Global Warming? A Misunderstanding with a dash of Lies

Me | Today | Me

[dila813]

Global Warming

 

I can hardly pick up a newspaper anymore without seeing one story or another making reference to so called Global Warming.

This term provides me with a daily irritation for its wide spread misuse that relies more on its connotation than its actual meaning.  By relying on a word’s connotation rather than its actual meaning, a statement can be made and accepted as fact or agreeable by a wide range of professional groups.  Other people reading works with references to these terms would take this to mean that these professional groups (Not having publicly disputed the work and using the same terminology themselves) have endorsed this particular view or statement.

Global warming describes a phenomenon of the global mean temperature increasing.  This term appears in all kinds of works as Global Warming not global warming.  I don’t know when this started to occur but the results demonstrate a mass miss-communication that is currently driving politics and activism on a global basis.

I have in my frustration frequently searched the internet and library resources for the term, “The Global Warming Theory”.  Those familiar with accepted scientific methods know that before something can be referred to as a scientific fact it had to be proved out as a theory first.  Since no one has ever submitted a formal paper defining this theory the term seems to have appeared out of thin air.  Each work published seems to rely on a previous works use of the term.

When people read articles and they see the term Global Warming they take this as a synonym to Green House Theory (a theory that Green House Gases cause heat to be trapped in the atmosphere causing increases in global temperature).

This has caused a huge communication problem between the public, activists, journalists, and the scientific community.  Journalists reporting for the public ask the scientific community if Global Warming is a fact and if it is occurring.  The scientific community interprets these terms using the literal meaning and answer in the affirmative that this is a fact.  The journalists then report this to the public as a whole and the headline usually ends up saying something like, “Global Warming is Real!”  The public, upon reading this and previous articles they have read, believe this is confirmation of the Earth warming being caused due to Green House Gases released into the atmosphere by man.

When the scientific community publishes data that shows what they think global warming over the last 100 years has been based upon ice core samples or whatever, it tends to be reported in the newspapers as, “Global Warming responsible for Temperature Increases over Last Hundred Years!”  The public again interprets this to mean that the Green House Gases released by man over the last 100 years are responsible for the increases in temperature being reported.

I think the reason that this bothers me so much is that I care about the planet so much because I want to ensure a good quality of life for my children.  As long as people are talking apples and oranges, we can not have an intelligent discussion about what is happening in the environment.

I believe that the reason that this has continued so long is that many in the scientific community realize that the public is misinterpreting the information and that activist groups are reinforcing this with misinformation, but with this flood of concern came a flood of research dollars.  Since they don’t feel they have violated any scientific ethics in their release of data they don’t feel the need to go out and try to correct these misconceptions. I hear some of them justify this because their job is research not trying to get involved in what they view as politics.

I wish someone would fix this so that when someone puts together the headlines for news articles that they choose better terminology instead of global warming.

If people realized how much we don’t know about this phenomenon, they would push their elected representatives to prepare for the coming climate change instead of trying to resist it with expensive strategies that may or may not be worth it.

[Hunble]

Well stated Freeper!

Today, Environmentalist is simply another term used by Socialists to hide their politics.

Every good Environmentalist 'knows" that all pollution is cause by greedy 'Big Business' Capitalism. By the mid 1970's, the USSR figured this one out and got very busy in Europe to create the Green Party.

Today, the Socialist party is alive and well here in America.

I continue to work in support of efforts that actually improve our environment in ways that actually work, instead of following some political agenda.

[yooper]

Scientific Method being the key phrase. Only an arrogant and ignorant pseudo-scientist (realizing the world is as old as it is) would try to predict a trend based on data which has only been recorded for a scant 100 or so years.

[dila813]

The only scientific fact they have is that the Earth's surface temperature has increased by 0.5+ degrees since 1930 in the northern equatorial regions.

So you can say global warming is a fact but what does the term global warming mean? That is the question, if you find it means that based upon only scientific fact the temperature has risen around the globe in this region then its true, there is global warming.

Everything else is speculative, has the rest of the globe experienced similar rises in temperature?

What is causing it?

If the global climate models show the Temperature is going to increase what can we do about it. My position is nothing, so therefore if you believe the radical climate forecasts government should be doing something other than trying to reduce so called green house gases.

If you haven't heard, even the EU Space Admin said if the Kyoto treaty was implemented with every country in the world participating it would still fail to stop the projected rise in temperature predicted in these models.

[Always Right]

I agree there is no such thing as Global Warming. That's why my perferred term is Gorebull Warnings, which is a proven phenonon.

[Always Right]

preferred....phenomenon....I should read prior to posting

[FormerLurker]

You don't understand, Environmentalism is a religion now.

I've never looked at it as such.

I am a conservationist not a environmentalist, this doesn't mean I am pro-pollution.

I suppose words can mean different things to different people. To me, a conservationist is one who desires to conserve that which we consume. An environmentalist is concerned with ALL of nature, not just that which we eat, drink, or breathe. It is of course well known that the food chain exist, and if we mess up any part of that chain, that which we consume will suffer as well. That is where I don't follow the logic of those who view "environmentalists" as some whacked out tree hugger. Of course there ARE people like that, but to me they are simply whacked out tree huggers...

