Welcome to Gaia! ::


Alien Dog

17,850 Points
  • Citizen 200
  • Voter 100
  • Mark Twain 100
Lord aKHAANaton
Keltoi Samurai
Divine_Malevolence
Term's "Climate change" not "Global warming".


Yeah, "Global Warming" is so 20 years ago.

And "Next Ice Age" was so 20 years before that.

The simple truth is, "climate change" became the term when we realised we were wrong twice before, and we wanted a new term that'd stay right no matter how wrong we were.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/05/17/97-percent-of-scientific-studies-agree-on-manmade-global-warming-so-what-now/


A similar number agreed that we were heading for a new ice age only a handful of decades ago.

Also, that study isn't saying "97% of studies agree," it's saying "97% of the 34% of studies we chose to include agree."

It's an important distinction to make.
Keltoi Samurai
Lord aKHAANaton
Keltoi Samurai
Divine_Malevolence
Term's "Climate change" not "Global warming".


Yeah, "Global Warming" is so 20 years ago.

And "Next Ice Age" was so 20 years before that.

The simple truth is, "climate change" became the term when we realised we were wrong twice before, and we wanted a new term that'd stay right no matter how wrong we were.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/05/17/97-percent-of-scientific-studies-agree-on-manmade-global-warming-so-what-now/


A similar number agreed that we were heading for a new ice age only a handful of decades ago.

Also, that study isn't saying "97% of studies agree," it's saying "97% of the 34% of studies we chose to include agree."

It's an important distinction to make.


Well, if you look at climate data we technically are. The cycles of the earth are always periods of high temperatures followed by extreme cooling periods. Then temperatures slowly rise again. Basically the temperature of the early slowly goes up then shoots down and then slowly goes up again.

Dapper Hunter

6,825 Points
  • Treasure Hunter 100
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
Omnileech
A conservative newspaper once again declares that global warming is over because winter is coming. Seriously, the evidence they're going that "global warming is over" is that the Northwest Passage which until years ago did not exist now has enough ice to hinder shipping.

The "global" temperature, rising sea levels... none of that has changed. Nor the fact that humans keep pumping greenhouse gases into the air.


Yeah...once I clicked the link to the source and saw the other anti-climate change articles I knew something wasn't right. cheese_whine

Greedy Consumer

THE PROBLEM WITH THIS information is square miles has nothing to do with temperature, there are more square miles because the large glaciers are breaking apart into small ones from melting, thus covering more distance when they are the sizes of cliffs, above and under the water, so now we have alot of thin ice refreezing now and then, who cares, this doesn't prove beyond a doubt anything.

Rainbow Smoker

5,650 Points
  • Mega Tipsy 100
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Ultimate Player 200
Keltoi Samurai
Well, even you must admit that the polar ice has been one of the more major harping points of the push to recognise climate change, and if that polar ice is increasing, when it was supposed to be gone, even after emissions have increased . . . that rather means that it's time to reevaluate the model to account for new details.


There's no problem with reevaluating the model, I think a lot of people severly underestimate how complex climate science is. It's not as simple as the local news' weather report, so yeah, the conservative slack-jawed yokels can't be expected to understand what's going on.
Well first I would like to say, we humans did not cause climate change or global warming. We had global warming before humans became industralized, I mean how did you think the planet got out of the last ice age? Though we are not helping the cycle, possibly true we are making the cycles sway more as the get to the peak of the cycle and head to the next.
La Veuve Zin
Keltoi Samurai
Well, even you must admit that the polar ice has been one of the more major harping points of the push to recognise climate change, and if that polar ice is increasing, when it was supposed to be gone, even after emissions have increased . . . that rather means that it's time to reevaluate the model to account for new details.


There's no problem with reevaluating the model, I think a lot of people severly underestimate how complex climate science is. It's not as simple as the local news' weather report, so yeah, the conservative slack-jawed yokels can't be expected to understand what's going on.


You think?

Given that certain Conservatives declare once a year that Global Warming isn't a thing because Winter is cold, I don't think one needs to say "I think a lot of people...."

Rainbow Smoker

5,650 Points
  • Mega Tipsy 100
  • Forum Sophomore 300
  • Ultimate Player 200
Young Griff Connington
La Veuve Zin
Keltoi Samurai
Well, even you must admit that the polar ice has been one of the more major harping points of the push to recognise climate change, and if that polar ice is increasing, when it was supposed to be gone, even after emissions have increased . . . that rather means that it's time to reevaluate the model to account for new details.


There's no problem with reevaluating the model, I think a lot of people severly underestimate how complex climate science is. It's not as simple as the local news' weather report, so yeah, the conservative slack-jawed yokels can't be expected to understand what's going on.


You think?

Given that certain Conservatives declare once a year that Global Warming isn't a thing because Winter is cold, I don't think one needs to say "I think a lot of people...."


Touche, I was trying to be nice. This is what happens when "God created the heavens and the earth" is considered a valid lesson in science class.
Keltoi Samurai
Lord aKHAANaton
Keltoi Samurai
Divine_Malevolence
Term's "Climate change" not "Global warming".


Yeah, "Global Warming" is so 20 years ago.

And "Next Ice Age" was so 20 years before that.

The simple truth is, "climate change" became the term when we realised we were wrong twice before, and we wanted a new term that'd stay right no matter how wrong we were.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/05/17/97-percent-of-scientific-studies-agree-on-manmade-global-warming-so-what-now/


A similar number agreed that we were heading for a new ice age only a handful of decades ago.

Also, that study isn't saying "97% of studies agree," it's saying "97% of the 34% of studies we chose to include agree."

It's an important distinction to make.



Actually.....

http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article


Quote:
We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.



It's more complicated then just saying "Oh, they chose not to include 66% of studies."That's an easy way to brush it off, but it's far from the truth.

They had a clear goal with the study, which was to determine a scientific consensus. Only 34% of studies they looked at qualified. And, of that 34%, the overwhelming majority started that it does, in fact, exist.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games
Mini-Games
Play with GCash
Play with Platinum