So what is it... global warming??? or climate change????

Heineken Helen

This is the usual media propoganda... global warming is man made and something we have inflicted on the planet generally. Once we start disputing this, suddenly we're told we must call it 'climate change' :?

So which is it? It reminds me of the whole 'Saddam did 9/11' / 'shit, did I say that? What I meant was he's a bad guy and should be killed', I find it quite funny how the media always contort things to suit their needs. It would be funny if people didn't believe it.

philthehip

I think its both to a degree. We have helped the process along but I dont feel we are totally to blame. This here earth has gone through many cycles. The scientists all around the world would not get anywhere near the support or funding if it was just a natural change that was innevitable. Maybe that should be a study for someone to figure out. Just how much we are not told to keep the budgets high.

Starfall

Climate change is a scientifically broader, more encompassing term for the phenomena we're seeing now. It's now accepted among the major independent, unbiased scientific bodies of the world that study this, that humans are the primary cause of it.

The accumulation of greenhouse gases will certainly cause warming of the atmosphere, but also cause unpredictable changes in climate throughout the world, not necessarily record heat waves, but also unseasonal and unparalleled cold, precipitation, and droughts.
So while the decade of the 2000s was the hottest on record, it was also punctuated by extreme cold in various regions of the world - witness the cold spells we're seeing across the country: we had one in New Orleans, even.

marcos

Whenever it gets really cold or really hot, you blame global warming, meaning I'm not too sure either but it's always good to lay the blame somewhere. But when it's warm in the winter I'm all for global warming. I'm older now and can't take the winters like I did when I was younger. I can't recover the same from drinking either, that actually might be global warming as well.

philthehip

Starfall's is a better answer, mine is too drunken

Heineken Helen

philthehip wrote:

I think its both to a degree. We have helped the process along but I dont feel we are totally to blame. This here earth has gone through many cycles. The scientists all around the world would not get anywhere near the support or funding if it was just a natural change that was innevitable. Maybe that should be a study for someone to figure out. Just how much we are not told to keep the budgets high.

But when scientists come out and say that global warming is fiction... they're called irresponsible, made a laughing stock and sacked... are scientists only worthwhile when they're saying what people want to hear?

In which case... surely science is unreliable?

Starfall

philthehip wrote:

Starfall's is a better answer, mine is too drunken

Since I'm stuck at work, I'll trade you a few pints for a less coherent answer any day.

philthehip

Heineken Helen wrote:

philthehip wrote:

I think its both to a degree. We have helped the process along but I dont feel we are totally to blame. This here earth has gone through many cycles. The scientists all around the world would not get anywhere near the support or funding if it was just a natural change that was innevitable. Maybe that should be a study for someone to figure out. Just how much we are not told to keep the budgets high.

But when scientists come out and say that global warming is fiction... they're called irresponsible, made a laughing stock and sacked... are scientists only worthwhile when they're saying what people want to hear?

In which case... surely science is unreliable?

I believe totally in science personally but looking at the planet and its history, there has been many changes. We certainly have had a huge impact as starfall rightly pointed out but I dont think its all us as I said. The problem is that money, power and politics are alot to do with the information we recieve and it makes the truth murky.

philthehip

Starfall wrote:

philthehip wrote:

Starfall's is a better answer, mine is too drunken

Since I'm stuck at work, I'll trade you a few pints for a less coherent answer any day.

Defo. You can have a pint anytime. Im always open for drinks with fellow PJ fans

Starfall

Heineken Helen wrote:

philthehip wrote:

I think its both to a degree. We have helped the process along but I dont feel we are totally to blame. This here earth has gone through many cycles. The scientists all around the world would not get anywhere near the support or funding if it was just a natural change that was innevitable. Maybe that should be a study for someone to figure out. Just how much we are not told to keep the budgets high.

But when scientists come out and say that global warming is fiction... they're called irresponsible, made a laughing stock and sacked... are scientists only worthwhile when they're saying what people want to hear?

In which case... surely science is unreliable?

They're made laughing stocks because the ones who are making such claims are:

1. Taking money from corporations with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.
2. They go to the media - in particular conservative media - instead of publishing their findings in the known peer-reviewed journals and studies, where they can be analyzed and subject to scrutiny by the experts in their field.

