No more global warming?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

No, he said it wasn't validated yet, which means it is in that terrority of "we don't know" the merits of that theory yet.

4.5 million dead would be a good thing for the planet though, wouldn't it? If you're a Gaiaist surely this is just mother nature bitch-slapping hummanity back down to a reasonable population size.

2 years is absurd, even assuming systemic collapse of global society and economy people will persit in larger numbers longer than that.

Interestingly, the Climate Change lobby has been very seriously hurt by A: the attack of science on religion and philosophy and B: the recent scandals of scientists "sexing" up their data because they feel they need to scare the general populace into complience. "climate Change" is now being lumped in with "moral reletivism" as well as "militant atheism" and "multiculturalism".

Bluntly, the physical scientists would probably be getting more traction if men like Dawkins had confined themselves to useful research instead of populist rubbish, and we might all suffer as a result.

The fact is, it's quite clear that the scientists aren't really sure what's going on, but instead of trying to present the ecological and economic case for renewable energy and sustainabl development, not to mention the moral case on which they are silent, they resort to absurd scare tactics that cause them to be generally ignored.

[Subotan]

Hang on a minute. According to the 'climologists' the science is settled. So which is it?

There is a consensus that human activity is warming the planet, and we have some pretty good ideas by how much, but that doesn't mean that climatologists shut themselves off from all new theories which may add to that.

4.5 million dead would be a good thing for the planet though, wouldn't it? If you're a Gaiaist surely this is just mother nature bitch-slapping hummanity back down to a reasonable population size.

I couldn't care less about the natural world. The sodding polar bears can drown for all I care. I care about people.

[Fragony]

People in the artic regions do care about polar bears, there are too many of them they are a serious problem. These wooly buggers are thriving, almost trippled in population since the fifties. Good news no? Waving not drowning.

[Subotan]

Dinosaurs probably more than tripled in population from 225 million years ago to 65 million years ago. What's your point?

[Fragony]

Dinosaurs probably more than tripled in population from 225 million years ago to 65 million years ago. What's your point?

That the symbol that is drowning fluffies is just useless as the rest of the settled science. Polar bears are bouncing.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Dinosaurs probably more than tripled in population from 225 million years ago to 65 million years ago. What's your point?

What's yours? An asteroid wiped out the Dinosaurs.

[Subotan]

That the symbol that is drowning fluffies is just useless as the rest of the settled science.

Yawn.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten...306/5702/1686#

That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" (9).

The 928 papers [on climate change] were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.

That is settled science. You really need to come up with some new good factually correct arguments.

Polar bears are bouncing.

No, they're not, and you know it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bear

What's yours? An asteroid wiped out the Dinosaurs.

Exactly

The fact that Polar bears may have done well in the past is irrelevant. They are suffering now.

But like I said, I do not give a flying **** about the polar bears. The polar bears can all be cut up to make poison liver and onions for all I care. I'm concerned about the effect climate change will have on people, not animals.

[Fragony]

Pick one you like http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&so...=Google+zoeken

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I couldn't care less about the natural world. The sodding polar bears can drown for all I care. I care about people.

That is exactly the attitude that has caused the problem to begin with!

If people cared about the planet then we would already be doing everything needful to stop global warming, even if we didn't believe in it. The failure of the ideaology of human stewardship has caused every major ecological disaster. Consider, for example, the recent oil spill and the decidedly lacklustre response.

[Subotan]

"Pack of lies" seems disproportionate.

[Furunculus]

i think it is quite appropriate for the following statements:

1. The science is settled
2. It was agreed by the 'consensus' of scientific opinion
3. It was achieved using the highest standards of peer reviewed science

[Fragony]

"Pack of lies" seems disproportionate.

Don't you know it huh.

@Beskar, not forgetting anything, they used to melt and now they don't. Polar bears aren't any less perfectly fine. As a symbol it's useless.

[Fragony]

Surprisingly secular opinion in de Volkskrant about DEATH BY ACID RAIN. The flaggalants knew that ALL the forest would be GONE in FIVE years. Leading to an ECOLOGICAL HOLOCAUST, causing MASS STARVATION and GLOBAL WAR, IF WE DO NOT ACT RIGHT NOW.

(Dutch) http://extra.volkskrant.nl/opinie/ar...bossen_niet%3F

save the earth

[Subotan]

SO2 emissions have been drastically reduced in Western Europe over the past 10-20 years. Complaining that there is now no acid rain is bizarre and strange.