Global Warming/Climate Change 2

[STEVE G]

If you're not going to rewrite greenhouse gas theory, C02 is the biggest problem, it's been understood for over a hundred years. If you're saying that the warming is caused by CFC's and not C02, you need a different version of physics. This isn't my idea, it's mainstream science.

[sargeant]

Just to put it in context i still believe CO2 emissions are a problem but carbon taxes are a fraud and even if CO2 emissions stopped tomorrow GW/CC and rising temps will continue due to the other three reasons i have continuously stated and have been studiously ignored

If you're saying that the warming is caused by CFC's

I am not saying it WIKIPEDIA does
And yes i am old and yes my short time memory is buggered i cant remember what i had for breakfast but my long term memory of newspapers and TV wall to wall on cfcs and the icecap melting sits fine with me

But the biggest fault of the GW argument is this indoctrinated dogma that it is solely due to CO2 and deforestation/urbanization has nothing to do with it which is so wrong its bordering on the insane

Let me shout it loud yes CO2 is a big problem but if you do not stop deforestation the only means with which to remove the CO2 from the atmosphere one is pissing into a gale.
With raging bush fires in the USA and Australia to say nothing of the Indonesia jungle burning how much do they add to the CO2 in the atmosphere i bet a lot but i will also lay a wager the GW fraternity will still put all the warming down to power stations and cars a total nonsense

The GW fraternity have been caught with their hands in the till they rigged the figures and have had to revise them down but still cannot answer how much of the revised figures are down to the loss of forest not being able to take up the excess of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere. At every turn they suddenly come up with pardon me if i say BS like deep ocean water temps when they have no idea how much heat is pumped into the ocean by geo thermal vents hell they dont even have a clue how many of them or even where they all are

It depresses me to see that this argument has become so polarized that its shoot the messenger before you have opened the envelope by both sides
Nobody wins because the real problem is shouted down or ignored by both sides and so we all become losers

[STEVE G]

Here is an interesting article about ozone depletion:

The Skeptics vs. the Ozone Hole
http://www.wunderground.com/resources/c ... eptics.asp

"DuPont, which made 1/4 of the world's CFCs, spent millions of dollars running full-page newspaper advertisements defending CFCs in 1975, claiming there was no proof that CFCs were harming the ozone layer. Chairman Scorer of DuPont commented that the ozone depletion theory was "a science fiction tale...a load of rubbish...utter nonsense." (Chemical Week, 16 July 1975)."

"The aerosol industry also launched a PR blitz, issuing a press release stating that the ozone destruction by CFCs was a theory, and not fact. This press release, and many other 'news stories' favorable to industry, were generated by the aerosol industry and printed by the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Fortune magazine, Business Week, and the London Observer (Blysky and Blysky, 1985). The symbol of Chicken Little claiming that "The sky is falling!" was used with great effect by the PR campaign, and appeared in various newspaper headlines."

[MrPlum]

Dupont stopped fighting when it was granted the patent for Freon's replacement.

According to this article, The Hole in the Ozone Layer was the trial run for AGW and the evidence behind it is just as shaky... http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/ ... gs_pi.html

[STEVE G]

Oreskes and Conway's book "Merchants of Doubt" describes how industries have used the same tactics, and many of the same people, to try and stop legislation against smoking, acid rain, ozone depletion and global warming.
In all four instances, the industries involved could easily have afforded to finance their own scientists to rapidly disprove any shaky science it is was there.

[sandemb]

On a lighter note - The increase in global warming is cause by Makkas burgers. Deforestation in Brazil where the majority of their beef comes from, excess cattle = excess cow farts = excess methane!

[sargeant]

Oreskes and Conway's book "Merchants of Doubt" describes how industries have used the same tactics, and many of the same people, to try and stop legislation against smoking, acid rain, ozone depletion and global warming.

