Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jhocking]

Just saw this on another forum, posted by a fellow who is clearly not a fan of Al Gore:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKVkgY45eLU

I was struck by the part about there being 30,000 scientists, and supporting the scientists are 9,000 PHD researchers. Wait, so if only a fraction of the "scientists" have doctorates, what exactly is their definition of a scientist? I mean, is every tom-dick-and-harry with a vested interest in the global warming debate considered a scientist?

Given that bit of hand waving, I'm rather leery of the "9000 PHd researchers" bit too. I mean, I'm sure they really do have 9000 people with PHds lined up, but PHds in what?

[Verergoca]

Somehow we have to be heard, so we figured maybe a court of law...

So, they want to sue someone because they are beeing ignored? Gee, i wonder why the rest of the world tends to think of the US in a certain way...

[Johnny C]

We've been burning fossil fuels for a hundred years and nothing has happened! I breathe CO2 out of my mouth and nothing happens! CO2 is a natural compound and furthermore HURF DURF HURF DURF

Man I don't get people who can't understand what climate change means.

[Chesire Cat]

A scientist is someone who professionally does science.  You dont need a degree to practice science, hell if I started making soap myself to sell, I could label myself a scientist.  So frankly  I dont think its fair to try to burn the Weather Channel for their use of Scientist.  The stupid part is these people deny Global Warming.  I mean, shit even if global warming doesn't exist, and just the natural ebb and flow of the worlds climate.  I mean, how many mass extinctions and stuff comes from Ice Ages and Sunny-Beach Ages.

[RedLion]

I love how he says "We've been trying to get a debate going."

There's already been a debate. You've been proven wrong, and consequently lost.

[jhocking]

frankly  I dont think its fair to try to burn the Weather Channel for their use of Scientist.

I wasn't so much trying to burn them as pointing out how their claim isn't as impressive as one might first think. As they use the term, saying "30,000 scientists" is really no different from just saying "30,000 people."

Put that way, it's hardly surprising that they have a petition with 30,000 signatures on it.


ADDITION: hm that maybe still doesn't make my point clear. I'm not saying that their use of the term "scientist" is incorrect, just that it's misleading.

As you point out, a soap-maker could accurately call themself a scientist, but that's not particularly relevant to the global warming thing, now is it? By bringing it up in that context, the guy is implying that these scientists are all specialists in climate change research, but that's not actually what his use of the term means.

[Vendetagainst]

Well I'm all for grilling Gore, but mostly because he's a douche

I love how he says "We've been trying to get a debate going."

There's already been a debate. You've been proven wrong, and consequently lost.

The fact is that nobody's been proven wrong, really, and only time will tell who was right. I don't think the existence of global warming is the real issue though, I think that what we do in regards to the environment is equally important with or without it.

[RallyMonkey]

What I think is ridiculous, is how willing people are willing to listen to the topics brought up in An Inconvenient Truth, without doing any thinking or research on their own. Most likely this does not apply to this forum, but how many of the average part time environmental activists do you think have seen any research from other sources? The average high schooler who spends their time touting about global warming has seen nothing but an Inconvenient Truth to back them up, and yet they will defend global warming without a second thought.

I'm not saying one way or the other on the issue, and I'm not saying there's not a lot more evidence out there supporting An Inconvenient Truth, I'm just saying that it is dangerous thinking, or lack there of, to just accept these claims outright without a thought. Yet, if someone is to say otherwise, they are instantly berated by these very people.

[Chesire Cat]

Well what *I* am saying is that, clearly the environment is changing, and life exists in a very delicate balance.  Whether or not its cause by CO2 emissions is not exactly relevent, wouldnt you rather be proven wrong by being more eco conscious and not affecting change, than proven right by not giving a shit about man-made environmental changes (bottom line is if CO2 isnt causing global warming, well its still not something that would occur naturally in such high doses, and if the world has been chugging along with life for hundreds of million years, maybe if it aint broke dont fix it)?

