Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raiden" data-source="post: 2148132" data-attributes="member: 253631">While I&#039;ll agree that there wasn&#039;t any proof provided and could be considered a rant, I&#039;ll let bravozulu speak for himself. If you are truly curious to see if he has any proof then why don&#039;t you e-mail him? Maybe others here could respond with details but l won&#039;t seeing as how I don&#039;t follow a whole lot of the science or what he was talking about. The way I look at all this global warming/climate change stuff is not by using the science but what I believe is simply logic.Now if there is anything that I have actually learned from this question and the answers is that the satellite data apparently goes back until 1979. I am seriously shocked. If this is really true (I am going to confirm it for myself) and I see someone quoting this data to try and prove global warming I will certaintly have a laugh. What an absolute joke. It&#039;s bad enough that certain temperature data we have only goes back 100+ years but now I hear this. Only 31 years of satellite data which is being used to try and prove global warming? Hell, I&#039;ve even heard some say that time periods such as 30 years is needed to make more accurate conclusions about climate. Pretty hard to do when you only have a single 30 year period to work with. The way I see things, we seriously need more data. I mean.....wow. We are talking about a planet that is millions of years old which has apparently had extreme climatic changes such as ice ages! You know, I said to someone in a previous question that scepticism doesn&#039;t neccesarily mean being &#039;on the fence&#039; so to speak. It can be someone that may be unconvinced and/or express doubts. If anything, this new information has only made me MUCH more unconvinced and even more doubtful of catastrophic global warming.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raiden, post: 2148132, member: 253631"] While I'll agree that there wasn't any proof provided and could be considered a rant, I'll let bravozulu speak for himself. If you are truly curious to see if he has any proof then why don't you e-mail him? Maybe others here could respond with details but l won't seeing as how I don't follow a whole lot of the science or what he was talking about. The way I look at all this global warming/climate change stuff is not by using the science but what I believe is simply logic. Now if there is anything that I have actually learned from this question and the answers is that the satellite data apparently goes back until 1979. I am seriously shocked. If this is really true (I am going to confirm it for myself) and I see someone quoting this data to try and prove global warming I will certaintly have a laugh. What an absolute joke. It's bad enough that certain temperature data we have only goes back 100+ years but now I hear this. Only 31 years of satellite data which is being used to try and prove global warming? Hell, I've even heard some say that time periods such as 30 years is needed to make more accurate conclusions about climate. Pretty hard to do when you only have a single 30 year period to work with. The way I see things, we seriously need more data. I mean.....wow. We are talking about a planet that is millions of years old which has apparently had extreme climatic changes such as ice ages! You know, I said to someone in a previous question that scepticism doesn't neccesarily mean being 'on the fence' so to speak. It can be someone that may be unconvinced and/or express doubts. If anything, this new information has only made me MUCH more unconvinced and even more doubtful of catastrophic global warming. [/QUOTE]

Name

Verification

Loading…