Color me a bit skeptical of both journalists and scientists. Journalists are in business to sell stories. However accurate, if it doesn't sell, they're in the soup line. Which sells better, the story of a trend that's been going on for over a thousand years, or a tale of possible impending doom?

OTOH, climatological research scientists largely work off grants - universities, government, etc. Without grant money, they have to go back to teaching or being a TV meteorologist. Again, which is more likely to pry loose the maximum amount of grant money - researching a trend that's been going on for over a thousand years, or checking out possible impending doom? Look at the money trail and you will see ample reasons for both groups to sensationalize.

As I remember the ice age theory, it started with the theory that humans were causing global cooling. When it was shown that the cooling, although real, had been a minor blip & that the earth was continuing its slow recovery from the mini-ice age, (which itself followed the Medieval Optimum,) the story then became that the earth's warming would cause more snow to fall in the northern latitudes, which would be unable to fully melt each summer, and the ice sheets would soon encroach on New York, Chicago, and major European cities. When it was noted that most glaciers in the northern hemisphere were retreating, the dire warnings were changed again. Time after time, computer projections have failed to happen, so the programs were 'tweaked' to produce the observed results. All the programs have proved so far is that with the proper adjustments they can show what's already happened. I don't believe any of them anymore.

Good for you. I tell people all the time to never trust everything they see in print or hear on tv. It is just too easy for journalists to be manipulated, or to manipulate the story themselves. The bigger the story, the bigger the stakes, the more likely the "sources" are going to try to push an agenda. Again, never rely on a single source for the information you are using to make decisions!

We work hard to present the facts, but in complex stories, it requires more than a single story, or a 30-second clip, to do the job right. Journalists are called to make judgements on the quality of our sources, which is reflected in our coverage. I expect nothing less from our readers. Judge the information you use to make decisions based on the credibility of the source. The main stream media usually does a good job of coverage over the long haul, but you have to balance many sources to develop a reasonable understanding of complex issues like global warming.

My biggest fear is our society is trending in the opposite direction . . . with the Internet we can "customize" our news so we only get our "facts" from sources we agree with and ignore any sources which do not valid our own positions.

As for the business -- I sell my paper a year in advance. My readers are less concerned about this week's headlines as they are with the consistency and quality of coverage of local issues. I have enough issues in my own backyard to work on, thank goodness I don't have to worry about reporting on global warming! :rolleyes:

Are you are comparing grant money with the near LIMITLESS money made in the oil industry? They simply do not compare. It's like comparing apples to a fart. There really is no comparison.

You are also putting your trust in politicians over legitimate scientists. There is no comparison there either ... well except for the fart. :D

... Brad

Global warming is a great subject for discussion. It allows people to demonstrate ignorance and stupidity. In many cases it reveals additional traits about people, such as greed, racism and fascism.

I'm not surprised by any of the ignorant comments on the 50+ forum. Reading about complex subjects with a high degree of comprehension is a tiresome task. And many 50+ers repeatedly demonstrate slothful, "can't do" characteristics in their other posts. Critical thinking isn't one of the attributes that come to mind when reviewing the inane subject matter of many of these threads.

In a larger sense, some how in some way, it seems that stupidity and ignorance have somehow gained respect and relevance in today's society. Many people are supporting and applauding public figures with stubborn fascist-like reasoning. All positions, regarding the nation's interests are afforded equal respect, no matter how ridiculous, how absurd, how patently unreasonable.

That being said, there are no reasons, in advancing any logic in this subject matter. Smell you later.......

From Wikepedia:
Propaganda is a type of message aimed at influencing the opinions or behavior of people. Often, instead of impartially providing information, propaganda can be deliberately misleading, or using logical fallacies, which, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid.

Problems are much easier to identify/specify than solutions. Do we really want a special interest oriented government mandated alteration of lifestyle or forfeiture of personal choices/freedoms based on a "concensus"? If the US follows Autrailian "solution" to ban incandescent lightbulbs to be replaced with little curly flourescent bulbs and 10, 20, 40, 50, or ??? years would have to lapse before the (favorable/unfavorable) results could be determined........once mandates are in place, it is nearly impossible to remove. Consider the cost, in terms of dollars and quality of life, while contemplating a solution to a contrived CRISIS. Freedom of choice should apply to more than just abortion! This "issue" needs to be validated/substantiated beyond reasonable doubt.

Not to beat this to death, but I just received this "news release" from an environmental group:

The first sentence reads: "Global warming pollution in Colorado increased by 38% between 1990 and 2004, according to The Carbon Boom, a new analysis of state fossil fuel consumption data released today by the Environment Colorado."

I guarantee some newspaper or tv station will focus on the 38% in their headline or teaser in the rush to make the next edition. Then they will start asking questions and breaking down the details -- 2.7% average growth each year, much lower than our annual increase in population . . . what does it really mean? And the follow-on stories will help explain the details a little more.

And so the "news release" by a special interest group jumps up on everyone's radar and their perspective takes priority and a life of its own . . . sort of like this thread on the biking forum.;)

Your Point????
Wise people speak because they have something to say....
Fools speak because they have to say something.....

Great. I want to plant some Eastern Red Bud Trees. Please forward $75 per carbon credit, and I will purchase and plant tree. PM for PayPal account.

