In the Rush to Help - Global Warming - Page 23

**ryberg** · 11-12-2007

It is rather like what I've told my wife (only trying to reassure her) about her application for residency in the U.S. I've said, hey, look, in the end, we can provide ample evidence of you being part of a real and legitimate marriage to an American citizen for over a decade, and documentation from the US's own Dept of State to the effect that you're the mother along with me as the father of 3 American citizen children born over the span of that decade, and you don't have any bad history or criminal record or anything, and we do have sufficient funds which we can also document for them and so forth... Well, if CIS (Citizenship & Immigration Services) rejects you for residency, who are they ever going to accept???

In the global warming debate, however, we do have a side rejecting so much clear evidence being presented, and that latter question goes from being a rhetorical one to a serious one: what would people with this view ever accept? I mean, when thousands of scientists from all different countries in the biggest research and peer-reviewed effort in the planet's history all come up with the same conclusion... ?

The view of the evidence for this side is precisely what is pre-determined: if the evidence says that people must be causing the planet to heat up, then the people who are presenting that evidence must have been biased and/or mistaken during their research process.

Steve

PlayadelSoul · 11-12-2007

Its more akin to me having a church, whereby one of the membership requirements is that you believe in the existence of Christ. In return, I will make sure that you get a fair share of the money we collect on Sunday. If you waiver, you will be asked to leave and we will label you a heretic. Now, of course, every one of my church members is a strong believer in the existence of God, as I know him. Its a consensus.

**ryberg** · 11-12-2007

No, it's more like what I've told my wife, as it's about reason, not religious beliefs or the like.

If you don't want to see consensus on the issue, well you can see what you want to see; if you don't want to accept the notion of consensus and/or its significance in the framework of the scientific process, well you don't have to. That doesn't mean it isn't out there on this issue or doesn't have value.

It's also hard to imagine the attempt to maintain such a view in the face of even such conservative stalwarts as Newt Gingrich and resisters such as our current President no longer with you. But this is a practical matter, I realize. In any event, I wish you and your side luck in fighting this quixotic rearguard action, amigo!

Steve

Jacko · 11-12-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryberg

No, it's more like what I've told my wife, as it's about reason, not religious beliefs or the like.

If you don't want to see consensus on the issue, well you can see what you want to see; if you don't want to accept the notion of consensus and/or its significance in the framework of the scientific process, well you don't have to. That doesn't mean it isn't out there on this issue or doesn't have value.

It's also hard to imagine the attempt to maintain such a view in the face of even such conservative stalwarts as Newt Gingrich and resisters such as our current President no longer with you. But this is a practical matter, I realize. In any event, I wish you and your side luck in fighting this quixotic rearguard action, amigo!

Steve

And there it is.....

PlayadelSoul · 11-12-2007

Is there a consensus on the ideal temperature of the Earth? Are we above it or below it?

Jacko · 11-12-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by PlayadelSoul

Is there a consensus on the ideal temperature of the Earth? Are we above it or below it?

Its not about that...its about potentially avoidable, precipitous change...you should know this by now I would think?

Brent & Kim · 11-12-2007

The earths temp changing is unavoidable, whether we change our habits or not. I will do my part not to speed up the process.

PlayadelSoul · 11-12-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jacko

Its not about that...its about potentially avoidable, precipitous change...you should know this by now I would think?

So, I take it that the answer is "No."

We don't know what the ideal mean temperature is, but we will take drastic steps to make sure the temperature doesn't go up.

JEZ · 11-12-2007

Anyone read the new article on BBC today....

JEZ · 11-12-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEZ

Anyone read the new article on BBC today....

It effectively debunks in part or all of the myths including the medieval tempreture changes. Read it all there are some real gems from both sides of the arguement oops I meant to write diiscussion....

Sorry I haven't put in the link, I am crap at that stuff !

**ryberg** · 11-12-2007

Well it's probably safe to say there's a consensus among the people of the earth, without even polling them, that increasing flooding of coastal areas resulting from global warming, and the harm that would do to people and refugee situations it would create, would be undesirable, don't you think? I mean just to take one of many aspects involved in the issue as an example. It's kind of like asking if there's some sort of official and authorized world consensus on how many AIDS deaths are OK or how much war or famine is OK or whatever. Doesn't seem like you need to ask a lot on such points, to me...

Steve

PlayadelSoul · 11-12-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEZ

It effectively debunks in part or all of the myths including the medieval tempreture changes. Read it all there are some real gems from both sides of the arguement oops I meant to write diiscussion....

Sorry I haven't put in the link, I am crap at that stuff !

Here you go. I didn't see any debunking, however.
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Unravelling the sceptics

PlayadelSoul · 11-12-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryberg

Well it's probably safe to say there's a consensus among the people of the earth, without even polling them, that increasing flooding of coastal areas resulting from global warming, and the harm that would do to people and refugee situations it would create, would be undesirable, don't you think? I mean just to take one of many aspects involved in the issue as an example. It's kind of like asking if there's some sort of official and authorized world consensus on how many AIDS deaths are OK or how much war or famine is OK or whatever. Doesn't seem like you need to ask a lot on such points, to me...

