[MTVN]

Dunno really, I'm pretty cynical of how much influence we can actually have over the Earth's climate though

[Stu]

Youtube video

The skeptics should give this a watch.

[Liberty4eva]

Originally Posted by Stu

Youtube video

The skeptics should give this a watch.

I watched the video and I must say I am not impressed with his logic and reasoning. At all.

I majored in mathematics and I know there was a mathematician (not sure of the name but could figure it out if you're interested) centuries ago who used an analogous argument that we should believe there is a God and worship him.

His reasoning was more or less as follows: there is a level of uncertainty on whether God exists. If we worship God when God does exist then we are rewarded with eternal paradise. If we worship God when there is no God we are wasting some of our time. If we do not worship God when there is no God then we have more time to do other things. However, if we do not worship God when there is a God we are punished with eternal damnation. His conclusion was we should worship God because it's the better "column" if you will.

So Stu, should we all become religious and go to church every Sunday?

This argument he uses is one of the reasons why I think this global warming myth has in a lot of respects become a religion. And the clerics of global warming keep propogating the myth because that's how they make their money (just like religious clerics).

[Liberty4eva]

When the polar ice caps on Mars are melting, it begs the question how carbon emitions on earth are causing that. The sun goes through natural cycles and whether the earth is warming or cooling, I am absolutely convinced that the people behind global warming are using it to try and squeeze more taxes out of us and control us.

Global Warming is a scam.

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

I watched the video and I must say I am not impressed with his logic and reasoning. At all.

I majored in mathematics and I know there was a mathematician (not sure of the name but could figure it out if you're interested) centuries ago who used an analogous argument that we should believe there is a God and worship him.

His reasoning was more or less as follows: there is a level of uncertainty on whether God exists. If we worship God when God does exist then we are rewarded with eternal paradise. If we worship God when there is no God we are wasting some of our time. If we do not worship God when there is no God then we have more time to do other things. However, if we do not worship God when there is a God we are punished with eternal damnation. His conclusion was we should worship God because it's the better "column" if you will.

So Stu, should we all become religious and go to church every Sunday?

This argument he uses is one of the reasons why I think this global warming myth has in a lot of respects become a religion. And the clerics of global warming keep propogating the myth because that's how they make their money (just like religious clerics).

Except it's not at all the same. You need faith in order to believe in God. There have been philosophers who have attempted to use reason such as the ontological argument of Anselm and Descartes, but their dualistic metaphysics didn't stand up to scrutiny from the laws of causality or the principle of the identity of indiscernables. In the case of Pascal whom you mention, all he could do was appeal to fear as you say.

There is scientific evidence for the effects of carbon dioxide has on the ability of heat to escape the Earth's atmosphere. The irreversible impact of global warming is a very real possibility. The possibility of our souls going to Heaven or Hell after we die goes every natural law, whatever your philosophical views on it may be. Pascal's fear of divine punishment was likely a product of the religious prejudices of France in his day. He lived in a Catholic theocracy under Louis XIV. This was a time when clerics burning books was commonplace.

[Liberty4eva]

Originally Posted by BB_Eye

Except it's not at all the same. You need faith in order to believe in God. There have been philosophers who have attempted to use reason such as the ontological argument of Anselm and Descartes, but their dualistic metaphysics didn't stand up to scrutiny from the laws of causality or the principle of the identity of indiscernables. In the case of Pascal whom you mention, all he could do was appeal to fear as you say.

There is scientific evidence for the effects of carbon dioxide has on the ability of heat to escape the Earth's atmosphere. The irreversible impact of global warming is a very real possibility. The possibility of our souls going to Heaven or Hell after we die goes every natural law, whatever your philosophical views on it may be. Pascal's fear of divine punishment was likely a product of the religious prejudices of France in his day. He lived in a Catholic theocracy under Louis XIV. This was a time when clerics burning books was commonplace.

I think they are very much the same. The global warming video and my religious argument are based on "uncertainty". There's a difference between believing in a God and believing there's a chance a God exists. Even atheist Richard Dawkings (author of the God Delusion) says that there is a chance that there is a God. A very, very small chance but still a chance. You don't need faith to believe there's a chance God exists and are, to some extent, "uncertain" on whether God exists. I base my religious argument on this "uncertainty" on whether God exists just like the global warming video bases its argument on this uncertainty on whether global warming is happening.

Organized religion and global warming are very, very similar. Both religion and global warming have millions of followers. Both are billion dollar industries. Both groups of zealots outright ignore and are deaf to evidence that contradicts their beliefs. Both have shaky evidence that supports their beliefs: religion gets its evidence from a few desert scribblings and Global Warming gets its evidence from this misleading correlation between CO2 and temperature (higher temperatures lead to more CO2 not the other way around).

