Hefty physicist: Global warming is 'pseudoscientific fraud'

TheStorm · NOU! (Posts: 2552)

Companies need to also make money and while most aren't going out of their way to destroy the environment they also cannot afford to spend extreme amounts of money to make their product 1% more environmentally friendly.

Coal power plants are still one of the most cost effective and efficient ways to generate electricity, if you have some brilliant new tech that is cheaper and yet generates more power be my guest to inform us all of what it is. Maybe tell the power companies while your at it.

Because hybrids aren't perfect and some people actually need vehicles that can move things. Also on less aerodynamic vehicles like trucks and SUVs hybrid engines make even less of an impact. Not to mention hybrid engines cost more to build and maintain.

DShiznit · Guru-in-Training (Posts: 3715)

Companies are willing to do all kinds of research if it makes them more money(look at the big oil companies funding research on how 'wind farms hurt low-flying birds'), but as TheStorm pointed out, reducing pollution doesn't make them money (yet), so they aren't going to do it of their own accord.

I like the idea of using reasonable proposals to transition companies into slowly reducing pollution over time, I'm just not sure it will be effective in the real world, but by all means, good luck.

None of this changes the fact though that large sheets of ice *are* melting, and habitats *are* disappearing as a result. I shouldn't have to explain to you the permanent repercussions of these events on the global ecosystem.

Kllrnohj · ☢ PH34R |\/|3 (Posts: 8196)

Yes you do, because even if we are doing damage it is far from certain if it's permanent. Global climate change is certainly not limited to man's actions, just look at the ice ages for proof of that. There's also evidence of other extinction level events.

Global climate change, while likely real, *might* be caused by man (we don't know for sure), and the damage is far from known and we have no clue what is and isn't permanent.

Reducing oil use has far more immediate benefits anyway, such as reducing the income of middle eastern countries that aid terrorists. We are pretty much funding the terrorists, not to mention ridiculous "wars" that are all about gaining more stable sources of oil. There is also the visible impact of pollution such as smog, making places unhealthy to live.

As for companies doing things about it, you just aren't looking very carefully. Google has solar panels on the roofs of it's buildings, providing something like 30% of it's power. Google has also done some very interesting stuff in the computer power supply area, getting 90%+ efficient PSUs for their servers at a time when 80% was very rare (now ~85% is about the best you'll get out of a high end consumer PSU). I think it's HP that is building a new energy efficient data center that makes good use of natural cooling and air currents, reducing the power needed to cool it by a huge percentage. Reducing pollution might not *make* them any money, but it can certainly *save* them money in the form of reduced utility costs (which can be substantial).

Kllrnohj · ☢ PH34R |\/|3 (Posts: 8196)

Uh, no they don't.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:65_Myr_Climate_Change.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Phanerozoic_Climate_Change.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:All_palaeotemps.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record

Global average temperatures have been very *unstable* for the past millions of years. If you'll notice, the temperature scale on those graphs is also an order of magnitude larger than on the charts over the past 30 years.

DShiznit · Guru-in-Training (Posts: 3715)

Uh, no they don't.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:65_Myr_Climate_Change.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Phanerozoic_Climate_Change.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:All_palaeotemps.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record

Global average temperatures have been very *unstable* for the past millions of years. If you'll notice, the temperature scale on those graphs is also an order of magnitude larger than on the charts over the past 30 years.

KermMartian · Site Admin (Posts: 64056)

I know that this is sort of a non-constructive and trollish post, but I hope that that little turn of phrase there was intentional. Razz

Kllrnohj · ☢ PH34R |\/|3 (Posts: 8196)

I don't know, I've never seen it. More often than not, though, "documentaries" such as that are pushing an agenda, not digging for the truth.

For example, Ben Stein's "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" is more accurately describing itself than the topic it is supposedly investigating. It is full of crap, and is clearly pushing an agenda.

TheStorm · NOU! (Posts: 2552)

Um, so he can become more rich, duh.

Kllrnohj · ☢ PH34R |\/|3 (Posts: 8196)

Uh, political agendas can also be about power. He could also truly believe he is correct and think he is trying to save the world.

elfprince13 · OVER NINE THOUSAND! (Posts: 11872)

The infamous hockey stick graph used there, and elsewhere has been debunked.

Kllrnohj · ☢ PH34R |\/|3 (Posts: 8196)

Not really. It isn't "debunked" so much as "misrepresented". The data behind it is accurate afaik, it is just being misinterpreted.

elfprince13 · OVER NINE THOUSAND! (Posts: 11872)

Not really. It isn't "debunked" so much as "misrepresented". The data behind it is accurate afaik, it is just being misinterpreted.