Is The Sun Causing The Current Climate Change?

[ozark trout fisher]

Thank goodness for Tim Smith. I ran out of patience months ago on this (people willfully burying their heads into the sand will do that) but somehow he just keeps chugging along here. Impressive.

Keep fighting the good fight, but on here, it's in vain I'm afraid.

[Al Agnew]

Taking your first two points together, if 97% are scientific evangalist of the AGW theory, it is blindly obvious where the money is. So following the money will lead you to the bias, I'm sure. Also interesting to note that 95% of the models from these 97% of scientist are grossly wrong.Not a very good arguement. The bullet hole is a fact, not an unproven theory. It would be like the body was lying there on the street with no bullet hole, but a scientist had built a model saying it could have been a bullet that killed him, so we should invest a lot of time and money to find out why it's not there.I'm all for research into this infantile branch of science. But basing policy and running our economy into the ground to fight this boogey man is kind of hard to justify, given how inaccurate the science has been so far. As other posters have mentioned, the harder we make it on folks to do business here, the more we ship this pollution off to other countries that have far less pollution controls that we did even 10-20+ years ago. Not to mention the harm it does to our country by shipping those jobs away.

In other words, you ARE saying that 90 some odd percent of scientists working in fields relevant to climate change are dishonest. Even though not all of them are actually "chasing grant money", a whole lot of them have simply examined the science and publicly agreed with it. I guess those are just incompetent, not dishonest.

It is simply not credible. You're saying that nearly everybody in a whole related group of scientific fields are incompetent or dishonest. It would be like saying that 90 plus percent of physicists are incompetent or dishonest. They may turn out to be wrong. New data, new evidence, new forcing mechanisms for climate change may eventually come to light. But right now, like it or not, human induced climate change IS generally accepted science.

Oh well, I'm done here. What we believe or don't believe isn't going to change a thing.

[jeb]

The evidence for global warming is monumental. Most glaciers are retreating, the ice caps are retreating, the lakes are icing out sooner, most the cold adapted plants animals are moving north and further up the mountains and warm adapted species are moving in behind them, and yes...the temperatures are increasing. Global averages are hotter now than they have been since we started taking records. These things are all recorded and are all within a few mouse clicks of your computer.

While WW temps have remained pretty much steady over the last 10-20 years, and are far short of the predictions of 95% of the AGW models, I never said I did not believe we might not be in a warming period. My point is that the earth is ALWAYS in either a warming trend or cooling trend. Always has been, always will be. The guessing comes in with trying to blame it on mans presence. And I'm open to the idea. But so far, the proof is completely lacking. All the models are wrong, we are not warming at any appreciable rate at all, etc.

In other words, there is no hole in the guys head.

Also of note. Throughtout the history of mankind, the most prosperous periods have been during the warmer periods.

And many of them are looking for extra capacity to deal with reduced snow melt and stream flows, less water, higher temps, more intense storms and all the things that are already starting to happen.

I don't understand your point. What does it have to do with your original assertion of:

That's why companies based on the profit motive are investing money to prepare for this.

Those cycles don't come from thin air. Nature works on cause and effect. Greenhouse gases are one cause among many, and in the short term, they seem to be the ones moving the needle the most. You can say the scientists are just "guessing" but I have articles from 1991 that predict the very things that have come to pass in the last 23 years since that article was written. The predictions for the Midwest where you live are spot on. But if you're willing to say there's no current warming then you're not going to listen to that either.

See above. And cherry picking older articles is no better than changing the models to reflect the reality of the data, and then calling them "fixed". It is called steering by your wake. A model that predicts the past is easy to construct.

As the immortal Yogi Berra said "Prediction is difficult. Especially about the future."

[jeb]

In other words, you ARE saying that 90 some odd percent of scientists working in fields relevant to climate change are dishonest. Even though not all of them are actually "chasing grant money", a whole lot of them have simply examined the science and publicly agreed with it. I guess those are just incompetent, not dishonest.

It is simply not credible. You're saying that nearly everybody in a whole related group of scientific fields are incompetent or dishonest. It would be like saying that 90 plus percent of physicists are incompetent or dishonest. They may turn out to be wrong. New data, new evidence, new forcing mechanisms for climate change may eventually come to light. But right now, like it or not, human induced climate change IS generally accepted science.

We all know it's generally accepted, but it's also misguided, as proven by the fact that 95% of their models/predictions are wrong. That's not science, that's guessing. And darn poor guessing at that.

[Mark]

I find this debate so sad. By the time everyone agrees that we are destroying our planet, it will be too late. We will forever be remembered for the destruction we did to earth. That will be our legacy. Peace out!!

[Justin Spencer]

I find this debate so sad. By the time everyone agrees that we are destroying our planet, it will be too late. We will forever be remembered for the destruction we did to earth. That will be our legacy. Peace out!!

The earth will heal itself in due time, the suffering we will cause our children and grandchildren is what disturbs me.

[fishinwrench]

You're taking it too personal, Justin.

It's not "we". We can't control, we can only be controlled. I don't have any say in what is and isn't allowed upon this earth, and neither do you.

All my young life I was taught that there WAS someone with the power to control such things for the goodness of all on earth, but turns out that was just a cute bedtime story that got exaggerated and went viral.

[jeb]

The earth will heal itself in due time, the suffering we will cause our children and grandchildren is what disturbs me.

Actually, the deficit spending our govt is doing is more harmful than any supposed impact we're having on Climate Change or AGW, IMO. And that's something we CAN actually control. Or at least have a better chance of controlling, since it's a real world problem. But I fear the govt is so hooked on it's crack habit, er, deficit spending, it will never come under control.

[Justin Spencer]

Actually, the deficit spending our govt is doing is more harmful than any supposed impact we're having on Climate Change or AGW, IMO. And that's something we CAN actually control. Or at least have a better chance of controlling, since it's a real world problem. But I fear the govt is so hooked on it's crack habit, er, deficit spending, it will never come under control.

Maybe true, but we shouldn't just bury our head in the sand unless we really don't care about the future generations.

You're taking it too personal, Justin.

It's not "we". We can't control, we can only be controlled. I don't have any say in what is and isn't allowed upon this earth, and neither do you.

All my young life I was taught that there WAS someone with the power to control such things for the goodness of all on earth, but turns out that was just a cute bedtime story that got exaggerated and went viral.

I really don't take it personally, but don't understand how intelligent people can deny that humanity is having a negative impact on the environment. I'm not sure we can fix it, but when we are long gone the earth will eventually heal itself, time means nothing to her.

[jeb]

Maybe true, but we shouldn't just bury our head in the sand unless we really don't care about the future generations.

We're not, though. We've already come such a long ways in this country, and most other developed countries, as far as cleaning up pollution sources and making the world a better place to live. We need to figure out how to make developing nations clean up their act in a similar way. Continuing to ship them our jobs and polluters by strangling our own businesses with ever more onerous requlations, taxes, carbon taxes, etc is not the way to accomplish that goal, even if there were evidence to support the idea that it would help "fix" AGW/CC, which there is not.