[BB_Eye]

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

I think they are very much the same. The global warming video and my religious argument are based on "uncertainty". There's a difference between believing in a God and believing there's a chance a God exists. Even atheist Richard Dawkings (author of the God Delusion) says that there is a chance that there is a God. A very, very small chance but still a chance. You don't need faith to believe there's a chance God exists and are, to some extent, "uncertain" on whether God exists. I base my religious argument on this "uncertainty" on whether God exists just like the global warming video bases its argument on this uncertainty on whether global warming is happening.

Pascal didn't prescribe agnosticism. He said we should believe in God and obey his laws, if there is so little as a small chance he existed, we would have to worry about going to Hell otherwise.

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

Organized religion and global warming are very, very similar. Both religion and global warming have millions of followers. Both are billion dollar industries. Both groups of zealots outright ignore and are deaf to evidence that contradicts their beliefs.

It's not that Christians don't listen to evidence that contradicts their beliefs. It's just that they have no evidence to support their beliefs in the first place. Besides, what do you even mean that scientists are ignoring evidence? Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

Both have shaky evidence that supports their beliefs: religion gets its evidence from a few desert scribblings and Global Warming gets its evidence from this misleading correlation between CO2 and temperature (higher temperatures lead to more CO2 not the other way around).

Well inverting the relationship between the presence of CO2 and the earth's surface temperature hardly supports your case. I thought this was down to the burning of fossil fuels and the human/animal population taken in conjunction with the state of the rate of consumption of carbon dioxide by the world's plantlife.

[BB_Eye]

Nobody is saying that the surface temperature of the Earth doesn't fluctuate naturally, but I'm pretty convinced there is a strong correlation between the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the Earth's surface temperature. There is probably not much to be gained from us debating it though. None of us are geologists. But I would rather take the side of caution, given just how potentially dangerous and destructive global warming could be. Our Earth is the only possible source of intelligent life for a radius of at least 4 light years (the distance of the nearest star system from ours, Alpha Centauri). And that's before we can even think of just how unlikely an accident we are. Destroying ourselves would be an unimaginable tragedy and not merely on a human scale.

Even if I were wrong, there are plenty more reasons to look for renewable energy sources. We are living on borrowed time, because of our dependence on fossil fuels not only for electricity generation, but also for plastics, make-up, etc. Once we run out, say goodbye to our current comfortable lifestyles.

I personally don't buy the skeptics' conspiracy theory anyway. It's the sort of thing that sells papers and earns money for half-arsed newspaper columnists and bloggers and protects the reputation of international energy companies, but that's just my opinion.

[arista]

"...Blow Up China"


No Pat that would not work
as near every electrical Item in your home is made in China.

Infact they help you
post on here.

[Smithy]

It's climate change, I'd hardly call the months @ the tail end of last year warm

[Angus]

I think the mathematician was Blaise Pascal in the 17th century?

If people want to believe that they are doing their bit for the planet, good for them, but that is all it is, their BELIEF. ( And why is everyone using the incorrect spelling of sceptical?)

[Liberty4eva]

Originally Posted by angus58

I think the mathematician was Blaise Pascal in the 17th century?

If people want to believe that they are doing their bit for the planet, good for them, but that is all it is, their BELIEF. ( And why is everyone using the incorrect spelling of sceptical?)

That's probably the mathematician I'm thinking of. I'd have to check this history of math book I have buried somewhere in my room to be sure but that's most likely the guy.

[joeysteele]

I think the Planet is warming up and that also we Humans do not help the situation but I also believe we can do little to make a really big difference,as Angus58 said, the Planet warms up and cools down periodically so its a natural thing to happen.

Just as well again into the future when it likely cools again, we the Human race will have some small effect to that but it wil be as ever a natural evolution of the Planets climate.

[InOne]

I thought you were a girl lol

[Liberty4eva]

Originally Posted by InOne

I thought you were a girl lol

LOL, why would you think that?

[InOne]

Originally Posted by Liberty4eva

LOL, why would you think that?

The name and avatar I guess lol

[Crimson Dynamo]

a hoax?

that is one concerted effort on behalf of the hoaxers!

Its happening at the same time as twats are exploiting the situation for financial and political gain.

99% of the UK do not have a clue about either climate or weather. witness how we report it. If 99% dont understand the basics then we really are a bit f ucked.

No serious weather enthusiast, forecaster or climatologist doubts it.

[lostalex]

I don't think global warming is a hoax, but i do think a lot of the supposed "solutions" to global warming are coming from opportunistic people with alterior motives.

I don't think it's a coincidence that most international green campaigners focus on the USA's emissions, and focus less on developing countries emissions. I do think they have an anti-American agenda. Harming the US economy does seem to be a major factor in much of the "environmentalist" agenda.

