Comments on: ‘Climategate’ Proponents are Missing the Point http://www.greenandgorgeous.net/2009/12/11/climategate-proponents-are-missing-the-point/ Your guide to all things eco-friendly & fabulous! Wed, 04 Aug 2010 11:49:00 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Diane http://www.greenandgorgeous.net/2009/12/11/climategate-proponents-are-missing-the-point/comment-page-1/#comment-1021 Diane Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:30:36 +0000 http://www.greenandgorgeous.net/?p=630#comment-1021 I always figure it doesn't matter if climate change is true or not, when you get right down to it. I know that sounds crazy, but look at it this way: Whether or not it's true, you still have a responsibility to the earth. If our kids have a messy room we get all upset. But many of us are fine with dumping several bags of trash out the door each week. What if, instead of putting that trash to the curb and having it magically disappear, you had to store it in your backyard? How would that look after a week, a month, a year, a decade? Not so pretty. So even if you believe your lifestyle doesn't affect the planet (and I believe it does), your lifestyle affects something, someone, and in the end it affects you and your family. If we take care to protect our family from harmful substances, we in the end protect the earth as well. .-= Diane´s last blog ..<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DkmommySpot/~3/MiPyzQEj_g4/" rel="nofollow">Linden Flower (Tilia spp.) and its Uses</a> =-. I always figure it doesn’t matter if climate change is true or not, when you get right down to it. I know that sounds crazy, but look at it this way: Whether or not it’s true, you still have a responsibility to the earth. If our kids have a messy room we get all upset. But many of us are fine with dumping several bags of trash out the door each week. What if, instead of putting that trash to the curb and having it magically disappear, you had to store it in your backyard? How would that look after a week, a month, a year, a decade? Not so pretty. So even if you believe your lifestyle doesn’t affect the planet (and I believe it does), your lifestyle affects something, someone, and in the end it affects you and your family. If we take care to protect our family from harmful substances, we in the end protect the earth as well.
Diane´s last blog ..Linden Flower (Tilia spp.) and its Uses My ComLuv Profile

]]> By: emily http://www.greenandgorgeous.net/2009/12/11/climategate-proponents-are-missing-the-point/comment-page-1/#comment-857 emily Sun, 20 Dec 2009 19:25:53 +0000 http://www.greenandgorgeous.net/?p=630#comment-857 Few climate change skeptics that I know use their skepticism as an excuse to further exploit the environment. This may not resonate well with you, but consider the other perspective. There are real, proven environmental problems that we have that lose the spotlight to climate change, such as the great pacific garbage patch. The science that supports the climate change theory does not irrefutably prove that CO2, manmade, causes climate change in the atmosphere. And it fails to adequately explore other possibilities, such as solar activity, water vapor, geological activity, and ocean current activity. So far, only theoretical models and bench-top experiments conducted at sea level (not atmospheric) support this view. By far the majority of CO2 produced is from natural sources, man-made only contributes 1/10 of 1% (1), an extremely minute amount. Moreover, there is data available that shows that the planet is still absorbing CO2 and capable of absorbing more (2), throwing out the claim that the earth is not capable of absorbing CO2 at the rate we emit it. Water vapor is a warming gas in the atmosphere, another product of combustion, how much are the scientists truly accounting for that (1)? If so many scientists are behind the global warming theory, then how come so many scientists don't believe in it (3)? I'm fine with the fact that you may not completely understand it, nobody completely understands it. But that is the problem. We assume that all scientists support this, which they don't, and that we should blindly believe them. These are the same scientists who purposefully manipulated data to hide any periods of warming we had prior to industrialization (4). Even if that doesn't completely refute their theories, that completely throws the "peer-reviewed" claim out the window. Aside from that, if they are willing to manipulate data to support a view or hypothesis, what else are they manipulating? Can you really put any trust or credibility into scientists that lie to the public, so that they can get their careers going and their papers published to support a popular view? I can't. You don't have to take a side, I have chosen not to. I am not saying that anthropogenic climate change is real or false, for all I know it's real but it could be something manmade that we haven't accounted for yet. But I don't look at it from political angle, from a religious angle, or from a socially-accepted angle, I look at it from a scientific angle. Scientists are skeptics by design, and should be open to all possibilities. And I'm not conforming to any argument just b/c it's the only socially acceptable view. (1) http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html (2) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1226808/Earth-absorbing-CO2-claims-climate-change-study.html (3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming (4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_e-mail_hacking_incident Few climate change skeptics that I know use their skepticism as an excuse to further exploit the environment. This may not resonate well with you, but consider the other perspective. There are real, proven environmental problems that we have that lose the spotlight to climate change, such as the great pacific garbage patch. The science that supports the climate change theory does not irrefutably prove that CO2, manmade, causes climate change in the atmosphere. And it fails to adequately explore other possibilities, such as solar activity, water vapor, geological activity, and ocean current activity. So far, only theoretical models and bench-top experiments conducted at sea level (not atmospheric) support this view. By far the majority of CO2 produced is from natural sources, man-made only contributes 1/10 of 1% (1), an extremely minute amount. Moreover, there is data available that shows that the planet is still absorbing CO2 and capable of absorbing more (2), throwing out the claim that the earth is not capable of absorbing CO2 at the rate we emit it. Water vapor is a warming gas in the atmosphere, another product of combustion, how much are the scientists truly accounting for that (1)? If so many scientists are behind the global warming theory, then how come so many scientists don’t believe in it (3)?

I’m fine with the fact that you may not completely understand it, nobody completely understands it. But that is the problem. We assume that all scientists support this, which they don’t, and that we should blindly believe them. These are the same scientists who purposefully manipulated data to hide any periods of warming we had prior to industrialization (4). Even if that doesn’t completely refute their theories, that completely throws the “peer-reviewed” claim out the window. Aside from that, if they are willing to manipulate data to support a view or hypothesis, what else are they manipulating? Can you really put any trust or credibility into scientists that lie to the public, so that they can get their careers going and their papers published to support a popular view? I can’t.

You don’t have to take a side, I have chosen not to. I am not saying that anthropogenic climate change is real or false, for all I know it’s real but it could be something manmade that we haven’t accounted for yet. But I don’t look at it from political angle, from a religious angle, or from a socially-accepted angle, I look at it from a scientific angle. Scientists are skeptics by design, and should be open to all possibilities. And I’m not conforming to any argument just b/c it’s the only socially acceptable view.

(1) http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
(2) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1226808/Earth-absorbing-CO2-claims-climate-change-study.html
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
(4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_e-mail_hacking_incident

]]> By: Skye http://www.greenandgorgeous.net/2009/12/11/climategate-proponents-are-missing-the-point/comment-page-1/#comment-792 Skye Sat, 12 Dec 2009 20:41:16 +0000 http://www.greenandgorgeous.net/?p=630#comment-792 Well said, Jennae. .-= Skye´s last blog ..<a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/lizardkingdom/~3/ftjWEU6mD_o/you_should_be_reading_these_bl.html" rel="nofollow">You Should Be Reading These Blogs, Part The First</a> =-. Well said, Jennae.
Skye´s last blog ..You Should Be Reading These Blogs, Part The First My ComLuv Profile

]]>