The monetary gain is the grants to do research. You don't bring in research money, you don't keep a job.
Best Global Warming article I have read
- Thread starter joefrog
- Start date
The monetary gain is the grants to do research. You don't bring in research money, you don't keep a job.
How does that apply to NASA? And isn't it possible that research into cleaner forms of energy would be good for the planet? We know it would be good for millions of people suffering from respiratory illnesses due to pollution. And when has man polluting the planet ever been good for the atmosphere, earth or anything on it? Don't kid yourself, when it comes to money nobody has more involved than the oil and coal industry if we go to cleaner forms of energy.
I wonder how many scientists work in the oil and coal industries? My best guess is around 31,000. Actually it is probably quite a bit more.
Where did they post the sheet for signatures? On the internet?
Where did they post the sheet for signatures? On the internet?
No, probably not. We'd then blame 'activist judges' for 'legislating from the bench' when they say something those on the right don't want to hear.
Gore is the biggest hypocrite out there. He lives in a huge mansion and only recently is doing the things he asks everyone else to do, in reduce carbon footprint. He owns zinc mines that pollute mother earth. He is in this for the money and the glory only and it is working handsomely for him.
As for science, these are the same people that said the great lakes were going to flood the US in the mid 80's. Of course, the great lakes have record LOW levels for the past several years. What is a fact, is the earth goes thru cycles. Another fact is China is the greatest polluter out there...what is being done about that Mr. Gore???
As for science, these are the same people that said the great lakes were going to flood the US in the mid 80's. Of course, the great lakes have record LOW levels for the past several years. What is a fact, is the earth goes thru cycles. Another fact is China is the greatest polluter out there...what is being done about that Mr. Gore???
Whoa, slander is a great way to make your point seem better.
Nice tactic, sport!
When you don't have any facts, just impugn anyone who has an opposing view.
John Coleman and his take on global warming was discussed in a Cyclone Fanatic thread back in November 2007. See Link.
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum...-channel-founder-comments-global-warming.html
http://www.cyclonefanatic.com/forum...-channel-founder-comments-global-warming.html
Slander? You are kidding right?
I did some research on this petiton. The petition was done by OISM.org. (Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, sounds like it is associated with the state but it is just located there)
The petion was posted on their website. Guess what, Only 17,000 of the 31,000 had college degrees in science. Of that 17,000 only 9,000 had a PHD.
As I guessed, the petion was distributed on the internet. I wonder how accurate the profiles were? I wonder how they prevented multiple submissions. I wonder how many identities they verified.
Are you an American scientist? If so you can download the petition, sign it and mail it in here. Oh while you are at it you can send them some money. They like donations.
http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWPetition.pdf
FYI, there are 72,000 members in the Society of Petroleum Engineers.
I did some research on this petiton. The petition was done by OISM.org. (Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, sounds like it is associated with the state but it is just located there)
The petion was posted on their website. Guess what, Only 17,000 of the 31,000 had college degrees in science. Of that 17,000 only 9,000 had a PHD.
As I guessed, the petion was distributed on the internet. I wonder how accurate the profiles were? I wonder how they prevented multiple submissions. I wonder how many identities they verified.
Are you an American scientist? If so you can download the petition, sign it and mail it in here. Oh while you are at it you can send them some money. They like donations.
http://www.oism.org/pproject/GWPetition.pdf
FYI, there are 72,000 members in the Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Last edited:
Now, that's much better. Facts are better than trying to broad-brush people because they "might" work for the petroleum industry.
Question for you: Do you really believe someone who works for the petroleum industry is evil? As in "Steven Segal, you can kill them for working on the oil rig, evil?"
I'm not defending ANY special interest group.
But I'm questioning any "scientist" who ascribes to the "Global Warming/Climate Change" craze.
There is simply too little data for a "real" scientist to make a conclusion that human emissions of carbon are causing this particular period of warming. Just like the scientists who ascribed to global cooling and eugenics supported their insupportable theories.
However, if you want to be hired to work at a University, get tenure, and avoid being black-balled by the environmental fanatics that dominate the "science industry", you learn to embrace global warming/climate change, if you want to work in the non-productive venues of the "science industry".
As an addendum, possession of a PhD is not an indicator of competence. In fact, in academics, it's most probably the opposite. Most of the "real" work in science gets done at the B.S./M.S./un-lettered technician level.
Last edited:
Volcanos are more known for putting out methane and sulfur dioxide in massive amounts. I'm not sure about CO2.
Either way, they are a factor.
Kind of like "Iraq is a threat" was a political instrument to dupe the weak minded right
I am not scientist, but if that is the case, this is just another reason why CO2 is not the greenhouse gas everyone says it is. I have heard/read that methane is much worse. There are lots of people getting rich of this global warming scam.
A guy I work with is almost a global warming activist, whenever I bring up this subject I can tell his blood is ready to boil. We were talking about floods and how I said that I live in a 100 year plain and there are 500 years plains and the like. His first response was, "Nobody was here to record the data, how can we know that?" How can he believe in global warming being man made if there is only 120 years of recorded data? I told him this would be for a discussion we will have later about it.
Here's some material to counter the volcano > man for CO2 argument....
Climate myths: Human CO<SUB>2</SUB> emissions are too tiny to matter - climate-change - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist Environment
Also, please consider the context when considering the 31,000 'scientists' who put their names on a petition...
Newsvine - 31,000 "Scientists" (Some Dead) Refute Global Warming-
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I can understand republicans being skeptical of Al Gore, but I don't understand why so many republicans fail to trust the real scientists on the issue. It's not like it's difficult to understand that burning fossil fuels by billions of people on earth -> lots of chemicals released into the air -> changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere which can affect temperature/climate. Anyway, I think we all want more efficient use of energy, more diverse & sustainable sources of energy and reduced amounts of money sent to the middle east for oil, so I think we can find a lot of common ground with regards to changes in energy policy irregardless of our position on global warming or whether we're republicans or democrats.
