OT: Hurrican Ike Hits the Carribean

[fuelli]

Just to clarify:

@ Ike: I don´t wanted to say that dumping all the toxic waste will not affect the environment. It is a proved fact that this is affecting the environment. I was only talking about the assesment of data concerning the climate

I have to agree with Joe that your example as a few mistakes in it to prove my statement as wrong and not logical. In your example you have a closed system and you applicate one single parameter (smoke) which has an already proved and known influence. The relation between climate and CO2 is still not proved in fact there are studies which claim the that there is not relation. I do not trust both of them. There are also studies that say that the earth climate is mostly influenced by sun activities. There is still no prove for this for the reasons I mentioned in my initial post: Not enough data. Same is for CO2. What I wanted to say is that the discussion is lacking scientific depth and is more or less a political discussion.

To express my personal opinion: We have to change our attitude according energy consumption. There is no doubt about that. We have to do it now and we have to it fast. But the climate is a minor reason for it. And now I would like to ask everyone to not let this discussion go in an ugly direction. Thanks for your attention.

[Ike99]

Ike, that's a closed sytem, and in nature, there are no closed systems, unless you think the earth is self-contained.

The atmosphere is not a closed system? Would you like to show me where the window is to open and let out the pollutants that are poured into it Joe?

Of course it´s a closed system.

[tocaff]

So gentlemen we have varied opinions as to things that the so called experts can't agree on.  Maybe that's reason enough to agree that we don't have the proven data from any source to prove or disprove our points here. 

My point is let's all chill since this is starting to spin towards a direction that we really don't want to travel again.

Besides this is a thread I started in jest about a hurricane named Ike so if you'd like to discuss that OK otherwise be cool.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Ike, that's a closed sytem, and in nature, there are no closed systems, unless you think the earth is self-contained.

The atmosphere is not a closed system? Would you like to show me where the window is to open and let out the pollutants that are poured into it Joe?

Of course it´s a closed system.

Relax Todd, this should be OK.

Ike, a sealed Petrie dish is (arguably) a closed system, but solar radiation and solar wind enter into our atmosphere from outer space every day, as well as meteors, cosmic dust, and so forth; that's why it's not a closed system.

I don't know what's getting out, but every time you look into the night sky and see a "shooting star," something just got in.

[Ike99]

Relax Todd, this should be OK.

Ike, a sealed Petrie dish is (arguably) a closed system, but solar radiation and solar wind enter into our atmosphere from outer space every day, as well as meteors, cosmic dust, and so forth; that's why it's not a closed system.

I don't know what's getting out, but every time you look into the night sky and see a "shooting star," something just got in.

Is there a space under the door in a room with 3 people smoking in it?

Yes.

Does this crack prevent the room from becoming filled with smoke?

No.

Would this room then be considered a ¨closed enviroment¨?

Yes...unless they´re working for Exonn Mobil.

Mars, Neptune, Earth, etc., all are experiencing some form of "global" warming, but aside from all being globes, what else do they have in common?

They all inhabit the same solar system w/the same sun, Sol; when Sol gets hotter, everything in its system gets warmer.

Sorry Joe, that´s corporate science.

Question: Is Global Warming a Hoax?

Isn't it true that the global warming scare is really just a hoax perpetrated by environmentalists who want to attract more funding and liberals who want to promote big government?

Answer: No, it is not true.

This argument surfaces every now and then during discussions of global warming, often supported by some random and isolated bit of outdated information, but it is a ridiculous claim.

Scientific Consensus on Global Warming Worldwide, every major scientific agency or institution that studies climate, oceans or the atmosphere agrees that the global climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is greenhouse gas emissions related to human activity. Even a short list would include such notable organizations as:

* National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
* National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
* NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
* Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
* The Royal Society of the UK (RS)
* Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)
* Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

... I don't know what's getting out, but every time you look into the night sky and see a "shooting star," something just got in.

