Some do, some don't.
Its NASA, not The Bible. Don't treat it like one.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

Yup.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

No matter what I say, you will reject it and post more nonsense.

So I tell you what... instead of relying on 3rd parties politically-motivated articles and reports and statements, or on anything I might do or say here, which you will reject anyways - just do your own research. It is not that hard - collect the freely available temp data, or polar cap data, or whatever - there is a *ton* of related data and many different ways to approach the subject. If you go back, year by year, for a few decades you will see a very clear result. If this result supports your viewpoint, post it here and we will all tell you what you did wrong.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

Strawman:


I am not sure what you do not understand.

The Nasa scientist summed it up beautifully stating that all evidence was showing climate change, but not global warming. She spoke for the whole scientific community when saying they were wrong.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2415191/Global-cooling-Arctic-ice-caps-grows-60-global-warming-predictions.html

The pause – which has now been accepted as real by every major climate research centre – is important, because the models’ predictions of ever-increasing global temperatures have made many of the world’s economies divert billions of pounds into ‘green’ measures to counter climate change.

Those predictions now appear gravely flawed.

Professor Anastasios Tsonis, of the University of Wisconsin, was one of the first to investigate the ocean cycles.He said: ‘We are already in a cooling trend, which I think will continue for the next 15 years at least. There is no doubt the warming of the 1980s and 1990s has stopped.


So... Did all those research papers know about "The pause"?

Doubt it... because they were assuming warming would continue and a never ending upward trend. They were taking climate change indications and assuming global warming and not global cooling would occur.

I am wondering if you read any of the evidence I posted because I bet not.

The sun is in it dormant cycle... things are getting cooler, and not warmer.


Anything recent to 2012/2013 are all saying that global warming has stopped, and the global cooling is occurring.

Not to mention you not addressing the fact that all your studies and even the literature review itself has been posted by all of my evidence.

It is immaterial at this point.

The hard proof is that COOLING IS OCCURRING. That ICE IS BEING FORMED at a rate greater than has ever been seen before and that scientist are starting to see global warming as the mistakes estimation it is.

Folks, please pay attention. Uzziel's primary source was an April Fool's joke. He's a troll, or seriously confused. Best to ignore.

_________________
- Brady
Want to see videos of low-dan mistakes and what to learn from them? Brady's Blunders

Guess nonsense is actual fact, and evidence.

Guess this is real:

Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort experienced when simultaneously holding two or more conflicting cognitions: ideas, beliefs, values or emotional reactions. n a state of dissonance, people may sometimes feel "disequilibrium": frustration, hunger, dread, guilt, anger, embarrassment, anxiety, etc.

Then im done posting.

Too bad. I was really interested in your answer to my question.

To be sure, none of the statements you read in the press, or hear in the media, from neither side, is *evidence*, regardless if it is a scientist who says them or a political hack. And most of it, from either side, is politically motivated, one way or another. But there is enough data out there to do your own research easily.

So why don't you do the research I challenged you to do? It is *really* not that hard. And then you won't have to rely on what others say.

If you need help, please let me/us know, I am sure somebody will point you in the right direction. This is really the easiest way to see what is 'evidence' and what is 'nonsense'.



I am not sure how this fits into anything. Is that the condition you have?

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

Here is a page from NASA:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/

Yes I looked at it after your claims. And it seems to me that their own diagrams based on their own research shows clearly that the global temperature is raising over the past few decades. Just saying...

Still - do the research I told you. It is an eye opener for people who claim what you do.
Besides, it is fun to watch them squirm when they try to put a desperate spin on the inconvenient results.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

Here's my major question for deniers:

Given the enormous effect we've had on our earth (with changes to the chemistry of the atmosphere, landscape, ecosystems, and oceans):

If you are going to say that these changes had no effect on our climate... don't you think the burden of proof is on YOU to prove that?

Even if you find a single study which disagrees with a paper supporting climate change, it's not enough.

It's not enough because even if you succeed in arguing that their particular prediction of climate change is flawed, you still are left with major, human-driven changes to our earth which you have not ascribed effects.

Until you give a counterpoint for what the effects are, I'm afraid you're trying to keep a dam stoppered by poking your finger in it.

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

For a long time, I was a Young Earth Creationist. In my head I was convinced that scientists were mainly lying, and some were seriously confused. Due to this I refused to actually look at any of the evidence for evolution and only read from young earth creationists sites for my evidence. I had blinders on where I would refuse to look at any evidence that might make me even question my beliefs. Worse, I wasn't even consciously aware of how biased I was being, despite the fact that on other issues where people would act identically to me it was easy to spot how flawed their thinking was.

Citing a few articles in news sites is not the same as citing actual scientific journals or data. I could equally cite this New York Times article as proof of Bigfoot, but I'm sure we can all see the flaws with that.

_________________
We don't know who we are; we don't know where we are.
Each of us woke up one moment and here we were in the darkness.
We're nameless things with no memory; no knowledge of what went before,
No understanding of what is now, no knowledge of what will be.

Thanks for the April Fool's joke.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

Whoops! Guess that goes to show that you should fully read through your evidence.

Boy oh Boy if this were a debate I could clip/tag and abuse the hell out of that source though.

Anyway... This isn't an April fools joke.
Climate Change: UN Official Says World Leaders Failing, Climate Experts Admit Wrong Global Warming Predictions
http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/506884/20130918/global-warming-climate-change-carbon-emissions-greenhouse.htm

Also just want to clarify... that I was not going to repost but the April Fools prank was funny as I was completely fooled. (Speed research isn't a good strategy )

As far as my position... I never said I did not believe in climate change. I just do not buy into the *dump your carbon before its too late and tax everyone for breathing!* groups out there. I do believe we are cooling and not warming though, or that Global warming is cyclical and not related to the release of carbon.

So we basically go global warming, global cooling, global warming global cooling.

Now I think this is due to the cycles of the sun. While chemical release may affect this it is obvious the sun does have a part in how out climates are shaped.

Pretty odd everybody is afraid of carbon while our biggest natural carbon offset (TREES) are being eliminated for use at a very high rate.

But the Green Carbon Tax (Agenda 21 UN Bogus crap) Taxing everyone's pocket is fitting really nice into someones bank account with no real goal or ability to help the environment in any way.

Well anyway...
Peace

Plant trees.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.

There is a good idea out there, called the ideological turing test: the better you are able to state your opponent's ideas, in a way that he would find comprehensible and perhaps compelling, the more likely you are to be right.

Now, do you think it's accurate that people who believe in global warming typically "want to tax people for breathing"? I guess you'd say it was hyperbole. Most environmentalists who are worried about global warming think deforestation is a big problem and we should be trying to stop it. So it does seem like you're grasp of your opponents' positions are a little shaky. I think you would benefit from reading more about why scientists think that man made global warming is real. I think you might find it compelling, but regardless, I think that it would be helpful for you.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

From this I can deduce that you listen to Rush and Fox News all day and nothing else.

Here is a fact: the last 3 REPUBLICAN Presidential nominees all agree that the climate is warming
Mitt Romney
John McCain
George W. Bush

If BOTH nominees for the past 3 elections agree on something, that is a clear sign that the vast majority of Americans also agree. If you thought that it was anywhere close to 50/50, then you are getting very skewed information.

This may be because of a phenomenon called astroturfing, where certain organizations pay for many 'fake' comments (and blog posts etc) to be posted around the internet in order to manufacture the appearance of consensus or a grass roots campaign - or to perpetuate certain ideas.

This tactic seems to be being employed across the business and political spectrum these days. That is; both the 'left' and the 'right' are manipulating people's opinions through astroturfing (though left and right are simplistic labels, which are fairly corrosive to our democracy in the way that they force people into opposing teams - but that's getting too far off topic). I've read about astroturfing happening on large scales in China and Russia too (as well as the West). My guess is that it's happening in most advanced countries. It's been claimed that China has hundreds of thousands of astroturfers who get paid about 50 cents a pop to post pro government blog posts (I can't say whether that number is accurate though).

At this point - in my opinion - it's almost a total waste of time to read the comments on most big news sites, because of the number of paid hacks (from all sides) interfering with the conversations of genuine readers. If you think it often seems like people don't even read the article before commenting, it's because they don't. They're not paid to. They just read the headlines. Topics like climate change are like a magnet for this sort of thing.

Fortunately, Go is enough of a niche topic that we don't see really see that happening on L19 or other Go sites yet. The response you got here was probably more representative of the views of real people, with the caveat that the sample here may be heavily biased in terms of type and amount of education.

On an average day at gogameguru.com we'll receive between 50-100 spam comments on articles (99% of which we manage to automatically block, thankfully, so they don't appear on the site). Most of them are to promote some random commercial product (handbags, pharmaceuticals, shoes, get rich quick etc) but a handful of them are political, so the tentacles have a long reach and I expect this to keep getting worse. I don't have time to read that rubbish, but every week or so I scan through them to catch legitimate reader comments that somehow got caught in the spam filter. I've sometimes seen spam comments ranting on about global warming being a hoax, among other things. The significance of this is that if that's happening, someone's paying to make it happen, because it costs money. You wouldn't spam people about political stuff instead of something like viagra unless you were paid more to do so.

The majority of spam comments are left by botnet spammers (e.g. computers that have a virus which allows them to be remotely controlled by someone else - to do your bidding, for a fee). There's also a component of human submitted spam which is more expensive, but also more successful in (temporarily) getting past the antispam measures. A lot of the political stuff seems to come from humans, even when the relevance to the article they comment on is incredibly tenuous (I assume they have to meet some sort of daily quota).

What does this tell you? I guess nothing that we shouldn't already know: that you can't believe everything you read and that "follow the money" is still a good adage for people with a genuinely skeptical* mind.

Who stands to gain (or lose) the most here Magicwand? Who would pay to spread this sort of political message and what's the payoff for them?

* = in the true sense of the word 'skeptic'.

_________________
David

Go Game Guru: Learn Go | How to Get Better at Go | Go Game Shop | Go Boards | Baduk TV

This is a forum for go players. It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to suggest that go is a hobby for educated people with the capacity to think critically. That could explain why we are so heavily slanted away from science denialism.

_________________
Poka King of the south east.

Don't forget Bush I.

_________________
The Adkins Principle:
At some point, doesn't thinking have to go on?
— Winona Adkins

Visualize whirled peas.

Everything with love. Stay safe.