Sep 30 2005

From the Duh! Files

Published by at 3:35 pm under All General Discussions,The Duh! Files

Folks, in a stunning break-through scientist have just figured out a major component in Global Warming. This new discovery will require a re-alignment of all the computer models to take into account something that before now escaped scientists’ attention.

Folks, it is now known that a possible major factor in the warming of the Earth is…..

.. ..Yep….

The SUN!

What will those Crazy Scientists think up next?

7 responses so far

7 Responses to “From the Duh! Files”

  1. granitroc says:

    To be fair, there has been (for a long time) a major split in the scientific community over the impact of the sun. On the one hand, the many meteorologists have been intransigent in recognizing solar variability (claiming solar output was constant). On the other hand, the a contingent of astronomers were saying solar constancy is unproven.

    You will note the study reported above went to a geophysical journal – another clue as to the divide. Obviously, the global warming crowd (the one that wants to restrict CO2) has a vested interested in siding with the meteorologists and discounting the astronomers.

    If science is about truth, then what is the problem. Ahhh, science is sometimes more like religion – that is faith in hypothesis with little data to support same. The data “revealing” global warming is obtained from questionable instrumentation (location near cities is a major issue) and the data is highly scattered (in simple terms, lacking precision). Worse, the meteorologists mathematical models don’t work very well. For example, they can’t work in reverse to history match. As everyone is aware, computer models barely can be used to forecast several days in advance (re: hurricane season).

    As a geologist, I am always amazed at how much credence the scientific community is given. In some matters, scientific data is clear and unambiguous. In other matters, we are dealing with guesswork. In the matter of global warming it is the latter. Would you trust your global economy to guesswork? I wouldn’t.

  2. In a related development it has also been determined that flooding is caused by water. Still under investigation are just what causes liberalism. Film at 11.

  3. AJStrata says:

    GranitRoc

    I have science background and work for NASA. I find proven science an important matter in all things -emphasis on proven. My problem with the CO2 crowd is they are not scientists with science.

    And anyone who did not understand the solar output and Earth response were not a constant is just not a very good scientist.

  4. granitroc says:

    AJ, what you say is true but look at the preponderance of of news reporting of what scientists say. RARELY does the other side get quoted.

    Given that so many nations have signed the Kyoto Accord, you have to believe those nations were “advised” by scientists, because no rational leader would destroy their economy otherwise. Would they? As I wrote that, I am having second thoughts.

    And not just Europe and Asia. Here in California, our new governator has signed on implementing Kyoto. A number of other states have sued the federal government – wanting it to implement Kyoto (thankfully a federal judge threw out the suit). Etc., etc., etc.

    Interestingly, Blair has started to backtrack stating he doubts that Kyoto will really go forward. Countries like Canada and others are now waking up to the cost and having second thoughts.

    For a real interesting take on Kyoto, see http://junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Kyoto_Count_Up.htm

  5. AJStrata says:

    GranitRoc,

    Your first comment is about how silly it is to treat scientists like some sort of demi-god with special knowledge and then you ask whether Kyoto treaty backers have scientists consulting them. Look, the planet is warming. It does that. There are indications we are coming out of a cool period that was the 70′s and 80′s and returning to what was the 50′s and 60′s. The earth has been much warmer and colder.

    Being a scientific oriented person I want facts. Even the fact we do not know. At one time ‘doctors’ thought bleeding was a way to drain the illness from people. It turned out to be more harm than good. Kyoto could be the same things.

    When scientist have solid evidence of all the causes of the warming and their contribution we will know wether Kyoto would do anything. Man made CO2 is only one factor (BTW, that is actually known as a fact today since models based on man made CO2 as the primary or only cause produce garbage results). If it is 10% of the source of global warming, reducing emissions 10% would have no tangible impact on the warming. If we must invest to adapt, we should look at salination plants on the coasts of Africa and Asia to start greening massice areas of desert and turning them into livable, farmable, forestable lands. We have plenty of deserts. To me that would be a worthwhile investment. Kyoto is a bad joke.

  6. Duncarin says:

    Obviously, someone is too lazy to do their own research..

    As per the ARTICLE ITSELF:

    “Increased emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases still play a role, the scientists say.”

    -or too stupid…

  7. AJStrata says:

    Duncarin,

    Now, didn’t anyone teach you manners when visiting other people’s abodes? If I had known I needed to spell it out for you I would have. You just needed to ask.

    The Global Warming crowd claim CO2 is the primary driver to Global Warming, and therefore controlling emissions would slow or stop the warming process. Which is utter nonsense fed to neophytes who do not have the scientific education to know better.

    What is true is (a) there is Global Warming and (b) we don’t know what is causing it. I would be willing to cede CO2 could be a factor, but what portion of the effect does it contribute to?

    If the driving force is the Sun cycle, then CO2 could represent only a fraction of the effect. Let’s try some math, shall we? If CO2 is only 30% of the Global Warming phenomena (which is giving it a lot of credit), then the 10% reductions in Kyoto would only effect 3% of the overall problem – insignificant.

    That is why those of us who know science intimately want to know what drives Global Warming, so we know whether we are adapting to the problem or wasting time and money in a futile effort.

    One more insult and you are out of here.