Global Warming

[TheCoolinator]

The Forum on Physics and Society is a place for discussion and disagreement on scientific and policy matters. Our newsletter publishes a combination of non- peer- reviewed technical articles, policy analyses, and opinion. All articles and editorials published in the newsletter solely represent the views of their authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Forum Executive Committee.



The FPS Executive Committee strongly endorses the position of the APS Council that "Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate." The statement in the July 2008 edition of our newsletter, Physics and Society that, "There is considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution" does not represent the views of the Executive Committee of the Forum on Physics and Society.

Here again...is the FULL quote.

You guys are clinging to sand here. Your seeing what you want to see.

Not only was it not peer reviewed, but the people who published it take an aside to let the reader know that they officially agree with anthropogenic climate change.

lol, I wonder who's paying their bills.....

Ok, Now its time to show me why Global Warming is real.

Proceed.

[VaporTrailx1]

CO2 levels have been much, much higher throughout Earth's history although I wouldn't really count the pre-Carbiniferous levels since it was a vastly different ecosystem(ie. not much land vegetation). But throughout the Mesozoic, it was much higher than today.


Just as a side note. There seems to be a correlation between points where the temperature rebounds after a lowpoint and mass extinctions. for Example Ordivician/Silurian extinction, and the end Permian. There's no real good parallel to our current period btw. The Permian was in terms of Temperature levels, but there was pretty much one giant continent and one giant ocean, so it was vastly diferent other than that.

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by VaporTrailx1

CO2 levels have been much, much higher throughout Earth's history although I wouldn't really count the pre-Carbiniferous levels since it was a vastly different ecosystem(ie. not much land vegetation). But throughout the Mesozoic, it was much higher than today.


Just as a side note. There seems to be a correlation between points where the temperature rebounds after a lowpoint and mass extinctions. for Example Ordivician/Silurian extinction, and the end Permian.

Ironically I was just re-reading one of the articles that I previously posted and they were saying the same exact thing.

Here is the quote.

8. New research on our gasses


AT least four new papers by top scientists cast doubt on the IPCC claim that our carbon dioxide emissions are strongly linked to global warming.


One, published in Nature, shows the world had ice age activity even when atmospheric CO2 was four times the level of our pre-industrial times.


Another, by NASA medallist John Christy and David Douglass, shows global temperatures did not go up as much as expected from man-made emissions over the past three decades.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/...-1225823736564

[The Leader]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

You guys are clinging to sand here. Your seeing what you want to see.

Are you serious? You can't provide any evidence that there is no global warming, you ignore the fact that none of the articles you linked to claim that there is no global warming, only the sites that you found those articles linked from claimed that. Do you actually realize that you don't know what you're talking about or do you actually believe that you are correct, or rather that the sites where you get your opinions are correct?

Ask yourself this, have you ever actually read any of the papers or reports about global warming or have you only read conspiracy websites? Obviously you haven't because you evidently don't know anything about what has been found out about global climate change.

You aren't even voicing your own opinion, you're only regurgitating what the websites you look at say. You think that you're being targeted because you are thinking outside the box but you're not. You're being targeted because you evidently can't think outside of the box. You are unable to accept any information presented to you that is contrary to what you believe.

Prior to you joining these forums I had no opinion in regards to global warming/climate change, whether it was real or fictional etc, but after having read your comments and seen what kind of indoctrinated, unthinking, close minded individual you are when it comes to this issue I am beginning to think that there is in fact science behind global warming. Supafly has stated that he was a skeptic until he actually read into the theory. Someone who is able to actually asses the views of their opposition is a thinking person. You are not, evidently, and I am sure that you will read this and in your holier than thou mode of thought will think me a follower, duped by mass opinion, but I am not. I am not influenced by the opinions of the masses but rather by the opinion of one and their complete, needless detachment from reality.