Many of our fore-fathers were conservationists.

I believe they were that and more...

[dila813]

Gore flatulence causes global warming?

[FormerLurker]

In contemporary context, the term environmentalist is associated with groups that burn homes under construction, burn or trash research labs, sue, not for merit,but to create obstruction, chain themselves to trees and damage personal vehicles because they do not fit their environmentally "correct" perceptions.

To me, those who commit such acts aren't so much "environmentalists" as they are whacked out terrorists looking for a reason to rebel. Of course there ARE those who are mislabeled as being in league with these whackos, and it is not just them but all of us that suffer as a result..

[dila813]

Here is the contrast, Environmentalist thinking is something that is relatively recent.

Conservationists for example support hunting to keep the population of animals in the wild healthy.

Environmentalists want humans to stay out of wild areas period regardless of the impact on the wild populations of animals. Environmentalist believe that humans always cause a negative impact on the Environment.

Bush is more a conservationist instead of a environmentalist when looking at his proposed forest management policy.

[FormerLurker]

I am asking you kind Freeper. What has the EPA achieved?

I know what it is being PREVENTED from achieving...

Bush Slashing Aid for E.P.A. Cleanup at 33 Toxic Sites

Is the environment better today, than it was in 1970? If so, in what ways?

The link below might answer that better than I..

New Superfund Success Stories

[FormerLurker]

Bush is more a conservationist instead of a environmentalist when looking at his proposed forest management policy.

I'm all for allowing the lumber industry to harvest trees if they adhere to conservationist methods. What is lacking here though is a coherent policy towards polluters and the resulting toxic waste dumps created by them. If you look at post #30, you'll see what I mean..

[Hunble]

My wife and I are SCUBA divers, and each year we participate in a scientific survey of a Minnesota lake to study the growth of Eurasian Millfoil. This is a plant recently introduced to Minnesota, and has everyone's panties in a wad.

Simple scientific study, and about 100 divers participate each year. You are given a 1 foot square box of wood which you place over a grid and count how many EM plants are growing in that box. Continue that process over your designated area and report the results when you return back to the surface.

After a few years of doing this, I got fed up! One day, I returned to the surface with a bag filled with those weeds and reported a count of ZERO Eurasian Millfoil plants in my sector.

What the heck are we doing? Documenting how 'evil man' is destroying the evironment, or are we doing something about it?

Since my wife and I enjoyed SCUBA diving in that lake almost every weekend, care to guess what happened to the population of that plant?

Question: What was the important goal?

1) Remove the problem.

2) Document how evil man is?

[dila813]

Can't we have a sane policy though?

The liberals want us to use car seats and car booster seats out here in the west until our kids are 5+ years old.

Do you know how much room these seats take up?

If you are a family with two kids you don't have anymore room in your car for taking additional passengers. I have four kids, I have to drive a large vehicle just to fit them in.

Now the Liberals under the guise of environmentalism are trying to ban SUVs and to make large vehicles meet the same standards as compact cars. This will make these vehicles unavailable or too expensive for the middle class.

This is just another example of us being squeezed between radical policies.

[FormerLurker]

I think we should start by cleaning up those 33 sites that are heavily contaminated. You know, those superfund sites that have been defunded...

[FormerLurker]

I think the government should get out of our private lives and concentrate on protecting us from polluters who dump dioxins, mercury, PCBs, and other such filth into our environment.

[dila813]

I know about these dumps so to speak. You know, people were not aware of the problems these chemicals cause.

I remember my parents and my grand parents just dumping oil down the drain or on the lawn where they wanted to keep the weeds from growning. It just was not a big deal.

What we are doing today is appling our knowledge of these chemicals and using this to judge people from the past that did not have the benifit of this knowledge.

I hope people in the future will be kinder to us than you are being to them.

[Hunble]

I think we should start by cleaning up those 33 sites that are heavily contaminated. You know, those superfund sites that have been defunded...

Sure, but can I do it MY WAY?

Giggle, if I was able to do it MY WAY, they would be long gone at a fraction of the costs.

[dila813]

Thats a good point, we have several super fund sites over where I live, they spent millions on doing a study and in the end they just dug up the first 10 feet of soil and put in gravel and a tank to drain water into the tank to be pumped into the river.

I could have done the same thing for less than 10k but it cost them millions.

It is a waste of money.

[pfflier]

Of course there ARE those who are mislabeled as being in league with these whackos

Then it is up to "mislabeled" to clarify their objectives, methods and to disavow the "whackos". I have not seen this done nor any intent to do it.

[FormerLurker]

I hope people in the future will be kinder to us than you are being to them.

People have long known that mercury causes ALL sorts of problems. They have known many things that they simply didn't care about. I'm not the one to judge them, their ultimate judge they will meet someday whom they will answer to.

I just want the crap they left behind cleaned up. And I'd like those who continue to dump such filth to stop it. Nothing more, nothing less..