RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message

Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 10:36:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle
No, when I said Survey, I meant ORIGINAL WORK, not a bunch of links pulled off of google.

Is this what the educational system has produced? People who don't even have a clue how Scientific research is conducted?

Now, READ the citations you provided, and WRITE your own research report about the literature. Provide citations, etc....

THEN you will be competent to discuss the topic.

Until then? You're just promoting the Propaganda.

I was right to completely dismiss you earlier.

Take Care.


I have no interest in writing you a term paper that you will simply not read, pluck a single sentence from, attack relentlessly without attention to the merits of its claim, and offer nothing in return.  Seeing as you are beginning to take on a few critics, I think everyone here is beginning to see through the facade, farglebargle.

If you were the justice presiding over a trial, would you request rigorous evidence only from the defense?  You are so tainted by political bias that it is not even amusing.  Stop insulting my education and learn some debate tactics.

I'm quite done with you.

-Sicarius



Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 10:39:25 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
Anyone else have a competing suggestion? 'Cos if not, lets compile a list of Climatology Journals and the companies that publish them. Then we can determine for ourselves their relative reliability.


I offered him several, and he refuses to read them.  They might threaten the narrow scope of his selected paradigm.

I hope you realize what I am doing here, philosophy ... you seem to reserve judgement, and I suspect you do understand that I'm not actually arguing a position, nor am I condemning global warming outright.  All I am saying is that I reserve judgement and want to maintain my right to that opinion.

-Sicarius



philosophy -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 10:47:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sicarius

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
Anyone else have a competing suggestion? 'Cos if not, lets compile a list of Climatology Journals and the companies that publish them. Then we can determine for ourselves their relative reliability.


I offered him several, and he refuses to read them.  They might threaten the narrow scope of his selected paradigm.

I hope you realize what I am doing here, philosophy ... you seem to reserve judgement, and I suspect you do understand that I'm not actually arguing a position, nor am I condemning global warming outright.  All I am saying is that I reserve judgement and want to maintain my right to that opinion.

-Sicarius


..i can understand your position. It begs a question though......when do we accumulate enough proof on either side to take a definitive stand? Do we need yer actual 'smokin' gun'? Or can we make a decision based on the balance of probability?
A second consideration........what if delaying until we have definitive proof costs lives?
And finally, a rather artsy third thought. Would deciding that global warming is our fault make us more likely to assist those low tech countries that are suffering the early effects of rising sea levels? 



farglebargle -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 10:48:43 AM)

Will dumping tons of iron filings into the tropical ocean sequester sufficient CO2 to make this all moot?




Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 10:54:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
..i can understand your position. It begs a question though......when do we accumulate enough proof on either side to take a definitive stand? Do we need yer actual 'smokin' gun'? Or can we make a decision based on the balance of probability?


I suppose it depends on what you mean by "a stand."  I believe that based on the evidence we have right now that we should begin to reduce carbon emissions and seek out alternative sources of power that will not destroy the global economy and may actually help underprivilged nations.  I think that moving on the best evidence we have is fine ... I just don't want to see anyone getting railroaded into a singular notion of what is happening, and I believe that policy makers and hype artists tend to encourage exactly that.  Too much, and we risk making even more mistakes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
A second consideration........what if delaying until we have definitive proof costs lives?


See above.  I'm not saying we should bury our head in the sand and do nothing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
And finally, a rather artsy third thought. Would deciding that global warming is our fault make us more likely to assist those low tech countries that are suffering the early effects of rising sea levels? 


Hmm.  As much as *I* would want to say yes ... I rather doubt that the world's governments would see it that way.  I believe that it would be the only ethical thing to do, however, if that were proven.

-Sicarius



popeye1250 -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 11:51:06 AM)

"There MUST be global warming!"
"There MUST BE!"
"There MUST BE!"

(Click your heels together 3 times.)



Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 11:53:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

"There MUST be global warming!"
"There MUST BE!"
"There MUST BE!"

(Click your heels together 3 times.)


*Chuckles*

-Sicarius



philosophy -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 11:56:14 AM)

climate change is natural
climate change is natural
climate change is natural

(click your heels together three times)



Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 12:08:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
climate change is natural
climate change is natural
climate change is natural

(click your heels together three times)


Well, I do believe that there is substantive evidence to suggest that it has happened many times in our planet's history before humans existed ... and we have seen climate change on other planets in our solar system without the benefit of human intervention.  What we need to narrow down is exactly how much of what we are currently experiencing is generated by human activities.  I don't presume to know, myself.  I feel that only after we have substantiated that position beyond any real doubt will we know exactly how much we need to cut back on our emissions and that that should serve as the model to meet without destroying the global economy in the process ... and while also keeping our eye out for mistakes along the way.

-Sicarius



Sinergy -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 12:22:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sicarius
What we need to narrow down is exactly how much of what we are currently experiencing is generated by human activities. 



So apparently the rise from 280ppm in CO2 to 380ppm in CO2 in the past 130 years, with an excessive increase in greenhouse gases in the increase from isotopes of Carbon in the CO2 from the burning of fossil fuels (which is something the sun doesnt do, animals dont do, plants dont do, but people do, etc) is not enough of a "narrowing down" for you?

quote:



I don't presume to know, myself. 



Agreed.

I have posted at least a dozen links to scientific articles on this subject.  The twaddle from the other side of the aisle generally falls under the heading "we dont have enough proof" and "we dont really know" and "lets hope for the best" and "I blame Liberals."

It is a chaotic system.  Things interact with other things in ways that defy prediction to certainties.

Let me put it another way.

Global warming is caused by A and B and C and D and E and... where A is (for example) the sun heating up, and B is (for example) increase in CO2, and C is (for example) increased levels of methane from animal farts and D is (for example) the carbon feedback look.

We cant do anything about A.

We can do something about B.

We can do something about C.

We cannot do anything about D except doing something about B and C.

What most people who want to do something about global warming is proposing things to do about B and C.  The other people seem to want to wrap their towel around their head and hope the danger passes by.

The longer we wait to do anything about the problem, the worse the problem becomes, and sticking our heads in the sand and hoping things get better is either obtuse or cynical.

Sinergy



Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 12:34:57 PM)

Sinergy:

You did *read* this ... right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sicarius
quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
..i can understand your position. It begs a question though......when do we accumulate enough proof on either side to take a definitive stand? Do we need yer actual 'smokin' gun'? Or can we make a decision based on the balance of probability?


I suppose it depends on what you mean by "a stand."  I believe that based on the evidence we have right now that we should begin to reduce carbon emissions and seek out alternative sources of power that will not destroy the global economy and may actually help underprivilged nations.  I think that moving on the best evidence we have is fine ... I just don't want to see anyone getting railroaded into a singular notion of what is happening, and I believe that policy makers and hype artists tend to encourage exactly that.  Too much, and we risk making even more mistakes.

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
A second consideration........what if delaying until we have definitive proof costs lives?


See above.  I'm not saying we should bury our head in the sand and do nothing.



philosophy -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 1:21:38 PM)

Sicarius........i agree with much of what you have typed, but when i reiterated Popeyes' joke, instead of the same flip response he got (perfectly reasonably imo) i got a well worded critique. Surely both sides of the argument should be treated the same in order to arrive at an unbiased conclusion.......this would include jokes from both sides  [:)]



mrbob726 -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 1:28:08 PM)

This whole thread continues on a misunderstanding of what Sicarius said in the first place - thinking men want the scientific principle applied to this subject without political interference, from either point of view A or point of view B. How hard is that to understand ? I'm not a scientist, even though my entire working career was based on science and application of technology. I agree that whatever/whoever I am - I want a true scientific approach to determine what the problem is, and how to solve it. Many people have a tendency to read what they want to see, and not what is actually presented, even to the exten t of reading between non-existant lines. And yes, I read the Crichton speech information, and checked other sources linked here. I think many of the detractors to the premise of the OP fall into the category of "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up." 



Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 1:37:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy
Sicarius........i agree with much of what you have typed, but when i reiterated Popeyes' joke, instead of the same flip response he got (perfectly reasonably imo) i got a well worded critique. Surely both sides of the argument should be treated the same in order to arrive at an unbiased conclusion.......this would include jokes from both sides  [:)]


*Chuckles*

Well, I did laugh a little at both, to be honest.  You and I have discussed the issues a bit more, and as such I presumed that the discourse was more appropriate ... and that you would appreciate it.  I certainly hope that you did not interpret it as my being biased.  Certainly that was not my intention. :)

I'm not on either side.  If I had to define myself politically I'd have to say that I'm a right-leaning Libertarian, but I feel that I have a pretty "centrist" view on this particular subject.  I think that global warming exists ... I don't think purely discounting it for reasons of political affiliation is a prudent thing to do.  I just wish that the political polarization of the issue could go away so that we could be unobstructed by it in the pursuit of Science.

-Sicarius



Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 1:40:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mrbob726

This whole thread continues on a misunderstanding of what Sicarius said in the first place - thinking men want the scientific principle applied to this subject without political interference, from either point of view A or point of view B. How hard is that to understand ? I'm not a scientist, even though my entire working career was based on science and application of technology. I agree that whatever/whoever I am - I want a true scientific approach to determine what the problem is, and how to solve it. Many people have a tendency to read what they want to see, and not what is actually presented, even to the exten t of reading between non-existant lines. And yes, I read the Crichton speech information, and checked other sources linked here. I think many of the detractors to the premise of the OP fall into the category of "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is already made up." 


Thank you!  Sincerely.

-Sicarius



philosophy -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 1:55:23 PM)

Got to be honest Sicarius but it did come off, at least to my reading, as a bit biased....but thanks for the clarification........i definitely agree with depoliticising science, with the caveat that once science has found something out politicians will need to act on it.



Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 2:04:43 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

Got to be honest Sicarius but it did come off, at least to my reading, as a bit biased....but thanks for the clarification........i definitely agree with depoliticising science, with the caveat that once science has found something out politicians will need to act on it.


I understand how it could easily be interpreted that way, and I do formally apologize.

-Sicarius



Sinergy -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 5:47:21 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sicarius

Sinergy:

You did *read* this ... right?



I did.

Which is why I was so puzzled by the stuff I quoted.

Sinergy



Sicarius -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 6:24:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
I did.

Which is why I was so puzzled by the stuff I quoted.

Sinergy


What do you see as being wrong with it?  I'm not completely convinced, but I'm not denying it as a distinct possibility.  I just want more research and I want a de-politicized pursuit of new information as we proceed through dealing with it.  I don't think anyone rational would profess that we "completely" undertand our climate ... we need to remain openminded even if we start addressing problems with the best we have to go on.  Personally I think that's a rather practical position.

-Sicarius



Sinergy -> RE: The Best "Outing" of Global Warming I have ever read! (5/29/2007 7:30:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sicarius

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy
I did.

Which is why I was so puzzled by the stuff I quoted.

Sinergy


What do you see as being wrong with it?  I'm not completely convinced, but I'm not denying it as a distinct possibility.  I just want more research and I want a de-politicized pursuit of new information as we proceed through dealing with it.  I don't think anyone rational would profess that we "completely" undertand our climate ... we need to remain openminded even if we start addressing problems with the best we have to go on.  Personally I think that's a rather practical position.

-Sicarius


Ok, that clarifies it so I am no longer puzzled by what you wrote.

What exactly would prove to you that human activity over the past 25,000 years has caused extensive climate changes which will ultimately result in our inability to survive as a species?

Sinergy



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875