[RallyMonkey]

The biggest problem with that philosophy, is that if it isn't the CO2 that is causing the rise in climates, that we don't know what is helping it, and what can be done to stop it. If the problem is truly something that we don't know at this point, then the cause could very well be something that we are doing in an attempt to be more ecologically friendly. We never know, we could always be doing more harm than help. I'm not saying we shouldn't do something, I just don't want people to give up because they have decided they found the cause, and not do any more research. And I also don't want someone who could be doing very positive research to be laughed away because he disagrees with An Inconvenient Truth. Remember that during the early 20th century, cigarettes were recommended by doctors to reduce stress, at the time, they didn't know any better.

[Uber Ritter]

RE not getting what climate change means:

If people could be communists into the 70's, through the thuggish Russian Revolution, horrific civil war, red terror, terror famines, great terror, Nazi-Soviet Pact, iron curtain, Hungarian revolution and Prague Spring, because they continued to -believe- in the dream of a worker's paradise and thus think that everything that discredited it was simply a capitalist lie, then it makes perfect sense that those whose ideologies are inconvenienced by certain scientific consenses will deny them.  Ideology is a powerful force in shaping how people see reality, these days probably more so than religion in much of the world.

[Vendetagainst]

I read an issue of New Scientist that I thought made a really good point. Global Warming is a human problem, other species will continue to adapt and move on as they have since life was first formed, and ultimately only humans will be impacted.

[Vendetagainst]

I think the article meant as a species they would adapt (into another species) which would mean that humans as humans would suffer more. Plus, humans aren't like other animals in that we are very dependent on stable, consistent environments and would mostly be wiped out almost completely with very little effort.

[tania]

evolution works the same way for humans as it does for every other species, which is by killing absolutely everything expect the few that are able to survive and procreate.
over 99.9% of creatures that have lives on earth are now extinct. the few that aren't probably will be very very soon. it's essentially a random trial and error process with an extremely huge fail rate. adapting to a new environment isn't the same thing as evolving, which are random genetic mutations that take millions of years to become common. every other animal on earth is pretty much going to go through the same thing we are.

[Vendetagainst]

well yes, adaptation is evolution, it is just a single rung along a very, very long ladder.

[tania]

ah, right, adaptation is the right word. i was thinking of something else.
still, it goes against the point that animals would suffer less than humans since species only really evolve in the first place when something kills the old species before they can procreate but not the new one. otherwise you get animals like tortoises and sharks which have stayed the same for literally billions of years because there is no reason why any offspring they have, even if genetically different, would have any advantage over them. so in order for organisms to evolve in the first place, it's implied that something must be happening that's killing a whole bunch of the original species but not the genetic anomalies. which could be climate change, and the same thing would probably end up happening to humans as well.

[RedLion]

every other animal on earth is pretty much going to go through the same thing we are.

Which is precisely why global warming is an issue of such magnitude.

Earth certainly does go through periods of warming and cooling, as evidenced by the numerous ice ages. But the rate at which the temperature is increasing in unprecedented. It's amazing what scientists have been able to learn by drilling deep down into Arctic and Antarctic ice and tell what the general average temperature of an era was (I don't recall the minutiae of the process for how they determine that, but it's a fairly common and accepted practice.) The average temperature heights reached after an ice age were surpassed long ago. We're really in uncharted territory here.

And the fact that we've sat around on our hands for so long doing nothing while clowns like this bleat on like deranged cattle has possibly moved us beyond a point where we can even do anything to halt, let alone reverse, the warming trend. And as water levels rise and inundates massively populated areas along coasts, a flood of people will cause a huge strain on every region of the world. We're looking at hundreds of millions of displaced, poor, malnourished, sick people.

I'm not being alarmist or hyperbolic. It's already happening in low-lying countries like Bangladesh, Seychelles, the Maldives, dozens of Pacific island nations. Some of these places are going to be completely submerged in a decade's time...

[jhocking]

I read an issue of New Scientist that I thought made a really good point. Global Warming is a human problem, other species will continue to adapt and move on as they have since life was first formed, and ultimately only humans will be impacted.