Thankyou all. A higher percentage of thoughtful and reasoned posts to this thread lately. I certainly can agree with the statement that reading about complex subjects with a high degree of comprehension is a tiresome task since I stayed up all last night reading the preliminary synopsis of the IPCC report several times. If you 50+ folks are a bit slothful with your can't do characteristics, cheer up....it gets better after your 60.
Now I don't want to be accused of critical thinking but.....I think that I may have identified a handful of scientists who aren't sure about the human effects on global warming....and surprisingly they do not appear to be under the influence of "big oil". There are a group of researchers trying to make sense of the possibliliy that several of the bodies in our solar system are warming up at the same time earth is. Not that they are in possession of the answer, but they are out there. I suspect that there may be others.
As to the fear that a mere consensus might cause us to give up a few rights...well since that is one of the more common rules of a democratic republic I guess that we may just be stuck with it. Now only if the consensus could be more informed.....there's an idea.

:eek:

I've been planting trees for years. I have about 60 trees on my property right now. Last year it was beech trees, the year before it was apple trees, and the year before that it was maple, red oak and white cedar. I haven't yet decided what to plant this year; maybe a stand of white birch in a corner.

..My point is that it is interesting to read the ignorant comments in this thread but useless to discuss the topic with fools too ignorant and incapable of discerning fact from folly.

In addition, the trend in public discussions is to afford idiotic unreasonable positions based on opinion the same weight as fact-based, logical constructions of reality. This thread demonstrates this cultural shift.

The only wisdom I'm imparting here is that many comments belie the stupidity and ignorance of the poster.

:eek: Okay I'll bite. Why the heck, then, did you come back to the thread after your first condemnation?

Ah, yes... the perfect example of the ad hominem (abusive variant) reasoning fallacy. When all else fails, attack the person or group.

As you have so aptly demonstrated!!!!

Very few of us have the time or the resources to do in-depth research on something like this. All we can do is read a relatively few articles, maybe a book, and we base our opinions on that. I wouldn't call anyone here stupid or ignorant for their opinions; after all, I'm pretty sure we're all wrong! That is, the truth is probably somewhere in between the doomsayers and the denials.

Let's not let this turn into a flame war. There are other worthy subject for that. Now, White Lightning or motor oil?

Richard, they have a nice 7 page thread going on this topic over in the Road Forum, why don't you go play over there.

For interested folks, it has been well below normal temps here in New England for weeks. Tomorrow, 4/15, a winter Nor' Easter is expected to blow in, and continue through Monday. This Monday is known as Patriot's Day, and is also the day of the Boston Marathon.

Mostly rain is expected in the Boston area, with freezing rain and snow expected north of the city. There is "the possiblilty of signifcant snow in the Hopkinton area", where the race begins.

Veteran New Englanders simply shrug at this and say, "Yeah? Well that's the way it is around here in April and May". Tourists are shocked. They always expect the "springtime in New England" bit.

Global waming is certainly a polarizing topic, isn't it?

I find it encouraging that the concept of climate change is so well known that folks joke about it in relation to their local weather, even though there is little correlation one way or the other. It is pretty well documented that as the climate warms, local weather variability increases due due to the increased volatility of warmer oceans, land mass and atmosphere. So it seems likely that there will be more of these odd weather patterns, but it will not be obvious if it is a result of a warming climate... or just mother nature having fun at our expense...

REWRITING THE SCIENCE
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1415985.shtml

Follow the dollar ... just follow the dollar.

... Brad

How come the Martian polar ice caps are receding?

How come the Jovian Great Red Eye is slowly disappearing?

Hint, both ahve to do with increasing global temperatures on those planets. I read a left-wing organization actually blame it on Terran SUV's, generating so much heat that the other planets are warming up too.

I'm sure convinced. Anyone who doubts is ignorant, uneducated, breanwashed by the Right Wing, and you smell funny and your mother dresses you funny. You will never get laid.

The Polar ice caps are receding. The meen temperatures thought the planet have increased over the past 30 years more quickly than that can be reconciled as "trends" in weather.Too many of you are listening to Sean Hannity on this one.I like him to,I'd rather pay attention to what earth scientists say on this subject,you won't find much disagreement amoung them on global warming.LA for example has done so much to decrease smog,Cal. has always been ground zero for emmissions tech. so well-guided political policies are warranted as well,concerning all enviornmental issues,global warming is (or ought to be) a non-particin issue though. Whether you're for the war or not,like nature or not or ride a fixie or not,unless we want the whole world to look like Egypt,we better do something.You better believe it's happening!

"During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the internet."
No, but it appears he did claim he created the internet. It has always amazed me how many of Al Gore's statements require clarification by others.

For those that believe global warming is caused by man, you should learn about the heating and cooling cycles of our sun. How those hot and cool cycles of the sun can be tracked by observing the number/intensity of sun spots. How science has a record of sun spots dating back to the first telescope. How Earths cool and hot periods match the sun's cycles. And yes, Mars, Jupiter, Mercury are showing signs of global warming as well.

How about quoting the whole context?

Snopes

No problem.

Gore's 1999-03-09 interview on CNN's Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer.
During this interview when asked how he was different from his democratic primary challenger, Gore stated:
“During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.”

Does not really change the meaning, does it. He still claimed credit for creating the internet. He just was not specific in what else he was taking credit for.

I also note your link falls into the category of: "It has always amazed me how many of Al Gore's statements require clarification by others."

After seeing that this thread is still going strong, I have concluded that global warming is caused by heat released from electrons zipping back and forth on the internet. :)

You may have found the perfect tie in between global warming and Al Gore..........Impressive.....Most impressive. :p

Originally Posted by CB HI
"During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the internet."
No, but it appears he did claim he created the internet. It has always amazed me how many of Al Gore's statements require clarification by others.

TCP/IP (TeleCommunication Protocol/Interconnect Protocol) is the internet's primary "enabler" and was creatd by the US Government (GSA/FTS)......but NOT Al Gore.

A widely touted explanation for global warming that has some problems. If you are curious about those problems you can read about them (with a following point/counterpoint) here http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...solar-forcing/