You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
MySploofus
You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>  The Salty Dog  >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message



Pages:  1    


foogs
Foogs  (Level: 267.4 - Posts: 848)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 11:12 AM

MANUFACTURED CONFUSION

I was struck (stunned?) by a comment in a recent post that cast
doubt on the existence of global warming. As far as I'm concerned
the issue is no longer in doubt: humans are killing the planet. The
whole "debate" around global warming confuses me, and seems
oddly similar to the "debate" about evolution and intelligent design.

I read an essay the other night that clears up some of my confusion.
It was in the February issue of Wired. I'll include the link at the bottom.
But I'll give you the highlights: Ignorance is manufactured, usually
by special interests. No surprise there! Here is a quote:

"As Proctor argues, when society doesn't know something, it's often
because special interests work hard to create confusion. Anti-Obama
groups likely spent millions insisting he's a Muslim; church groups have
shelled out even more pushing creationism. The oil and auto industries
carefully seed doubt about the causes of global warming. And when the
dust settles, society knows less than it did before.

"'People always assume that if someone doesn't know something, it's
because they haven't paid attention or haven't yet figured it out,' Proctor
says. 'But ignorance also comes from people literally suppressing
truth—or drowning it out—or trying to make it so confusing that people
stop caring about what's true and what's not.'"

The title of the article is taken from a Noam Chomsky book called
Manufacturing Consent, an excellent (though possibly dated) book
about how the media and others lead us to believe and agree against
our better interests.

How this applies to Sploofus I'm not yet sure, but it does reaffirm
my skepticism of some posts.

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-02/st_thompson




caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.2 - Posts: 21598)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 11:34 AM

Maybe Global Warming or Climate Change does exist, Foogs-don't know. I do know a whole lot of money is being spent on the premise that it does. These "green" measures will certainly increase the cost to consumers. As someone pointed out I am a "selfish old cynic'' so everyone needs to keep that in mind. If I am understanding this theory special interest groups like the oil companies are creating the doubt. Why would the reverse not be true that folks who have interest in developing alternative energy for their own profit might be insisting that it does exist? Linda

garrybl
Garrybl  (Level: 279.5 - Posts: 6639)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 12:13 PM

I find Rick Warren's contribution to the green evangelical movement a very interesting one.
As a non-Christian I'm heartened by the idea that it is possible to be an evangelical without disbelieving in global warming and that it is OK to support green trends.
But that is surely an over-simplkification of a complex issue....

Barry

cujgie
Cujgie  (Level: 173.4 - Posts: 754)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 12:16 PM

We were talking about this at work yesterday. One of the most memorable comments was, "We are not killing the planet. It will recover just fine once we all disappear, because we are killing US!"

tuzilla
Tuzilla  (Level: 133.9 - Posts: 3777)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 12:25 PM

When you are making millions and billions from things that can cause it, it is easy to not believe, or pretend to not believe. Same holds for if your biggest contributors to your election campaign are making the millions and billions.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.2 - Posts: 21598)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 12:32 PM

I certainly will not live long enough nor will my kids nor their kids etc. to know if it is true. The whole issue has become politicized including the terminology "Global Warming" now "Climate Change". Lobbyists have influence over both parties. if you doubt me-check out Biden's words to the union leaders in Miami behind closed doors but it was all about dancing-Linda

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 1:32 PM

1. Noam Chomsky, Ross?

You have any credible sources?

2. We observe warming of the planet. However, we do not really know why. We hypothesize, but our hypothesis may be invalid. We ought to act as if this hypothesis is valid.

At the same time long before we were here in numbers the Earth cooled and heated up. The last glacial age was only 12,000 years ago. What explains the heating of the planet since then?

So global warming might be because of us, and it might be because of much more powerful natural forces.

tsk9653
Tsk9653  (Level: 113.2 - Posts: 1466)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 7:12 PM

Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent" remains as on-the-mark today as when it was initially published, unfortunately. Chomsky is a very thorough researcher and one of the country's leading scholars and intellectuals. In his political works, he is still speaking truth to power.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 7:20 PM

Yes, TSK, but he isn't a scientist.

