Customer Discussions > Science Fiction forum

Global warming is nothing but a hoax and a scare tactic


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 650 posts in this discussion
Posted on Feb 19, 2012 11:10:29 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 11:11:24 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 11:13:37 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 19, 2012 11:14:03 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 11:17:00 AM PST
C. Cobb says:
This hasn't a thing to do with dogma, and this isn't Wikipedia. I don't see why this is being posted here. You're just trying to upset others on Amazon.com, a place where we come to buy things and discuss products.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 11:21:09 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 11:26:47 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 19, 2012 11:27:27 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 11:31:54 AM PST
Because I don't want to sift through all of that evidence... Could it be that a natural rotation of the earth is leaning more toward the sun? This rotation aims all areas at the sun slightly more than over the last 15,000 years, causing an increase in temperature by a few degrees? Is this not a natural occurrence that happens to our planet as time passes? Could this not be one of those times?

You could argue that we are speeding up the process by the release of greenhouse gasses. But could we really in only 80years caused so much crap to rise in the atmosphere that it would increase our temperature from the start of the industrial revolution until present? I think it is ignorant to argue against either case. We have no proof that there is not a global shift causing our planet to heat up, nor do we have enough to 100% prove that 80-100 years of emissions is causing a rise in temperature alone.

What is true is that one day we will have to drastically change the way we live our lives from on generation to another and for the sake of human evolution we need to prepare for that and worry less over what dress Kim is wearing... I live in this world too, so I am no exception. Open your mind to the space outside the box.

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 11:41:25 AM PST
So Rick doesn't believe in global warming, but he does believe in God? Haha wow, I'd love to see his "evidence" on that. Its one thing to dispute science, its another to endorse a myth

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 11:45:29 AM PST
Okay, Michael Crichton is not a true environmental scientist, but he was one damn good fiction writer. As a thriller writer, I respect his ability to incorpoate science and fiction. I've tried to do the same. I think that "The Andromeda Strain" and "Jurassic Park" will go down as classics.

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 11:47:59 AM PST
Don't bring in the existence of God as a way to discredit anyone. I would put money on the fact that over 75% of the Scientists in the world have a religious view and its not atheism.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 11:48:15 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
Matthew,

We simply don't know. The facts are that the Earth did warm significantly from about 1980 to 2006, but then as Spencer's UAH data shows, the warming has tapered off and in fact started to decline a little. You have noticed the return of cold winters since 2007 I hope (even if the Eastern Seaboard is mild, Eurasia had its longest polar cold spell in decades, and remember last winter's cold and snow?)

If you read up on the subject, the preconceptual "hide the decliners" have been shutting down temperature recording stations in rural areas to give the semblance of warming from ground-based temperature recording stations, also as the climategate emails reveal, Phil Jones simply took out "outliers" which invalidated his preconception that the world is warming due to CO2 emissions.

I cannot tell you and make no prediction whether or not the Earth will warm or cool in coming years. The fact is that there are so many factors driving climate, and the reason why the IPCC Third Assessment report predictions are such a joke. And we understand very little of it.

Where there is ignorance / lack of knowledge, human beings hate not being able to explain things. So they invent explanations - simple ones like CO2 causing warming. This is not the first time. 2,000 years ago humans invented the Book of Genesis to explain Creation and people believed it (some still do today).

I am actually sifting through the evidence and will write a book, hopefully by the end of the year, detailing all of the issues / bad science that constitutes AGW. In fact, they are so unsure of the theory that they refuse to debate it. Normally, in the scientific world, debate is welcomed. But it seems not, in the thorny case of climate change.

What really incenses me is that incorrect decisions are being made based on a bad-science preconception, that is stifling our economic prosperity. Shale oil and gas are our ticket to getting rid of our trade deficit and debt and making America grow again through cheaper energy costs meaning cheaper manufacturing. And due to AGW, we're stopping our own rejuvenation, and instead wasting billions in pipe dreams such as Solyndra.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 11:50:11 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 11:52:00 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 19, 2012 11:55:58 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
Religion is fine and I have no problem with it, as long as people in power do not try to impose their religion on others who don't share the same religion or viewpoint. Contraception being such a case with regards to Rick.

And it's the same with AGW, which is also a theology. Anything preconceptual is in fact a theological mindset.
The opposite is a scientific mindset, where you start with no preconceived conclusion, and instead let the evidence drive your conclusion. And if new evidence comes in, you are then prepared to re-start from scratch.

