Global warming caused by human beings - true or false ?

Global warming caused by human beings - true or false ?

102 posts
31 March 2014
jivago
Photographer
jivago
mph
jivago
...Been at this a long time now - Including unleaded petrol, asbestos and scallop dredging to name just a few...... In my experience the spin is laid on most thick with a trowel, by corporate interests. Think of smoking! If anything has taught me a lesson - Its always be very sceptical about corporations and the environment!
Good to see you back - even if it is, as usual, a worthless contribution!
...'Portrait of Financial Advisor as A Young Man' (Apologies to James Joyce)
Posted 8 April 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
If you ever get taken to court I suggest you don't elect to appear in the witness box - it's one thing to look stupid - another to prove it conclusively every time you open your mouth.

Posted 8 April 2014
jivago
Photographer
jivago
An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science Stephan Lewandowsky1 Klaus Oberauer1,2 Gilles E. Gignac1 1University of Western Australia 2University of Zurich Abstract Although nearly all domain experts agree that carbon dioxide emissions are altering the world’s climate, segments of the public remain unconvinced by the scientific evidence. Internet blogs have become a platform for denial of climate change, and bloggers have taken a prominent role in questioning climate science. We report a survey of climate-blog visitors to identify the variables underlying acceptance and rejection of climate science. Our findings parallel those of previous work and show that endorsement of free-market economics predicted rejection of climate science. Endorsement of free markets also predicted the rejection of other established scientific findings, such as the facts that HIV causes AIDS and that smoking causes lung cancer. We additionally show that, above and beyond endorsement of free markets, endorsement of a cluster of conspiracy theories (e.g., that the Federal Bureau of Investigation killed Martin Luther King, Jr.) predicted rejection of climate science as well as other scientific findings. Our results provide empirical support for previous suggestions that conspiratorial thinking contributes to the rejection of science. Acceptance of science, by contrast, was strongly associated with the perception of a consensus among scientists. Stephan Lewandowsky, School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia http://pss.sagepub.com/content/24/5/622
Posted 8 April 2014
jivago
Photographer
jivago
mph

If you ever get taken to court I suggest you don't elect to appear in the witness box - it's one thing to look stupid - another to prove it conclusively every time you open your mouth.


Actually - I have been to Court many times in my work - 100% record of wins. Life ain't always fair is it. sad



Posted 8 April 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
jivago
Actually - I have been to Court many times in my work - 100% record of wins. Life ain't always fair is it.
Giving evidence on the number of "spiv" financial advisers were you - or did you stick to something you actually knew something about?
Posted 9 April 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
jivago
. Our results provide empirical support for previous suggestions that conspiratorial thinking contributes to the rejection of science. Acceptance of science, by contrast, was strongly associated with the perception of a consensus among scientists.
So, conspiracy theorists reject science. As most of your posts seem to imply a conspiracy by big business against the poor (like yourself ) then perhaps you should reject science too!
Posted 9 April 2014
jivago
Photographer
jivago
mph

So, conspiracy theorists reject science. As most of your posts seem to imply a conspiracy by big business against the poor (like yourself ) then perhaps you should reject science too!





Posted 9 April 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
You do need time even to think of silly answers don't you. Perhaps you can come up with something if you get some sleep!
Posted 10 April 2014
Rawandthecooked
Photographer
Rawandthecooked
er, can't wade through all this, but it's all caused by precessional wobble innit?

Posted 12 April 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
Is that where the torque-free precession rate of an object with an axis of symmetry, spinning about an axis not aligned with that axis of symmetry can be calculated as follows?


where \scriptstyle \boldsymbol\omega_p is the precession rate, \scriptstyle \boldsymbol\omega_s is the spin rate about the axis of Jivago's hypocrisy, \scriptstyle \boldsymbol I_s is the moment of inertia about the axis of Jivago's bile, and \scriptstyle \boldsymbol I_p is moment of inertia about either of the other two perpendicular principal axes.  laugh
Posted 12 April 2014
Rawandthecooked
Photographer
Rawandthecooked
Er, quite, but if you really want it dumbed down so even Jivago gets it, When the moon is in the seventh house, and jupiter aligns with mars, this is the dawning of the age of aquarius.

Posted 12 April 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
Posted 12 April 2014
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join