-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Global Warming
- Thread starter Disco08
- Start date
Merveille said:
Pointing out individual flaws (which has been done by scientists) hasn't changed the consensus, small details and predictions will be refined over time (by scientists), however the current consensus remains unchanged. Do you have some evidence to suggest otherwise?
Constantly conflating the politics and media spin with the science is a form of 'mud slinging'. If you actually have scientific evidence that disputes the current consensus then put it up. As Disco points out, unless we are mistaken, none of us are actual experts in the field and thus we have to rely on those educated in climate science. The overwhelming consensus of those who are trained in the field is that the climate is changing and humans are playing a significant role in that change. I would be interested to know why you (a layman like myself) base your denial on - ie. what evidence has convinced you that you are right and those that are experts in the field are wrong?
I am also interested to know where you think I acknowledged issues with the science fraternity (not saying that issues don't arise from time to time, but the nature of science tends to weed these out pretty quickly)? I pointed out that the popular reporting of science can often be sensationalist, but that doesn't reflect on the scientists (usually), but on the science reporters.
And there is more and more of this around. The last paragraph is very interesting, particularly the reference to arrogance.
Biogeographer Professor Philip Stott on the collapse of the global warming scare:
It is like watching the Berlin Wall being torn down, concrete slab by concrete slab, brick by brick, with cracks appearing and widening daily on every face - political, economic, and scientific. Likewise, the bloggers have been swift to cover the crumbling edifice with colourful graffiti, sometimes bitter, at others caustic and witty…
And, as ever, capitalism has read the runes, with carbon-trading posts quietly being shed, ‘Green’ jobs sidelined, and even big insurance companies starting to hedge their own bets against the future of the Global Warming Grand Narrative. These rats are leaving the sinking ship far faster than any politician, many of whom are going to be abandoned, left, still clinging to the masts, as the Good Ship ‘Global Warming’ founders on titanic icebergs in the raging oceans of doubt and delusion.
And what can one say about ‘the science’? ‘The ‘science’ is already paying dearly for its abuse of freedom of information, for unacceptable cronyism, for unwonted arrogance, and for the disgraceful misuse of data at every level, from temperature measurements to glaciers to the Amazon rain forest. What is worse, the usurping of the scientific method, and of justified scientific scepticism, by political policies and political propaganda could well damage science sensu lato - never mind just climate science - in the public eye for decades.
Biogeographer Professor Philip Stott on the collapse of the global warming scare:
It is like watching the Berlin Wall being torn down, concrete slab by concrete slab, brick by brick, with cracks appearing and widening daily on every face - political, economic, and scientific. Likewise, the bloggers have been swift to cover the crumbling edifice with colourful graffiti, sometimes bitter, at others caustic and witty…
And, as ever, capitalism has read the runes, with carbon-trading posts quietly being shed, ‘Green’ jobs sidelined, and even big insurance companies starting to hedge their own bets against the future of the Global Warming Grand Narrative. These rats are leaving the sinking ship far faster than any politician, many of whom are going to be abandoned, left, still clinging to the masts, as the Good Ship ‘Global Warming’ founders on titanic icebergs in the raging oceans of doubt and delusion.
And what can one say about ‘the science’? ‘The ‘science’ is already paying dearly for its abuse of freedom of information, for unacceptable cronyism, for unwonted arrogance, and for the disgraceful misuse of data at every level, from temperature measurements to glaciers to the Amazon rain forest. What is worse, the usurping of the scientific method, and of justified scientific scepticism, by political policies and political propaganda could well damage science sensu lato - never mind just climate science - in the public eye for decades.
Freezer said:
And what a shame that is. Unfortunately the truth of the situation is not a matter of public opinion and I haven't seen anything here, nor in my wider reading that makes me doubt the current scientific consensus.
I am still waiting for you to lay out what it is that makes you think that you know better than the vast majority of experts in the field?
The reason why people are dismissing the hard science is simply because they don't want to hear it. You can't have it both ways. Somebody cures your wife of cancer and I bet you're not carrying on about dodgey science then, checking back over years of research to find a number entered in the wrong column.
Freezer is correct about one thing, public perception is changing. Its a terrible thing. We've got frog-eyed inbred pommy aristocrats and shock jocks getting all the air time they want with zero evidence or apparent comprehension. Its a damn shame.
Freezer is correct about one thing, public perception is changing. Its a terrible thing. We've got frog-eyed inbred pommy aristocrats and shock jocks getting all the air time they want with zero evidence or apparent comprehension. Its a damn shame.
Merveille said:
No, it suggests that you know better than them. That doesn't mean you are wrong, but I asked what the basis of that scepticism is.
Panthera tigris FC said:
I'd suggest you know the basis of the sceptism, as it's been discussed on here ad nuseum. Clearly you don't agree with it, but that's obviously your right.
I'm retiring from this thread, as it's heading the same way as the Tambling thread, the Christianity thread and the Atheism thread - round and round in circles, with the same things being said in various guises, and is becoming pretty tedious.
Needless to say my sceptism will continue, not necessarily that the earth isn't in a general warming trend, but as to the reasons behind it and what we can actually do about it.
I will continue to worry about politicians who want to slug me for more money and impose more regulations on the basis of something that I believe even they aren't 100% convinced about, nor sure of what all these taxes and regulations will achieve.
You might suggest again that my non-scientific background means I should just go with the majority, and trust the 'consensus', but while these 'experts' appear to use practices and methods, and make statements, that are at least questionable, I will continue to do so.
Enjoy the merry-go-round everyone.