In fact, this is happening with the Big Bang Theory, where the original authors of the theory have decided to scrap it when the evidence did not support their original theory. Now they're formulating a new, completely different theory. Now that is excellent science - the continual search for knowledge, rather than the unfortunate human trait of sticking to one's preconceived beliefs.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 11:59:54 AM PST
Truthseeker says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 12:06:18 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 19, 2012 12:07:27 PM PST
Truthseeker says:
Here are some more "interesting" predictions from the IPCC Third Assessment Report followed by my comments.

http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipcc_tar/

"Soil properties will deteriorate under warmer and drier climate scenarios in southern Europe. The magnitude of this effect will vary markedly between geographic locations and may be modified by changes in precipitation. [medium confidence, established but incomplete evidence]

LOL @ Medium confidence.
It has been SNOWING and RAINING across Southern europe for years. No sign of desertification in Italy or Iberia.

"Natural ecosystems will change as a result of increasing temperature and atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2). Permafrost will decline, trees and shrubs will encroach northern tundra, and broad-leaved trees may encroach coniferous forests. Net primary productivity in ecosystems is likely to increase (also as a result of nitrogen deposition). Diversity in nature reserves is under threat from rapid change. Loss of important habitats (wetlands, tundra, and isolated habitats) would threaten some species (including rare/endemic species and migratory birds). Faunal shifts as a result of ecosystem changes are expected in marine, aquatic, and terrestrial ecosystems. [high confidence, established but incomplete evidence]"

Lol with -45C in Scandinavia during mid-January to mid-February, NO CHANCE of Trees invading the tundra.

"In mountain regions, higher temperatures will lead to an upward shift of biotic and cryospheric zones and perturb the hydrological cycle. There will be redistribution of species, with, in some instances, a threat of extinction. [high confidence]"

LOLOL! 2012 - BEST ski season EVER! -45C in the Alps. Ever heard of the term: Too cold to SKI?
Althletes participating in the ski competitions at the beginning of February in Southern Germany needed 3 SKI MASKS!!!!

"Timber harvest will increase in commercial forests in northern Europe [medium confidence, established but incomplete evidence], but reductions are likely in the Mediterranean, with increased drought and fire risk. [high confidence, well-established evidence]"

LOL, neither is true. While there have been the occasional forest fires (as happened since time immemorial) timber harvest has not been affected either way.

"Agricultural yields will increase for most crops as a result of increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration. This effect would be counteracted by the risk of water shortage in southern and eastern Europe and by shortening of growth duration in many grain crops as a result of increasing temperature. Northern Europe is likely to experience overall positive effects, whereas some agricultural production systems in southern Europe may be threatened. [medium confidence, established but incomplete evidence]"

LOL. Quite the contrary, rain has increased in Spain and Italy. No drought. Only reason why there are some water challenges is because of too many tourists in the summer.

"In coastal areas, the risk of flooding, erosion, and wetland loss will increase substantially-with implications for human settlement, industry, tourism, agriculture, and coastal natural habitats. Southern Europe appears to be more vulnerable to these changes, although the North Sea coast already has high exposure to flooding. [high confidence]"

LOL, there has been flooding in Europe in the past decade, but not in coastal areas and nothing more than can naturally be expected. NONSENSE!

PS: I cannot, of course, post this on any encyclopedic site such as wiki, because it would get censored by fanatic believers of the AGW cult.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 12:15:17 PM PST
I completely use the belief in God as a way to discredit people. Its a garbage belief that science disgraces with fact. I'd take that bet on 75% of scientists as well.

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 12:43:13 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Jul 5, 2013 10:23:20 AM PDT]

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 12:46:55 PM PST
Treehugger© says:
"AGW is a theology"

that's right out of Crichton's book 'State of Fear'

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 12:53:39 PM PST
Truthseeker says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 1:12:39 PM PST
Pan Demic says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 1:20:56 PM PST
Treehugger© says:
When more areas are warming then cooling. Guess what? Global warming.

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 1:22:23 PM PST
Treehugger© says:
What are you talking about Truthseeker?

Posted on Feb 19, 2012 1:30:28 PM PST
"Which makes more sense?
Regional and environmental groups are spending their limited operating budgets in a massive conspiracy with 90% of the worlds scientists to create a worldwide hoax and crash the global economy;
OR
Big oil companies are spending their obscene profits to bribe anyone they can to protect their profits and limit any future liability their pollution may cause."
Case closed. Go away and read a book.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 1:30:36 PM PST
I just finished a Sci-Fi novel about a guy who thought climate change was a hoax. Turns out [in the novel] hoax hunters exude a spicy odor that alien fast food lovers cannot get enough of.

Yep, he got zapped and snapped. His father was still grieving about his mother who had died from reading too close to the screen and inhaling the LCD fumes.

Nothing is stranger than fiction.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 19, 2012 1:32:54 PM PST
If you're joking, Jackie, and there is no such novel, I'd like dibs on writing it!
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Science Fiction forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science Fiction forum
Participants:  103
Total posts:  650
Initial post:  Feb 19, 2012
Latest post:  Nov 21, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 13 customers

Search Customer Discussions