If thine Data offends thee, throw it out....

[Ub Hauled]

You are right, but not how you think. The eruption of Pinatubo did result in a short term drop in global temperatures, but it has not changed the overall trend. It also provided valuable data that was used to validate several important climate modeling algorithms.

Bill, this is one of the best things I've heard you say
it's not the immediate that matters, it's on the longer run...

[Bill-SOCAL]

the question concerns the "science" being used to "prove" that humans are the cause.

This is your fundamental mistake. Nobody in the climate change research area is saying that man is the cause. What is being said is that man's activities are accelerating and worsening the natural variations. This is not really a scientific question any longer for those actually involved in the work.

The issue comes in when people with political agendas want to discredit the science in order to achieve their political goals. Sadly, some overstate the science for the same reasons.

Bottom line for me is that it is beyond idiotic to argue if it is happening and if man has contributed to the problem. The argument really is can we do anything about it and if so, what.

Having said that, I tend to lean more towards the ideas of John Lovelock as presented in his concept of a "Gaia Theory". Basically this says that we are screwed and better get used to a drastically different world no matter what we do.

http://www.ecolo.org/lovelock/what_is_Gaia.html

Essentially there are already too many of us crawling around on this rock we call Earth and global warming is making matters worse. Things are going to change, and not for the better. Bottom line, some few decades, or perhaps couple of hundred years in the future the conditions resulting from global warming will result in a sustainable human population of around 1 to 2 billion. Meaning that some 4 to 6 billion of us (by then) will be saying "bye-bye".

[Ub Hauled]

We haven't even spoken about the stuff we do to the oceans... some say it's even worst then what we do the the air and keep in mind that the oceans ARE the livelihood f this planet.

[Bill-SOCAL]

Got that right UB

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/08/090827180747.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science...tch/index.html

[Punisher 67]

Whooooo this is some real deep sh*t...........................

[andym]

I am just wondering if it was the left or right that dumped all the rubbish????
I feel quite sure Darrin will let us know

[Ub Hauled]

I am just wondering if it was the left or right that dumped all the rubbish????
I feel quite sure Darrin will let us know

Andy, it depends on what side you are standing... my left is your right and vice-versa

[Darin Jordan]

I am just wondering if it was the left or right that dumped all the rubbish????
I feel quite sure Darrin will let us know

If you are still thinking that I'm pointing fingers as far as WHICH political perspective is causing the polution, then you have a selective reading problem... and are still missing the point of my arguement... but then again, maybe I don't type clearly...

It IS fairly clear which "side" is working to tax us all based on this "data"...

[Bill-SOCAL]

.

It IS fairly clear which "side" is working to tax us all based on this "data"...

I have no issue with being upset about the proposed actions, but to try to counter that by denying reality is where I draw the line. Sadly it is a global problem (hence the name) and it is beyond unlikely that we will ever see a global consensus for action. And as I said, I am even skeptical that we can actually effect a meaningful decline in the first place.

[Darin Jordan]

...but to try to counter that by denying reality is where I draw the line.

No one is denying reality... BUT, what exactly is that??? We don't really know now, do we, if those who are supposedly the "experts" on the matter are hand selecting data, and trying to paint a picture, rather than documenting REALITY! At this point, EVERYTHING we are being told is suspect, in my opinion... on both sides...

And as I said, I am even skeptical that we can actually effect a meaningful decline in the first place.

Which has to lead one to wonder... if we supposedly have caused all of this in our 100 or so years of actual industrial times... but we can't, regardless of what we do, have a meaningful affect, for well over 500 or even 1000 years, according to "experts", then how much of this was REALLY caused by us in the first place???

[Bill-SOCAL]

I suggest you do some reading on the concept of tipping points, etc.

My comments about being able to do anything should have carried the caveat of doing so without going back to the days of no electricity, cars, etc. We are so far down the road that it is unclear if we can really go get back. But having said that, there is little question that we can delay the likely inevitable which may give us time to develop alternatives.

BTW - some more evidence that the polar ice cap is in on the fraud:

http://www.thestar.com/news/sciencetech/environment/article/732009---permanent-arctic-ice-vanishing

[RCprince]

CLIMATEGATE - Eco barons lead the way http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle5821334.ece

[RCprince]

CLIMATEGATE - RAMPING UP THE "YOU'RE GONNA DROWN IF YOU DON'T GIVE US YOUR MONEY" BOOGA BOOGA! http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6938356.ece

[RCprince]

CLIMATEGATE - The 12 Days Of Global Warming http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmPSU...ayer_embedded#

[RCprince]

Climate: We Can ALL Agree On Two Things http://georgewashington2.blogspot.co...wo-things.html