More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming

[Faustian]

Micheal Crichton...hmmmm, I think your praise is somewhat generous. He wrote average fiction, which for me is how I'd describe "state of fear". As regards his personal opinion, all of it is. He wrote it, therefore it's his work and impossibly devoid of his opinion.

 

I'm a scientist. I specialised in the brain. Us shrinks do models on computer of the brain. Some seem to think that's a little complicated too. 10 billion moving parts, all connected....the first complex models are being done now in fact. I'm aware of the shortfalls of the IPCC reports. I don't agree they are precise or accurate and more research is needed.

 

If you want to read the latest stuff, maybe you should have a look at this...

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/earth_climate/global_warming/

 

There are bits of research from all sources, some opposing global warming, some for it....I guess you can choose whether you think it is valid or not.

[..]

So, if this is the case, spending $billions in an attempt to fix a situation which is currently beyond our understanding is foolish.

Why is it foolish to limit the spewing of toxic gases into the environment? We (should have) learned about toxic shit over at least the past 100 or so years of industrialization. Burning rivers, cancer clusters, uninhabitable lands, etc. have all happened and we know why.

 

I fail to see where limits on this shit are bad, regardless of your stance on the "climate change" phenom.

 

Cheers,

SD

[drogon]

Michael Crichton was a scifi writer.

 

Not a scientist, there are enough scientists who have extravagant theories as not to listen to someone who never followed courses in meteorology and climatology...

 

Maybe 50% of scientists think there is a global cooling (explaining the various warming phenomena as being local climatological changes, the other 50% of scientists believe there is a global warming (explaining the cooling phenomena as local changes) -> All this because climatology is a young science and the fact climatological changes occur over hundred of thousands of years...

 

But, no matter if the climate is warming or cooling, as SD pointed we all know that our very own pollution simply destroys the earth ressources and is responsible for many of our diseases...

 

By continuing to pollute on the current scale we might as well destroy ourselves before long...

(and I dislike sierra club and other "ecology" supporters as I don't want to live in the nature like a prehistoric man)

[ThaiHome]

See, that is the problem. If you dare question the scientific facts or methods used to come with this Global Warming shit (now called climate change, duh) then you must be for pollution. Everyone wants to limit pollution, but some of the schemes that are coming out are excessively expensive and will have minimal impact, letâ??s do it based on facts, not sensationalized half baked theories.

TH

[..]

Agreed, but right now we are just doing nothing and that's unacceptable. If moderate laws were passed, then new business would spring up to service the need. Win-win!

 

Cheers,

SD

[ThaiHome]

Globally?

 

Yes, the weather changes all over the world,every day and has for hundred of millions of years.

 

TH

[ThaiHome]

I disagree, there is lot that has been done and lot more being done. Growing up in SoCal in the 50â??s and 60â??s I can tell you it is a lot better now. I think that is true for many places.

 

China certainly needs to do something as some areas look like Pittsburg and London in early 1900â??s. But how do you get them do that? Is global warming going to scare them into it? No, their own population that has to live in it has to make them change, just like in the US and UK.

TH

 

[cavanami]

Most of China is a polluted shit hole!

 

How many times a year do you read that a thousand here, a thousand there died because of some pollution related accident...many!

 

With over 1 billion people in China, the gov couldn't care a hoot about a thousand dead here and there, IMO.

[Faustian]

Agreed, but right now we are just doing nothing and that's unacceptable. If moderate laws were passed, then new business would spring up to service the need. Win-win!

 

Cheers,

SD

 

Indeed, it's a huge industry, with massive potential growth. If I had the money to start up such a company I would. The USA should be a leader. Forget supporting an ailing inefficient bloated car industry, get on with R&D for the environmental industries of the future. It's going to be huge.

 

[rogueyam]

Why is it foolish to limit the spewing of toxic gases into the environment?

 

As usual, you post garbage. The issue is not whether to "limit the spewing of toxic gases into the environment". The issue is whether CO2 is "toxic". Leftist scum say "yes" because this position is good for socialism. My estimation is that the truthful answer is "no".