Re: OT:Thanksgiving

In article <rosil31gd1msue1vnit25tq7jmtk30nli2@xxxxxxx>, Howard Brazee <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 15:57:17 GMT, spambait@xxxxxxxxxx (Doug Miller)
wrote:
Glacier melts for one

In some areas. In other places, some glaciers are growing.

The difference isn't even close.

In any event, it's irrelevant to the question of whether the very slight (0.6
degrees C since 1880) warming is a natural process, or the result of human
activity. The planet has, in the past, been much warmer than it is now.

- but there is a large body of work showing
damage. But scientists get fame and fortune by proving the
establishment wrong. Get the evidence that they are all wrong (even
GWB has accepted that they are not wrong) - that fame and fortune will
be yours.

Sorry, you missed the point. "Damage" in this analogy is not simple warming,
but *human-caused* global warming.

Sorry, you missed the point. We don't accept what nature gives us
just because it is natural. It doesn't matter how global warming is
caused if we don't want those changes.

Sorry, you missed the point. If it's a natural process, it's very unlikely
that anything we do, or don't do, is going to have much effect on it.

I think a better analogy is fixing the crack in the dam. We can wait
to make sure that the leak will, in fact break the dam, we can wait
until we have better dam repairing equipment, or we can start
repairing it now.

An even better analogy is spending a boatload of money to fix a crack in the
dam, when we're not even sure there is a crack in the first place. There is
*no* evidence that human activity is causing the planet to get warmer.

There may be *no* evidence that that dam crack was created by people.
So if we didn't create it, it's not our problem, right?

That's where the 'crack in the dam' analogy breaks down: the dam is a human
artifact, and thus (presumably) repairable by humans, regardless of the cause
of the crack. But if we didn't create global warming, then it's a natural
process -- and there isn't any reason to suppose that we *can* do anything
about it.

If we didn't create polio, then it's a natural process -- and there
isn't any reason to suppose that we *can* do anything about it.

Or not.

No, actually, it's a life form, not a natural process. There's plenty of proof
that human activity can cause the extinction of other species.

But what would you accept as evidence?

For starters, data showing that temperature increases *follow* the human
activity that is alleged to cause them. Data so far shows that the bulk of the
temperature increase in the last century and a quarter came *before* the human
activity that is alleged to have caused it.

What would you accept as evidence that global warming exists?

That's not relevant, really -- if the earth is getting warmer as the result of
natural climate cycles, there probably isn't a damn thing we can do about it,
and our efforts are much better directed at figuring out how to cope with it,
rather than in futile efforts to stop the unstoppable.

The evidence that there are particular causes is complex enough that
we cannot do the math in this forum. Unfortunately, this means that
the proposed solutions also require similar studies and math. I've
seen some studies saying that irrigation is a huge cause here - but
it's one with no cheap solution.

But those who fight the proposed solutions have been virtually united
in denying that global warming exists and that if it does exist, it
isn't our fault. To most of us this looks like a quasi-religious
argument, not a rational argument. It appears to be something you
don't want to hear, so you fight it.

Actually, I'm the one here who is insisting on a rational argument,
specifically that effects must *follow* their causes, rather than preceding
them. The majority of the slight warming that has occurred so far came
*before* the majority of the human activity that is alleged to have caused it.
To continue to insist that said activity is the cause of something that
occurred half a century previous is, to use your phrase, "not a rational
argument."

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

It's time to throw all their damned tea in the harbor again.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT:Thanksgiving
    ... It doesn't matter how global warming is ... to make sure that the leak will, in fact break the dam, we can wait ... An even better analogy is spending a boatload of money to fix a crack in the ... *no* evidence that human activity is causing the planet to get warmer. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: OT:Thanksgiving
    ... global warming include changes in agricultural yields, ... to make sure that the leak will, in fact break the dam, we can wait ... An even better analogy is spending a boatload of money to fix a crack in the ... *no* evidence that human activity is causing the planet to get warmer. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Heres how science really works
    ... help us understand global warming. ... You are on crack. ... cooling global temps. ... There were neither satellite measurement nor widespread ground-based ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: Hard evidence for global warming?
    ... seeing such a wide area> 564 DAM to our SW at this time of year before. ... Or is my memory failing me now I'm in my mid- fifties? ... It was 2022 and it was my 70th birthday and it was sweltering; I dreamt I was watching a TV program about how global warming had took everyone by surprise in 2015. ... The programme mentioned a planetary cooling up to 2012 with widespread winter snowfalls, then in the winter of 2012/13 something "flipped". ...
    (uk.sci.weather)
  • Re: Hard evidence for global warming?
    ... seeing such a wide area> 564 DAM to our SW at this time of year before. ... Or is my memory failing me now I'm in my mid- fifties? ... was watching a TV program about how global warming had took everyone by ... with widespread winter snowfalls, then in the winter of 2012/13 something ...
    (uk.sci.weather)