Global Freezing!

[Sam Slater]

You're getting witty in your old age.

[mrmcfister]

Sam..the world is full of 'experts'.. sometimes I just take a view.If I'm wrong OK but Jeremy Clarkson resonates with me far more than some of the toady twats recently seen gmeplaying in Denmrk.

On another note this place is richer for your inputs even if you can be ...shall we say 'entrenched'?!

[Sam Slater]

[quote]Sam..the world is full of 'experts'.. sometimes I just take a view.[/quote]

That's all well and good when your opinion isn't dangerous to others, mm. I think that this is the most important thing. I'm sure if Mr. Clarkson refused to believe leaded paint was poisonous you wouldn't go and paint your new-born's cot with the stuff. You'd, quite sensibly, ignore his views (I hope!).

I'm curious to know what would change your mind regarding global warming - are you really just making your mind up based on what Jeremy says? The IPCC report of 2007 had 2500 scientists from 130 different countries all in agreement that there's over a 90% probability that the global warming we are seeing is man-made. Do you want 99% probability or 5000 scientists?It's a pretty overwhelming consensus.

[quote]If I'm wrong OK but Jeremy Clarkson resonates with me far more than some of the toady twats recently seen gmeplaying in Denmrk.[/quote]

If only it was 'If I'm wrong OK...'. If only.... Sadly a more accurate admission is 'If I'm wrong say goodbye to all complex life'. My mate down the pub resonates far more with me than a climatologist from Tonga but when talking of the climate I'll go with the scientist and keep my mate to just talk about football and tits. I think that sounds sensible.

[quote]On another note this place is richer for your inputs even if you can be ...shall we say 'entrenched'?![/quote]

Watch out, you'll be shot around here paying me the odd compliment. In all seriousness, though, mm, cheers.

[mrmcfister]

Sam,
I just hate hypocracy,double standards and charlatans.I saw them in spades in Copenhgen.Plus I accept that some of these people are ernest many more have different agendas.I am far from convinced by the science.Plus I feel that if this is really going to be a prioblem it will be so for my great great great great granchildren and hopefuly by then the science will be better...me ..I will be pushing up the dasies!

[Sam Slater]

If you're not convinced about the science now I don't think you ever will be, mm. You talk of hypocrisy, but as I've pointed out, the hypocrisy does seem to lie with a lot of deniers, who'll listen to the experts about dna evidence in murder/rape trials, and confidently trust the physics expert that organises the safety procedures and tests your car had to pass before you could buy it. You seem to only trust the experts when they say things you want to hear. It's an attitude all too common I'm afraid.

As for you pushing up the daisies.....there may be no more daisies left to push up if you hold out long enough! !sad!

[eroticartist]

JRPornstar,
This guy is always on the side of authority and he is always intransigent in his views. Notice that he dos not mention the 100 dissenting scientists but will play the numbers game, and indeed he thinks that he knows more about the cause of Global Warming than a 100 scientists. He is not a scientist himself though!
It does not matter how many scientists say one thing, or the opposite, but what is important is that they disagree, and the ones going along with official government policy get all the publicity, while the dissenting scientists views are suppressed.
Mike Freeman.

[eroticartist]

Sam Slater,
Well I've found a hundred scientists who are not convinced and they are dissenting so their point of view won't be publicised. There must be a lot more dissenting scientists out there but a hundreds enough for me!
Mike Freeman.

[Sam Slater]

You accused me of 'playing the numbers game' not so long ago, Mike. Don't you think it a little hypocritical of you to now use the number of scientists that disagree with the general consensus as something that gives credence to your own conclusions?

Again, 2500 scientists from 130 different countries have studied the available evidence and have all concluded that the global warming we've experienced over the past 100 years or so is mostly man-made and will be/is decremental to our current way of life.

If you look hard enough you can find plenty of creationist scientists who don't agree that chimpanzees are our closest relatives but we realise most have an agenda to push.

I'm not here to change your mind (though it would be beneficial if you did) but just to explain my views and why I think the way I do. I'm in the position of gambling with peoples' time and effort, you, on the other hand, are gambling with the planet and most of the life it supports. You seem ok with the gamble and I do not; I think the gamble dangerous and foolhardy, you either do not realise the gamble or don't care.

[eroticartist]

Sam Slater,
As usual you ignore the fact that at least 100 scientists who dissent that Global Warming is manmade and play the numbers game. What is important are the one's who disagree in spite of enormous political pressure to make them conform. Either you take notice of scientists or not because if you say that the dissenting one's opinions are irrelevant the analogy is that you don't trust scientists!

When I look at what scientists come up with I like to know who funded their research!

I don't agree either that homo sapiens descended from simians but that does not make me a creationist. Whoever created Homo Sapiens could have genetically engineered chimpanzees but no-one can prove it or that humans came from the apes because the link is missing and again we have a theory.
Mike Freeman.

[Sam Slater]

[quote]As usual you ignore the fact that at least 100 scientists who dissent that Global Warming is manmade and play the numbers game.[/quote]

I'm not ignoring the 100 scientists at all. It's quite usual to find dissenting views in most scientific theorems. It seems to be you ignoring my point about you being hypocritical. If I'm using the numbers game so are you.

[quote]What is important are the one's who disagree in spite of enormous political pressure to make them conform.[/quote]

This argument that political systems are somehow all scheming and plotting global warming just to tax us a little more is pretty far fetched. It costs more money to wean ourselves off carbon fuels than it does to stick with what we already know. Why do you think the biggest economic powers in the world (USA, India and China) don't want to give it up? I might also add that there are plenty of scientists from these countries within that IPCC report so if they themselves were being pressured politically then it would be to oppose man-made global warming.

[quote]Either you take notice of scientists or not because if you say that the dissenting one's opinions are irrelevant the analogy is that you don't trust scientists![/quote]

Lol. That's strange logic, Mike. So if you find one girl unattractive the conclusion is that you find all girls are unattractive? I don't think I need to add any more to this.

[quote]When I look at what scientists come up with I like to know who funded their research![/quote]

I could say the same for these 100 dissenters, Mike.

[quote]I don't agree either that homo sapiens descended from simians but that does not make me a creationist. Whoever created Homo Sapiens could have genetically engineered chimpanzees but no-one can prove it or that humans came from the apes because the link is missing and again we have a theory. [/quote]

You're not a creationist but you think humans have been created? Ok, you're not the sort of creationist we all know and fear but you are a creationist. And I don't understand why this 'creator' created us but then genetically engineered chimpanzees. The world already had other great apes like Gorillas and Orang-utans so why add another? Also, this creator of yours was having a laugh when he gave us our appendix wasn't he? What was going on there then? Did he just give us something needless that randomly kills us because he's a bit of a twat? If you ever see him/her/it you can ask how come human embryos develop gills, tails and all-over body hair at different stages in the womb and lose them all before birth. It seems a waste that the baby takes energy from it's mother to develop these things if they'll then never see the light of day. That's like a car designer adding wings onto a car during the production process but taking them off before it hits the showroom. It just costs more time and effort for nothing. What's the point?

I'm really not being frivolous here, Mike, but if you believe humans were created by some being and that chimps are genetically engineered (for no good reason I can think of) then you may as well believe in fairies and unicorns also. There's no more evidence for genetically engineered chimps as there is Hydra and Medusa.