How is this a good point? "Oh don't worry, we're not going to wipe out all life, just life as we know it."

[RallyMonkey]

From a human perspective, it is very bad. Your grand children probably will not survive if global warming is in fact true.

Yet, from a world perspective, it is old hat. We are not destroying the Earth, we are changing the Earth, which is a natural process, as we are part of the world. Everything we do, everything we make is natural. No matter how much humans like to believe we are special and different, we are not. Humans ceasing to exist is not the end of the world. The animals we know ceasing to exist is not the end of the world. In fact, it is completely normal. Trying to stop it truly is futile, at most we can prolong our death as a species. But no matter what, the world will go on.

[Vendetagainst]

well sure it is!

[RallyMonkey]

It can be reassuring to know you are a part of something much bigger than yourself, or anything humans could do.

[Cartilage Head]

 I found out recently that Al Gore was once friends with Fred Phelps. I don't like Al Gore much anymore.

[Chesire Cat]

I read an issue of New Scientist that I thought made a really good point. Global Warming is a human problem, other species will continue to adapt and move on as they have since life was first formed, and ultimately only humans will be impacted.

Ummm not really, the natural ebb and flow of global temperatures which happened much slower than this current warming caused massive ecological changes to occur.

[Ozymandias]

Guys.

Guys guys guys.

Can't we all at least agree that we're just dudes (or ladies) on an internet forum arguing about something instead of trying to change it in one or another?

Can't we all just admit that we're only doing this as a thought exercise because we will never change anyone's mind, especially our own?

Isn't that really the inconvenient truth?

[RedLion]

Well it's either this or "GENTLEMENS CLUB/TEA PARTY AHBLOO-BLOO-BLOO" threads. At least these are actually interesting.

[Ozymandias]

Why can't we just go back to trying to fuck each other?

[jhocking]

Didn't that get the forum shut down before?

[Storm Rider]

Why can't we just go back to trying to fuck each other?

You say this as if you ever stopped trying.

[Liz]

And I will never stop loving you, Bryan.

[Hairy Joe Bob]

I tell you, fucking will cause the world to heat up even faster and so we will be doubly doomed.

So it's safe to say Al Gore would not approve of fucking.

[Vendetagainst]

But when his only ethical option is Tipper, can you blame him?

[Ozymandias]

You say this as if you ever stopped trying.

I'll see you Chicago, sexy.

[Hairy Joe Bob]

Everyone in this place is just getting so damn horny.

[jhocking]

But when his only ethical option is Tipper, can you blame him?

oh snap!

[Liz]

I'll see you Chicago, sexy.

Ozy, are you really going to be there?

[Vendetagainst]

Somebody come to Chicago so I can say I met a real life internet person.

[David_Dovey]

POPULATE OR PERISH, FOLKS

[Ozymandias]

Goddammit, I am going to try my damnedest. My absolute damnedest. I didn't end up going to Tronno was just because it was hell of expensive and I was too lazy to get a passport. Chicago is cheaper and arguably inside the United States, so it is very likely. I hope. Dammit.

[Vendetagainst]

Chicago is arguably within the US?

[Ozymandias]

Under some interpretations of the constitution.

[Liz]

Man. Chicagocon is going to be the party of the century. Ozy and Bryan? So many boys, so little time!

(Is she kidding, folks? Is she?)

[Vendetagainst]

There's going to be a Chicagocon? Please somebody give me a link and some background information.

[David_Dovey]

ChicagoCon slogan:

"Chicago is in the United States, and Ozy is going to be in Everybody"

[Liz]

Yusssssssssss...

[Jimmy the Squid]

Man fuck Chicagocon. I'm going to be in Bostronnocon or whatever the hell we are calling it now. I'm a foriegner! That's way more interesting than your run of the mill, domestic forumites!

[Liz]

We'll have Canadians, and Tommy.

[Jimmy the Squid]

I fail to see the relevance.

[David_Dovey]

Liz, everyone has had Tommy.

[Liz]

You haven't. I bet you're just jealous.

[Vendetagainst]

Also, Bostron is a figment of your imagination