View Single Post
Old 01-11-2013, 10:58 AM   #353 (permalink)
user removed
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,927
Thanks: 877
Thanked 2,014 Times in 1,300 Posts
Your charts start at the end of the mini ice age. Remember the Irish potato famine, when it was cold enough to kill the potatos which grow underground. Also right after the Krakatoa volcanic eruption and the earlier Tambora eruption which reduced globall temperatures by an average of 2 degrees and caused summer temps in South Carolina to fall below freezing (32 degrees F) in 1814-1815 (the year without summer).

Just an example of how cherry picking information can slew the information used to draw a conclusion when the conclusion is already the driving force behind the data presentation.

When you go back thousands of years you have eliminated human influence. Start at the lowest point in the mini ice age if you want when much of Europe was starving to death, or be truly scientific and look back several thousand years and you see spikes of temperatures that are as bad as today.

I see the effects of the current warming trend and sea level rise in the last 100 years, first hand, but there still remains evidence of this being a repeat of temperatures that occured long before human influence became a factor.

Real scientific investigations do not draw conclusions based on a microscopic data evaluation. Long ago the atmosphere was 35% oxygen. What caused that percentage to drop by almost 50% compared to today. It was not human activity.

As suspect stated in his original post, "it's all over but the sweating", which implies a conclusion. In my lifetime I have seen the exact opposite "conclusion", hence my scepticism about the current "conclusion", which can be rationally rebuked with little effort.

Like Aragonis, I am finished with this thread. I have a solution for the "conclusion" the global warming advocates continue to support, but see little real effort to incorporate my solution into the transportation environment. I have done something personally, at considerable cost in time and financial resources. If warming is in fact a trend with danger to future generations, then help me to promote my solution. Unending debate and claims of fact based on cherry picked evidence smack of an agenda which demands financial support for those who will always claim what is "fact" will provide them with financial support.

While they waste the resources and energy to accomplish their goal, it just smacks of another "the sky is falling" scare tactic while real solutions, like mine, are not even given a decent amount of research and support. In the meantime the globe keeps warming and your "solutions" require major economic hardship on countries that will never support such a proposition.

When you have made a similar effort in thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars to actually DO SOMETHING to resolve the problem (assuming it exists as you do) then come on back and we can discuss OUR solutions.

regards
Mech