This is a scientific question. On scientific questions I listen to scientists

(and certainly not to one Al Gore who apparently won't answer questions from scientists)

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 7:28 PM

Please at least give a look at the following:

Top Japanese Scientists: Warming Is Not Caused By Human Activity / Western media completely ignores major report from Japan’s Energy Commission

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Friday, Feb 27th, 2009

A major scientific report by leading Japanese academics concludes that global warming is not man-made and that the overall warming trend from the mid-part of the 20th Century onwards has now stopped.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/top-japanese-scientists-warming-is-not-caused-by-human-activity.html

Global Warming? MIT says not caused by humans…
October 31, 2008 by Royal Farris

Global warming has become such a political and money making issue.. People who have spoken against it have been ridiculed and called stupid, mostly in the political arena. No one in the media or in politics is listening to any of the scientists who say it isn’t so.

http://royalfarris.wordpress.com/2008/10/31/global-warming-mit-says-not-caused-by-humans/

foogs
Foogs  (Level: 267.4 - Posts: 848)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 7:28 PM

You're confused, Don.

Manufacturing Consent, subtitled The Political Economy of the
Mass Media, is not about global warming. It's about how the
mass media reflect hegemony (sorry, I've been doing cultural
theory lately).

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 7:37 PM

Ross, I think it's a bit ridiculous to try to decide a scientific question on the basis of which way the special interests are arguing and someone's theory about the media. If that's logical, I should start checking my horoscope and biorhythms in the newspaper again.

We humans are harming the planet in numerous ways, but it's far from clear that burning carbon fuels is contributing to that (other than the polluting effects).


caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.2 - Posts: 21598)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 8:01 PM

I like the direct approach of the British woman who threw green slime on the Business Secretary as her environmental protest to the building of an additional runway at Heathrow Airport.She expressed her view at a level I can understand get lost somewhere between my couch and the intellectual podium. LOL Linda

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 8:03 PM

I don't.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.2 - Posts: 21598)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 8:05 PM

Must be nice to be so smart, Andy.... LOL Linda

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 8:13 PM

Linda, I just don't like these nutty individuals doing stuff like that.

There's a local hero over here who whacked up a McDonald's to protest genetically modified seeds. And vigilante types go out and destroy crops of genetically modified grains. They have the French people thinking that a can of corn grown from genetically modified seed is effectively radioactive.

These matters should be decided rationally, not by hack science.

caramel1
Caramel1  (Level: 128.2 - Posts: 21598)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 8:27 PM

I will not comment further on that woman. I found it funny and by far less harmful then the protests that have been staged of late in the San Francisco area if you can call destruction of homes and businesses to make a political point about how someone voted on an issue. i personally have no opinion on that issue but sure have an opinion on the methods those people used. I will leave this discussion about how the wealthy have influenced everything to those of you who like to engage in that. Just for the record: I am a selfish cynic and don't give a damn about "Climate Change" but do care about the cost of my utility bill-carry on or as Don would say Onward and Upward - Linda

tsk9653
Tsk9653  (Level: 113.2 - Posts: 1466)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 8:34 PM

Actually, "Manufacturing Consent" isn't about global warming; it's about media manipulation of the public to serve the interests of ruling elites. From Foggs post, I'm not certain if there is more to the connection between the Chomsky work and the article besides the play on the title. The gist of the article may be that auto manufacturers and others with a vested interest in not reducing green house gas emissions are manufacturing confusion on the issue of global warming.

As to global warming, I don't doubt its reality, although periods of global warming and cooling have occurred cyclically, so from my perspective, a more illuminating discussion would be over human contribution to global warming. At one point I was skeptical on that subject, but I think it probable human contribution is significant -- the evidence sure seems to be stacking up that way. It does make intuitive sense humans pumping crap into the atmosphere at ever increasing rates since the Industrial Revolution would eventually have consequences.

tsk9653
Tsk9653  (Level: 113.2 - Posts: 1466)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 8:40 PM

I shouldn't have stopped reading at Andy's attack on Chomsky, as I see that he raised the issue of warming/cooling cycles, and Foggs later indicated what "Manufacturing Consent" was about. Of course, its only been 150 to 200 years that humans have been sending crap up stacks into the air, which could certainly change any naturally occurring cycles.

foogs
Foogs  (Level: 267.4 - Posts: 848)
Fri, 6th Mar '09 9:06 PM

I should take my own advice: Simplify.

