Interesting
There is increasing evidence that global warming, much like economics, is entirely made up.
Update: To make the meaning more clear, here it is worded more accurately to reflect my point:
There is increasing that evidence that the speculative causes of global warming, much like speculative causes of economic trends, are entirely made up.
December 11th, 2003 at 11:45 am
OK, I’m missing something: If I read the article correctly, humans STILL are responsible for global warming; we just started the process a whole lot earlier than originally anticipated. It doesn’t comment as to whether or not the rate of warming has accelerated over the past two centuries (the concensus in the scientific community is that is has). And it certainly doesn’t say that global warming is “made up” or that human activity is irrelevant. Quite the contrary!
Never mind the fact that this is one friggin study!
I’ll be waiting patiently for your “world is flat and 6,000 years old” story. š
December 11th, 2003 at 11:58 am
Well, maybe i should have listed it as the causes of it (SUVs and such)is made up.
Face it, global warming causes never really stand up to scrutiny.
December 11th, 2003 at 2:55 pm
Sorry, but you’re just plain wrong. In the scientific community, there is simply no debate as to whether or not global warming is real, or even whether or not hydrocarbon emissions have an effect. The only debate concerns the degree of that effect (bad versus really worse).
You have to simply ignore large swatches of evidence to come to any other conclusion. Occasionally, somebody writes something that tries to contradict the human effect on global warming (Skeptical Environmentalist, anyone?) and they are always quickly and soundly debunked.
December 11th, 2003 at 3:08 pm
That’s the point of contention isn’ it? The impact of humans. I’ve seen reports going both ways. Sorry, the burden of proof is on the cause not the lack of a cause.
December 11th, 2003 at 4:40 pm
I think you’re missing the point entirely. Per the current consensus, there is human impact, and it’s having a noticeable (bad) effect. The only serious debate is whether the ice cap will melt in 20 or 50 years. (I made up those numbers just to make the point, I don’t claim them to be scientifically accurate.)
The evidence in favor of (1) global warming exists; and (2) human activity has a profound effect on global warming; is overwhelming.
Unfortunately, it’s not something that can be easily replicated (for obvious reasons), but a couple of studies were done showing that the three-day shutdown of US airspace following 9/11 had a measurable effect on the weather. If just three days had a measurable effect, what would the effect of ten years look like?