nh mike said:
Ya gotta love it when non-scientists use this "scientists have been wrong in the past, so why should we believe anything they say" argument. Essentially, it doesn't matter if science theories are right 999 times out of 1,000, if there has ever been one theory that was wrong, we should apparently discount any scientific model, no matter how much consensus there is behind it in the scientific community, and how much data there is to support it.
It's a nice trump card to essentially toss away any scientific evidence. So, if you want to rely on that, what really is the point of participating in this discussion?
This supposed "global cooling scare" has largely been blown out of proportion by right wing media groups. At the time, all it was was some media people completely misinterpreting what the scientific community was saying (that based on natural trends we are heading towards a cooling era - of course it will take thousands of years for a significant cooling to happen from the natural cycle though).
I know Rush and their ilk like to make this claim about a massive global cooling scare the scientific community supposedly created in the 1970s, to argue that "they were wrong before, they can be wrong again". Can you point to any papers from then in peer-reviewed journals making such claims about a great cooling that was coming immently? How about point me to an international panel of scientists set up back then that agreed there was an imminent cooling coming?
No? Didn't think so.
I didn't brand anyone evil - just misinformed.
That's like saying "after someone shoots you in the head and your dead, *maybe* I'll admit that someone is trying to kill you, and that you need protection.
The whole point of making these models is so we don't HAVE to wait until disaster hits before knowing we need to do something about it.
So, who cares if hundreds of millions of people may die, and wars may end up being fought to try to get usable land? (that was the Pentagon's prediction, remember)
Your argument is so absurd I honestly can't tell whether you're joking or not.
Massive droughts *don't* affect the survival of billions of people? Complete shifting (and in some cases halting) of ocean conveyors, causing massive cooling in some areas, and heating in others, doesn't affect the survival of billions of people? Massive flooding if/when Greenland's ice sheet melts *doesn't* affect the survival of billions of people?
Seriously, are you joking?
It would be worse - but it's not something that's going to happen anytime within the next 10,000 years.
I think you just perfectly summed up exactly what's wrong with the
Global Warming scare. You think Greenland's ice sheet is *suddenly*
going to melt? You think shifting of the ocean conveyors is suddenly
going to happen? Define "suddenly"? Can I get Vegas odds on these?
What were the Vegas odds on an Ice Age going to happen "suddenly"
back in the 1970s?
When did scientists become god-like in their predictive ability?
If people start passing laws that costs huge gobs of money, do we
get to file a class-action lawsuit against those same idiots if the world
start to cool a little?
Or will the stakes become so high that that data would be buried?
Or will the theory be "modified" constantly, and consistently, when
the data doesn't quite fit the theory conveniently?
You know, I have little faith in humankind. We are idiotic, stubborn,
holier-than-thou fools who believe so completely in our own views
of the world that they're wiling to bomb buildings (9/11) or pass laws
out the wazoo restricting the rights of others for the (fill in the blank)
reason of day, or otherwise think the other guy is going to hell because
they aren't following a particular religion.
And I'm now more and more inclined to group scientists into a new
religion called Science based on this extremely powerful tendency to
meddle with the lives of others in order to "save" them - from Global
Warming or the devil (pick your synonym).
Geez, I could be wrong. I've learned a hell of a lot about a lot of
things in my life, but I've never advocated passing a law to restrict
the freedoms, economic or otherwise, based on beliefs that have
crystallized over the years. I'd love to hear a lot more of, "We could
be wrong about Global Warming" disaster scenarios, but I'm not holding
my breath.
Maybe you're right: the world is coming to an end. But I don't think
Global Warming will be the blame. Methinks we have much more
pressing things to worry about and fix first.