While for all we know they *might* be right - just as anyone who says that God is the cause of global warming might actually be right - this is NOT science. Science is eliminating the disproven, and constant scrutiny and testing of hypotheses, and even established Theory. For years, for instance, the Ptolemaic Solar System (earth centered) was considered the truth, and was fairly robust even, until Copernicus came along and established a better, more consistent model (sun centered), later borne by actual observations.

Imagine if such tactics were employed by the climate change deniers against, say, the Theory of Gravitation, we might see Richard Lindzen boldy proclaim on Sean Hannity's show that Newton was wrong, that the apple that dropped on his head didn't really do so, that it actually went upwards, or even sideways, but not straight down. Hannity applauds, parrots his talking points, meanwhile the real scientists at NASA and the American Geophysical Union are wondering how Lindzen gets away with this, when every experiment they've conducted has shown that the apple would go straight down to the earth.
Everyone with a measure of knowledge in the field would also laugh Lindzen out of existence, but they might be able to convince people into thinking, "hmm, maybe the apple did drop sideways".

And yet, that's what they're doing - muddying the waters to avoid honest science and discussion.

philthehip

In which case... surely science is unreliable?[/quote]

They're made laughing stocks because the ones who are making such claims are:

1. Taking money from corporations with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.
2. They go to the media - in particular conservative media - instead of publishing their findings in the known peer-reviewed journals and studies, where they can be analyzed and subject to scrutiny by the experts in their field.

While for all we know they *might* be right - just as anyone who says that God is the cause of global warming might actually be right - this is NOT science. Science is eliminating the disproven, and constant scrutiny and testing of hypotheses, and even established Theory. For years, for instance, the Ptolemaic Solar System (earth centered) was considered the truth, and was fairly robust even, until Copernicus came along and established a better, more consistent model (sun centered), later borne by actual observations.

Imagine if such tactics were employed by the climate change deniers against, say, the Theory of Gravitation, we might see Richard Lindzen boldy proclaim on Sean Hannity's show that Newton was wrong, that the apple that dropped on his head didn't really do so, that it actually went upwards, or even sideways, but not straight down. Everyone with a measure of knowledge in the field would also laugh him out of existence, but they might be able to convince people into thinking, "hmm, maybe the apple did drop sideways".

And yet, that's what they're doing - muddying the waters to avoid honest science and discussion.[/quote]

Your absoluely right, I read an article in new scientist a long time ago now about a scientist who claimed he went to the highest bidder with his findings because he knew he would never work again. He seemed very open and contrite from what he was saying but who ever really knows whats the truth when the water is muddied.

tybird

Starfall wrote:

Climate change is a scientifically broader, more encompassing term for the phenomena we're seeing now. It's now accepted among the major independent, unbiased scientific bodies of the world that study this, that humans are the primary cause of it.

The accumulation of greenhouse gases will certainly cause warming of the atmosphere, but also cause unpredictable changes in climate throughout the world, not necessarily record heat waves, but also unseasonal and unparalleled cold, precipitation, and droughts.
So while the decade of the 2000s was the hottest on record, it was also punctuated by extreme cold in various regions of the world - witness the cold spells we're seeing across the country: we had one in New Orleans, even.

What he said....climate change.

Shawshank

Thank God for global warming. It's 7-degrees here with the windchill. I can't imagine what it would be like if we had "normal" weather (which by the way, no one knows what "normal" is because we haven't taken readings long enough to establish a scientific basis.....just thought I'd throw that in there. )

Heineken Helen

Starfall wrote:

Heineken Helen wrote:

philthehip wrote:

I think its both to a degree. We have helped the process along but I dont feel we are totally to blame. This here earth has gone through many cycles. The scientists all around the world would not get anywhere near the support or funding if it was just a natural change that was innevitable. Maybe that should be a study for someone to figure out. Just how much we are not told to keep the budgets high.

But when scientists come out and say that global warming is fiction... they're called irresponsible, made a laughing stock and sacked... are scientists only worthwhile when they're saying what people want to hear?

In which case... surely science is unreliable?

They're made laughing stocks because the ones who are making such claims are:

1. Taking money from corporations with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.
2. They go to the media - in particular conservative media - instead of publishing their findings in the known peer-reviewed journals and studies, where they can be analyzed and subject to scrutiny by the experts in their field.