I mentioned Herman and Chomsky's book only to acknowledge
that the Wired article's title played off the title "Manufacturing
Consent."

There are some similarities between the arguments presented
in text and article. But that's not what I was going for.

Now lets get back to the suggestion that 150 years of burning
fossil fuels and belching billions of tons of CO2 into the air
has had no effect whatsoever on the atmosphere.

I can't wait until someone mentions methane from cattle.



collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Sat, 7th Mar '09 4:27 AM

Thank you, Ross.

I agree with that.

avdralle
Avdralle  (Level: 183.6 - Posts: 57)
Sat, 7th Mar '09 8:05 AM

There is no question there have been warming and cooling cycles in the past, before the Industrial Revolution. E.g., a so-called Medieval Warm Period lasted from about 800 AD to 1300 AD, during which time Greenland supported farming and livestock. The "Little Ice Age" (1400 - 1850) followed. And there is evidence (ice core samples) of similar climate excursions much farther back in time.

The fraction of Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased from 280 to about 380 parts per MILLION since the beginning of the Industrial Era. It's a minor constituent of the atmosphere, in terms of volume. But it is also one of the major foods of all green plants on the earth. It's not clear why the extra CO2 is there: is it the result of industrial activity, or has it been released from the oceans during a period of NATURAL warming?

The sun is currently in a prolonged interval of very few sunspots. Sunspot activity could pick up at any time, but a long period of no sunspot activity (Maunder Minimum - 1650-1710) coincided with a very cold interval in Europe and North America. Are we entering a cooling period?

I'm not a climate scientist, but I have a science background. I've studied this issue for awhile and am not convinced one way or the other about a link between human activity and climate change.

- Tony

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sun, 8th Mar '09 9:48 PM

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=439146

Scientists meet to dispute global warming theory
Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 3/8/2009 4:00:00 AM

"NEW YORK CITY - The A-list of manmade climate-change skeptics is meeting in New York City for the 2009 International Conference on Climate Change.The Conference is definitely international in scope. Opening the conference is Vaclav Klaus, president of the Czech Republic and the European Union. When it comes to manmade global warming, Klaus calls that a myth.

He is also an outspoken critic of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and says the panel is one-sided and has a political agenda.

Featured at the conference will be more than 70 scientists who do not subscribe to the notion that so-called global warming is driven by manmade emissions of carbon dioxide, one of those being Harrison "Jack" Schmitt -- one of the last astronauts to walk on the moon....

...Besides the 70+ scientists at this conference, more than 650 scientists worldwide have expressed skepticism over manmade climate change."

I'm not saying they're right or wrong (obviously, I'm not a scientist), but I am saying there are those who ARE brilliant who disagree about this subject.

foogs
Foogs  (Level: 267.4 - Posts: 848)
Sun, 8th Mar '09 11:16 PM

I recognize the debate. Avdralle is right on in
looking at alternative scientific explanations.
However, I won't be putting my faith in a news site
sponsored by the American Family Association.


jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Sun, 8th Mar '09 11:22 PM

Does the site change the facts that there are notable scientists who aren't convinced? Facts aren't prejudiced.

oldcougar
Oldcougar  (Level: 219.7 - Posts: 1935)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 4:14 AM

It doesn't really matter which side of the global warming debate you're on, the Planet still needs our help. Pollution, deforestation, over fishing, poaching, re-routing of water resources, etc. are killing the flora & fauna at an astounding rate. We all need to try & change how we live, to leave a kinder gentler mark on the World

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 7:27 AM

Absolutely, Randy. We

I run around the house behind Odile turning out lights and we recycle like crazy. I used to amaze the French when I would pick up debris from hiking trails, but this is a beautiful country and I'd like to keep it that way.

Which reminds me that at the top of my very last discovery hike yesterday a fabulous 360° panarama was about me. The snow-capped Pic de Canigou, all the mountains range of the province, the plain of Roussillon, the coast . . . drool.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 7:27 AM

Absolutely, Randy. We

I run around the house behind Odile turning out lights and we recycle like crazy. I used to amaze the French when I would pick up debris from hiking trails, but this is a beautiful country and I'd like to keep it that way.

