Automotive News

Global Warming: Are the Skeptics Right?

Page 1 / 3 Next >
View Comments: Newest First|Oldest First|Threaded View
<<  <  Page 38/54  >  >>
William K.
User Rank
Re: it probably won't happen
William K.   2/9/2012 5:52:16 PM
There is an error in the assertion that the only reason that the earth can support so many is because so many have so little.

The fact is that agriculture has become far more efficient over the years, and has been getting more efficient for quite a while. Crop yields have been increasing steadily.

Of course, the greatest production is here in the USA, but crop yields have been increasing for a whole lot of the world. If we returned to the yields we had in 1900 a whole lot of folks would starve.

To repeat, most farmers yields are and have been increasing, not only in the US, but everywhere.

Dave Palmer
User Rank
Re: The Endless Dither
Dave Palmer   2/9/2012 5:45:52 PM
@Charles: By the way, if you still think the "skeptics" are victims of bullying or censorship, you might be interested in this article.

Global warming "skeptics" (okay, actually the coal and natural gas industries) have mounted a campaign to prevent a Penn State researcher from speaking at... Penn State.  Huh?

I'm not saying that either side is blameless in its behavior.  But the situation of global warming skeptics is not exactly like Galileo versus the Inquisition.

User Rank
sorry for frequent posts
jeffbiss   2/9/2012 5:22:56 PM

As an example of what I was referring to with regards to you needing to read through the papers to find good examples to support your case can be seen in Contribution of changing galactic cosmic ray flux to global warming.

In this paper the author concludes "...that the contribution to climate change due to the change in galactic cosmic ray intensity is quite significant and needs to be factored into the prediction of global warming and its effect on sea level raise and weather prediction."

So, this is not a "skeptic" example, but an example of the scientific process.

User Rank
Re: Here
jeffbiss   2/9/2012 5:04:59 PM

I just edited my previous response, so take a look at it. It has to do with assembling a list of papers.

User Rank
Re: Here
Non-mag   2/9/2012 4:59:00 PM
I appreciate the "cool" response.....

User Rank
jeffbiss   2/9/2012 4:53:15 PM
I looked at The Earth is Cooling, and that's all I needed to see. There's no support for their contention nor any reference to the source of the graph. So I'll give their stuff another look.

As for your claim about "skeptics", you had better assemble what you consider the relevant papers that support your claim. I see that in the "sun" section, there's a bunch of papers that may not say what you think they do. I've read many papers that take issue with certain points of others that really don't debate "global warming" per se.

As for global warming science, it's not my point of view, it's the researchers'.

User Rank
Re: You've got be kidding!
Non-mag   2/9/2012 4:33:08 PM

Who's "we"? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

It's obvious you didn't take the time to look over any of the information on the website -even if you did look it over you would still find a way to dismiss it, I'm sure. There are a large number of journal published papers which are referenced at the site. I'm sure the work YOU reference is the only valid work in the field, however.

It's people like you with a snooty attitude that give your cause a bad name - but you're too arrogant to realize it. Do yourself a favor and present your point of view and then respond to others without your mega-ego doing it's best to belittle what they say. You'll gain a lot more converts this way....... 

User Rank
it probably won't happen
jeffbiss   2/9/2012 4:23:02 PM

Believe it or not I share your view that it's impossible to get people to change their ways. I think that absolute catastrophe will occur that will force change.

For example, the only reason that the earth can currently support so many people is because so many do with so little. Although quite oversimplified, as the U.S. is roughly 5% of the global population and uses roughly 25% of its energy resources, we'd need more than one earth to support all at the standard of living that we enjoy and that's impossible. Or, we would have to chose to reduce our use by 4/5s to allow all to share equally. Again, it aint going to happen.

Also, the only reason that we have been able to meet the world's demand is due to cheap fossil fuels. If you look at the Total Energy Flow graph, you'll see that in order to meet an ever-growing demand for food and the economy in general, we'd have to replace the fossil fuels with "green" sources (I include nuclear power in "green") before a) peak energy source rears its ugly head at any great scale and (b) global warming drives the current equilibirum to a point at which moderation is impossible.

