15 ms·

Oh great, now we are back to "Global Warming". For years that label was not working because many areas were experiencing record low temperatures which kind of m

by SeanDav 12y ago

Oh great, now we are back to "Global Warming". For years that label was not working because many areas were experiencing record low temperatures which kind of made the "Global Warming" advocates all look a bit silly. Thus the term "Climate Change" was introduced because after all who can argue against the fact that the climate is changing! I am on the fence as far as "Global Warming" is concerned but even I must admit that the climate is changing - the fact that the climate has always changed and always will seems to be besides the point. Now we have a warm year and back we go to "Global Warming". Really hard sometimes to take these people seriously.

wnevets 12y ago
what? Are you saying you dont think on average the planet is becoming warmer?
- SeanDav 12y ago
  I am saying we do not know yet if the climate change is within normal parameters, and even what is the definition of "normal change". The earth has been much much warmer and much much cooler. What I find irritating is the rather poor science behind much of this (statistical modelling being presented as scientific proof for example), and government agendas and business interests are all clouding the picture. The UK government for example have raised a huge amount of tax on the back of these fears.
  - beat 12y ago
    I find the lack of numeracy in this criticism disconcerting. It's not just a question of whether the Earth has been historically warmer or cooler - it's a question of how quickly the Earth became significantly warmer or cooler. A temperature change over thousands of years is a tremendously different thing than a temperature change over a few decades, when it comes to how temperature-sensitive life forms respond. Moreover, it's not just a question of temperature. Changing CO2 levels are also measurably impacting ocean acidity, which affects extremely sensitive single-celled life forms at the root of the ocean's food chain.
Retra 12y ago
By "these people", you mean Justin Gillis of the New York Times? What do you care what the terminology is? Our climate doesn't really give a crap if you call it 'warming' or 'changing.' That has nothing to do with data. I don't think you could be missing the point more if you tried.
cholantesh 12y ago
>For years that label was not working because many areas were experiencing record low temperatures which kind of made the "Global Warming" advocates all look a bit silly. Demonstrably false. Both terms are equally old and their level of usage has not markedly changed over the years in scientific literature. >I am on the fence as far as "Global Warming" is concerned Not suprising; you're giving unwarranted credence to claims whose origins are fossil fuel lobbyists and spin doctors. The scientific community is practically unanimous about the reality of global warming.

by SeanDav 12y ago

wnevets 12y ago

what? Are you saying you dont think on average the planet is becoming warmer?

SeanDav 12y ago
I am saying we do not know yet if the climate change is within normal parameters, and even what is the definition of "normal change". The earth has been much much warmer and much much cooler. What I find irritating is the rather poor science behind much of this (statistical modelling being presented as scientific proof for example), and government agendas and business interests are all clouding the picture. The UK government for example have raised a huge amount of tax on the back of these fears.
- beat 12y ago
  I find the lack of numeracy in this criticism disconcerting. It's not just a question of whether the Earth has been historically warmer or cooler - it's a question of how quickly the Earth became significantly warmer or cooler. A temperature change over thousands of years is a tremendously different thing than a temperature change over a few decades, when it comes to how temperature-sensitive life forms respond. Moreover, it's not just a question of temperature. Changing CO2 levels are also measurably impacting ocean acidity, which affects extremely sensitive single-celled life forms at the root of the ocean's food chain.

Retra 12y ago

By "these people", you mean Justin Gillis of the New York Times? What do you care what the terminology is? Our climate doesn't really give a crap if you call it 'warming' or 'changing.' That has nothing to do with data. I don't think you could be missing the point more if you tried.

cholantesh 12y ago

>For years that label was not working because many areas were experiencing record low temperatures which kind of made the "Global Warming" advocates all look a bit silly. Demonstrably false. Both terms are equally old and their level of usage has not markedly changed over the years in scientific literature. >I am on the fence as far as "Global Warming" is concerned Not suprising; you're giving unwarranted credence to claims whose origins are fossil fuel lobbyists and spin doctors. The scientific community is practically unanimous about the reality of global warming.