Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Only it DOESN'T the models don't work PERIOD. Its garbage in garbage out, its not science, its a videogame.
|
Except for the fact that 'it' (global warming/climate change) whathaveyou is accepted by most climatologists as the most likely description of what is and will happen over the next century or so. Right now, I'm aware of no reputable agencies or groups that are both knowledgeable on matters related to climatology *and* deny that man-made climate change is a reality.
They could be wrong. But we should base our policies on the best available scientific evidence we have now, not on hoping it's wrong, or believing it's wrong based upon ideology.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Calling it climate change is a way to de-politicize the issue, but its a meaningless statement. The climate will change, and when it changes some places will be better off and some places worse off, perhaps they will grow fine wine in England again like the good old days. Its GOING to change, hell climate change is in part blamed for the fall of the Roman Empire, but the question is if WE are causing it.
|
"Human-influenced climate change" is probably the most accurate descriptive phrase. "Global warming" is also in a sense accurate, but gives laypeople the wrong impression, ie that "we're all going to burn up!" or that everywhere on earth is going to get hotter. The reality, as always, is much more nuanced.
Second, as you point out, climate has always changed, and, for as long as we've been around, we've been effected by it (usually in a negative way over the short term). For nearly as long, we've *affected* climate to one degree or another. Now, we're starting to be able to measure, study, and understand those changes. At the same time, the degree to which we're affecting our environment is increasing dramatically.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Angry man is angry, angry man went off on tangents which have nothing to do with what we were talking about.
|
Fair enough. Angry man is damned angry. And, while you may think it has nothing to do with what we're talking about, it's the same damn thing. People don't want to believe that we are causing climate change (or acid rain, or that they evolved from primates, or that the earth is round, etc), so they stick by their guns, no matter what evidence they're presented with. And I see it almost entirely associated with 'the right wing', whatever that is. It's unhealthy, and I'm tired of putting up with it politely.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
I'm an atheist with 2 biology degrees on top of my professional ones, if you want to rant about the Church Lady, do it elsewhere.
|
Fair enough. I don't particularly want to debate global warming (again), it's not going to go anywhere. But I see it as part and parcel of a much larger problem of denying science and evidence in favor of one's chosen ideology.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Lots of idiots are on the right, well lets get into powercrystals,
, 9/11 was done by GWB, PeTA, people talking about the spirit of the earth, and the like on the left.
|
Most of those bizarre beliefs aren't confined to 'the left', AFAIK - aside from perhaps the extreme behaviours of PeTA and 'GWB did it' as a branch of 9/11 conspiracy theories. They also don't have a dramatic effect on public policy like the anti-climate-change thing, various other anti-environmentalism things, or the anti-evolution thing. The truly harmful stuff seems (to me) to be mostly confined to the right.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
They are unimportant in this thread, as is your rant.
|
Another good point. I don't want to try to hijack your thread, but I did want to point out how I felt. Maybe sometime when I have more time and energy, I'll start a thread about which crazies are more widespread and harmful. For now, please accept my apologies if I've gone too far offtopic.