Global Warming: What do YOU think?

I have recently become aware of two camps of thought with regard to global warming/climate change, niether one relating to religion vs science. On one side is the internationally recognized theory of rapid devastating change and on the other a token uncertainty of the actual changes occuring in terms of what effects we may be facing and how quickly they will emerge.

As a "regular sort" I don't really know a lot of the science involved with our changing conditions and so I guess that puts me in between the two in this arguement. They both have very valid points and the answer to this riddle is important- so what do you all think?

Views: 31

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by equinox on December 6, 2009 at 5:09pm
I do question the work of the anti-AGW scientists as well. Presently, I am unaware of any misconduct on their part. And based on some of their work, NASA has had to retract some of it's previous findings. There is at least one other example where the anit-AGW folks science caused the AGW scientists to change their findings. Wow! A real consensus.

Again, I am not trying to polarize the issue. I am interested in legitimate science.
Permalink Reply by Jason Spicer on December 6, 2009 at 6:16pm
equinox, pretty much everything the AGW-deniers do is misconduct. They lie about the data and the conclusions, they distort the science, they pursue crackpot theories and continue to promote them after they have been debunked, they complain that their substandard work won't be accepted by peer reviewed journals but won't admit that's because their work isn't good enough, and they smear the scientists, among other things. You're not seeing their misconduct because you're not looking.
Permalink Reply by equinox on December 13, 2009 at 9:30pm
Can you try to be more moderate? Many good scientists have contributed to the GW debate who are skeptical of AGW. some of McIntyre's work has caused NASA GISS to adjust their findings? Your polarizing language isn't helping the debate.
Permalink Reply by equinox on December 1, 2009 at 8:34pm
But you are using epistemic authority, right?
Permalink Reply by equinox on December 1, 2009 at 8:40pm
Ok, so you're just a messenger. Cool. How do you know the advice is good?
Permalink Reply by equinox on December 2, 2009 at 2:47pm
The current theory is in question due to scandal. Shouldn't we at least take caution and re-evaluate?

Of the 4 main research centers watching climate science, 3 have been shown to be using the same data:
1. CRU in the UK
2. NOAA in the US
3. NASA GISS in the US
4. Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA)

Two of these have been caught up in scientific misconduct. A climate scientist in Albany has been charged with scientific misconduct. A climate scientist in Belfast is withholding data. A climate center in New Zealand has admitted to manipulating the data based on CRU's techniques.

So far, I am not hearing about any misconduct or FOIA request denials among Heliogenic or non-AGW climate scientists.

I am not sure what is so unusual about questioning the climate science that was wrought with questionable methods?
Permalink Reply by Jason Spicer on December 2, 2009 at 6:33pm
There is at least one scandal. AGW is not in question, except by industry flaks and their dupes.

Nobody would bother filing a FOI request with the AGW-deniers for two reasons: They have no actual science worth hiding, and in any case, they're generally not government researchers, so they would not be subject to FOI laws. Besides, it's clear that pretty much everything they do is dishonest. Nice try.

You seem incapable of grasping that the whole of climate research into AGW is not tainted by the theft of CRU files, because it is not based solely on CRU files.
Permalink Reply by Ogden Lafaye on December 2, 2009 at 5:29pm
@ Don

"Technologically, intellectually and politically, science resides somewhere near the center of our culture. I speak of that society, those persons...who value their freedom, honor their responsibilities, appreciate their ignorance and are willing to keep learning."
Timothy Ferris
Permalink Reply by equinox on December 2, 2009 at 3:00pm
I never said I don't accept authority.
Permalink Reply by equinox on December 6, 2009 at 5:14pm
Oddly enough...based on one Infidel Guy podcasts, the majority of members of the Flat Earth society are atheists. Very unexpected. We may need to retire the charge against theists. I don't know any theists who think the earth is flat.
Permalink Reply by Ogden Lafaye on December 6, 2009 at 10:37pm
equinox: "the majority of members of the Flat Earth society are atheists."

This is not true...a complete fabrication and absolutely stupid on your part to even think such an absurdity.
Permalink Reply by equinox on December 10, 2009 at 8:42pm
I gave my source...the Infidel Guy show. I heard it there. I didn't make it up. I was as surprised as you seem to be.

RSS

Members

Blog Posts

Death of a family member

Posted by Larry Taylor on May 20, 2013 at 8:15pm 4 Comments

OK. I am venting. My mother died two weeks ago. She was a “god fearing christian.” Before her death she refused all medical treatment. She wanted to be left alone. She even refused to speak with my brother who is a methodist minister. He is a pip, let me tell you! I suspect she did not believe, but a woman born in her time could not and did not state her actual beliefs. This is the opening salvo to all christians; FUCK YOU! I had so many people come and tell…

Continue

Unbelievable!!!!!!!!

Posted by Christy Stewart on May 20, 2013 at 2:17pm 6 Comments

This probably should not have shocked me as much as it did (especially since I am in Texas). I actually thought my coworkers were playing a joke on me because they know I am an atheist. Sadly, this was no joke. This actually happened.

I work in a psychiatric hospital. The doctors who admit patients are general MDs. (Psychiatrists see patients after admission) Yesterday evening we received several calls from irate parents. A new doctor who was doing admissions yesterday actually…

Continue

anti-atheist rant from an Orthodox Mormon part 2

Posted by Debra Stevenson on May 20, 2013 at 1:09pm 1 Comment

What do you think of this,

 

Nathan Young,

 

No Jason Torpy it is you that should be banned for promoting atheism, a belief that has no foundation in reality and zero proof behind it.  The letter was a mockery of your atheist beliefs.  I request to the board here that they remove Jason for his unverifiable beliefs in atheism for which he has no proof other than his arrogance.  The letter was a mockery of atheism.  Atheism is stupid and it should be mocked and it…

Continue

Anti-atheist post from an Orthdox Mormon

Posted by Debra Stevenson on May 20, 2013 at 12:42pm 3 Comments

 

What do you think of this Facebook comment?

 

 

Nathan Young to Jason Torpy,

 

for once you and I can agree on something.  We should disrespect beliefs that are untenable such as the belief that there is no God.  Indeed for me to respect you Jason, I cannot respect your belief in non-belief in atheism.  Your atheism comes across as arrogrance, smugness, and self righteous.  Indeed after reading "An Open Letter to My Religious Friends" I penned one…

Continue

Events

© 2013   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service