Is there a space under the door in a room with 3 people smoking in it?

Yes.

Does this crack prevent the room from becoming filled with smoke?

No.

Would this room then be considered a ¨closed enviroment¨?

Yes...unless they´re working for Exonn Mobil.

This isn't a scientific argument; it's worded as a joke, which is what it really is.

BTW, smoke RISES, so unless there's a negative pressure system, it's obviously not going under the door, although there is some exchange of gases occuring thru there, which means the system isn't closed; otherwise, your smokers would soon affixiate.

Mars, Neptune, Earth, etc., all are experiencing some form of "global" warming, but aside from all being globes, what else do they have in common?

They all inhabit the same solar system w/the same sun, Sol; when Sol gets hotter, everything in its system gets warmer.

ORIGINAL: Ike99
Sorry Joe, that´s corporate science.

No, it's not corporate science, it's Copernicus' heliocentric theory w/some thermodynamics thrown in.

It's also an elementray school lesson; have you ever seen our new American TV game show, "Are you smarter than a 5th Grader"?

[Ike99]

No, it's not corporate science, it's Copernicus' heliocentric theory w/some thermodynamics thrown in.

Wow, really?! Sounds good to me.

Let´s remove pollution controls tomorrow then and while we do that bring back atmospheric nuclear testing too because Copernicus ¨theory¨ says everything is fine. Doesn´t matter his ¨theory¨ goes against every major scientific agency and institution that studies climate change in the world.

[8|]

It's also an elementray school lesson; have you ever seen our new American TV game show, "Are you smarter than a 5th Grader"?

Not suprising it´s an elementary school lesson because anyone beyond an elementary school level of understanding would immediatley realise it´s corporate science.

[HansBolter]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

No, it's not corporate science, it's Copernicus' heliocentric theory w/some thermodynamics thrown in.

Wow, really?! Sounds good to me.

Let´s remove pollution controls tomorrow then and while we do that bring back atmospheric nuclear testing too because Copernicus ¨theory¨ says everything is fine. Doesn´t matter his ¨theory¨ goes against every major scientific agency and institution that studies climate change in the world.

[8|]

It's also an elementray school lesson; have you ever seen our new American TV game show, "Are you smarter than a 5th Grader"?

Not suprising it´s an elementary school lesson because anyone beyond an elementary school level of understanding would immediatley realise it´s corporate science.

When Copernicus took them on every "major scientific agency and institution" in the world was absolutely certain the Earth was the center of the solar system.

Big Science (read government funded) has been headed down a path toward a quasi-religious underrtaking in Cosmology for some time now. It's called the String Theory.

Big Science has proven that it is just as capable of "reaching a consensus" on the religion of Global Warming.

Not long ago a symposium of 30,000 INDEPENDENT scientists signed a document labeling the concept of human caused global warming a total sham.

Yes indeed, the Earth is warming. As pointed out by another informed poster, so are all the other planest in this system dominated by and HEATED by the star we call Sol. Attributing that warming to human activity is what constitutes the sham.

[fuelli]

The fact that a number of scientific instituts claim one thing and a huge number of scientist claim another thing based upon the same data shows that the data is still not sufficiant to claim anything. That´s what I said in the beginning, and now I´m outa here[:'(]

[Ike99]

Not long ago a symposium of 30,000 INDEPENDENT scientists signed a document labeling the concept of human caused global warming a total sham.

Independent meaning ¨I need to make so money so will say anything for anybody who puts money in my pocket¨

"Oil and coal companies in the United States have joined in a conspiracy to hire pseudoscientists to deny the facts, and then begin raising political arguments that are essentially fraudulent"-US Interior Secretary Bruce Babbit

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

No, it's not corporate science, it's Copernicus' heliocentric theory w/some thermodynamics thrown in.

Let´s remove pollution controls tomorrow then and while we do that bring back atmospheric nuclear testing too because Copernicus ¨theory¨ says everything is fine ...

The heliocentric theory simply states that the planets rotate about and are dominated by a single stationary sun; it's NOT an excuse to pollute the Earth, but if you're going to throw $ at global warming, you better hit the "bulls eye," assuming you even want to "tinker" w/our climate on a solar scale!

ORIGINAL: Ike99
Not suprising it´s an elementary school lesson because anyone beyond an elementary school level of understanding would immediatley realise it´s corporate science.

I taught Earth Science, not "Corporate science"; the latter's just a slogan and it's not even close to scientific method.

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

... When Copernicus took them on every "major scientific agency and institution" in the world was absolutely certain the Earth was the center of the solar system.

Big Science (read government funded) has been headed down a path toward a quasi-religious underrtaking in Cosmology for some time now ... Big Science has proven that it is just as capable of "reaching a consensus" on the religion of Global Warming.

Hans, thanks for reminding us abt this; remember what happened to another independent scientist named Gallileo?.

[HansBolter]

No, independent means: Not being paid to promote some one else's agenda....ie....the governments's.

Try doing a little real research and maybe you'll discover that it's a consistent fact in life that it's the underperformers and margionally competent who end up working for governments while the real capable and competent professional performers work in the private sector.

The ones denying facts are the 900 scientists at the UN who started it all with their flawed computer climate model.

You quote a government beauracrat and expect to be taken seriously?

Maybe we should start calling you Chicken Little.....

[decaro]

ORIGINAL: Ike99

Ike, you started w/a joke, now a cartoon; both are very funny, but neither makes a very convincing argument.

[Ike99]

Try doing a little real research and maybe you'll discover that it's a consistent fact in life that it's the underperformers and margionally competent who end up working for governments while the real capable and competent professional performers work in the private sector.

You mean like these people?

Frederick Seitz, Ph.D.

Seitz was a signatory of the 1995 Leipzig Declaration, which disputed that there was any scientific agreement about climate change. He has been Chairman Emeritus of the George C. Marshall Institute, which received $630,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005, according to the Greenpeace's Exxonsecrets.org and a review Exxon's financial documents. Seitz also served on the Board of Academic and Scientific Advisors for the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, which received $472,000 from Exxon from 1998 to 2005, according to the same sources.

Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D.

Lindzen charges oil and coal interests $2,500 a day for his consulting services; his 1991 trip to testify before a Senate committee was paid for by Western Fuels.

S. Fred Singer, Ph.D.

Dr. Singer has acknowledged previously being a paid consultant for several oil companies. In addition, his organization -- the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP) -- has received multiple grants from ExxonMobil. Many of the other organizations with which Singer works -- Frontiers of Freedom, the Cato Institute, National Center for Policy Analysis -- have received large grants from Exxon as well.

[tocaff]

Oh no it's no good if it comes out of the US strikes again! 

Please kids can't we all behave?

You guys could maybe reach a consensus on the probability that if I say black somebody else will say white?

[Ike99]

Oh no it's no good if it comes out of the US strikes again!

Please kids can't we all behave?

You guys could maybe reach a consensus on the probability that if I say black somebody else will say white?

You´re right tocaff. I have to finish the Allied ships with flags with this time anyways.

[tocaff]

Now can the rest of us behave too?

[HansBolter]

So if scientists whose foundations are funded by oil companies can be assumed to be pursuing the interestes of the oil companies then it also must follow that scientists whose institution IS the UN and is funded by the UN MUST be pursuing the UN's interests...........


I just love how gullible people brought up in socialist societies automatically presume private companies can't be trusted but government entities can be.

We who grew up in democracies have come to recognize that in most cases the opposite is true.

[tocaff]

Ah Hans we weren't brought up in a democracy, but rather in a republic. 

It seems that as youngsters our society educated us all to fit that society's mold, whatever that may have been.  I've learned that one of the toughest things is to not judge another culture by your culture's standards.