I don’t know about you, but as far as I’m concerned, the notion that humans are the primary reason for global warming seems nuts to me. I don’t deny that humans may have had some impact on it, but it is my view that global warming is part of a larger warming and cooling cycle of the planet, one that has been going on for a lot longer than we have been recording weather phenomena.
Now it seems the sun may be responsible for global warming [1], as Mars is apparently experiencing a similar warming to Earth. It seems logical that the one object which prevents this planet from freezing would be responsible for it getting hotter and colder…there has to be a reason for the ice age, and one can only assume that the earth is warmer now than it was during that ice age, so it seems reasonable that it would continue to do so, and then eventually move back towards an ice age.
Perhaps it is time that we, as a race (or indeed a species), stop pretending that we are almighty and powerful and can cause things which have been happening for thousands, if not millions, of years. We may have some influence, but the majority of the issue is surely out of our control.
Samuel
Comments Disabled To "Sense on Global Warming"
#1 Comment By John_Barnes On March 5, 2007 @ 8:50 am
Hmmmm ….. careful Samuel, you might be accused of being a
“greenhouse gas denier” , haha.
Fortunately, it’s not a crime in this country – yet.
Trendy terms in use at the moment include –
Greenhouse gases
Global warming
Carbon credits
Walk, don’t drive
#2 Comment By seepi On March 5, 2007 @ 5:32 pm
Replacing forests with factories cannot be good for the Earth.
#3 Comment By Samuel On March 5, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
Also true.
#4 Comment By Bearded Clam On March 5, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
What if they were forbidden forests?
#5 Comment By Jey On March 6, 2007 @ 6:47 am
Or spooky forests?
#6 Comment By John B1_B5 On March 9, 2007 @ 9:04 am
I heard some ‘expert’ on the radio a few days ago, claiming that
global warming being caused by greenhouse gases was a “load
of bollocks”.
Naturally Al (‘It’s my party and I’ll cry if I want to’ ) Gore wouldn’t
agree with that. ( Not related to Leslie Gore).
#7 Comment By Hans Fruck On March 9, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
What really seems nuts to me, Samuel, is that despite the vast preponderance of scientific opinion telling you that global warming is taking place, you choose to ignore it.
Yes, it’s always possible, if you search hard enough, to find contrarians who will go against scientific consensus — and it’s even easier to find naysayers who are funded by Big Oil. I simply don’t understand why you’re so prepared to swallow whole the opinions of the (very small) scientific minority, yet blithely discount the opinions of all the other experts.
Your post is glib and dismissive. I can only assume it’s the result of willful ideological blindness.
#8 Comment By Hans Fruck On March 9, 2007 @ 12:48 pm
BTW, I followed your link. You do realise that climatologists — you know, people who actually study the climate, as opposed to doing space research — dispute your man’s claims? How can you claim this as evidence of your theories?
If you want a survey of the current state of climatologist opinion, try this: [2]
It might be fun to buttress your opinions with facts. Try it and find out.
PS: John, your Gore jibes are infantile. The entire world is currently paying the price of Gore’s scandalous defeat in 2000 at the hands of the US Supreme Court.
#9 Comment By Samuel On March 9, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
Scientists are proved wrong all the time…you do remember that it was once widely believed that the earth was the centre of the universe don’t you?
Just because I’m not an all knowing scientist doesn’t mean I can’t be right.
And you are right about one thing, I choose not to believe the overwhelming scientific evidence about global warming. I’m also in the minority of people who aren’t convinced that the footage of the initial (and subsequent) moon landings are real…maybe we went there, but I just don’t believe that the footage is real.
Dismiss me as a raving nutcase if you will.
#10 Comment By John B1_B5 On March 9, 2007 @ 1:06 pm
That should be Lesley Gore, not ‘Leslie’.
#11 Comment By Hans Fruck On March 9, 2007 @ 1:11 pm
If you think any helpful parallel can be drawn between pre-Copernican “science” and the current debate, then you’re mistaken. Yes, scientists, even a majority of scientists, have been wrong before and will be wrong again. But, unlike you, I don’t use this as a pretext to dismiss whatever science I find unpalatable.
The pertinent point is why you place such faith in the scientific fringe when there is far more evidence to support the view of the vast majority. To me, this doesn’t seem like a case of you weighing the evidence in good faith, then coming to a conclusion. Rather, it’s a case of you seizing on any argument that fits your preconceptions and your ideological orientation.
You are duly dismissed.
#12 Comment By Samuel On March 9, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
Thank you for your dismissal…I will continue to exercise my right to an ill-formed opinion.
#13 Comment By Hans Fruck On March 9, 2007 @ 1:25 pm
Of course, you’re entitled to your opinion, Samuel. But why settle for an “ill-formed” one?
Resolve in the service of uninformed opinions is resolve wasted.
#14 Comment By John B1_B5 On March 9, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
Al Gore’s grossly over-exaggerated (and unproven) documentary
has unduly upset and scared a lot of people.
#15 Comment By Samuel On March 9, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
Because I have held the opinion for a long time, and the only reason I call it ill-formed is because the evidence to support it is flimsy. I believe it, so I think you answered the question earlier when you referred to it as an “ideological orientation”.
#16 Comment By Hans Fruck On March 9, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
And what exaggerations are they, John?
#17 Comment By John B1_B5 On March 9, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
That the main cause of global warming is caused by ‘greenhouse
gases’.
Gore showed some extracts of his documentary on the Oprah
show, and there were gasps of anguish and sheer terror from
the audience.
One woman even fainted !
The man is a scaremongerer.
#18 Comment By John B1_B5 On March 9, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
Read what Dr. Nir Shariv, one of Israel’s top scientists says
about it –
[3]
#19 Comment By Hans Fruck On March 9, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
Yes, interesting. But this doesn’t change the fact that Dr Shariv is part of a very, very small minority on this issue. Are we to wait until there’s 100% agreement in the scientific community before we change our approach to emissions and resource consumption? If that’s the case, then we’ll never make any changes, because you’ll never get 100% agreement. Meanwhile, if CO2 > climate change link proves to be a reality, as the vast majority of climatologists believe it is, then we’re staring down the barrel of a catastrophe.
You’re willing to bet the planet on the prospect that a minority opinion will be proven right. A more responsible attitude would be to modify behaviour on the assumption that the overwhelming majority opinion is right. After all, the consequences of unnecessarily modifying the way we consume and generate energy, should the CO2 link be a figment of our imagination, are far less dire than the consequences of not doing anything, should the link turn out to be real.
#20 Comment By John999555 On March 10, 2007 @ 11:00 am
Al has really been enjoying the limelight lately.
In 12 months time he’ll be begging Oprah to appear on her
show again, but by then he’ll be old news !
#21 Comment By Samuel On March 12, 2007 @ 10:47 pm
Clearly I’m a bit late with this reply…but I think it is worthwhile noting that the majority isn’t always right.
#22 Comment By John B1_B5 On March 14, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
Gore got lambasted about his ‘documantary’ by a Dr. Robert Carter on the 2CC Drive Show today (Wed. March 14, 2007).
Dr. Carter claimed that Gore’s ‘documentary’ was irresponsible.