Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
The Great Global Warming Swindle
Log In to post a reply

90 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
Merrick
Merrick
2148 posts

Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle
Mar 09, 2007, 11:27
DarkMagus, I love how last time you did climate denial you said brusquely that it wasn't that you didn't believe in anthropogenic climate change, just that because the theory couldn't be conclusively proven it was therefore nonsense like believing in the tooth fairy.
http://www.headheritage.co.uk/headtohead/u_know/topic/32192/threaded/404954

It's funny how now you can tell us that far from being fools for thinking we can understand it, climate science is actually 'very simple'. As long as it is against anthropogenic climate change.

Just like the people on the programme last night. People like Professor Philip Stott. I've read every peer-reviewed paper he's written on climate change. So have you. That's because there aren't any.

Saying climate change is part of a darker misanthropic shady agenda of environmentalists, as if people like Stott doesn't have his anti-recycling, pro-GM, stance! Funny how he ignored uncertainties with GM yet sings them from the rooftops with anthropogenic climate change.

Patrick Moore, ex-Greenpeace, these days a stout defender of biotechnology, logging and mining firms, saying it's just environmentalists who think all humans are scum. Ranking sustainability over profit makes me scum, but logging Canada's old growth forests makes you so nice and cuddly, eh Patrick?

Yes, there were some of the climatologists on the IPCC who fundamentally disagreed with the findings. They have spoken out against it and withdrawn from future research. There are also scientists who say the IPCC is too conservative, that in trying to amalgamate all the opinions of the experts who contribute it waters it down. Over 98% agree with the findings.

Hey, less than 2% of climatologists can't be wrong, right?

But CO2 isn't much of the atmosphere! We're all made of carbon, it's not bad! And anyway, oceans and decaying vegetation give off more than fossil fuels!

The question isn't whether CO2's in the atmosphere, whether it's a cartoon good guy or bad guy. The issue is what happens when you start messing with the proportion. Vegetation's CO2 was recently absorbed from the atmosphere, it's part of the carbon cycle; fossils add more to the cycle.

There's nothing in earth's history that shows CO2 ever affecting temperature!

The end of the Permian period, 250 million years ago. There were volcanic eruptions that put vast quantities of CO2 and sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere. It caused a global temperature increase of 6 degrees in a very short space of time.

But two crap solar panels weren't enough to power a clinic!

That's not an argument for fossil fuels; it's an argument for more, better and mixed sources of sustainable power.

Global cooling was wrong so global warming must be too!

Yes, that's right; if someone's ever been wrong on a climate prediction then all predictions by anyone must forever be wrong. (And the theory behind the industrial emissions cooling idea seems to have been correct, it's just that it's more than outweighed by the warming factors).
Topic Outline:

U-Know! Forum Index