While for all we know they *might* be right - just as anyone who says that God is the cause of global warming might actually be right - this is NOT science. Science is eliminating the disproven, and constant scrutiny and testing of hypotheses, and even established Theory. For years, for instance, the Ptolemaic Solar System (earth centered) was considered the truth, and was fairly robust even, until Copernicus came along and established a better, more consistent model (sun centered), later borne by actual observations.

Imagine if such tactics were employed by the climate change deniers against, say, the Theory of Gravitation, we might see Richard Lindzen boldy proclaim on Sean Hannity's show that Newton was wrong, that the apple that dropped on his head didn't really do so, that it actually went upwards, or even sideways, but not straight down. Hannity applauds, parrots his talking points, meanwhile the real scientists at NASA and the American Geophysical Union are wondering how Lindzen gets away with this, when every experiment they've conducted has shown that the apple would go straight down to the earth.
Everyone with a measure of knowledge in the field would also laugh Lindzen out of existence, but they might be able to convince people into thinking, "hmm, maybe the apple did drop sideways".

And yet, that's what they're doing - muddying the waters to avoid honest science and discussion.

I think your comparisons are pretty dangerous... gravity, whether it's as science describes it or not, is simply common sense... cos we can SEE the apple dropped on his head. Global warming/climate change - well I'm all for cleaning up the planet and saving resources... I think most people are - could very simply be as nature intends it to be. There were always catostrophic events throughout history... what killed the dinosaurs? Was that man made too?

Commy

does it matter what we call it?



human beings are filthy animals and we are polluting this planet. we need to stop doing that. the end.

pearlballs

Global warming is NOT man-made!!!! The reason they changed it to climate change is because the planet is NOT warming and so that no matter what the temperatures are they can blame it on man. The polar bears are NOT dying, the ice caps are NOT melting! Grow up! The lie that man is causing the planet to warm up is only so the globalists can tax every human for everything they do. Cow farts for example is one of the global warming taxes. The whole cap n trade scam is only giving permission slips to pollute. I mean SELLING permission to pollute. So all these clowns idea to stop mans pollution is to make money off of it and do absolutely nothing to solve their made up crisis. And in case you don't know the facts: CO2 levels rise AFTER the rise in temperature! That is the exact opposite of Al Gore's LIE and ends the whole debate on whether man is causing a global warming. Quit watching mainstream media, all they do is lie. Look at how you're arguing about whether it's called global warming or climate change. That's what they want you arguing about while they keep hidden the real issues. It's the same as the fake fights they have between republicans and democrats, they're on the same team, WAKE UP! Global warming is set up for control and the carbon tax is to fund world government. To fund the New World Order.

satansbed

Heineken Helen wrote:

Starfall wrote:

They're made laughing stocks because the ones who are making such claims are:

1. Taking money from corporations with a vested interest in keeping the status quo.
2. They go to the media - in particular conservative media - instead of publishing their findings in the known peer-reviewed journals and studies, where they can be analyzed and subject to scrutiny by the experts in their field.

While for all we know they *might* be right - just as anyone who says that God is the cause of global warming might actually be right - this is NOT science. Science is eliminating the disproven, and constant scrutiny and testing of hypotheses, and even established Theory. For years, for instance, the Ptolemaic Solar System (earth centered) was considered the truth, and was fairly robust even, until Copernicus came along and established a better, more consistent model (sun centered), later borne by actual observations.

Imagine if such tactics were employed by the climate change deniers against, say, the Theory of Gravitation, we might see Richard Lindzen boldy proclaim on Sean Hannity's show that Newton was wrong, that the apple that dropped on his head didn't really do so, that it actually went upwards, or even sideways, but not straight down. Hannity applauds, parrots his talking points, meanwhile the real scientists at NASA and the American Geophysical Union are wondering how Lindzen gets away with this, when every experiment they've conducted has shown that the apple would go straight down to the earth.
Everyone with a measure of knowledge in the field would also laugh Lindzen out of existence, but they might be able to convince people into thinking, "hmm, maybe the apple did drop sideways".

And yet, that's what they're doing - muddying the waters to avoid honest science and discussion.