So, while I argue that the global warming science is solid I do not argue that we will make the required changes in time. China cann't feed itself and grow its economy and is more concerned with stabilizing its internal politics than solving global warming. Add to that the "skeptic" argument that if China won't act then there's no point in us doing it unilaterally, and you have a recipe for economic collapse when peak energy source (oil or coal) occurs.

So, until we chose to reverse our population growth AND reduce our energy consumption, the global warming discussion is moot.

User Rank
Re: Why not just stop smoking?
Cassiopeia   2/9/2012 3:53:11 PM
"just cannot dictate that everyone implement CO2 reduction strategies without a lot more cooperation and honesty in the debates"

Ah, now your talking Ivan, lets try to prevent this sort of thing. Something familiar on this thread already.


A. [Over-emphasise] the scientific uncertainties

B. Emphasize and take out of context selected findings to weaken the scientific conclusions

C. Making false claims for the policy implications of scientific findings


A.Those eco-doomsters, alarmists, communists! – Plain old name calling

B. Proclaim all guilty by association



A. Put climate change (or at least the US and fossil fuel industry) in the best possible light

B. Sign-on petitions

C. Putting on a scientific front

D. The proliferation of skeptics organizations

Re- Union of Concerned scientists - Misinformation about Climate Science


Ivan Kirkpatrick
User Rank
Re: Why not just stop smoking?
Ivan Kirkpatrick   2/9/2012 3:39:24 PM
Well I was just looking for a solution that wuld be possible to implement.  As I mentioned before and it is not an original thought, it will be nigh on impossible to get enough people on the planet to concentrate on reducing CO2 emissions.  Tell me how you will accomplish that?  Convincing enough people that it is the right thing to do is a very big problem.  You just cannot dictate that everyone implement CO2 reduction strategies without a lot more cooperation and honesty in the debates and research.

I had another thought and have yet to research it but has anyone heard of an experiemtn to show the effects of GH in a lab simulation?

I was thinking about crreating a test facility, say a large room with a sun source, land and water and the ability to radiate energy to space, essentially 4K I think.  then fill the room or simulation chamber with air, dry nitrogen, H2O, CO2 and so on and vary the conditions to show exactly how much the CO2 concentation affects the thermal characteristics.  One might even adjust the pressure and thereby the density of the GH gas so as to obtain addional measurements.

From this crude physical model surely some useful data could be obtained that would show how the CO2 concentration affects the temperatures.

Obviously I cannot afford to do such a simulation but perhaps two competing groups could try it out or soemthing similar and try to show with real data that the CO2 effect is real.

Keep in mind we are not debating whether or not the earth's climate is changing.  We really want to know if the CO2 being released by antrhopogenic sources is in fact causing an increase in measured temps worldwide.  If we can show it is through some simple experiments it would help the cause greatly, if the results don't support the conclusion of AGW then we should focus our dollarson other ways to mitigate climate change. 

<<  <  Page 38/54  >  >>
Partner Zone
More Blogs from Automotive News
Sales of plug-in electric vehicles in the US fell by about 5% in 2015, despite a record-setting year for the rest of industry.
Infrastructure is usually cited as the hurdle facing the new fuel cell vehicles, but the truth is, cost will be an imposing problem, too.
The end may not yet be near, but recent statements by two of the world’s biggest automakers point to the fact that the industry has begun to plan for a dramatic decline in vehicles that are powered solely by internal combustion engines.
At the recent Autodesk Accelerate event in Boston, the director of product development for a niche hypercar firm replied "no, no, no" to three answers he got for what makes a car go faster. What was the right response?
A panel of automotive experts at the Renesas DevCon suggested that the technology for such autonomous vehicles is still far too expensive to be practical.
Design News Webinar Series
1/28/2016 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
12/8/2015 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
2/18/2016 11:00 AM PT | 2:00 PM ET
2/24/2016 11:00 AM PT | 2:00 PM ET
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Jan 11 - 15, Designing ARM Devices Using Segger Tools
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6 |  7 | 8 | 9

Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2016 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service