TheYell
99% then:)

Actually, even the ones who do 'believe' can't argue on which parts they believe on... sounds a bit like christianity to me

Einstein, feedback mechanisms are put back into the models. I am in my final year as an undergraduate physics student and I have done some climatology modules during my degree, in undergraduate courses feedback mechanisms are taught, and feedback mechanisms were included in the models presented in things like the IPCC reports. Biological feedback by things like increased plant growth is very important, but there are both positive and negative feedback mechanisms, there were also negative biological feedbacks (though I can't remember from the top of my head I can't be bothered looking for my notes, my room is too messy). Global warming is not profit driven because nobody makes a profit from it, except for some mysterious conspiracy between climatologists that I hear mentioned every now and again. I actually wish global warming was hysteria driven, but it is more likely to be apathy driven by lazy people who are too comfortable driving even the shortest distances in their oversized penis replacement cars who just couldn't care less about something they think will not affect them.

My personal view is that we can;t do anything about global warming unless governments take a real lead (not just talking about it, actually doing something), and I don't think that is going to happen soon enough, if ever. As a result, I don't think there is an awful lot we can do.

Oh and the financial aspects are well proven. Check the Carbon Trading going on. There is a stock exchange aspect on it, with full crews of traders involved.

Silly people: omg we are having an ice age!!
Silly people: no wait, omg its a global warming!!
Silly people: no no wait, its an ice age!!
Silly people: no no no wait, its global warming...Al gore the retarded politican says so in his completely biased documentarty...it must be true!
Silly people: wait...Is it an ice age?

Geez. Honestly, i call this the do-gooder syndrome. It has nothing to do with what will happen, but a combination of what people want, what they are scared of, what they desire, etc.

And the entire bloody time, nothing has been done to PROTECT the farmers or coral reefs, if either global warming or ice age were to happen. In 50 years time if its incredibly cold -- or incredibly hot -- people will look back and say "We might be screwed, with no food, coral reefs, rare animals, but at least we reduced Co2 production!!!".

x(

Flint, in science as in life and in fact everything, effects can have more than one cause. The cosmic ray study is interesting, but it does not prove that humans do not contribute to global warming. Nor does it prove that global warming is a bad thing.

Don't try to patronise me with reference to a "school teacher". I am a final year university undergraduate in physics. I am taught by respected academics and I am predicted to achieve a first class degree. I do not have a "school teacher" and I am intelligent enough to reach my own conclusions.

As for the 4 topics you have named

1) The medieval warm period was a warm period between the 10th and 14th centuries or something like that. What about it?

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/ipcc2007/fig6-10b.png

Here is a plot showing simulated temperatures over history. The different lines are different models. The variation between models shows exactly how difficult simulating temperatures like this is but anyway, all the models show an increase in temperature around the time of the medieval warm period and a decrease around the time of the "little ice age" but only two of the models show the temperature rising above the line of 0 temperature anomaly, i.e above the temperature between 1961 and 1990. The medieval warming period is proof that climate variability happens without human cause but we knew that already, it does not mean that climate change cannot happen with human cause, or with human activity being a factor.

2) The hockey stick is just the shape of the temperature profile graph through time. There is a debate about the methodology used to produce past climate simulations. There is always a debate about methods in science, and as the variation between models as posted above shows, it is very difficult to simulate past climate. The more debate about methods there is, the faster the methods will be improved. The models we have may not be perfect but they are the best we have at the moment. And models predicting future climate, although equally variable in values, all take into account feedback mechanisms as I have said, and I have yet to see one which goes down.

I don;t know anything about native american migration or farming on Greenland, but I suspect that they are both evidence for previous warm climates. As I said before, just because warming happened without pollution does not mean it can not happen as a result of pollution.

The greenhouse effect is a well known effect and without it Earth would be uninhabitable to us. We know that the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is rising, we know that greater concentrations of greenhouse gases increases temperature and we know that the increase in concentration is happening at the same time as we are pumping out shit loads of greenhouse gases from factories, power stations, cars and whatever else. For me this is a good enough argument. I know that you will not and will probably never be convinced by it, but that is up to you. Unfortunately, I also think that things are out of control because of the development of places like India and China, the inaction of world governments and the refusal of most people to take action themselves even if they believe that human activity causes a larger greenhouse effect. Basically I give up, I will carry on cycling everywhere, recycling as much waste as possible and switching off lights when they;re not needed, but I give up trying to convince anyone else to, it is a waste of time, no one listens because everyone is too comfortable in huge, vulgar, child killing cars and exotic holidays.

There was no ice on Greenland? That is a massive claim! It is quite possible to farm on Greenland today, look...

http://www.rala.is/beta/Greenland%201.jpg

hmmm if you read the links you just posted....

"THE oldest DNA found on earth has been collected from under a kilometre of ice in Greenland, revealing that the frozen island really was once green. Half a million years ago Greenland was covered by lush forests filled with butterflies, moths and the ancestors of beetles, flies and spiders"
"The discovery of ancient DNA from a warm period half a million years ago suggests that ice on top of the ancient forest did not melt as believed during the last warm period, 116,000 to 130,000 years ago, when temperatures were 5 degrees higher than today. If it had, the remains of the ancient trees and insects would have been replaced by new flora and fauna."

i doubt the north did farm it then

ROFL yes I have heard 5-6 postponement lengths.. it will be funny to see which one wins out

that was the Jehovah Witnesses, and technically, they're not Christians