Great Barrier Reef "cooked" to death

[aquadreams]

I recently joined CF so just read through this entire thread. I have to say, Wow! Just Wow.

I'm surprised no one mentioned being able to sail through the Arctic and wanting to do that. I'm sure it will become a trendier topic, since the ice is melting at, oh, 13% per decade. But we're not sure if we should believe the data.


BIST: Browse Image Subset Tool

And while not wanting to attack anyone personally, I don't think I've seen a more selfish attitude ever than - to paraphrase - "screw my kids, their problem, not mine." Granted, not everyone likes their kids, but isn't this really about all our fellow humans?

Wishing you all well in the new year.

- Joe

[Juho]

The scientific community does not produce scientific facts by voting, but it does produce scientific facts by consensus. When say >95% of the scientific community agrees on something, after careful argumentation in line with the scientific method, then those results will be called scientific consensus, and eventually scientific truth. At some point in time we find that we agree that earth is round and e=mc^2 although we maybe didn't before. We seem to be somewhere at that level now with AGW. Also other theories can and shall be studied too, but it seems that there is a >95% consensus in the scientific community by now.

[conachair]

Originally Posted by Juho

The scientific community does not produce scientific facts by voting, but it does produce scientific facts by consensus. When say >95% of the scientific community agrees on something, after careful argumentation in line with the scientific method, then those results will be called scientific consensus, and eventually scientific truth. At some point in time we find that we agree that earth is round and e=mc^2 although we maybe didn't before. We seemt to be somewhere at that level now with AGW. Also other theories can and shall be studied too, but it seems that there is a >95% consensus in the scientific community by now.

Science may fantastically successful at working out what's going on in the real world but it counts for nothing regarding this one branch on Internet forums

(eg there was a snow shower in the Sahara, therefore the world's climate scientists have got it all wrong)

[chala]

Originally Posted by aquadreams

I recently joined CF so just read through this entire thread. I have to say, Wow! Just Wow.

I'm surprised no one mentioned being able to sail through the Arctic and wanting to do that. I'm sure it will become a trendier topic, since the ice is melting at, oh, 13% per decade. But we're not sure if we should believe the data.

In case you missed these one.

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...rs-158143.html

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ng-157085.html

[Nikolina]

"Al Gore could be short, evil and fond of child sacrifice."Al Gore have a screw loose"
Hey you guy's quit talking smack about Algore, you're making me go to my safe space...Goosfraba....Goosfraba

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Capt Phil

As one of the deplorable, shallow, ignorant dumb shits who still feel that unproven science is still unproven, I have long felt that caring for the environment is important but the fanatics who kneel to the alter of Al Gore have a screw loose.
There are many aboard here who have come to the party a little late and care little for those of us who have worked for many years in our own way to hold our own little worlds together.
The hysterical bleating of folks who swallow the political crap currently being peddled as the flavor of the moment need to get a grip and take a more measured and calm approach to the whole environmental issue. Phil

Brilliant! I couldn't agree more.

[jtsailjt]

And while not wanting to attack anyone personally, I don't think I've seen a more selfish attitude ever than - to paraphrase - "screw my kids, their problem, not mine." Granted, not everyone likes their kids, but isn't this really about all our fellow humans?

Wishing you all well in the new year.

- Joe

That does sound pretty selfish at first reading, but then you look at the reality of what is going on and you realize that there is absolutely NOTHING anyone who professes to be selflessly willing to sacrifice themselves to make the climate better for their kids can actually do to deliver on that sentiment. So maybe those who seem selfish in their attitude are merely being realistic? IF higher levels of CO is the culprit that the worriers claim it is, then it's already there in our atmosphere and we can't take it out and they've told us we've already passed the point of no return, so whatever effects it will yield on our climate is going to happen no matter what we do now.

