Oh, dear... I am going to be a bit brutish but for those of no self-consciousness/self-awareness, this is a MUST! I can listen to/read Yen's science stories because he knows stuff... I can read about various developers talking about their fields. What the fook do you know, "user"?!? if only you were very bright (which I just can not see, sorry) or somehow talented (again, it escapes me, if it is true), I am sorry to have to say this, from what I have read on this forum, written by you. On the other hand, you are spouting right-wing nonsense of the lowest kind sometimes. Why would anyone listen to you? Now, if you want to change that, you can. It's up to you. You must dig in, shut your big gob and listen, learn, get tested, then one day you may well be able to contribute - I don't know if this is a real possibility but it is worth exploring. All else is poppycock! Education or die! I am sorry, Socrate, for perhaps bursting your bubble, but the same applies in your case. You have a very high opinion of yourself which precludes you from learning/studying. 'Nuff said! A wee bit of humility would serve both of yous rather well, I think...
I think it is a natural occurring phenom: However; I do believe that mankinds footprint since raping oil and burning it has upset this natural order and increased the chances of natural disaster.
That's your philosophical response? A 5 year old would have done better. P.S. Guess Hegel rolls over in his grave, crying from Heaven: why the heck I wrote those damn books? I should have become a painter...Damn books!
He sure does when he sees a "critical comment" on Philosophy like yours... But this is a waste of time, indeed...
Thorough, not thoroughly fabricated: The truth about global temperature data Thorough, not thoroughly fabricated: The truth about global temperature data
I joined this forum this morning in the pursuit of Windows 7 info and BIOS mods etc (like many folks, presumably) but can't resist chiming in on this discussion. Only poked my head into this subforum to see if there was any discussion of climate change and hey, a stickied poll thread Is that accurate, that nearly half of respondents either passively question or actively dispute the scientific consensus on AGW? I am not a climate scientist, and have no formal/academic qualifications of any kind in any field related to climate science. I have been an active "sidelines participant" in the debate for a long time, though, it's been a hobby of mine for years, and I have a broad scope of knowledge on the topic, so if anyone's got specific questions or concerns or wants to debate some aspect of this topic, I'm totally in. I haven't read this whole thread but have hopped around a bit and there's definitely some misinformation here imo. To be clear, I absolutely support the scientific consensus on climate change, specifically that a) global warming is occurring, b) it's predominantly caused by human activity, c) its impact will be severe. That's a good place to start, maybe, if anyone wants to dispute any of those points. The article posted above on weather station data is long but a really good read. Even if you don't read the whole thing, a skim proves revealing. It's nice to have someone explain the necessity for periodic data adjustments in "real-world" terms. In that context, it seems impossible to imagine climate data that didn need to be recalibrated/corrected. It's easy to forget that the earth's climate is one of the most complex physical systems known to the human race; we've learned a lot but there's a ton we don't know and are still working out.
Hide The Hiatus Hide The Hiatus: Global News Media Ignore Inconvenient Research Findings A new paper published yesterday in Nature Climate Change confirms that the so-called global warming hiatus between 1997 and 2014 was real and that claims that it was overstated or never existed are untrue: “It has been claimed that the early-2000s global warming slowdown or hiatus, characterized by a reduced rate of global surface warming, has been overstated, lacks sound scientific basis, or is unsupported by observations. The evidence presented here contradicts these claims.” ... more