rietrot
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2016
- Messages
- 44,716
- Reaction score
- 22,693
That's not what he said. Stuff travel through the vacuum and hits earth and has an affect. How does any particles get from the sun to us? Magic?
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How do you normally pay for purchases in stores?
Bombshell Claim: Scientists Find "Man-made Climate Change Doesn't Exist In Practice"
- Thread starter Gingerbeardman
- Start date
SaiyanZ
Executive Member
There's no such thing as a perfect vacuum, even in deep space. As soon as you have matter, you have have hotter or colder regions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum
John Tempus
Executive Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2017
- Messages
- 6,119
- Reaction score
- 5,625
Great news everyone.
Smoking is also suddenly good for your health. I was planning to stop smoking but now that I got this new information I will start to smoke twice as much.
Climate change is real. The only debate even among those who deny its affects is to question who causing climate change but both sides of the isle agree climate is changing.
One the one side you have the vast majority pointing out the human element as big increasing contributor and on the other side it is argued that climate change is all just natural process (partially correct).
There is no disputing the ice core scientific results that shows since the human industrial age kicked off there was an exponential increase in global warming. No one is disputing these findings either and even the side that says humans are not to be blamed for climate change is arguing that this exponential global warming is a natural process.
So take from it what you want. To me the facts are in, the parabolic uptrend found in the ice cores is clearly evident that since the industrial age and the use of oil by humans and not some random other animal , global warming have been sped up.
Smoking is also suddenly good for your health. I was planning to stop smoking but now that I got this new information I will start to smoke twice as much.
Climate change is real. The only debate even among those who deny its affects is to question who causing climate change but both sides of the isle agree climate is changing.
One the one side you have the vast majority pointing out the human element as big increasing contributor and on the other side it is argued that climate change is all just natural process (partially correct).
There is no disputing the ice core scientific results that shows since the human industrial age kicked off there was an exponential increase in global warming. No one is disputing these findings either and even the side that says humans are not to be blamed for climate change is arguing that this exponential global warming is a natural process.
So take from it what you want. To me the facts are in, the parabolic uptrend found in the ice cores is clearly evident that since the industrial age and the use of oil by humans and not some random other animal , global warming have been sped up.
Last edited:
Gordon_R
Honorary Master
You can't win this discussion. The denialists are smart enough to find references that contradict you, but not smart enough to realise that these do not bolster their argument.
Technically true, but also absolutely nothing to do with earth weather. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_space#Interplanetary_space
SaiyanZ
Executive Member
What am I supposed to be reading there? Read it and it has nothing to do with your post? Is this a joke?
Yes and what concentration of particles do you need to cause any measurable change in temperature?
quovadis
Honorary Master
SaiyanZ
Executive Member
It's in that link that Gordon posted.
Different densities of material can also block more or less light/heat. Space in the solar system is generally more dense than space between stars in the galaxy which is generally more dense than space between galaxies. There are anomalies like clusters of gas clouds which could cause less light/heat to reach earth if the solar system happened to pass through one.
SaiyanZ
Executive Member
The data/chart in there only spans 800k years. I don't deny climate change for the last 800k years but the chart is incomplete without the other 4.6billion years.
It's so extreme, it's like looking at the Bitcoin price chart for the last 10 hours and ignoring the 10 years before it.
Last edited:
Moto Guzzi
Expert Member
"Global Warming" etc has come in sync with power struggles for control of the world, I trust very little and all of these are very difficult to prove sustainably and securely, to me in any case. The world has changed a lot over many years all by itself, by nature itself. All that man made actually comes from the earth itself that includes everything, in the mean time its discussed as if we bring in chemicals from outer space and smother the earth with it ,... && as we speak space is littred with rocket stuff.
It seems that those promoting wind farm energy, really believe the wind will be predictable and usable fo the future where they install these power plants, so they at least dont expect that much changes, so where do they get their science-?
The thing is about polution perspective:Now if you overpopulate, overcook an area, you will see polution, and if you poorly design and maintain, you will see polution of various sorts.
The earth down below seems not done yet either, looking at earthquakes and lawa outbursts.