I think your comparisons are pretty dangerous... gravity, whether it's as science describes it or not, is simply common sense... cos we can SEE the apple dropped on his head. Global warming/climate change - well I'm all for cleaning up the planet and saving resources... I think most people are - could very simply be as nature intends it to be. There were always catostrophic events throughout history... what killed the dinosaurs? Was that man made too?

while its common sense that an apple falls that in itself doesn't prove gravity, it just gave newton the idea for gravity...

since industrialization co2 in the atmosphere has been increasing dramatically so it is bound to have an impact on the climate, whether or not that is the sole reason is beyond my knowledge of science...

however it is happening, the only thing that can really be disputed is how much of it is man's fault

haffajappa

They switched it to climate change because people couldn't get past their own obtuse reasoning that there's nothing wrong because it "doesn't feel warm today"

Personally I don't give a shit what its called, I hate the whole debate.
There's more than enough evidence - aside from the climate - that we're a reckless and irresponsible species.

haffajappa

pearlballs wrote:

Global warming is NOT man-made!!!! The reason they changed it to climate change is because the planet is NOT warming and so that no matter what the temperatures are they can blame it on man. The polar bears are NOT dying, the ice caps are NOT melting! Grow up! The lie that man is causing the planet to warm up is only so the globalists can tax every human for everything they do. Cow farts for example is one of the global warming taxes. The whole cap n trade scam is only giving permission slips to pollute. I mean SELLING permission to pollute. So all these clowns idea to stop mans pollution is to make money off of it and do absolutely nothing to solve their made up crisis. And in case you don't know the facts: CO2 levels rise AFTER the rise in temperature! That is the exact opposite of Al Gore's LIE and ends the whole debate on whether man is causing a global warming. Quit watching mainstream media, all they do is lie. Look at how you're arguing about whether it's called global warming or climate change. That's what they want you arguing about while they keep hidden the real issues. It's the same as the fake fights they have between republicans and democrats, they're on the same team, WAKE UP! Global warming is set up for control and the carbon tax is to fund world government. To fund the New World Order.

Yeah, the planet is just peachy. :roll:

pearlballs

It's natural, it's been happening since the beginning of time. 20 years ago CO2 was causing global cooling, now magically it's causing global warming and the sheeple just keep on marching to their drum of fear. The evidence for man-made global warming is a BIG LIE. Google "Climategate"!

CO2 RISES AFTER TEMPERATURE RISES. CO2 DOES CAUSE WARMER TEMPERATURE, WARMER TEMPERATURE CAUSES CO2 LEVELS TO RISE. Al Gore LIED! The paid scientists saying this are LYING! What is happening, has nothing to do with man. There are WAY WAY WAY more scientists saying that man-made global warming is a fraud, They're just not the ones put on TV.

And all the talking heads: Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, Olberman, Matthews Orielly, etc are all lying pieces of garbage who can't tell the truth or they'll lose their jobs.

polaris_x

it is both ...

climate change is the result of global warming ...

it's like saying someone has a fever but the cause of the fever is an infection ...

the reasons why there is confusion is because people rely on biased sources of information and are unable to think critically for themselves ... it's like - if it's really cold where you live, they automatically think global warming isn't happening ... so, sadly for those people who can't get over that - they had to use the term climate change ...

but the primary problem is global warming ... which in turn has many drastic effects from climate change to sea level rise, to loss of sea ice to destruction of ecosystems like coral, to a plethora of different things ... the earth has been running a fever for some time now and what we are experiencing now is the result of the emissions from 25-30 years ago ...

it's unfortunate that these issues have to be played out in the world of public opinion and that the influence of lobby groups and PR firms have such a big role ... but i suppose it's like anything else ...

dunkman

i don't know the answer to this but I do know you've used your annual quota of question marks in a thread title!

Jason P

dunkman wrote:

i don't know the answer to this but I do know you've used your annual quota of question marks in a thread title!

The answer is obvious. It's warming global change climate gate armageddon.

UpSideDown

haffajappa wrote:

They switched it to climate change because people couldn't get past their own obtuse reasoning that there's nothing wrong because it "doesn't feel warm today"

Personally I don't give a shit what its called, I hate the whole debate.
There's more than enough evidence - aside from the climate - that we're a reckless and irresponsible species.

I like this post.

People just going back and forth saying "I have more scientists than you!" is not a debate......

This issue falls under "undebatable" in my eyes.......trying to convice somebody will just result in frustration and going cross eyed.

eyedclaar

UpSideDown wrote:

I like this post.

People just going back and forth saying "I have more scientists than you!" is not a debate......

This issue falls under "undebatable" in my eyes.......trying to convice somebody will just result in frustration and going cross eyed.

