If he isn't trolling he is being horribly ignorant, Seriously global warming is literally the only thing in human history that effects the survival of our species as a complete whole sure that sounds overly dramatic but I know of nothing that will have as wide spread an impact.

Yeah, IQ, you can cherry-pick the AR4 all you want, but a basic look at the information on just the first page shows that's exactly what you're doing.

I'm pretty much done here, because if you're NOT trolling, you show an incredibly poor understanding of the issue and I'm not going to waste my time trying to argue something you're willfully just going to deny.

IQ, I really don't think you're stupid. But you're opinion comes off as really stupid for a number of reasons that people in this thread have explained far better than I ever can.

So yeah.

Keep in mind the IPCC is a political organization. The group that does the interpreting does not answer to the people whose work they interpret, nor does there seem to be much control to make sure their conclusions are correct. In short, pointing to the IPCC really just says you don't have a good understanding of the issues involved.

Also, waving your arms and calling someone a troll is still as unconvincing an argument as it is possible to make.

Also, I apologize for opening my mouth without hitting Wikipedia first. How uncivil.
 

I have looked over what I assume is the most comprehensive and hopefully unbiased information available on the issue and admitted the practicality of your collective point. What more do you want? I'd promise to drive my car less, but I don't have a car. Because I care about the environment.

Personally, I've had enough snow out here. First storm hit us with 6 inches, then 12, and last week saw anywhere from 18-35 inches.

Quick, everyone get outside and idle your cars.

Ahem: http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.htm

Please, don't just spout stuff. Yes, it's "political," in that it's run by some form of government, but it's not like the "corporate scientists" paid by big business. This is a NOBEL PRIZE-WINNING scientific body formed by the highest international authority on the planet, taking information from thousands of independent researchers of differing viewpoints worldwide and incorporating it into one central place.

If you have something better, by all means, I'd love to see it.



Edit: Also: http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/orga...procedures.htm

You'll notice even OPEC is listed in the list of observer organizations, so the idea that nobody is watching them is simply not true. If anyone would want to quiet questions of global warming, it's someone selling fossil fuels.

I thought we discussed the Nobel Prize in another thread and how it has been transformed into a political tool rather than an award.

That's another thing. It's possible (and I don't know how much of this is bullshit and how much isn't) that corralling all of this information into one place leaves it open to be reinterpreted and filtered to advance one agenda over another. Also, with these recent scandals (again, not sure how much is garbage) my faith in the IPCC has been somewhat shaken. Not so much by the body of those leaked letters, but by the excruciatingly slow response by their higher ups after they heard the story was going to break.

*sigh*

Okay, so what if it is? This is an organization under heavy review, as posted in my edit.

Climategate a sham: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ear...ock-solid.html

That said, no, it's under outside scientific review, just like everything else. Science HAS to be reviewed to be accepted. If it's not, it's not considered worth the paper it's printed on. This is why science is so slow to change, because any challenge to conventional wisdom tends to get shot down.

blue, some sources other than the one under scrutiny would strengthen your case. What an organization says it is and what it actually does is not necessarily the same thing.

I'm also fairly certain the founders of the Nobel organization would be sad to see what it has become.

Anyway this all seems irrelevant to me given my first post in this thread which seems to have gone ignored. To recap: If we are in fact warming up the planet, reversing what we have done over the past few hundred years could have disastrous results on a scale far greater than anything the current trends are projecting. That's really what needs to be addressed first of all, all these other issues are just, well, red herrings i suppose, distractions.