Steve

What if 6 more inches of sea means millions more can eat? Its not as if the seas are going to rise tsunami style. We are talking decades, if not centuries.

Just Lucky · 11-12-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pok-a-tok

And at the same time the western world is promoting neoliberalism and "fair trade" so that poor countries can get access to our markets...

This kind of western protectionism is not the way to develop the world IMO.

Just to give a quick correction. Neo-liberalism believes in unrestrained corporate "free" trade. Fair trade is not something they favour. Wiki link

Pok-a-tok · 11-12-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

Just to give a quick correction. Neo-liberalism believes in unrestrained corporate "free" trade. Fair trade is not something they favour. Wiki link

Thanx JL. Your comment makes it easier to understand why the neoliberal
agenda is losing credibility around the world, I guess.

11-12-2007	#331 (permalink)
ryberg playa maya guy Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: wandering between the Village Vanguard, NYC, 1961 and the Plugged Nickel, Chicago, 1965 Posts: 10,841	It is rather like what I've told my wife (only trying to reassure her) about her application for residency in the U.S. I've said, hey, look, in the end, we can provide ample evidence of you being part of a real and legitimate marriage to an American citizen for over a decade, and documentation from the US's own Dept of State to the effect that you're the mother along with me as the father of 3 American citizen children born over the span of that decade, and you don't have any bad history or criminal record or anything, and we do have sufficient funds which we can also document for them and so forth... Well, if CIS (Citizenship & Immigration Services) rejects you for residency, who are they ever going to accept??? In the global warming debate, however, we do have a side rejecting so much clear evidence being presented, and that latter question goes from being a rhetorical one to a serious one: what would people with this view ever accept? I mean, when thousands of scientists from all different countries in the biggest research and peer-reviewed effort in the planet's history all come up with the same conclusion... ? The view of the evidence for this side is precisely what is pre-determined: if the evidence says that people must be causing the planet to heat up, then the people who are presenting that evidence must have been biased and/or mistaken during their research process. Steve Last edited by ryberg; 11-12-2007 at 04:01 PM.

11-12-2007	#333 (permalink)
ryberg playa maya guy Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: wandering between the Village Vanguard, NYC, 1961 and the Plugged Nickel, Chicago, 1965 Posts: 10,841	No, it's more like what I've told my wife, as it's about reason, not religious beliefs or the like. If you don't want to see consensus on the issue, well you can see what you want to see; if you don't want to accept the notion of consensus and/or its significance in the framework of the scientific process, well you don't have to. That doesn't mean it isn't out there on this issue or doesn't have value. It's also hard to imagine the attempt to maintain such a view in the face of even such conservative stalwarts as Newt Gingrich and resisters such as our current President no longer with you. But this is a practical matter, I realize. In any event, I wish you and your side luck in fighting this quixotic rearguard action, amigo! Steve Last edited by ryberg; 11-12-2007 at 04:13 PM.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

11-12-2007	#332 (permalink)
PlayadelSoul Registered User Join Date: May 2005 Location: We'll know when we get there, We'll find mercy Posts: 8,965	Its more akin to me having a church, whereby one of the membership requirements is that you believe in the existence of Christ. In return, I will make sure that you get a fair share of the money we collect on Sunday. If you waiver, you will be asked to leave and we will label you a heretic. Now, of course, every one of my church members is a strong believer in the existence of God, as I know him. Its a consensus.

11-12-2007	#335 (permalink)
PlayadelSoul Registered User Join Date: May 2005 Location: We'll know when we get there, We'll find mercy Posts: 8,965	Is there a consensus on the ideal temperature of the Earth? Are we above it or below it?

11-12-2007	#337 (permalink)
Brent & Kim añejo Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Rockford, IL Posts: 4,827	The earths temp changing is unavoidable, whether we change our habits or not. I will do my part not to speed up the process.

11-12-2007	#339 (permalink)
JEZ añejo Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: At the Beer Bucket, Playa Del Carmen Posts: 3,580	Anyone read the new article on BBC today....

11-12-2007	#341 (permalink)
ryberg playa maya guy Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: wandering between the Village Vanguard, NYC, 1961 and the Plugged Nickel, Chicago, 1965 Posts: 10,841	Well it's probably safe to say there's a consensus among the people of the earth, without even polling them, that increasing flooding of coastal areas resulting from global warming, and the harm that would do to people and refugee situations it would create, would be undesirable, don't you think? I mean just to take one of many aspects involved in the issue as an example. It's kind of like asking if there's some sort of official and authorized world consensus on how many AIDS deaths are OK or how much war or famine is OK or whatever. Doesn't seem like you need to ask a lot on such points, to me... Steve

register to remove these adverts