--- On Sun, 2/7/10, Mario Goveia <mgov...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > Then we find that their predictions were wrong FOR A WHOLE > DECADE THROUGHOUT WHICH THEY WERE TELLING US THE OPPOSITE OF > WHAT WAS ACTUALLY HAPPENING. > ............................................ > None of the questions in these studies asked why the earth > had not warmed since 1998 after all these scientists > predicted it would.? Or why Mars and Pluto were also > warming when there were no humans around to blame.? Or > how a trace amount of man-made CO2 - 0.013% total man-made > CO2 - could be eliminated.? Or how this could have any > effect on their own theory that CO2 levels are driving > global warming since most CO2 in not man-made and the CO2 > added by all human activity for over 100 years is like a > drop in a bucket. > Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 07:26:24 -0800 (PST) From: Santosh Helekar <chimbel...@yahoo.com>
I have already provided factual data that debunk the global cooling in the 1970s myth. Here are the facts provided by the University of California at San Diego that support the conclusion that anthropogenic rise in CO2 is responsible for global warming: http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/globalchange/global_warming/03.html Mario responds: All this staunch defending of one-side of the climate change issue - unfortunately the side that is now being exposed for a series of unethical conduct - seems to be wearing Santosh down. He is responding AGAIN to what happened in the 1970's where we had the same "herd mentality", ...er, "consensus", that we see today on one side worrying about global warming, which had ceased back in 1940, with many eminent scientists on the other side worrying about global cooling. The "herd" was wrong for 40 years until 1980, and have been wrong again since 1998. In the excerpt of mine that Santosh chose to respond to, there was no reference to what happened in the 1970s. I was talking about the "herd" predicting continuous global warming through the last decade, whereas there was none. Once again, Santosh provides us with what one side of the "herd" has to say, which is well known. Unfortunately, the predictions based on their opinion have not come to pass since 1998. Maybe some day. I'm really surprised that a scientist is so impressed by "consensus", and seems to go along with whatever one side of the debate says or does without even a word of acknowledgement about their unethical behavior. The actual ebbs and flows in global temperatures are what they are. The causes the "herd" believes will be proven or disproven by what actually happens in the future. However, what the environmental extremists want the western economies to do, which is basically to shut them down and transfer their wealth to the countries who have no environmenal controls even for health reasons, is what will have a devastating effect on the entire world. THAT is what the "herd" and their defenders like Santosh are studiously ignoring. For example, from the same post he has responded to here: Quote: In the US the policy prescriptions are to turn the mammoth US economy back to 1875 levels in carbon emissions per capita by 2050. This is nonsense taken to a scientific "consensus" level. We must be very skeptical when only one side of a scientific debate is defended, while chicanery by the foremost spokesmen fot the "consensus", Al Gore and Rajendra Pachauri who are openly falsifying the science, goes without comment. The extreme environmental fanatics want to turn back the western economies to emission levels the pre-dated the industrial age, but leave the other countries to do whatever they want, i.e continue to churn out man-made CO2. Does this make sense to anyone with more than half a brain, hobbled in their thinking by "consensus"? Unquote. Fortunately, India has had it with the chicanery of the "herd" as we saw in another report that I posted on Goanet. One can only hope that they will include both sides of the debate in their deliberations, and not just members of the "herd".
