How could you NOT believe in global warming?

[Tradewind]

As I said above, the data does show an increase in global temperatures since collection was started, but it also shows a cooling trend in the past number of years. I'm not disputing that the earth is warmer now than it was before.

It's a cooling trend after 2000, which had a strong La Nina...as did 1997...

[Junkdepot]

Let's agree to disagree on the cause, but I think we both agree on the effect. All I know is I would like to actually see some snow on the ground as it all typically falls SOUTH of me now (I live north of New York City and they get more snow lately than I do).

[Cthulhu 2020]

Yes, because all our usernames are so very relevant to any discussion?

Your "source" took raw IPCC data and made its own (incredibly incorrect) interpretation of the data. IPCC itself agrees with CO2 induced GCC. Your random crappy blog site doesn't really hold much in the way of credibility. There are literally thousands of denial blogs out there and none of them have any real hard science, just misrepresentation/misinterpretation of the facts. There are many more sources of sound science that prove it's real though, the deniers just choose not to listen to real science and grasp at straws and misinterpret data.

So yes, you're a junk depot.

[Aalyy]

Let's agree to disagree on the cause, but I think we both agree on the effect. All I know is I would like to actually see some snow on the ground as it all typically falls SOUTH of me now (I live north of New York City and they get more snow lately than I do).

You can disagree on the cause but that opinion is worthless as it's based on junk. You admit you are seeing localized climate changes. The cause is important if we want to limit or mitigate it's effects.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Let's agree to disagree on the cause, but I think we both agree on the effect. All I know is I would like to actually see some snow on the ground as it all typically falls SOUTH of me now (I live north of New York City and they get more snow lately than I do).

Nobody is going to fault you for having an opinion. People will fault you for being wrong, but not for having an opinion.

The scientific consensus among climate experts (Read here if you don't understand the significance of a scientific consensus: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus ) is that GCC is real and human-induced by CO2 emissions. Source: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107

[Junkdepot]

Your "source" took raw IPCC data and made its own (incredibly incorrect) interpretation of the data. IPCC itself agrees with CO2 induced GCC. Your random crappy blog site doesn't really hold much in the way of credibility. There are literally thousands of denial blogs out there and none of them have any real hard science, just misrepresentation/misinterpretation of the facts. There are many more sources of sound science that prove it's real though, the deniers just choose not to listen to real science and grasp at straws and misinterpret data.

So yes, you're a junk depot.

And yet one more attack on my username...

Seriously though, did you bother to even look at the chart I posted or my resulting posts that fully recognize that the earth has gotten warmer since the data collection began? Or that the two data charts (from completely different sources) both show a period of cooling since the peak in 1997? The facts are the data, scientific interpretation of that data is subjective based on who's doing the interpretation.

[Aalyy]

I'm afraid you absolutely misunderstood my post.

My point was that a 21 y/o person saying "when I was smaller there was more snows!!! and the sky was more blue!" is neither sufficient nor scientific proof of global warming. If you disagree with that, I guess -you- should learn something and then come back to the debate.

Your original comment:

Your logic is so freaking flawed. I'm 18 and I don't remember ever having so much snow in December here where I live as we do now.

Neither do I remember a year like this one when there was 3 weeks of -20°C in a row, I remember well because we could never play hockey for so long on the pond.

Of course I don't remember my smallest years, but anyway, memory of an 18 / 21 year old person is not at all any kind of proof for the theory of global warming.

OK, I'm resisting the urge to get all "get off my lawn" on a whippersnapper such as yourself but maybe quoting the comment you were responding too could have helped to put into the context you intended. I still haven't found a post by you indicating you do correctly understand what "global warming" actually means. If I skipped over it, I apologize, and maybe you can post it to show me?

[Tradewind]

And yet one more attack on my username...

Seriously though, did you bother to even look at the chart I posted or my resulting posts that fully recognize that the earth has gotten warmer since the data collection began? Or that the two data charts (from completely different sources) both show a period of cooling since the peak in 1997? The facts are the data, scientific interpretation of that data is subjective based on who's doing the interpretation.

I'm going to say it for the third time now.

El Nino/La Nina...1997...2000...warmer periods...cooler after. Still upward trend overall.

[Junkdepot]

I'm going to say it for the third time now.

El Nino/La Nina...1997...2000...warmer periods...cooler after. Still upward trend overall.

Have I yet denied an upward trend? The earth warms, it cools, it warms, it cools. I'm not denying that.

[Tradewind]

Have I yet denied an upward trend? The earth warms, it cools, it warms, it cools. I'm not denying that.

You're using the "cooling" trend following those two specific time periods to debunk the idea of an overall warming trend or the sources that contribute to it. Despite them only being two larger instances of temperature growth in an otherwise 30+ year upward swing.

If that's not what you mean, here's a chance to actually explain it...

[Aalyy]

Seriously though, did you bother to even look at the chart I posted or my resulting posts that fully recognize that the earth has gotten warmer since the data collection began? Or that the two data charts (from completely different sources) both show a period of cooling since the peak in 1997? The facts are the data, scientific interpretation of that data is subjective based on who's doing the interpretation.

You are posting data that doesn't support the conclusions you are trying to draw. Yes, a pause in global warming is seen after an phenomena like El Nino in 1997. Yet the year right after it was the warmest on record in the 20th century. The same scientific methods that show an El Nino cooling effect are also those that show human activity is responsible for the overall warming trend.

