In the Rush to Help - Global Warming

[ElvisP]

You guys. The ice age was too cold, global warming is too hot.
What will it take to make you all happy?

[jetpilot]

Originally Posted by ElvisP

You guys. The ice age was too cold, global warming is too hot.
What will it take to make you all happy?

Yeah Really . Don't drink that, don't eat that, don't breath etc. etc. etc.

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

Actually, they (the scientific studies) aren't. The IPCC has them and only releases "summaries". It picks and chooses (by vote, it seems) what evidence it wants us to see and keeps the rest to itself. Whether it is oil rich Saudi Arabia or super green socialist Norway applying the pressure, what gets released is either diluted or overstated (who knows?). The only oversight is political (the UN), not scientific.

It looks to me that the documentation is fully available:PublicationsandPublications

It's an awful lot to read. Have you read all of it?

[woodman]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

Dude, you are a prime candidate for Hand Wringers of America. Need more info, I believe there are a few members here who can help.

Enlighten me.

[ElvisP]

Originally Posted by jetpilot

Yeah Really . Don't drink that, don't eat that, don't breath etc. etc. etc.

Don't smoke this, don't inhale that, don't chase that dragon....geez

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by jetpilot

Yeah Really . Don't drink that, don't eat that, don't breath etc. etc. etc.

Its kinda hard to argue with that logic.

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

It looks to me that the documentation is fully available:PublicationsandPublications

It's an awful lot to read. Have you read all of it?

That is not all of the evidence available on climate change.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

That is not all of the evidence available on climate change.

All is alot

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

That is not all of the evidence available on climate change.

Nevertheless, It appears the full studies are available. Didn't you say they weren't? Maybe I misunderstood. It is an awful lot of information.

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

All is alot

No kidding. That is why it is a stretch to say you have a "consensus" based on picking and choosing those articles that suit your preconceived purpose. Any skeptics invited to the party? Strange, how out of 2500 scientists, every of them (minus the ones who resigned in disgust) agrees. Won't find that kind of agreement anywhere else in the scientific world.

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

Nevertheless, It appears the full studies are available. Didn't you say they weren't? Maybe I misunderstood. It is an awful lot of information.

I said that they disregarded evidence that ran contrary to their preconceived ideas.

Let's take something similar. A Supreme Court decision, for example. Experts trained in the same art (in this case, the law) coming to different conclusions. You know how you always get a dissenting opinion? Where is the dissenting opinion on manmade global warming? You going to tell me that 2500 scientists agree to the letter?

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

No kidding. That is why it is a stretch to say you have a "consensus" based on picking and choosing those articles that suit your preconceived purpose. Any skeptics invited to the party? Strange, how out of 2500 scientists, every of them (minus the ones who resigned in disgust) agrees. Won't find that kind of agreement anywhere else in the scientific world.

Starts to sound like something one should seriously consider, eh?

you are the one who believes you must have ALL in agreement to start to move forward , not me.

Again, I ask you..where is this large body of disagreeing scientists.....big conspiracy to shut them up you think?

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

I said that they disregarded evidence that ran contrary to their preconceived ideas.

Let's take something similar. A Supreme Court decision, for example. Experts trained in the same art (in this case, the law) coming to different conclusions. You know how you always get a dissenting opinion? Where is the dissenting opinion on manmade global warming? You going to tell me that 2500 scientists agree to the letter?

My understanding is that compromises were reached in order to come up with the consensus for the final report. Some of the scientists felt there was an even stronger case others ,no doubt, felt differently and may have dropped out of the project. One thing is certain, those scientists know significantly more about climatic change than you or I. I reckon I'll hang my hat with the scientific majority of the IPCC. You feel differently I believe.

[ryberg]

When do you hit "all" in terms of evidence? Do we have "all" the evidence that the world is a sphere or that the universe began with a big bang or what the cause of the northern lights is or that smoking causes cancer or that vitamin C is good for you or that language learning and bilingualism helps ward off Alzheimers?

Having "all" the evidence to reach a sound conclusion seems to be limited to things like discrete mathematics, like 2+2=4 (and Hume even wondered about that, I believe).

I'm sorry for your side, PDS, but there is a consensus out there. Maybe it will turn out to be wrong, someday, very surprisingly. But to say there's not a consensus is to partake in denialism, at this point. Edit: Well, or to misunderstand the concept of consensus and the nature of science, scientific research and scientific progress, which is much more than absolutely and clearly defined discrete mathematics.

Steve

[PlayadelSoul]

Originally Posted by Jacko

Starts to sound like something one should seriously consider, eh?

you are the one who believes you must have ALL in agreement to start to move forward , not me.

Again, I ask you..where is this large body of disagreeing scientists.....big conspiracy to shut them up you think?

Here are some more notable ones. They aren't alone. Those that disagree with the cash cow theory have been labelled "deniers (Holocaust reference)", "energy company whores" or worse.

List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Tempest - washingtonpost.com