Global warming skepticism

[Derek]

We are happy to debate here, but a degree of rigour of facts, substantiation and of level of discernment are required.

There follows a thread moved from elsewhere that illustrates how not to engage here.

I will not give webspace to garbage - there are plenty of other places on the web to do that.

Paul Ward - webmaster

Thread by "Derek" starts here:

Originally Posted by drummy

For example, there is considerable evidence from BAS scientists amongst other authoritative sources that...

"The west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula is one of the fastest warming areas of the planet, temperatures having risen by almost 3?C over the past 50 years."

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/press/pr...ase.php?id=336

Err, is it not the case that the bits of the Antarctic that are warming, have volcanoes that are quite active underneath them.
://www.lermanet.com/antarcticmelt/

I thought that the below was a published, and peer reviewed study, that shows Antarctica has been cooling for about 30 to 40 years.
Chapman, W.L. and J.E. Walsh. 2007. A Synthesis of Antarctic Temperatures. Journal of Climate, 20, 4096-4117.
As reviewed here,
://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2007/09/05/antarctica-warming-cooling-or-both/

To be fair the volcanoes have only recently been "discovered".

[Paul Ward]

You need to research Antarctica first before offering a commentary.

Drummy is talking about the Peninsula, your first link refers to the Ross Sea area. The Ross Sea is an area that is often cited as cooling by you skeptics - which is it to be - heating or cooling? Though the volcanic activity is only recently discovered in specific location and extent, it has long been known to exist - Mount Erebus for instance.

The wider web site that the page you refer is on seems to exist in order to attack scientology.


Your second link is to a web page that comments on the paper you mention - it is not the original source that you imply and so cannot be relied on to report the full finding in an unbiased way. It says on the "About Us" section of that site:

"Acclaimed by those on both sides of the global warming debate, World Climate Report has become the definitive and unimpeachable source for what Nature now calls the “mainstream skeptic” point of view, which is that climate change is a largely overblown issue and that the best expectation is modest change over the next 100 years. "

Hardly an unbiased starting point!

The web allows just about any "evidence" to be found for just about anything. These are two very lightweight comments and links that non the less take time and effort to show to be the misunderstood science that they are. You seem to be like 99.9% of climate "skeptics" where you have made your mind up and look for "evidence" to back it up.

I have not the time nor inclination to debunk ideas and commentary that do not serve webspace in the first place and even less to allow live links to junk that doesn't deserve the publicity it tries to gain by piggy-backing off highly regarded sites such as this one.

Links broken - add http in front of what is there and copy/paste into your browser if you wish to follow them.

[psr]

I guess the environment is always going to be a hot topic. It just seems odd that after vehemently arguing that global warming is a very real problem suddenly there are some scientists who are saying that it isn't an issue. It makes you wonder who these "non believers" really are, and who are they working for???? Yes. I really think there is a bit of a conspiracy going on and I think that it is better to be safe than sorry!

As for Antarctica...the reports and studies which have shown the damage caused by rising temperatures etc far out number those reports which say that it's not true! You only have to study the migration and breeding cycles of whales to know that something is not quite right! We can't balme the Japanese whalers for everything! And the krill...don't let me get started on that! So, I'm firmely on Paul's side on this.

Ruben, I'm glad that your thoughts are "green" and personally I HAVE to believe in global warming....I might end up with a big natural swimming pool in my backyard!

I guess this all sounds a bit tongue-in-cheek but it's really serious. More people need to wake up!

psr

[Derek]

It's good to know how you "discuss" here.

1) Dismiss the empiracal data or observation, or questioning of the science of AGW.

2) Rubbish the scource.

3) Repeat the mantra.

10 out of 10. Sadly predictable reaction.
As for the breaking of the links...for goodness sake, Holy AGW links only allowed...