But even though they say it's too late to avoid it, if man made climate change is going to be the catastrophe for our world that they claim it is and they really believe that, then you'd think that the worriers would be doing everything they possibly can on a personal level to stop it, and that would mean superinsulating their homes, throwing out their air conditioners, not driving gas powered vehicles or traveling on airliners. But we don't see that and instead see approximately an equal percentage of climate change "worriers" and "deniers" continuing on with all the nice little perks that our western lifestyle allows us to enjoy. When they start talking about carbon taxing others less and leading by example more, I suspect that more Americans will begin to take them a little more seriously. But for now, most Americans have the supposed harmful effects of climate change well down on their list of things to worry about.

[Lake-Effect]

Sure, let's give the wheel another spin.

Originally Posted by first wind

for one thing, the data collection that supports it is corrupted. that is a fact.

Nope

the present government supports the global warming shtick. there are only two ways scientists get money to be scientists and pay their bills: private industry/interests and government. if you work for oil companies, you had better take their side. if you work for government or 'green' industries, you had better say the sky is falling. you are not going to collect a paycheck if your expert opinion is in opposition to your employer's stance. science is not neutral and unbiased.

Nope

another thing, the sun goes through warm and cool phases. presently, it is in a warm phase. the entire solar system is warming up. think we caused that?

The entire solar system is not currently warming up

when mount st. helens blew up, the scientists said it released more pollution into the air than the human race has created since we have been here. over the centuries, how many other volcanoes have gone pop? they didn't turn the earth into a sauna any more that mount st. helens did. in comparison, how can we possibly have created global warming?

a link or two wouldn't hurt your case.

it has been pointed out by many scientists that the co2 levels increase after global temps rise. not before. rising co2 levels are caused by global warming. they don't cause it.

Nope

add to this that there are no good 'green' solutions for energy production. all have their problems. neither wind nor sun is dependable equally in all areas. wind generation kills lots of birds... birds like eagles that are on the endangered list.

Fossil fuel production and use kills waaay more birds than wind farms. Alternatives are still young technologies, but they are steadily improving.

nuclear power is a real no brainer. besides the environmental issues caused when SHTF, they generate tons of toxic waste that we do not know how to get rid of. there are butt loads of rusting steel drums full of the stuff at the bottom of the ocean. how's that for environmentally friendly energy?

(SHTF...hey, are you a prepper?)
While there have been some past problems and mistakes with nuclear energy, the current state of knowledge is much better than before... and per watt generated, nuclear is still alot safer and cleaner than energy from fossil fuels. (it's easy enough to prove this. Google away)

Not counting global warming, the extraction, processing, transport and use of fossil fuels have killed several orders of magnitude more people than nuclear power, and this includes all the big nuclear events like 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima.

i am not saying we don't have an impact. we do. look at all the trash everywhere and google hormone mimicking chemicals. what i am saying is that the evidence for human caused global warming just isn't very solid. in fact, since global temperatures have swept from one extreme to the other since the beginning and man was only here for a tiny bit of time, what actually constitutes 'normal' or 'abnormal' global temperatures?

There are other reasons besides AGW for not burning fossil fuels as fast as possible. Like not making such a mess, or making them last more than a couple of centuries, so that they'll be available for other uses like plastics, pharmaceuticals, lubricants...

the whole thing is a cash cow for 'green' industries and a great vote generator for certain types of politicians. vote for them because they will save the world from global warming.

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Brilliant! I couldn't agree more.

Theres nothing quite like starting the new year off with a big stinky (political) dump. On a sailing forum.

[buzzstar]

Originally Posted by aquadreams

...And while not wanting to attack anyone personally, I don't think I've seen a more selfish attitude ever than - to paraphrase - "screw my kids, their problem, not mine." Granted, not everyone likes their kids, but isn't this really about all our fellow humans?...

As to your non-intent, BULL. One of the major points of disagreement is the extent, if any, that a cause of what is supposedly being observed is man. Anthropogenic climate change (global warming if you prefer), aside from simple hubris, seems designed to create and obtain government grants and make certain politicians and former politicians rich, and while the changes may be useful no one seems to feel the money is having much effect, if any, that will be meaningful. I am still on the side of the earlier poster who suggested a human population of perhaps 500,000,000. I do not know if any would be my grand (or great, or great great, grand) children but it would work well for the living, and the human family.