Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Respond to Gore on Global Warming
ArthurDent writes "For quite a while global warming has been presented in the public forum as a universally accepted scientific reality. However, in the light of Al Gore's new film An Inconvenient Truth many climate experts are stepping forward and pointing out that there is no conclusive evidence to support global warming as a phenomenon, much less any particular cause of it."
How can you so viciously slander the man who invented the Internet!
The Yasashii Syndicate ||
According to Gore, global warming will end it all in 10 years. Yet he felt no need or responsibility to do anything about it when he was a Senator or Vice President. He felt no need to campaign on the issue in 2000, and he feels no responsibility to run for president in 2008 in order to get the power necessary for him to save the world.
He is an "activist" which means he can complain and grouse and content himself with believing that creating "awareness" equates with actually doing something concrete.
I have always loved the way slashdot rips stories like this apart. Throwing up some piece of BS onto meant to support your cause onto /. is akin to stabbing yourself in the back.
If an article makes sense, there will be an interesting, moderately in-depth discussion about it.
If it doesn't make sense, it's like a thousand little critters climbing into your little piece of rhetoric and tearing it to shreds.
A few will usually even follow the trail so far as to discredit ancillary actors in the story.
Then the moderation system starts to do it's job, evaluating which posts have substance and which don't, boiling the best to the top.
If you read at +2, threaded, highest rated first--you will always have fantastic additional input to complete the story behind the story within a few comments.
Never truer than on crap like this story. If all news outlets had the same type of system, it would be a much better world.
Thanks guys.
Science is all about proving negatives. Indeed, the only thing ever proven in science is that a model is wrong. A scientific theory, even one that has been granted the vaunted title of a "law", is simply a hypothesis which explains the available evidence better than alternatives and which could conceivably be shown to be wrong, has been vigorously attempted to be proven wrong, and failed to be proven wrong.
Interesting, you also just described religion.
God Exists.
There, now I'd like to be proven wrong or else I've scientifically demonstrated the existence of God.
>>"The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners ...
Nope. He ment U.S. Science. the "US" is completely capitalized and makes sence to mean the Unitied States.
You should have just kept lurking. Stop trying to get more research funds with scare tactics.
~ now you know
The sad thing is that I am utterly unable to understand which side of the argument you are attempting to argue is unfounded. If you want to rely on the opinion of experts then name some.
I am not a climatologist but I did use to build computers for folk doing that work. I also have a doctorate in physics. My reading of the litterature gives me no reason to believe that there is any serious doubt as to the fact of climate change, indeed it is absolutely beyond dispute that the climate is warmer today than during the Victorian period when the Thames regularly froze. Nor is there serious dispute that human factors are the principal cause and the rate of climate change is considerably more rapid than in any other period bar the catastrophes that triggered mass extinctions.
There is dispute over the likely extent, pace, implications of future climate change.
Some people are seriously worried that the melting artic frost will disrupt the circulation of ocean currents causing a new ice age in Europe. Others dispute these claims. And there is the bunch of engineers who want to drop a large amount of cast iron into the sea in such a way as to encourage algae to do something or other.
If your grasp of the subject is so tenuous that you can;t even make clear which side you are on I suggest you read something on the subject before posting further.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
What? Mass has nothing to do (at least not directly) with sea level; it's volume that counts. A given mass of ice will occupy a higher volume as water. Don't believe me? Take a cup of ice water, full to the brim, and wait for the ice to melt. When you're done cleaning up the puddle, come back and recant that statement. When the polar ice melts, just like the ice in your cup, it will take up more space. Thus, rising water levels. Say goodbye to all those nice coastal regions.
Nice bit of self-promotion there Bruce. Do you make any money from your site? It'd be a shame if we were to just off-handedly dismiss you as insincere because you made money, even indirectly, from any of your opinions.
Then again, like your own site, perhaps we should ban you too if we don't like what you say.
When the hell did sincerity become a barometer of fact anyways?