Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Are global warming believers becoming more desperate in their arguments?
Today they're arguing that if it's still warm, that means it's still warm-ING.
Take a number. If it goes up during the 1990s - - be it your kid's height, your savings account balance, etc... - and then stays level during the 2000s, it didn't go up. Comparing the two year average, five year average, etc... for any two or five-year period in the 1990s versus any two or five-year period in the 2000s will show that the average for the 2000s was higher. Comparing the average for the whole decade of the 1990s versus the 2000s will show that the 2000s was higher. But that just means that there wasn't a decline - that the number didn't go back down.
That would be relevant if and only if CO2 levels had gone up in the 1990s and then stayed level during the 2000s.
But that isn't what happened. Atmospheric CO2 levels went up in the 2000s - because of human emission of CO2.
So the temperatures should have increased.
There is natural variability and 1998 had a strong El Nino but there have been other El Ninos since and no new record was set, despite increasing CO2 levels.
The problem with the "near term natural variability" argument is that we're not talking near term - at least not relative to the warming trend itself. The warming began in the late 1970s. It warmed for about 20 years. CO2 levels rose during those 20 years, and then continued to rise for the next 11. But temperatures didn't. They didn't fall, either - they held steady.
Obfuscation tactics such as taking two and three year averages, or five year averages, simply don't apply. If you're 5'7" tall when you graduate from 8th grade and you're still 5'7" tall when you graduate from high school, you didn't grow in high school. Bob and Dana would apparently tell you that this is cherry-picking, and that because your average height for any two year period in high school was taller than your average height for any two year period in middle school, you continued to grow in high school.
This is one of the most transparent arguments I've seen from this bunch.
So the question is - are they getting more desperate?
9 Answers
- daddeo01905Lv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
Yes, because they have more and more derogatory names to call deniers. More names than faces. And such closed minds, unwilling to look at the facts. Such 'intolerance of any dissenting voices'.
year 2000 CRU prediction
{ According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event".}
Source(s): The Man-made Global Warming Hoax (Part 1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpWa7VW-OME - Anonymous1 decade ago
I have been thinking about how desperate they will become as the Thames starts to freeze over and the Hudson is completely frozen? I wonder if or how quickly they will all convert back to the old Global Cooling movement probably without batting an eye as their figures are so vague anyway... could, might, possibly, within the range of a 5-60% increase... bla bla bla :)
- Dr JelloLv 71 decade ago
Now that temperatures are declining, and have been for the last 12 years, alarmists are getting more desperate and ratcheting up the fear tactics to keep people in a state of alarm in order to keep their funding.
They know that science cannot predict the future and every one of their "predictions" have failed to come true. The only tool they have left is their agenda of fear.
So-called "Global Warming" is over. They can't adapt to the reality that the Earth isn't in the center of the Universe.
- Ben OLv 61 decade ago
I'm hoping this will be the death rattles from the global warming movement, but I fear we are in for more extreme illogical arguments before this peters out. My local paper is running a story along the lines of "it's not not warmING because it's warm". If you can't follow that logic, we have to break it down into smaller steps. One Peter Garrett, environment minister for the Australian government demands the leader of the opposition take back his 'absurd' claim that it hasn't been warming for the past 10 years. The reason is that it is warm. If we summarise it in one sentence, 'It's not not warm-ING because it is warm'.
If in the next few years, we get significant cooling, I expect similar arguments along the lines of 'it's not cool-ING because it's not cool'.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- ?Lv 45 years ago
Voila! an stunning subject remember wherein uncomplicated floor between 2 very numerous issues must be discovered. no remember in case you have faith in worldwide Warming or no longer the very fact nevertheless maintains to be temperatures are starting to be and the polar ice caps are melting. you may might desire to blind or stay decrease than a rock to no longer observe those issues. the considerable reason i think of that many human beings placed this off as fiction is via the fact in the event that they agree and stick to technology this time it makes them look undesirable for putting different issues off that technology has additionally undeniable fact (evolution, vast bang concept, etc.). they do no longer wanna part with it now to stay away from looking undesirable interior the long-term that's undeniable BS. it rather is wintry climate right here in Florida and we are dealing with 80 degree climate! I propose it rather is in many situations warm, no lie, yet wintry climate is in many situations the time the place it drops to a minimum of 60. Why human beings can no longer placed their ideals aside to realize our planet is in severe hardship is previous me. the two way Christianity has continuously finished the different of what it rather is supposedly meant to do....
- 1 decade ago
yup.
The politicians are all hypocrites - Al gore the big global warming liar is partner in the multi billion dollar carbon trading company (Hara).
They are all laughing all the way to banks folks - check out the background of your congressmen, they do not practice what they preach. They are lying to you in order to make money off of you.
- atomic fireballLv 71 decade ago
You can be in denial all you want. Just watch the History Channel or do some unbiased research and you will know that global warming is a reality, and it has caused actual damage to this planet, like the restriction of the movement of the gulf stream caused by the melting of the polar ice cap. This is only one facet of the problem, but when you consider the fact that it will change Europe's climate to one similar to Canada's, even if you DON"T live in Europe, you have to be worried. And there are plenty of things that are going to happen, and are already happening, in the U.S.
Therefore, while people on Yahoo! engage in this endlessly annoying "blame game" about the causes of global warming, or even debate whether it exists, in the face of all the scientific and empirical evidence that it does, we are all wasting time. If we know that the greenhouse gases we, as human beings, have been producing ever since the Industrial Revolution (or earlier) are causing this problem to escalate, why wouldn't we do something about it?
This whole debating process reminds me of 2 parents who are divorced arguing in front of their children, blaming each other for the breakup of the family. They know that the very act of their arguing is doing perhaps irreparable damage to their children, but they continue to point fingers and engage in accusation and denial while the psychological damage to their children gets worse and worse. It's all about their egos, they're too selfish and lazy to act upon their awareness that the best thing they can do for their kids, is to TRY to work together to do what they KNOW is best for their kids: STOP ARGUING, and start creating a healthier environment for their kids.
Well, think of the earth as our "kid". While we sit here engaging in ego/intellectual masturbation with these endless witty debates to avoid facing the fact that the biggest problem is our own selfish attitude and unwillingness to take responsibility for our own mistakes, the environment (literally) for our "kid" is getting worse and worse. Time to stop being so selfish, don't you think??????
Or, if you wish to continue being selfish, think of it this way: if you treat your "kid" like crap now, when you need its support and nurturing in your dotage, you'll be sorely disappointed.
So, if you must be selfish, be so in an enlightened fashion, and try to be a little more attentive to the needs of that which ultimately holds the key to your survival, instead of just satisfying the needs of your ego with "brilliant" arguments.
You sound like an extremely intelligent person, Didier Drogba. However, I think you're missing the forest for the trees, and as long as you (and others with your mindset) direct your intellectual energies in such attempts deny what is obvious, pretty soon there will be no forests, no trees and no fruit....literally...and we'll have to think of new metaphors to describe those who can't see what is right in front of them. . With your intelligence, Didier, why not consider being a part of the solution, rather than the problem? We need people like you, who have half a brain, to help to stop the destruction, rather than sit around and try to argue it away with the manipulation of statistics, and so forth. We know you're smart, you don't have to prove that anymore. However, intellectual capability and wisdom are not always the same thing.