I'd just as soon punch people in the throat as try to educate them anymore. Like someone suggesting our planet's ice isn't melting. How do you argue with that kind of ignorance? I'm not even talking about who or what is responsible, although I know full-well what is, but to deny something so obvious, I mean, I don't even know what to do with that... other than start punching.

I assume some clever bloke was just hiding all the ice sheets this last summer when I was in Glacier National Park. You know, the place where 5 or 6 glaciers still remain when there were over 150 of them when the park was founded. Yeah, the ice isn't melting.

pearlballs

What is responsible eyedclaar? Fill us all in! Are the polar bears dying also?

"The ice cap isn't melting anytime in this millennium or the next. It would be more rational to assume that it won't melt. There have been times in the past when the icecap was much less than now and further ice ages happen like clockwork in spite of the less albedo or reflected sun. There is a misinformation campaign going on trying to convince people that the arctic has never been this free of ice and it is some kind of positive feedback. They point to the melting ice in the arctic ocean that supposedly will decrease albedo and mean that the poles will soon be ice free. That is a distortion of the sea ice melting completely during the height of summer but algore is an idiot and he continues to spread that nonsense. What they disregard in their propaganda is that ice has been increasing the past few years and that increases albedo so the ice should be recovering by their own "logic". It is perfectly natural for the sea ice to vary and it isn't doing anything out of the ordinary. There was less ice in the 1920, 1950 and certainly much less ice 1000 years ago. That was all just natural variation and the arctic didn't change permanently. It is just activists taking advantage of a period in 1997 when the wind blew much of the ice out into the Atlantic. It has nothing to do with warming and the ice has recovered to normal."

haffajappa

pearlballs wrote:

What is responsible eyedclaar? Fill us all in! Are the polar bears dying also?

"The ice cap isn't melting anytime in this millennium or the next. It would be more rational to assume that it won't melt. There have been times in the past when the icecap was much less than now and further ice ages happen like clockwork in spite of the less albedo or reflected sun. There is a misinformation campaign going on trying to convince people that the arctic has never been this free of ice and it is some kind of positive feedback. They point to the melting ice in the arctic ocean that supposedly will decrease albedo and mean that the poles will soon be ice free. That is a distortion of the sea ice melting completely during the height of summer but algore is an idiot and he continues to spread that nonsense. What they disregard in their propaganda is that ice has been increasing the past few years and that increases albedo so the ice should be recovering by their own "logic". It is perfectly natural for the sea ice to vary and it isn't doing anything out of the ordinary. There was less ice in the 1920, 1950 and certainly much less ice 1000 years ago. That was all just natural variation and the arctic didn't change permanently. It is just activists taking advantage of a period in 1997 when the wind blew much of the ice out into the Atlantic. It has nothing to do with warming and the ice has recovered to normal."

Just curious, how is believing the naysayers any different than believing those that say man is the problem?
It seems people believe one or other... also curious where you have quoted the above from?

pearlballs

Follow the money! The "naysayers" have nothing to gain by denying man-made global warming. The man-made global warming liars are set to make billions. And they gain a lot of control over the planets population. It's also a fact that the earth has been cooling the last 15 (I think 15) years. No matter how many glaciers are left at glacier amusement park. Really all you have to do is look up. Look up "Maurice Strong", "climategate", and look up what the cap n trade scam is all about. To answer the original question, they changed it to climate change because we're in a period of global cooling so they wanted to be able to blame man either way to collect their carbon tax. And for the last time, and this is VERY important because it ends the debate on man-made warming and totally destroys Al Gores lies: CO2 levels rise AFTER temperature rises! It's a fraud!

Kraven

When it comes down it, I think it's human arrogance to ever believe that we could have a lasting impact on the planet, or to think that we could possibly ruin it. This planet was here long before us, went through more changes than we could ever fathom, and yet life went on.

I don't dispute climate change, or the fact that is because of humans. But in my opinion it's just mother natures way of trying to balance out all the stuff we are putting into the air. If she thinks that we should be wiped off the face of the planet, exterminated like the pests we are, then by all means she will do it. If you want the human race to survive for millions of years, like the dinosaurs, then yeah I would be a little more conservative about how much you are polluting.

Digital Twilight

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-F8EO3qOVk

Godfather.

here we go, Al Gore has the answers.

Godfather.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/02/ ... -warming/#