[sparky@home]

Global warming is a much-discussed matter, and something that could affect future generations. However, this article from www.investors.com is kind of a revelation. I have heard of scientists cooking up data for various reasons, but an organisation like NASA doing it so that their data are proved accurate is not something expected from them. Having read the article I thought of sharing same, I really have no knowledge how far it is true.

Source : https://www.investors.com/politics/e...warming-scare/

Mods. : I could not find any appropriate thread, if needed kindly do needful, or delete as necessary.

[Chetan_Rao]

Red flags all over that article.

First, the site and section it's posted on.

Second, its counterclaims are more political sniping than actual scientific data. Notice the repeated claims of government and lying.

Third, it quotes climate change skeptic 'bloggers' as some sort of experts. Tony Heller isn't even the guy's real name, it's his blogging pseudonym.

Fourth and the most obvious, qouting Breitbart of all publications.

I'm more than happy to consider a counterview to anything, but this particular specimen is absolute tosh.

[BenjiRoss]

The article is written like a typical WhatsApp forward. No real numbers other than some links to blogs, etc
Should tweet the link to NASA and see if they respond.
Anyway, since the article says global warming is a myth, let me go for another spin in my car just like that.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by sparky@home

but an organisation like NASA doing it so that their data are proved accurate is not something expected from them.

BTW, where is NASA mentioned in the article? The article talks about some organization called the NOAA. But what does NASA have to do with this?

The interesting thing about Global Warming skeptics is that most of them think the 'scientists' have to 'prove' global warming to them. Like that is the most serious issue about this whole thing.

Well, whether anyone's going to prove it to everyone's satisfaction or not, the weather's not going to discriminate, it's going affect all of us!

[2000rpm]

Originally Posted by BenjiRoss

Anyway, since the article says global warming is a myth, let me go for another spin in my car just like that.

I think let the skeptics be skeptical but the remaining world should move to EVs ASAP. Dont know if that will create some sort of a new problem on some other dimension, but will atleast alleviate global warming to some extent.

[CrAzY dRiVeR]

Isn't it getting to a stage where each one of us can feel the effects of global warming? No longer do we need statistical data to prove its happening. The changes are there for people to see and feel for themselves.

[Samurai]

In this Fake News era, you have to be very careful about the source of the information.

For example, I came across this book back in 2015. Impressed with the title, I bought it on Kindle and started reading. But I stopped after the first chapter. He was doubting the theory of evolution in the very first chapter... which is no different than doubting earth is round. Do I want to get scientific information from somebody who thinks evolution may not be real, or that earth is flat?

So I googled this author Tim Ball, and he turned out to be a Phd in historical geography, which is not exactly hard science or related to climate science. He is not a scientist at all.

[srishiva]

Everytime something even remotely interesting comes on whatsapp, i search online and most of the time find it to be fake.
I keep telling people how easy it is learn about things with so much information online. Its turning into nightmare with people creating fake items in all fields. Its coming out of just entertainment and is not funny.

[dailydriver]

So the global warming scare is basically a hoax.

This being the central view of the article, I would, in all my wisdom and foolishness, call it nothing but propaganda.

Global warming is actually a misnomer for it doesn't just make the earth warmer, but colder too. In essence, it disrupts the balance of nature and pushes the environment to its extremes.

Any common man will have experienced unnatural behaviour of nature in the past decade. Even without going into its scientific causes, one understands that increasing deforestation, concretization, mechanisation and as a consequence pollution, have left their mark on earth. We do not need the NOAA or its affiliates to tell us that our summers are hotter than ever, winters colder and rains irregular; we have experienced it and therefore know it for a fact.

There has always been a lobby to deny the very existence of Global Warming, driven mainly by the oil industry and it is no coincidence that the ascension of a particular individual to a particularly powerful position has emboldened the said lobby. While there is no way for us to ascertain the veracity of the claims made in the article, the intent behind the claims are crystal clear.

