Global warming survey

[Lucy]

I refer you to this thread and the wiki link I have posted there:

http://forums.contractoruk.com/threadnav12893-1-10.html

I am agnostic on the issue and will keep an open mind until I have understood more and reviewed the evidence for both sides. However I know from experience that this forum is not the place for reasoned debate, as most people have a hidden agenda

It is my understanding that the scientific consensus is that human beings are contributing to global warming by their activities. Perhaps I am wrong.

Science is not consensus

And wiki, is by and large, unreliable. I edit it for christ's sake !

[sasguru]

Science is not consensus

Really? Heard of Kuhn's paradigm shifts? That's when the consensus changes...

[Zippy]

It is my understanding that the scientific consensus is that human beings are contributing to global warming by their activities. Perhaps I am wrong.

Maybe you are wrong but I would say that humans and their activities are producing more and more pollution. If the doomsayers are right, this will lead to misery and hardship for all species. Maybe that is just evolution, but it seems to me that its happening real fast.

[DimPrawn]

In the 1970's all the evidence pointed to an inevitable ice age that was about to hit in 50 years.

It was ice age this, ice age that.

All total bulltulip backed by fantastic "scientific evidence".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

End of Little Ice Age
Beginning around 1850, the world's climate began warming again and the Little Ice Age may be said to have come to an end at that time. Some global warming skeptics believe that the Earth's climate is still recovering from the Little Ice Age and that human activity is not a decisive factor in present temperature trends. Recent warming over the last 50 years is generally believed to be caused primarily by the increased proportion of CO2 in the atmosphere caused by human activity (Even though there is little evidence to prove this). There is less agreement over the warming from 1850 to 1950.

[Lucy]

"However, consensus is far from unproblematic, and perceived consensus or its lack in a few aspects of a theory is often used to sway debate on matter of public policy and religious doctrine, such as global warming, intelligent design, the legal status of homosexuality, among others. Karl Popper suggested that all experimentation should be aimed at falsifiability, since its opposite, irrefutable proof, was an impossibility. Thomas Kuhn, writing about paradigm shfits and scientific revolutions, pointed to the human nature component in all scientific undertakings and assessments, and his assertion that sometimes the passage of time was the only sure way for one theory to be worn down by opposition and replaced by another. "

I'm cutting and pasting because I am tired and I don't think arguing with sas is a good use of my brainio.

[sasguru]

In the 1970's all the evidence pointed to an inevitable ice age that was about to hit in 50 years.

It was ice age this, ice age that.

All total bulltulip backed by fantastic "scientific evidence".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

can you read? It says on there thatthe theory never had much scientific support.

[sasguru]

"However, consensus is far from unproblematic, and perceived consensus or its lack in a few aspects of a theory is often used to sway debate on matter of public policy and religious doctrine, such as global warming, intelligent design, the legal status of homosexuality, among others. Karl Popper suggested that all experimentation should be aimed at falsifiability, since its opposite, irrefutable proof, was an impossibility. Thomas Kuhn, writing about paradigm shfits and scientific revolutions, pointed to the human nature component in all scientific undertakings and assessments, and his assertion that sometimes the passage of time was the only sure way for one theory to be worn down by opposition and replaced by another. "

I'm cutting and pasting because I am tired and I don't think arguing with sas is a good use of my brainio.

Well googled.
And the last comment is very patronizing
...and patently untrue

Notice they say "...perceived consensus or its lack in a few aspects of a theory is often used to sway debate on matter of public policy and religious doctrine.."

When most scientists agree on most aspects of a theory, the evidence for the assertion is usually stronger than the evidence against. I'm not saying this is true of global warming yet. I will look into it.

[DimPrawn]

sas mate.

If you want to believe the man made global warming myth, that's fine by me.

You can cheer loudly as Gordon Brown piles one "green" tax on after another, safe in the knowledge that he and the scientists funded by central government are in "consensus".

Then, if you live long enough, and the cycle starts turning back into a global cooling phase, you might reflect how, that tax money might have been better spent.

HTH

[sasguru]

sas mate.

If you want to believe the man made global warming myth, that's fine by me.

You can cheer loudly as Gordon Brown piles one "green" tax on after another, safe in the knowledge that he and the scientists funded by central government are in "consensus".

Then, if you live long enough, and the cycle starts turning back into a global cooling phase, you might reflect how. that tax money might have been spent.

HTH

You're clearlly more worried about the tax than the global warming. Personally I think even if if GW is true, a tax in the UK isn't going to fix it. But that's another issue, entirely.

[Lucy]

Well googled.
And the last comment is very patronizing
...and patently untrue

Patently ?

Yes, so many things are still being argued about - gravity, relativity, units of measurement, elements etc etc

Well we never patronise anyone here do we and, as I remember you didn't do well arguing the case for France the other day, now did you.

Also, science is not my special subject, my second favourite exBF ran off with a 'scientist'