|
|
#61
02-06-2007, 04:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
variance explain how <150 years of observations and 10000s years of data from ice core models(even if this is accurate, its much too smooth to judge temperatures at 100 yr intervals) is enough to prove a <2 degree increase over 100 years is statistically signifigant. [/ QUOTE ] Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't true. 
|
|
#62
02-06-2007, 05:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
Global Warming: What needs to be done? Ignore it and wait 10-15 years until all the current theories about global warming are proven to be inaccurate. Rinse and repeat every 20 years or so. [/ QUOTE ] Amen Brother. I mean doesn't anyone remember the 70's? (No, everyone is young on this board.) Global Cooling was ALL the rage man. Newsweek article reprinted, but originally written circa 1975. http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060...2828-5298r.htm I love it. I'm already working on my documentary, Global Cooling, an Inconvenient Truth, by Maurice. Due out in theaters the summer (err winter) of 2045.
|
|
#63
02-06-2007, 05:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] best rational article on Global Warming newsweek [/ QUOTE ] I found this excerpt particularly interesting and would like to hear what someone like wacki makes of it: [ QUOTE ] Nothing Americans can do to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions will make a significant impact on the global climate while every 10 days China fires up a coal-fueled generating plant big enough to power San Diego. China will construct 2,200 new coal plants by 2030. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Only the coal stations that China is building have the technology to be later fitted with CO2 sequestration technology unlike older plants in USA.
|
|
#64
02-06-2007, 12:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
Bump because I don't like to gamble w/ my life. [/ QUOTE ] Avoid all automobile transportation. Orders of magnitude riskier.
|
|
#65
02-06-2007, 12:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] best rational article on Global Warming newsweek [/ QUOTE ] I found this excerpt particularly interesting and would like to hear what someone like wacki makes of it: [ QUOTE ] Nothing Americans can do to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions will make a significant impact on the global climate while every 10 days China fires up a coal-fueled generating plant big enough to power San Diego. China will construct 2,200 new coal plants by 2030. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Only the coal stations that China is building have the technology to be later fitted with CO2 sequestration technology unlike older plants in USA. [/ QUOTE ] I'm gonna speculate here that the Chinese government addresses ecological issues at about the time those issues are actually dropping Chinese dead. Until then, not so much. Google USSR model for insight.
|
|
#66
02-06-2007, 12:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] best rational article on Global Warming newsweek [/ QUOTE ] I found this excerpt particularly interesting and would like to hear what someone like wacki makes of it: [ QUOTE ] Nothing Americans can do to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions will make a significant impact on the global climate while every 10 days China fires up a coal-fueled generating plant big enough to power San Diego. China will construct 2,200 new coal plants by 2030. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] Only the coal stations that China is building have the technology to be later fitted with CO2 sequestration technology unlike older plants in USA. [/ QUOTE ] I'm gonna speculate here that the Chinese government addresses ecological issues at about the time those issues are actually dropping Chinese dead. Until then, not so much. Google USSR model for insight. [/ QUOTE ] see three gorges dam
|
|
#67
02-06-2007, 12:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] variance explain how <150 years of observations and 10000s years of data from ice core models(even if this is accurate, its much too smooth to judge temperatures at 100 yr intervals) is enough to prove a <2 degree increase over 100 years is statistically signifigant. [/ QUOTE ] Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't true. [/ QUOTE ] come on, explain.
|
|
#68
02-06-2007, 01:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] variance explain how <150 years of observations and 10000s years of data from ice core models(even if this is accurate, its much too smooth to judge temperatures at 100 yr intervals) is enough to prove a <2 degree increase over 100 years is statistically signifigant. [/ QUOTE ] Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't true. [/ QUOTE ] come on, explain. [/ QUOTE ] Just go look it up yourself. The evidence is strong and publicly available.
|
|
#69
02-06-2007, 01:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] variance explain how <150 years of observations and 10000s years of data from ice core models(even if this is accurate, its much too smooth to judge temperatures at 100 yr intervals) is enough to prove a <2 degree increase over 100 years is statistically signifigant. [/ QUOTE ] Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it isn't true. [/ QUOTE ] come on, explain. [/ QUOTE ] Just go look it up yourself. The evidence is strong and publicly available. [/ QUOTE ] i did. the evidence is 150 yrs of recorded temperatures and data modeled from ice cores. please show me what other evidence they are using.
|
|
#70
02-06-2007, 01:54 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Global Warming: What needs to be done?
[ QUOTE ]
i did. the evidence is 150 yrs of recorded temperatures and data modeled from ice cores. please show me what other evidence they are using. [/ QUOTE ] You're overlooking the data that explains that temperature increase over the last 50 years (give or take) is not only explained by the increase in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, but also that the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere now are attributable to human activities. The question is not whether or not the variations are statistically significant compare to past data. That argument would presume that their is some kind of independence between the past and the present that would allow one to conclude that current observations are observations of the same random variable that generated past temperature changes (i.e. it's "just happening"). The scientific evidence suggests that the current changes in temperature (dependent variable) are being triggered by changes in other factors (independent variables) and we know what those independent variables are. I know what you're saying and I encourage your skepticism, but you're clinging to skeptical views that have been shot down already.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