[sparky@home]

Global warming skeptics also believe the models used to predict Earth's future under global warming are unreliable. They feel that while the sun, clouds, gases, glaciers and oceans are responsible for weather, so, too, are other factors, including some we don't currently understand. According to global warming skeptics, computer models are merely a guess at what will happen on Earth in the future -- something climatologists don't deny -- and an arguably poor guess at that. After all, if we can't accurately predict the weather a week from now, how can we predict the global climate in 100 years?

[ashokrajagopal]

Originally Posted by sparky@home

Global warming skeptics also believe the models used to predict Earth's future under global warming are unreliable. They feel that while the sun, clouds, gases, glaciers and oceans are responsible for weather, so, too, are other factors, including some we don't currently understand. According to global warming skeptics, computer models are merely a guess at what will happen on Earth in the future -- something climatologists don't deny -- and an arguably poor guess at that. After all, if we can't accurately predict the weather a week from now, how can we predict the global climate in 100 years?

So many things wrong in these sentences. Of course there are factors we do not understand, but there are things we clearly understand and climatology's predictions are based on that, using scientific methods.
Computer models are predictions considering the factors and data available as of now, again derived on scientific methods. It is not about accurately predicting 100 years from now, it is about extrapolating the data available as of now to an extended periods of time.
Also, we can predict weather accurately in many places in the world. There are some places where you cant do that easily - mostly because we dont have mechanisms for the data that we want, and to somewhat lesser extent because we are still figuring this out.

The website where it came up and the closing statement in the article shouts out "propaganda". The air we breath is more important than the markets and profits. Apparently, some people do not get that.

[Nav-i-gator]

Global warming, as others are also pointing out, is not the generally understood "warming" of the planet Earth. It is a generalized term to encompass all the weather changes related to (as effect of), rise in temperatures over the long-term mean. It may mean rise in sea levels (and as a result, drowning of low lying areas/islands/coastal cities), due to melting of large Icebergs, resultant disruption in highly susceptible ocean currents that are responsible for delicate and localized weather phenomena (like higher than "geographically normal" temperate climates in some parts of Norway, like Monsoons etc).
Global warming can lead to floods, tropical climates, drop in temperatures, frequently violent cyclones/hurricanes/typhoons, floods and unusually hot heat waves.

One cannot predict the timelines for all these, but can establish the link through backward interpolation as well as forward extrapolation of weather data.

[sandeepmdas]

Do we need to continue discussing in this thread? Climate change and global warming are real and naysayers are classified along with flat-earthers and moon-landing hoaxers. IMHO, this thread should be locked.

Originally Posted by am1m

BTW, where is NASA mentioned in the article? The article talks about some organization called the NOAA.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. I think it enjoys the same legal and administrative status of NASA.

[shashanka]

Originally Posted by sparky@home

Global warming is a much-discussed matter, and something that could affect future generations. However, this article from www.investors.com is kind of a revelation. I have heard of scientists cooking up data for various reasons, but an organisation like NASA doing it so that their data are proved accurate is not something expected from them. Having read the article I thought of sharing same, I really have no knowledge how far it is true.
Source : https://www.investors.com/politics/e...warming-scare/
Mods. : I could not find any appropriate thread, if needed kindly do needful, or delete as necessary.

Hello sparky@home, this article is quite useful - as an example of the silly lengths to which vested interests (interested in maintaining the status quo - that global warming is so much hot air & that these interests should be allowed to continue with their commercial/industrial rampage in dragging the planet to its death) will go.

The website (investors.com) should have rung warning bells - there's no mention anywhere of the large body of concerned humanity with their unfortunate experiences at the receiving end of this mindless growth.

And as someone mentioned earlier, where's NASA in all this ! - though NASA is no holy cow either, being an entrenched part of that opaque complex that hides behind the euphemism of the military-industrial complex.

An ordinary Google search elicited the following about NOAA -

"National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA; pronounced /ˈnoʊ.ə/, like "Noah") is an American scientific agency within the United States Department of Commerce that focuses on the conditions of the oceans and the atmosphere."

No surprises there - Uncle Sam & commerce are like the proverbial baby & its umbilical cord. Commerce is vital, yes - but not at the expense of destroying this little blue planet.

[GTO]

Guys,

We can safely conclude that the article is a hoax. Hence, closing thread.