Go Back  The Hull Truth - Boating and Fishing Forum > BOATING FORUMS > Dockside Chat
Reload this Page >

New report from climate scientists: If global warming is real, it would actually be a

Notices

New report from climate scientists: If global warming is real, it would actually be a

Old 03-26-2014, 07:02 PM
  #1  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location:
Posts: 11,193
Default New report from climate scientists: If global warming is real, it would actually be a

New report from climate scientists: If global warming is real, it would actually be awesome

http://www.caintv.com/new-report-from-climate-scient

Gonna soak up the sun.

Remember, the whole "climate change" debate is a canard and always has been. Big government types, both in Washington and around the globe, are hyping this hysteria as a way of justifying things they want to do anyway. Massive tax increases and controls on industry are not some emergency steps they propose to take in the face of an emergency. They are the fundamental core of left-wing thinking, and they can't make them happen without convincing people that we're all doomed without them.

That is one of the reasons the following question is rarely considered: Even assuming man-made "climate change" is real, why are we to assume it would be a terrible thing? Just because the scientists working for the UN and cited by Democrats and the media say so? Now that you're thinking about it, let me introduce you to the thinking of the Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change, which consists of climate scientists who are not part of the big government agenda, but are studying the issue just as carefully.

Here's some of what they have to say (hat tip to Rick Moran at the American Thinker):

The authors find higher levels of carbon dioxide and warmer temperatures benefit nearly all plants, leading to more leaves, more fruit, more vigorous growth, and greater resistance to pests, drought, and other forms of “stress.” Wildlife benefits as their habitats grow and expand. Even polar bears, the poster child of anti-global warming activist groups such as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), are benefiting from warmer temperatures.

“Despite thousands of scientific articles affirming numerousbenefits of rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2, IPCC makes almost no mention of any positive externalities resulting from such,” said one of the report’s lead authors, Dr. Craig D. Idso. “Climate Change Reconsidered II corrects this failure, presenting an analysis of thousands of neglected research studies IPCC has downplayed or ignored in its reports so that scientists, politicians, educators, and the general public can be better informed and make decisions about the potential impacts of CO2-induced climate change.”

The authors look closely at claims climate change will injure coral and other forms of marine life, possibly leading to some species extinctions. They conclude such claims lack scientific foundation and often are grossly exaggerated. Corals have survived warming periods in the past that caused ocean temperatures and sea levels to be much higher than today’s levels or those likely to occur in the next century.

The authors also make what should be the rather obvious case that forced movement away from fossil fuels would cause devastating instability in the energy supply, destroy jobs and lead to economic chaos - all of which would be ridiculous when fossil fuels remain not only the most plentiful but also the most reliable energy source on Earth. When newer sources become viable through the advancement of technology, great, throw them into the mix. But in the meantime, there is no reason to force it when the alternative sources aren't ready and fossil fuels remain plentiful, safe and clean.

None of this is necessarily to say that man-made global warming is real. I remain a skeptic, a position I base in part on the failures of their predictions to come to pass, in part on the way they try to silence their critics (which doesn't usually indicate confidence in your own position) and in part on an understanding of what motivates them.

But what the NIPCC has done here is throw another useful question into the mix. Not only is it absurd for us to just take global warmists at their word that it's happening, it's also absurd to just take them at their word that it would be a bad thing. This report makes a compelling case that it would be far more beneficial than troublesome.

In either case, we have people purporting to tell us what will happen in the future - in spite of the fact that the same people have not been successful in previous attempts to do so - and also telling us that we must stop all debate and do everything they say. Now.

Why?

Why should we believe their assessment of the situation is accurate?

Why should we believe the consequences will be what they say?

Why should we believe the right solutions, assuming we need solutions, are ones they want?

Why should we discount a study from another group of climate scientists, this one not associated with government, just because it disagrees with the conventional orthodoxy on the issue?

Answer: We shouldn't.
Back-in-Black is offline  
Old 03-26-2014, 08:51 PM
  #2  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,406
Default

Koch Brothers: 1

Intellectual Curiosity: 0
marketic is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 04:41 AM
  #3  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Goodland, Florida
Posts: 4,001
Default

Originally Posted by marketic View Post
Koch Brothers: 1

Intellectual Curiosity: 0





The AGW theme is the antithesis of intellectual curiosity. There can be NO MORE DEBATE! No more questioning! Get in line!
Cat-a-holic is online now  
Old 03-27-2014, 06:21 AM
  #4  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Between Richmond and Williamsburg
Posts: 2,964
Default

Ice core samples show various periods of global warming over the past 800,000 years. Co2 levels during these periods were about 315 ppm and rose AFTER the warming. Co2 levels as high as 4000ppm showed ZERO measurable effect on the climate. We average about 380ppm today. Scary how easy it is to fool people and extort billions of dollars in the process.

Last edited by twobyfour; 03-27-2014 at 09:09 AM.
twobyfour is offline  
Old 03-27-2014, 07:40 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: New York
Posts: 988
Default

Originally Posted by marketic View Post
Koch Brothers: 1

Intellectual Curiosity: 0
x2 Spot on!
easy_e is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread