Climategate--The Final Chapter
12-13-2012, 11:32 AM
#431
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by todd1200
Jungle, can you find any nationally or internationally accredited scientific organiztions that refute the reality of man-made global warming? I believe even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists has abandoned the skeptical camp. I know there are plenty of bloggers who advocate any stance a person could dream up, but are there any legitimate scientific groups that claim that human activity does not contribute to long-term global warming? I don't mean those who acknowledge the complex nature of weather patterns and the uncertainty inherent in the analysis of such complex systems; I mean groups that so fiercely deny the possibility of global warming.
http://dpa.aapg.org/gac/statements/climatechange.cfm
AAPG supports expanding scientific climate research into the basic controls on climate specifically including the geological, solar, and astronomic aspects of climate change. Research should include understanding causes of past climate change and the potential effects of both increasing and decreasing temperatures in the future. This research should be undertaken by appropriate agencies involved in climate research and their associated grant and contract programs.
Certain climate simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as reported through National Academy of Sciences, American Geophysical Union, American Academy for the Advancement of Science, and American Meteorological Society. AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not necessarily support the maximum-case scenarios forecast in some models.
AAPG supports research to narrow probability ranges on the effect of anthropogenic CO2 on global climate. • AAPG supports reducing emissions from fossil fuel use as a worthy goal. (However, emission reduction has an economic cost, which must be compared to the potential environmental gain).
AAPG supports the premise that economies must retain their vitality if they are to be able to invest in alternative energy sources as fossil fuels become more expensive.
AAPG supports the pursuit of economically viable technology to sequester carbon dioxide emissions and emissions of other gases in a continuing effort to improve our environment and enhance energy recovery. • AAPG supports measures to conserve energy.
Certain climate simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as reported through National Academy of Sciences, American Geophysical Union, American Academy for the Advancement of Science, and American Meteorological Society. AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not necessarily support the maximum-case scenarios forecast in some models.
AAPG supports research to narrow probability ranges on the effect of anthropogenic CO2 on global climate. • AAPG supports reducing emissions from fossil fuel use as a worthy goal. (However, emission reduction has an economic cost, which must be compared to the potential environmental gain).
AAPG supports the premise that economies must retain their vitality if they are to be able to invest in alternative energy sources as fossil fuels become more expensive.
AAPG supports the pursuit of economically viable technology to sequester carbon dioxide emissions and emissions of other gases in a continuing effort to improve our environment and enhance energy recovery. • AAPG supports measures to conserve energy.
Ask yourself this question. Do you consider the debate settled? If so doesnt that make you the denier?
Last edited by FDXLAG; 12-13-2012 at 11:52 AM.
12-13-2012, 12:00 PM
#432
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,014
Yeah, they take a cautious approach that recognizes both the possibility of man-made global warming and the need for further study. I'm not gonna argue with that. My point is that AAPG was the last scientific organization to deny man-made global warming (they changed their official stance a few years ago) -- so the most skeptical scientific organization in the world (that I could find) "supports reducing emissions from fossil fuel use as a worthy goal." My question is, is there a credible scientific body that denies man-made global warming?
12-13-2012, 12:14 PM
#433
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by todd1200
Yeah, they take a cautious approach that recognizes both the possibility of man-made global warming and the need for further study. I'm not gonna argue with that. My point is that AAPG was the last scientific organization to deny man-made global warming (they changed their official stance a few years ago) -- so the most skeptical scientific organization in the world (that I could find) "supports reducing emissions from fossil fuel use as a worthy goal." My question is, is there a credible scientific body that denies man-made global warming?
12-13-2012, 12:56 PM
#434
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,014
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
So tell me what part of their statement is incorrect. If the answer is nothing than you are a denier. Your side is the one that says there is no need for further study. You say a cautious approach. I say they take a scientific approach.
12-13-2012, 01:19 PM
#435
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
The bottom line is this, many have speculated that MMGW is possible, but none have actually proven it is the primary or even a major mechanism for climate change or even present over the last 16 years of intensive study.
No warming for 16 years despite dire and incorrect predictions by many.
We could be entering a cooling phase or it could be a pause in the 15,000 year cycle of warming. Nobody knows, but they do know warming stopped for 16 years.
No warming for 16 years despite dire and incorrect predictions by many.
We could be entering a cooling phase or it could be a pause in the 15,000 year cycle of warming. Nobody knows, but they do know warming stopped for 16 years.
12-13-2012, 01:27 PM
#436
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,014
Isn't zeroing in on a relatively small data sample narrow minded? If the Dow goes up, does that mean the underlying fundamentals of the economy need no further attention? I realize that the models were wrong and the dire predictions were way off, but does that mean the whole concept can be disregarded and it's safe to annouce "The Final Chapter"?
12-13-2012, 01:28 PM
#437
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: 767 FO
Posts: 8,047
Originally Posted by todd1200
I'm not saying their statement is incorrect. I'm saying that they are the most skeptical group of scientists that I can find and they do not deny the possibility of man-made global warming. Prior to 2007, it was possible to say that an accredited scientific organization denied global warming (AAPG), but in 2007, they changed their stance and officially recognized the possibility of man-made global warming. AAPG seems to be the outlier, the overwhelming majority of credible scientific groups solidly affirm the reality of global warming. I'm wondering if there is a group of credible scientists somewhere in the world that denies the possibility of global warming.
The money quote from AAPG: AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data
12-13-2012, 01:40 PM
#438
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by todd1200
Isn't zeroing in on a relatively small data sample narrow minded? If the Dow goes up, does that mean the underlying fundamentals of the economy need no further attention? I realize that the models were wrong and the dire predictions were way off, but does that mean the whole concept can be disregarded and it's safe to annouce "The Final Chapter"?
No concept can be disregarded, including the possiblity that we may be entering a cooling cycle and the possibility that man has little or no effect on climate change.
We do know that no matter how much money the UN or Gore may pry from your hands climate is unlikely to change as a result.
12-13-2012, 01:41 PM
#439
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,014
Originally Posted by FDXLAG
No because a credible scientific organization can not deny or affirm anything. They can only hypothesize and attempt to prove or disprove their hypothesis. Now show me a credible organization that has backed up their hypothesis on MMGW.
The money quote from AAPG: AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data
The money quote from AAPG: AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data
12-13-2012, 01:47 PM
#440
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Originally Posted by todd1200
Dozens of credible research groups affirm the reality of man-made global warming and a few, like AAPG, are noncommital. I cannot find one group that actively dissents.
They have only affirmed their speculation as to cause, the have not even seperated their speculation from the clearly active natural causes.
If you think man is the cause, then perhaps you deny the absolute evidence that natural causes were responsible for all of climate change prior to man.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
