Manmade Global Warming: How A Lie Died

[Dennis_Ista]

Be that is it may, it is always wise to invest in products that lower emissions and save energy.

It saves you money, and they last longer and are more durable.

With energy saving lightbulbs, double glazing and insulated walls, I save 75% on my heating and lighting bill every year.

[Reiner]

Dennis, I agree. As much as some try to demonize global warming skeptics, I 100% belive we have a responsibility to protect our environment and leave our planet in as good as (preferably better) shape for future generations.

[Danno]

Reiner Wrote:Danno, you are also right about a few facts, but you made a major logical error.

Yes, greenhouse gases by definition warm the planet. And yes, man has produced greenhouse gases, albeit nothing in comparison to the forces of nature. To draw a direct corollary between these two facts and ignore the other major forces at work is ridiculous. (Example: Volcanoes pump millions of tons of carbon and other greenhouse-causing elements into the atmosphere all the time.)

It's like saying you drove on I-94 today, and there was an accident on I-94, so you caused the accident. The logic just doesn't add up.

The reason the earth has warmed over the past 150 years is because we the "Little Ice Age" ended approximately 150 years ago. What you really are saying is that today's "normal" temperatures are warmer than a 500-year cold spell.

By the way, we're not talking about a coldest day, or month, or even winter. East Anglia says 15 years of cooling. That's not statistically insignificant when you are talking 150 years of data.

Do you seriously think that scientist are not taking into consideration the influence of volcanic gasses in the equation?

[Reiner]

Quote:Do you seriously think that scientist are not taking into consideration the influence of volcanic gasses in the equation?

Re-read my post. Did I ever make this claim? No, so stop putting words in my mouth for the third post in a row.

The point is, you are comparing "normal" temperatures to a 500-year cold spell. I don't think anyone will argue that today is warmer than a period known as the "Little Ice Age." But at the same time, that doesn't mean the Earth is too warm.

[Danno]

Reiner Wrote:

Quote:Do you seriously think that scientist are not taking into consideration the influence of volcanic gasses in the equation?

Re-read my post. Did I ever make this claim? No, so stop putting words in my mouth for the third post in a row.

The point is, you are comparing "normal" temperatures to a 500-year cold spell. I don't think anyone will argue that today is warmer than a period known as the "Little Ice Age." But at the same time, that doesn't mean the Earth is too warm.

No. You did use the word "ignore" in that sentence in reference to "other major forces" and then gave an example of volcanic "elements".

[Danno]

Reiner Wrote:

Quote:Do you seriously think that scientist are not taking into consideration the influence of volcanic gasses in the equation?

Re-read my post. Did I ever make this claim? No, so stop putting words in my mouth for the third post in a row.

The point is, you are comparing "normal" temperatures to a 500-year cold spell. I don't think anyone will argue that today is warmer than a period known as the "Little Ice Age." But at the same time, that doesn't mean the Earth is too warm.

If your theory is indeed factual wouldn't it also be possibly factual that the little ice age ended earlier because of the infuence of greenhouse gasses?

[Reiner]

Ok, let me clarify since Danno continues to spin everything:

I am sure AWG propagandists are aware of the natural forces at work on this planet, but they certainly do ignore them in their conclusion that global warming is purely a result of human activity. If cutting our carbon emissions is the only solution to stop a warming trend, then volcanoes, ocean currents, solar activity, and a million other factors clearly don't fit into their scenario.

[Reiner]

What significant sources of greenhouse gases existed in 1800? How about in A.D. 1000 when the Medieval Warming Period began? Or 20,000 years ago when the late major ice age ended? This is absurd.

[Danno]

Reiner Wrote:Ok, let me clarify since Danno continues to spin everything:

I am sure AWG propagandists are aware of the natural forces at work on this planet, but they certainly do ignore them in their conclusion that global warming is purely a result of human activity. If cutting our carbon emissions is the only solution to stop a warming trend, then volcanoes, ocean currents, solar activity, and a million other factors clearly don't fit into their scenario.

So by that same logic we should have never restricted the use of phosphates, which were causing major degradation of our aquatic environments, because phosphates and other degrading elements also occur naturally?

[Danno]

Reiner Wrote:What significant sources of greenhouse gases existed in 1800? How about in A.D. 1000 when the Medieval Warming Period began? Or 20,000 years ago when the late major ice age ended? This is absurd.

AGAIN. So by that same logic forest fires can never be deemed to have been caused by humans because historically forest fires are caused by ligthning? Talk about absurdity. I think I'm going to try to popularize that theory because we spend way too much money trying to prevent humans from causing forest fires. Smokey Bear must be part of a conspiracy! Of course, I'm not going to tell you that I also sell forest fire fighting equipment.