Yes we all know that but the GW fraternity are NOT as pure as driven snow either because they are no longer interested in the true reasons for the GW/CC they have become so CO2 anti oil and coal that it has become an obsession and the real truth and what is really needed in the way of fixing it has been lost in the my link of bs is bigger bs than yours

I will say it again and again CO2 IS a problem but it is NOT the ONLY part

[MrPlum]

Oreskes and Conway's book "Merchants of Doubt" describes how industries have used the same tactics, and many of the same people, to try and stop legislation against smoking, acid rain, ozone depletion and global warming.

This is just a mirror-image of the merchants of alarmism and their tactics, which have destroyed public confidence in both their theory and the science. Forget the evidence. Just publish images of 'stranded' Polar bears.

Acid rain was supposed to see the ends of the forests. Ozone was going to make animals go blind. There's been so much ridiculous fear-mongering that all but the faithful are left believers. Too proud to say 'We've been had'.

In all four instances, the industries involved could easily have afforded to finance their own scientists to rapidly disprove any shaky science it is was there.

It is certainly shaky. The warming has stopped and even the strongest advocates can't provide a credible answer as to why.

[sargeant]

The warming has stopped and even the strongest advocates can't provide a credible answer as to why.

No it has not MrP it has just been over calculated at a time when cfcs played their part and now they are almost eradicated the rise in temps has slowed but and its a big but it is still rising

In black i agree i do not think in their blinkered CO2 fixated view they will be able to provide an adequate answer

I still believe CO2 is having a real effect but that is not the be all and end all of GW the tipping point has come and gone when the forests and nature could no longer soak up the CO2 and man has just continued to force a build up of excess CO2 compounded and increased year on year that wont be dealt with with a one idea one thought dogma driven remedy

[STEVE G]

As I explained before, the problem with fossil fuels is that they're releasing C02 that was sequested millions of years ago when the composition of the atmosphere was different to what it is now. I think that worldwide deforestation accounts for about 15% of C02 emmisions and fossil fuels 65% but many Western countries actually have more reforestation than deforestation so for them fossil fuels are the whole problem.

[sargeant]

I think that worldwide deforestation accounts for about 15% of C02 emmisions and fossil fuels 65%

You think but dont have a link or any credible source to quote

Forest fires /land clearing may add to the CO2 levels ONCE after that it is the deforestation that is no longer removing CO2 from the atmosphere which is the problem,and that goes back years on years ago and its that lack of forest to remove the CO2 which makes it a double whammy

15%+65%=80% and the other 20% is let me guess

[MrPlum]

'To The Horror Of Global Warming Alarmists, Global Cooling Is Here'
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrar ... g-is-here/

[STEVE G]

....its that lack of forest to remove the CO2 which makes it a double whammy

As I also explained before, mature forest is carbon neutral, for it not to be it would have to keep growing larger for ever and that is clearly not possible. All the carbon sequested in mature forest is released again when dead plant matter either rots away, gets eaten by insects or animals or burnt by natural forest fires.

[STEVE G]

'To The Horror Of Global Warming Alarmists, Global Cooling Is Here'
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrar ... g-is-here/

By Peter Ferrara of the Heartland Institute, the same people that were paid by Phillip Morris to convince everyone that smoking was safe!
Apparently Exxonmobil funded them by $800,000 in 2008.

[MrPlum]

Apparently Exxonmobil funded them by $800,000 in 2008.

The AGW camp is awash with money. Researchers receive $80 billion a year just from Obama. Do you think their objectives and findings aren't influenced by the need for future funding?

Forbes is a corporate rag. Like TIME magazine, ripe for propaganda. But I posted it with good reason. The article claims we are now entering a cooling phase, with several recent severe winters. Yet what do we find, a month later, in this piece?... http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/wor ... -too-small

'America also witnessed the hottest dozen years in recorded history happen within the last decade and a half, with 2012 ranked as the hottest ever in human history. Hundreds of cities all across America are witnessing record-breaking heat waves, recording temperatures never seen before in their recorded history. Backing up these trends, Science Magazine reported that the earth is warming much faster than we thought.'

What!??

So one predicts an Ice Age and the other the world burning up. How can the public make an informed decision when we are subjected to such totally opposite conclusions?