I wish Polititians and Scientists could live to age of 500 years, so they cover more than 5 generations and can experience their own doings, we just die to quickly, and seeing everything id digital to be, just one good surge wipe out of nature and the history is gone in any case.
Last edited:
And you are just being a twat as shown.
Gordon_R
Honorary Master
Yet you discard sources such as nature. You're just the classic bogus skeptic.
Arthur
Honorary Master
Bombshell Claim: Scientists Find "Man-made Climate Change Doesn't Exist In Practice"
I'm devastated.
I'm devastated.
Gingerbeardman
Executive Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2018
- Messages
- 5,472
- Reaction score
- 1,174
NarrowBandFtw
Honorary Master
You expect to find a mainstream source carrying a story that contradicts the mainstream narrative?
Have you thought that through?
Gordon_R
Honorary Master
You may be late to the discussion, and must have missed my point. The OP takes two dodgy sources, and conflates them with a genuine Nature story which has nothing to do with the topic at hand, to create veneer of credibility.
This is typical of denialists, throw in just enough facts to make it seem plausible, but leaving huge logic gaps in the argument.
I am neither a skeptic nor bogus, but have learned (over many decades) to poke holes in fallacies, and disregard those with an obvious agenda.
That was all clear to me within seconds of the OP, and my first post reflects this. Everything after that is a tedious attempt to deal with multiple trolls.
Sl8er
Executive Member
Instead of waiting for mainstream sources, ever thought about getting into touch with one of the **scientists actually doing the work, Dr. Brian Tinsley?
Here are his contact details:
I posted his publications earlier on in the thread -which conveniently got ignored or overlooked.
Here's the link to his publications / involvement, once more, in case you missed it:
https://profiles.utdallas.edu/brian.tinsley
** Not just one of the "jump-on-the-bandwagon-97-percenters"
I assume this is something that interests you quite a bit, so if you do contact him (and if he replies) please post how it went, here -or if you create a new thread, post the link here, please.
(I'd be hella curious to find out how it went
)
Gordon_R
Honorary Master
Science is self correcting, over long timescales. The theory of Plate Tectonics is a classic example of that. First speculated when maps of South America and Africa showed similar coastlines, then proposed by Wegener around 1920 and supported on geological grounds by South African Alex du Toit. It was ridiculed by mainstream geologists due to lack of a plausible mechanism. Only in the 1960s with sonar surveys, magnetic surveys, earthquakes and deep-sea drilling was it established that the mid-Atlantic was a magma spreading center. This clear proof turned it from a hypothesis into a universally accepted theory.
I use this off-topic example of how science should work. IMO the theory in the OP does not pass muster on these grounds. Postulating all kinds of correlations does not prove anything, in the absence of measurable mechanisms. Today there are hundreds of satellites in orbit, continuously tracking everything from sunspots, solar storms, cosmic rays, clouds, sandstorms, sea-surface temperatures, winds, trace-gases, etc.
To now say that one crackpot mechanism disproves decades of climate science, as the OP and thread title imply, is preposterous.
Gordon_R
Honorary Master
Instead of waiting for mainstream sources, ever thought about getting into touch with one of the **scientists actually doing the work, Dr. Brian Tinsley?
Here are his contact details:
I posted his publications earlier on in the thread -which conveniently got ignored or overlooked.
Here's the link to his publications / involvement, once more, in case you missed it:
https://profiles.utdallas.edu/brian.tinsley
** Not just one of the "jump-on-the-bandwagon-97-percenters"
I assume this is something that interests you quite a bit, so if you do contact him (and if he replies) please post how it went, here -or if you create a new thread, post the link here, please.
(I'd be hella curious to find out how it went
You want me to contact a crackpot scientist and engage in a discussion on a theory he has been promoting for six decades. How much time do you think I have to waste?
Many eminent scientists with great credentials come up with ridiculous theories. The most prominent example is Linus Pauling, who won two separate Nobel Prizes. His pet theory was that Vitamin C is a cure for the common cold (or cancer, I forget which). How does that theory seem to be holding up.
In any case this has nothing to do with the original topic. See my last post.