Nature isn't linear. Ebbs and flows are to be expected. What science is concerned with is overall trends which are all increasing upwards. A pause in global warming doesn't contradict the scientific consensus that anthropogenic greenhouse gasses are responsible for the warming and resulting climate changes we are seeing.

[Hyve]

I doubt there are many people who deny Global Warming is happening, what I don't believe is the rate and effect we're having on it.

The globe has heated up, and cooled down millions of times in its billions of years of existence. It has survived meteor impacts, vast shifting of the tectonic plates and earthquakes, tsunamis & hurricanes that could wipe our the entire of our species in a matter of days.

Whatever impact we do have on our planet, it isn't earth that is going to have a problem with it, it is us. Millions of species of plants & animals have been and gone. I don't advocate the needless waste of our planet, but I don't think we're having such a dramatic effect as others believe. The planet will heal, move on and just continue. We've only got ourselves to worry about.

[Daelak]

I doubt there are many people who deny Global Warming is happening, what I don't believe is the rate and effect we're having on it.

The globe has heated up, and cooled down millions of times in its billions of years of existence. It has survived meteor impacts, vast shifting of the tectonic plates and earthquakes, tsunamis & hurricanes that could wipe our the entire of our species in a matter of days.

Whatever impact we do have on our planet, it isn't earth that is going to have a problem with it, it is us. Millions of species of plants & animals have been and gone. I don't advocate the needless waste of our planet, but I don't think we're having such a dramatic effect as others believe. The planet will heal, move on and just continue. We've only got ourselves to worry about.

Yes the Earth has sustained heat and ice ages and meteor strikes, but here is the kicker, NEVER in the Earth's history has CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere increased as fast as we have recorded and observed, EVER. The amount of time it took the Earth to have a CO2 concentration such as now and in the future, was a process that took literally tens of millions of years. Now it has only taken less than 2 centuries.

[Deadvolcanoes]

The globe has heated up, and cooled down millions of times in its billions of years of existence.

How do you know this information? How do you know the earth is billions of years old? Who gave you this information?

[Vayshan]

How do you know this information? How do you know the earth is billions of years old? Who gave you this information?

Science did! Core samples did! Actual, physical proof. As to the age of the Earth: layers of soil and carbon dating them. Not really hard to figure out or find information on...

[Deadvolcanoes]

Science did! Core samples did! Actual, physical proof. As to the age of the Earth: layers of soil and carbon dating them. Not really hard to figure out or find information on...

Ice cores are not physical proof of anything. It's just a big piece of ice.

What you need are field specific scientists to take the ice cores, apply science, and accrue data.

The point here is that he trusts scientists when they say the earth has cooled and warmed in the past, he trusts scientists when they say the earth is billions of years old, but when the very same scientists tell him that the evidence for human induced warming is almost undeniable, he refuses to believe.

Picking and choosing what to believe in.

[Bakis]

Yes, US and China, go fuck everyone else over with your egocentric retarded policies regarding polutions as you've done the past decades.
No wonder it will be hard to convince 3rd world countries now by saying "No, you simply cant polute like we did to get your prosperity".

Well, at least one is communist the other have a large portion of the elected candidates thinking the earth is a few thousands years old, what could possibly go wrong with stupidity.

[Deadvolcanoes]

Yes, US and China, go fuck everyone else over with your egocentric retarded policies regarding polutions as you've done the past decades.
No wonder it will be hard to convince 3rd world countries now by saying "No, you simply cant polute like we did to get your prosperity".

Well, at least one is communist the other have a large portion of the elected candidates thinking the earth is a few thousands years old, what could possibly go wrong with stupidity.

You're right. But there's probably a better way of saying that without sounding like such a fartwaffle. You're just inciting nation bashing.

[Wikiy]

Issues are in places like the Balkans where infrastructure is breaking down, thus water processing sometimes is not up to standards.

Odd that you say that, my country's tap water is of extremely good quality. I hear that, though, in the more developed European countries, even more in the US, tap water is actually undrinkable. Though I'm not quite sure whether you'd consider my country a Balkan one. I wouldn't, but then again, i guess I'm too biased.

There are still biologists who question evolution. Guess there's no consensus there yet.

With all due respect, biologists who question evolution are idiots that should be fired immediately and have their diplomas taken away.

Your logic is so freaking flawed. I'm 18 and I don't remember ever having so much snow in December here where I live as we do now.

Neither do I remember a year like this one when there was 3 weeks of -20°C in a row, I remember well because we could never play hockey for so long on the pond.

Of course I don't remember my smallest years, but anyway, memory of an 18 / 21 year old person is not at all any kind of proof for the theory of global warming.

Nor is it valid proof against it. And yes, I haven't experienced these kind of amounts of snow earlier either, but that means absolutely nothing. What's the point of your post anyways? 99% of the people who refer to their memories as any proof concerning anything that has to do with global warming are those that are actually trying to disprove it by saying nothing's really changed.

[Bakis]

You're right. But there's probably a better way of saying that without sounding like such a fartwaffle. You're just inciting nation bashing.

Actually im stating facts. Just look at this last summit.
Which two top poluters point their finger and say Fxxx Yxx into the face of the entire world?