[Legend killer]

Who care anyways we all die anyway whether it is from extreme weather condtions or just in your sleep it's just how life goes baby. In answer to the original i think it's all a load of ****e

[Livia]

What annoys me about the Green Lobby in the UK is that we are all paying through the nose in Green Taxes and yet none of the money seems to be going toward addressing Global Warming. I'm asked not to leave my TV on standby, and yet every town and city in the country is lit all night long... you can see them from space, for God's sake! We pay a ridiculous price for petrol while the USA (no personal offence to any Americans on here...) pay a fraction of what we pay and drive everywhere and still refuse to sign the Kyoto Agreement. I've been to India and it's frightening when you see what they're doing to the environent there, and in other developing economies like China, while we in the UK pay more and more Green Tax every year.

I believe Global Warming is a natural process, but I believe it's being exacerbated and accelerated by the greed and ignorance of the human race.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Livia

What annoys me about the Green Lobby in the UK is that we are all paying through the nose in Green Taxes and yet none of the money seems to be going toward addressing Global Warming. I'm asked not to leave my TV on standby, and yet every town and city in the country is lit all night long... you can see them from space, for God's sake! We pay a ridiculous price for petrol while the USA (no personal offence to any Americans on here...) pay a fraction of what we pay and drive everywhere and still refuse to sign the Kyoto Agreement. I've been to India and it's frightening when you see what they're doing to the environent there, and in other developing economies like China, while we in the UK pay more and more Green Tax every year.

I believe Global Warming is a natural process, but I believe it's being exacerbated and accelerated by the greed and ignorance of the human race.

Yep I bet that hacks off the Green Lobby too. They asked for increased levies to help fund green energy sources, very little of the money taken from us in the form of "Green Taxes" finds its way to the green energy developments.

Petrol has also been more expensive in the UK than in the US, when I was a kid, gas in the states was pennies(cents) per gallon. In the UK petrol was shillings per gallon.

Did you know in the seventies when the great wonder that was North Sea Oil was booming we shipped most it overseas, in particular to the Middle East, we in turn bought their heavy crud(crude oil) simply because our refineries were better geared up to cope with it than the lighter more easily refined local product.

You might think by now the various energy industries and the government would have got their act together, but no.

The government taxes and plays with the revenue, the energy industry knows the government will"oversee" but not cap them. So both are laughing and the consumer pays. And we do pay, well over the odds, look at British Gas and their latest profits.

In the future the various industries will expect to continue making higher and higher profits at our expense. They will actually need reinvestment to develop and implement sustainable energy. Their shareholders wont pay, the government will, in the form of grants.

We the taxpayer will then foot the bill for those grants, oh and then to really take the mick pay higher costs for our energy, so the energy suppliers can make ever increasing profits.

But the one I like the best is larger companies etc who can afford higher overheads actually get energy cheaper than the home user.

Aint life grand.

[bananarama]

I wouldn't call global warming a hoax. But I do believe it's more likely that "Experts" as usual are making fools of themselves.......

They made fools of themselves a few decades ago claiming there would be an ice age on the way........Experts also claimed "automation" in the 60's would lead to half the poulation not needing to work in a few years time............

Experts bless them do it all the time. It usually takes awhile to find out that an expert is not an expert after all......Just another bunch of wannaby clever dicks getting it wrong time and time again......

If global warming is happening there is nothing we can do to stop it......

If it is happening the most likely cause is over population......Multi millions more of warm blooded creatures adding little heaters to the planet which will eventually overheat it.

[cub]

Originally Posted by Livia

What annoys me about the Green Lobby in the UK is that we are all paying through the nose in Green Taxes and yet none of the money seems to be going toward addressing Global Warming. I'm asked not to leave my TV on standby, and yet every town and city in the country is lit all night long... you can see them from space, for God's sake! We pay a ridiculous price for petrol while the USA (no personal offence to any Americans on here...) pay a fraction of what we pay and drive everywhere and still refuse to sign the Kyoto Agreement. I've been to India and it's frightening when you see what they're doing to the environent there, and in other developing economies like China, while we in the UK pay more and more Green Tax every year.

I believe Global Warming is a natural process, but I believe it's being exacerbated and accelerated by the greed and ignorance of the human race.

Good post.

It amuses me that a politician can come on TV and talk about saving energy for ecological reasons and then go on to say why the war in Afganistan is important.

I remember when the flu scare was on and every household was issued with a rather patronising pamphlet telling us how to blow out noses responsibly (with illustrations!) and then when I was out with the dogs I saw at least three people gob and snot in the street.

It was then I thought, "You know what! What will be will be, and that's that!"

It's like bailing out the Titanic with a leaking bucket.

[Angus]

The thing with so called "experts" in any field is that they have to maintain their status and justify their existence by coming up with some theory or another presented under the guise that it is scientific "fact".

The truth is that all sciences are organic and evolving all the time, often rendering previous theories redundant. The fact that theories such as global warming are challenged and criticised is surely a good thing, since it ensures that nothing is taken for granted and the issue is always in the public arena for debate, and not simply taken at face value.