Origami December 8, 2009 Share December 8, 2009 Yes, Sam. Statistically correlated, perhaps. But is it causal? LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquariareview December 8, 2009 Author Share December 8, 2009 (edited) Eric (who by the way is one of the science people that I respect) first: Fox news has nothing to do with this, Deniers have nothing to do with this. Right wing nut jobs have nothing to do with this . This is about the primary group of data collectors who gave us most of the concept (AGW) being exposed as frauds. if the data the whole concept based on is suspect then the average layperson does not know what to believe. There is to much junk science that we already know to be false, so what is the real deal? I am not denying there is bad stuff happening on this planet but we do not want to sold more directions that prove to be not helpful. Most of the people who are defending against so called climate gate seem to all be quoting from the same data that is now lost. So they are still suspect. Anyone who blindly accepts the "science we have been told is real" now that they lost the data (how convenient) is like the people who believed the earth was flat. Lets see some data that can backed up by open shared groups of researchers who don't have political agenda. I truly believe we want to do the right thing but what is that (see posts about hybrids and cf bulbs). This thread is not about denying global warming, It is about wanting to know truth (that can be backed up with real data) Do we all ride bikes? Do all have the AC removed from our homes? Do we sterilize all of the people who have more than 2 kids while some groups in the world breed at 8.1 children per family? Do we just decide to limit population at any cost? Do we kill all the cows , stop everybody from eating meat? Do ruin our economy by raising the bar of cap and trade while India, Mexico and China do nothing but pollute and take business away from our companies? And create more pollution because they take our manufacturing and do it without controls we have already. Some of these things would help a little but are we ready to live that way? If the problem is that big do we need to make hard choices? What is the real direction to solving the problem? Edited December 8, 2009 by Aquariareview Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquariareview December 8, 2009 Author Share December 8, 2009 (edited) Here is a fun piece of news from the Telegraph The total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. "We haven't got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand," "We're having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden." The airport says it is expecting up to 140 extra private jets during the peak period alone, so far over its capacity that the planes will have to fly off to regional airports – or to Sweden – to park, returning to Copenhagen to pick up their VIP passengers. As well 15,000 delegates and officials, 5,000 journalists and 98 world leaders, the Danish capital will be blessed by the presence of Leonardo DiCaprio, Daryl Hannah, Helena Christensen, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Prince Charles. A Republican US senator, Jim Inhofe, is jetting in at the head of an anti-climate-change "Truth Squad." The top hotels – all fully booked at Edited December 8, 2009 by Aquariareview Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dschflier December 9, 2009 Share December 9, 2009 What is so scary is that it took so long for this to come out. I believe people are getting away from Aquariareview main point. He seems to be pointing out that the so called science has been manipulated. This is outragous. Politicians are using global warming as a way to control people. The science is junk. Yes we pollute and it would be a good idea to clean up as much as possible. I came to this conclusion a long time ago. It became clear to me once I began hearing people say the debate was over. Look at all the other problems we have dealing with various kinds of pollution. Acid rain, Bald eagles going extinct because of DDT, runoff from farms, smog. Has anyone ever said the debate is over on what is causing these things? WE figured out the issue and then worked to resolve the problem. People dont end debate on something if it is still theory because the fact that it is theory means we dont have the answer. It has become more of a religion for some and they hold on to it. The problem is it is being used to control people. This is an international disgrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dschflier December 9, 2009 Share December 9, 2009 (edited) So Eric because you are so sure that the debate is over you have to degrade FOX news and other sources. When I want something explained to me about Calcium/Alkalinity relationship I come on this site or reef central and I can get answers. I have not yet had anyone tell me the debate is over on this relationship or I am only allowed 10 questions on this subject. I become very mistrusting when people close debate. Why demonize a news organization or other people who dont yet understand what you so clearly do? What are you afraid of? If the next time you listen to Beck or Hannity and they say something about global warming which sounds wrong to you mention that, but please, we dont need their educational background. You said: "There is no real debate only faux debate on this subject and if your source of climate change science is Fox News or any mainstream media source I suggest you do not have the ability to enter substantially into any debate." I understand you are a scientist. Coming from a scientist this comment is scary. If I presented video of people walking around and used this as evidence for creationisam as opposed to evoloution you would think I am crazy. People need to continually try to prove the theory until it becomes science fact. Until then it is a theory. You certainly dont strengthen your argument with your comments. Edited December 9, 2009 by dschflier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveoutlaw December 9, 2009 Share December 9, 2009 Mr. Borneman, while I respect your opinion and your profession, your post was perhaps one of the most arrogant and condescending that I have read. Stating that someone has no knowledge of a subject based on their educational background is naive and belittling. Some of the greatest advancements in history were from those who did not have a college or even a full high school education. Now, as for the debate, you are incorrect.....and that is fact. You can put up as many papers as you want on glacial recession and the affects of climate on the coral reef, but the FACT, and that's what scientists deal with is fact, the fact is that all of those don't speak to the cause of the climate change. Another fact is that many well known climatologist have denounced global warming as being man made and that it is merely part of the earths natural cycle. The purpose of this thread and what we seem to be getting away from,is that all of the raw data that many of the scientists have based their research on has disappeared and is now suspect due to the recent developments. So the bottom line is that nobody knows. Lastly, since your implication is that only a scientist can have knowledge into matters like this, please explain to all of us where the ice age that all the top scientists in the world were predicting in 1975 is. That is yet another illustration of just how little we know of the earth and it's climate history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquariareview December 9, 2009 Author Share December 9, 2009 I live In WA State now,, 0 degrees F. last night. I think they might be right on that Ice Age thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountaineer December 10, 2009 Share December 10, 2009 (edited) I wonder why Mr. Borneman left out Peter Jennings as a "high school drop out"? I'm sure it was merely an oversight on his part and he has good records on all of our educational backgrounds. I agree with steveoutlaw that his comments were extremely arrogant and added nothing to the thread other than furthering his obvious political bias. I expected more I guess from a "scientist". Here is a list of a few more, that would put the group Mr. Borneman attempts to demonize in good company, and "gasp" some are "scientists". http://www.cosmoloan.com/markets/intellect...l-dropouts.html I am going to be fair and acknowledge that anyone could post with that username (looked like 1 post) and may or may not be the Eric Borneman we are thinking of.....Just to be fair. Edited December 10, 2009 by Mountaineer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dschflier December 10, 2009 Share December 10, 2009 Good point Mountain. I was actually a bit upset to see who it was. Are we sure it is Eric who has all the background in the reefing hobby? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquariareview December 10, 2009 Author Share December 10, 2009 Lets be fair to Eric I believe he has a real world view because of the time he has spent on the reefs. It may be colored (like most in the science world) by the people who he draws his research data from. I have met him many times and he is a true conservationist who does not have a political agenda, he just wants to save the reefs, I for one respect him for that. But he draws from the same fountain of tainted data and theory that is now suspect. Like many he now has the struggle of judging the data and finding out what is true and what is junk. I want someone like him (with real goals) to be forced to find the truth. I believe that as the whole science world goes on to figure this out, We want people like Eric to be involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanman December 11, 2009 Share December 11, 2009 Here is a fun piece of news from the Telegraph Okay - that had me laughing out loud!! Nice article! bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanman December 11, 2009 Share December 11, 2009 Good point Mountain. I was actually a bit upset to see who it was. Are we sure it is Eric who has all the background in the reefing hobby? I'll find out... bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanman December 11, 2009 Share December 11, 2009 Uh, yep - that was Eric Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 8:46 PM Subject: Re: AEFW Hey Bob: I sure did. Is any response needed? Eric __________________________ Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and BiochemistryUniversity of Houston Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L8 2 RISE December 11, 2009 Share December 11, 2009 Uh, yep - that was Eric Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 8:46 PM Subject: Re: AEFW Hey Bob: I sure did. Is any response needed? Eric __________________________ Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and BiochemistryUniversity of Houston ...that's truly disappointing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanman December 11, 2009 Share December 11, 2009 Lets be fair to Eric I believe he has a real world view because of the time he has spent on the reefs. It may be colored (like most in the science world) by the people who he draws his research data from. I have met him many times and he is a true conservationist who does not have a political agenda, he just wants to save the reefs, I for one respect him for that. But he draws from the same fountain of tainted data and theory that is now suspect. Like many he now has the struggle of judging the data and finding out what is true and what is junk. I want someone like him (with real goals) to be forced to find the truth. I believe that as the whole science world goes on to figure this out, We want people like Eric to be involved. I've met him just once - but I agree - he is passionate about conservation, and particularly our coral reefs. bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquariareview December 13, 2009 Author Share December 13, 2009 check this video out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu December 16, 2009 Share December 16, 2009 It appears this thread may have indirectly hit the big time: http://www.reefbuilders.com/2009/12/16/eri...climate-change/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dschflier December 17, 2009 Share December 17, 2009 Wow Reading that link is very disturbing to me. So the way I see it you are either a "believer" or "denier" Sounds like a religion to me. I dont suppose any information would change Erics convictions or any of the other "believers". He holds no credibility with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveoutlaw December 17, 2009 Share December 17, 2009 I have now lost all respect for Eric Borneman. This is by far one of the stupidest articles I've read, and the scary thing is....people listen to him. No one is denying that climate change is happening and having an effect on the ecosystems of the planet (not just the reefs). The debate is the REASON for the climate change, and the fact is that nobody knows for sure what is causing the climate change. The laughable thing about this, at least to me, is that he is talking about all of these experts and peer reviewers that have analyzed the data.......the same data that has disappeared? The same data that was manipulated to give false conclusions? As for the high school education comment, well that just makes Eric look like an idiot. There are quite a few individuals with only high school educations that could kick his can to the curb in a debate about this. He is one snobby SOB as far as I am concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happyfeet December 17, 2009 Share December 17, 2009 It appears this thread may have indirectly hit the big time: http://www.reefbuilders.com/2009/12/16/eri...climate-change/ After reading his post, I feel like he is on a high horse. Those who don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquariareview December 18, 2009 Author Share December 18, 2009 Ok eric here is where you jump the tracks You Say "About 2-5% of the scientists are not on board" yet we know that the so called majority has suppressed any data that did not support the AGW Theory. so that Number is tainted because the AGW mafia has made anyone who does not go along a pariah. In the current environment if you don't agree you can't get published, Read the emails They talk openly about suppression of all who don't agree, and the suppression of all data or worse the tricking of their own data when it does not support the theory. You also say "One cannot expect the average person to have access to, read, understand, or critique overwhelming consensus of a diverse global scientific community" well I am not the average person. but one thing I do understand is the people who are behind the original findings that AGW comes have admitted to lying, data adjustment (more Lying), suppression of all who don't agree (scaring others into lying) and now losing all of the data so they can't be proven as liars The very data that eric uses in his article comes from the pool of data that was lost and can't be backed up with proof. Give us better Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveoutlaw January 25, 2010 Share January 25, 2010 And it takes another ugly turn against the scientists: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12...a-verified.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanman January 26, 2010 Share January 26, 2010 Oooops! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquariareview January 27, 2010 Author Share January 27, 2010 these guys are scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquariareview February 6, 2010 Author Share February 6, 2010 More news ,, India forms new climate change body The Indian government has established its own body to monitor the effects of global warming because it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now