4 ms·

All I meant with that point is that it's hard to get to the meat of the argument with so many clearly false statements flying around. I have yet to find any no

by russss 17y ago

All I meant with that point is that it's hard to get to the meat of the argument with so many clearly false statements flying around. I have yet to find any non-climatologists doing decent, unbiased, independent analysis of the climate change debate. As a scientist myself, this annoys me.

electromagnetic 17y ago
I've yet to see any decent, unbiased, independent analysis' of climate change from any side. I've yet to see a single climatologist tackle the Milankovitch cycles and argue that it won't be the greater cause of global warming. I've yet to hear any evidence to disprove the theory, but I've heard lots of evidence to prove it and more just keeps on coming out. So please, prey tell, why isn't insolation variations of over 20% causing global warming? Why is it the human emission of CO2 that is being attributed as the sole/major cause of global warming when it has been conclusively shown to have less than 1/10th the forcing effect of variations in the Milankovitch cycles? Please where is this magical heating coming from that CO2 is providing? Why is the hundreds of years of work on the Milankovitch cycles being wholly ignored by climate scientists? Perhaps because it clearly states that there's likely to be a short-term ~5C raise in global temperatures regardless of what we do. When climatologists actually acknowledge these facts, I'll then believe what they have to say. Until then everything I do to save energy, to recycle, everything is to help our physical environment and to prevent the export of our waste to third world countries that we're using as waste dumps for our hazardous materials. When climatologists acknowledge that regardless of what we do the planet will warm, and that it's in our best interest to prepare for these changes and not ignorantly claim we can defeat them, then I'll believe they're truly trying to help people and not make a cheap billion dollars at our expense.

by russss 17y ago

electromagnetic 17y ago

I've yet to see any decent, unbiased, independent analysis' of climate change from any side. I've yet to see a single climatologist tackle the Milankovitch cycles and argue that it won't be the greater cause of global warming. I've yet to hear any evidence to disprove the theory, but I've heard lots of evidence to prove it and more just keeps on coming out. So please, prey tell, why isn't insolation variations of over 20% causing global warming? Why is it the human emission of CO2 that is being attributed as the sole/major cause of global warming when it has been conclusively shown to have less than 1/10th the forcing effect of variations in the Milankovitch cycles? Please where is this magical heating coming from that CO2 is providing? Why is the hundreds of years of work on the Milankovitch cycles being wholly ignored by climate scientists? Perhaps because it clearly states that there's likely to be a short-term ~5C raise in global temperatures regardless of what we do. When climatologists actually acknowledge these facts, I'll then believe what they have to say. Until then everything I do to save energy, to recycle, everything is to help our physical environment and to prevent the export of our waste to third world countries that we're using as waste dumps for our hazardous materials. When climatologists acknowledge that regardless of what we do the planet will warm, and that it's in our best interest to prepare for these changes and not ignorantly claim we can defeat them, then I'll believe they're truly trying to help people and not make a cheap billion dollars at our expense.