Climate myths: Human CO<SUB>2</SUB> emissions are too tiny to matter - climate-change - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist Environment
Also, please consider the context when considering the 31,000 'scientists' who put their names on a petition...
Newsvine - 31,000 "Scientists" (Some Dead) Refute Global Warming-
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I can understand republicans being skeptical of Al Gore, but I don't understand why so many republicans fail to trust the real scientists on the issue. It's not like it's difficult to understand that burning fossil fuels by billions of people on earth -> lots of chemicals released into the air -> changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere which can affect temperature/climate. Anyway, I think we all want more efficient use of energy, more diverse & sustainable sources of energy and reduced amounts of money sent to the middle east for oil, so I think we can find a lot of common ground with regards to changes in energy policy irregardless of our position on global warming or whether we're republicans or democrats.
I supposse I did suggest that people in the oil industry are likely to bash global warming because they are protecting their financial interests. However, many others (including you in your post) on this site have suggested that people who support the science of global warming are only doing it to protect their financial interests.
Your argument that there is to little data is ridiculous. Even George Bush has given up on that argument and states that while it is rea,l he thinks it may cost to much to solve the problem. Why not at least making the inexpensive changes.
I think we need to promote efficiency. Sure every idea might not work but it is a goal which should be worked to. In addition, since we are producing C02 we need to balance the equation and plant trees to absorb it.
I never said people in the oil industry were evil. Maybe motivated by greed like most people. However, loosely quoting a movie "Should the rebellion have destroyed the Death Star knowing it would kill thousands of contracters working in the Death Star?"
People who don't have a PHD, do do a lot of work in the sciences. However, a lot of it is grunt work done at the direction of a PHD. Probably worth thinking about if you are going into a science career.
I don't think a lot of people are getting rich promoting the science of global warming. Maybe companines like Toyota who developed the hybrid but with gas prices as they are they would probably be making money without global warming. Even Al Gore donated his profits.
If I write a program that consumes all of a servers resources my boss does not let me buy another server Instead of buying another server he tells me to make the program more efficient. We should simply be doing the same. FYI, the reason we can't buy additonal servers is because our current facility cannot handle the power load to cool the facility. Server farms consume a huge amount of energy. More than most small towns.
Your argument that there is to little data is ridiculous. Even George Bush has given up on that argument and states that while it is rea,l he thinks it may cost to much to solve the problem. Why not at least making the inexpensive changes.
I think we need to promote efficiency. Sure every idea might not work but it is a goal which should be worked to. In addition, since we are producing C02 we need to balance the equation and plant trees to absorb it.
I never said people in the oil industry were evil. Maybe motivated by greed like most people. However, loosely quoting a movie "Should the rebellion have destroyed the Death Star knowing it would kill thousands of contracters working in the Death Star?"
People who don't have a PHD, do do a lot of work in the sciences. However, a lot of it is grunt work done at the direction of a PHD. Probably worth thinking about if you are going into a science career.
I don't think a lot of people are getting rich promoting the science of global warming. Maybe companines like Toyota who developed the hybrid but with gas prices as they are they would probably be making money without global warming. Even Al Gore donated his profits.
If I write a program that consumes all of a servers resources my boss does not let me buy another server Instead of buying another server he tells me to make the program more efficient. We should simply be doing the same. FYI, the reason we can't buy additonal servers is because our current facility cannot handle the power load to cool the facility. Server farms consume a huge amount of energy. More than most small towns.
Last edited:
I don't know about "only", but do you know if you want to teach at a major university or work for the government/military, it's pretty much necessary to sign on to the whole "white men are evil" mantra, don't you? Do you suppose all the people that sign those "diversity" oaths do so because they believe in it?
1. How is it ridiculous to suggest that the current observable data is insufficient to predict the "global warming" models, when the models themselves are unable to "predict" what has already happened in the past?
2. Which "inexpensive changes" are you talking about? Are you talking about the $45 trillion that most of "your scientists" have publicly declared would have no effect.
Co2 is a handy "bad guy". It's plentiful, and it is extremely difficult to directly link to the effect it is supposed to have.
Actually, most of the people doing "real" science are working for the eeeeeevil greedy corporations, and are more interested in earning a paycheck.
Scientists tend to be extremely myopic, and have a very poor understanding of the "real" world, outside the tiny part they have expertise about. I DO. NOT. TRUST scientists who wander out of their area of expertise. The ones that do, tend to be notoriously wrong, and attempt to apply simplistic paradigms to an unexpectedly (to them) complex and analog world. I'm not saying scientists or science is "wrong" per se; I'm suggesting that it's insufficient. Scientists and engineers tend to be overly literalist.
The assumption you make here, leads me to believe that you have a simplistic, strawman view of wealth. Most evil in the world, is done by relatively poorly paid people, doing their regular job. It is my opinion that those that promote global warming, do so out of their over-developed sense of guilt, combined with their desire to control others' lives. They are mostly passive-aggressive personalities, if you ask me.
Here's a clue: The world is mainly hardware, and it's overwhelmingly "analog" and messy. And a lot of the time, running a test program isn't possible in real life.
(You'll pardon me if I'm less than charitable toward IT guys right now. I had a rough weekend, because a bunch of IT guys decided to crash our system, more than once, in order to do maintenance, because evidently the work done during the weekend is less valuable than the work done during the week, according to their "logic".)
I can take all of this back and forth, but once you start trash talking IT guys, well then you're going to start having problems. Like all good IT guys, they keep "the list" of users who annoy them - it's best to stay off of that list. :wink:
Edited to add:
Last edited:
