Go.

It might not be a prove, and i was just being extreme.
look up around a bit in this site, search in youtube for some global warming lectures. I bet all of the deniers or 'agnostics' here didn't even bother to do the most minor research about the global warming, it's so much obvious that the global warming is caused by humanity and by the industries, and you should look the amount of scientists understanding and supporting it, on the amount NOT, also look at the respect and achievements of the ones supporting it vs the deniers, IT IS OBVIOUS.

[dySWN]

At 7/6/08 01:14 AM, zoolrule wrote:

At 7/5/08 10:05 AM, uhnoesanoob wrote:

Prove that all scientists who deny global warming are paid by the corporations. Go.

It might not be a prove, and i was just being extreme.
look up around a bit in this site, search in youtube for some global warming lectures. I bet all of the deniers or 'agnostics' here didn't even bother to do the most minor research about the global warming, it's so much obvious that the global warming is caused by humanity and by the industries, and you should look the amount of scientists understanding and supporting it, on the amount NOT, also look at the respect and achievements of the ones supporting it vs the deniers, IT IS OBVIOUS.

That's a lot of linked text. Bad forum etiquette.

More to the point, urging people to search youtube for lectures does not constitute citing your sources. Honestly, I'm sure that there are plenty of reputable scientists on both sides of the issue, but if you can't be bothered to find accurate information on them then this argument is going nowhere.

[Sajberhippien]

At 7/2/08 07:02 PM, n64kid wrote: The greenhouse effect still isn't a fact, and it still hasn't been connected to global tempuratures. Yet this seems to be the focus of all global warming discussion. What a waste of tax dollars just to lie to people to get them to pollute less. Now I drive a prius.... but that's just because I like driving 700 miles between fill-ups.

A note on this though: The greenhouse effect is a theory, and can't ever become a fact, because that's how science works. A theory is a well-founded explanation with lots and lots of empirical evidence. You can't really get more than empirical evidence, and so it can't become a fact.
But still, gravitation is also a theory. You DO consider it to be real despite it not being a fact, right?
The greenhouse effect exists. It what makes us survive on this planet. We would probably freeze to death if not for the greenhouse effect, and if not, at least many plants and animals would die out, so we starve to death instead.

[JoS]

I am sorry, but a lot of the the scientists who claim Global warming is caused by humans are looking at the results of global warming. They presume a cause and effect relation. Is a zoologist really a credible expert on GW, or is a astrophysicist or climatologist a better source? Polar ice melting does nto mean humans are making it warmer, its a natural cycle. Fuck in the 1970's scietists warned of a impending Gloabl Ice Age due to CO2. Take a looksy.

[JackPhantasm]

I agree with JoS. But does JoS agree with me?

I think that no matter the cause, we should try to do something about it. If it even is something.

Also making our tools of living more efficient couldn't hurt.