Which reminds me that at the top of my very last discovery hike yesterday a fabulous 360° panarama was about me. The snow-capped Pic de Canigou, all the mountains range of the province, the plain of Roussillon, the coast . . . drool.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 7:27 AM

Absolutely, Randy. We

I run around the house behind Odile turning out lights and we recycle like crazy. I used to amaze the French when I would pick up debris from hiking trails, but this is a beautiful country and I'd like to keep it that way.

Which reminds me that at the top of my very last discovery hike yesterday a fabulous 360° panarama was about me. The snow-capped Pic de Canigou, all the mountains range of the province, the plain of Roussillon, the coast . . . drool.

collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 7:30 AM

Absolutely, Randy. We all need to pitch in.

I run around the house behind Odile turning out lights and we recycle like crazy. I used to amaze the French when I would pick up debris from hiking trails, but this is a beautiful country and I'd like to keep it that way.

Which reminds me that at the top of my very last discovery hike yesterday a fabulous 360° panorama was mine to behold. The snow-capped Pic de Canigou, all the mountain ranges of the province, the plain of Roussillon, the coast . . . drool.

tsk9653
Tsk9653  (Level: 113.2 - Posts: 1466)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 7:22 PM

Jank:

Which of those deniers of global warming is a "notable scientist"?

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 7:29 PM

Are you saying Jack Schmitt, the first scientist-astronaut to walk on the moon, isn't notable enough for you?


collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 7:32 PM

They aren't deniers, TSK.

They're SCIENTISTS.

jank0614
Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4597)
Mon, 9th Mar '09 7:43 PM

More? Ok.

A short list of also notables:

Weather Channel co-founder Joseph D’Aleo

Timothy F. Ball, former Professor of Geography, University of Winnipeg

Robert M. Carter, geologist, researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia

Vincent R. Gray, coal chemist, founder of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition

Hendrik Tennekes, retired Director of Research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute

Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists

Believe global warming is cyclical and not man-made:

Khabibullo Abdusamatov, mathematician and astronomer at Pulkovskaya Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Sallie Baliunas, astronomer, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester

Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University

William M. Gray, Professor Emeritus and head of The Tropical Meteorology Project, Department of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University

There are many more so I won't waste any more space here. Please go to:

http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

Also - I gave a link to an MIT scientists article in another place.


tsk9653
Tsk9653  (Level: 113.2 - Posts: 1466)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 8:39 AM

Actually, Jank, very few of the listed people deny the existence of global warming; however, several dispute that global warming is caused primarily by human activities and several conclude that it is not currently possible to draw a conclusion on the cause of global warming. In some few cases, they acknowledge global warming, but maintain that this is a benefit for human society.

Harrison "Jack" Schmitt -- who is trained in geology -- doesn't make the Wiki list, but I did find several references to his views. He does not deny global warming wither, although he does dispute it. From Fox News, http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,493624,00.html:

"'Not that the planet hasn't warmed. We know it has or we'd all still be in the Ice Age,' he said. 'But it has not reached a crisis proportion and, even among us skeptics, there's disagreement about how much man has been responsible for that warming.'

Schmitt said historical documents indicate average temperatures have risen by 1 degree per century since around 1400 A.D., and the rise in carbon dioxide is because of the temperature rise."



collioure
Collioure  (Level: 104.7 - Posts: 9952)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 2:43 PM

That's fair, TSK.

When you said deniers of global warming, I took you to mean those who deny that it is man made.

bokeelia
Bokeelia  (Level: 187.8 - Posts: 114)
Tue, 10th Mar '09 6:42 PM

It really does seem hard to deny man's impact on global warming. There seems to be far to quick a rise in temperatures to attribute it to normal variances. The day to day reality of it though has little impact on our lives here in North America, which makes it difficult to get people to see the need to cut greenhouse gases. Warmer winters in the Northeast, while an indication of the problem, do not cause discomfort. Unfortunately what is necessary is a cataclysmic event to get everyone's attention. I always liked Chomsky, he was out in front against the Vietnam war, before many others.


Pages:  1    



Copyright © 2003-2016 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus