NFR - Global Warming Poll

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Scott Keith, Oct 18, 2007.

?

Do you believe in Global Warming?

  1. No, the Earth is not warming

    3.0%
  2. Yes, the Earth is warming and it is mans fault

    49.5%
  3. Yes, the Earth is warming as part of its natural cycle

    43.4%
  4. How does this relate to fishing?

    4.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jasmillo

    jasmillo Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    518
    Likes Received:
    98

    I agree completely...that was the point of my post as well. It is not a left/right-black/white issue. Seems like a lot of people debating this issue make their political leanings very obvious and it really has nothing to do with the issue. I will be the first to admit that I should be more educated myself on this subject and that's why for the most part I have stayed away from this thread and the one that was around earlier regarding the same subject. However, since I currently do not have the to read every piece of research ever published on this subject and I am assuming most people on this forum are in the same boat unless you do it for a living, really all we have to offer to the debate is open minds and logical/rational thought processes. In my mind, the fact that there are 7 billion of us in the world, means we are most likely having some sort of "unnatural' effect on the climate. Who knows though- I could be wrong. I am not an expert but for now I'll be cautious because I'd rather be safe than sorry.

    I simply do not see how any person can say global warming absolutely is or is not human caused....that's why there is a debate. However, all the Gore/Limbaugh/Prius comments sprinkled thoughout this thread shows where most folks get their info on this subject and that's a bit scary in my mind.

    As far as your comment about educating myself about emmisions trading, lawyers lining up to sue the U.S., etc. Again, it's obvious that this would be occuring. Parasites look for opportunity and they jump on it. However, just because parasites are lining up to take advantage of a situation doesn't mean the situation doesn't exist. Those asses are a whole different issue completely.
     
  2. Jon Borcherding

    Jon Borcherding New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    534
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    iagree

    :rofl:

    JonB
     
  3. Jon Borcherding

    Jon Borcherding New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    534
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    iagreeiagree

    :rofl::rofl::rofl:

    JonB
     
  4. Jon Borcherding

    Jon Borcherding New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Messages:
    534
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Tacoma, WA
    In my opinion this is a better question:

    Regardless of weather (sic) or not there is anthropogenic global warming, do you believe that we are better off, as a society, if we encourage the coercive power of government to shape our everyday behavior or are we better off as a society if we limit the coercive power of government to shape our everyday behavior?

    If we agree that there is little we can do to affect climate change, isn't it more important to limit the power of govt. so that freedom and the free reign of ideas can enlighten and enhance our destiny?

    Imposition of order = escalation of chaos.

    JonB
     
  5. gt

    gt Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    sequim, WA
    OR, perhaps the primary question might have been worded as:

    is man accelerating climate change around the world by introducing various emisions into our atmosphere?
     
  6. chadk

    chadk Be the guide...

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    5,057
    Likes Received:
    43
    Location:
    Snohomish, WA.
    One thing seems pretty clear from this poll. We are evenly split and this division is just cauing us to focus more or 'being right' and less on taking care of real pressing issues that I bet over 90% of us would get behind. Issues related to pollution in the Puget Sound (Victoria sewage anyone?), over harvest of certain fish in the ocean, protecting our lakes and rivers, habitat restoration, hatchery practices, salmon farming practices, run-off, etc etc. Take these issues out of the hands of the likes of Al Gore and political agendas and watch true progress take off. And if you believe man is responsible for global warming or not, tackling these issues can't make it worse, and if real, can possibly help.
     
  7. Philster

    Philster Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,939
    Likes Received:
    346
    Location:
    .

    Sea lice from farming operations on outmigrating smolt... Definite area for study.
     
  8. 05tacoma

    05tacoma Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    246
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Auburn, WA
    My feelings exactly. I've never doubted global warming, only Al Gore's version of it.
     
  9. gt

    gt Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    sequim, WA
    i'm surprised no one has quoted the ever popular readers digest or perhaps nostradamus! the fact that so many are in denial regarding 'we the people' and our direct influence on our environment is down right scary.

    can anyone 'prove' that what is happenning is 'caused' by mankind? of course not that is not what is being postulated. big al simply has put the spotlight on OUR collective negative influence on the one and only environment we happen to have.

    gore bashing, scripture spouting, denial of any sort, is not going to resolve what is clear to scientists around the world. 'we the people' are having a direct bearing on expediting the degradation of our environment. sitting back and not changing what we are currently doing is simply going to create a place where soilant green becomes a reality, and i mean your children are going to be suffering for your blind acceptance of the gas and oil company's propoganda.

    butt, i won't be around to see you eat your words, that much is a certainty.
     
  10. Philster

    Philster Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,939
    Likes Received:
    346
    Location:
    .
    "yes, the current change in climate is directly related to human intervention." GT, post #74 http://www.washingtonflyfishing.com/board/showthread.php?t=43364&page=4 :rofl:
     
  11. gt

    gt Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    sequim, WA
    oooooooooooh, yet another nanana post. didn't like the bit more precise way of stating the obvious i guess!
     
  12. Philster

    Philster Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,939
    Likes Received:
    346
    Location:
    .
    Yes it's true, I was blinded by the precision of this paragraph:

    "can anyone 'prove' that what is happenning is 'caused' by mankind? of course not that is not what is being postulated. big al simply has put the spotlight on OUR collective negative influence on the one and only environment we happen to have."

    It truly renders one speechless... A mind is a terrible to thing to have wasted.
     
  13. oilslick

    oilslick New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2007
    Messages:
    49
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hillsboro, OR
    [​IMG]

    Nice trigger fish...

    I guess some people make money "trading weather". I haven't yet been able to wrap my brain around this concept, but I guess its a volitle market. This week it swang 25%. :eek: :D
     
  14. gt

    gt Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Messages:
    2,631
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    sequim, WA
    yes, it is important to distinguish between inferential statistics and relational statistics, but you know that philster, right? the first is a set of tools commonly used in situations where the researcher has control of the variables in question. the conclusions are of the nature: '...i did A and CAUSED B to occur...'. these are the sorts of experiments which can be replicated by other researchers.

    the statistical tools used in all of this climate research are relational. what is happenning is scientists are looking for patterns in events. examining ice cores tells us that warming and cooling has happened in the past, as an example. but examining those cores also tells the story of time and now long it took for these cycles to happen.

    i have yet to read a single published study which has used the word 'caused' simply because it is not possible to jump to that conclusion given the avaliable statistical tools.

    now some folks are going to say '...so what...', but the point is a simple one, 100% of the science community who has engaged in examining all sorts of data are of one mind: climate change is here now and mankind is accelerating the rate at which it is occurring. how sure are they? 96% sure. and remember that 'p' value is the result of a concensus vote which means that the various governments they represent had to sign off. such major polluters of the environment as 'we the people' as well as china had to give the ok so that value is a conservative one at best.

    unfortunately, the media, having an apparent zero understanding of statistics and how the science community uses these tools, interjected 'caused' and thereby had the appropriate straw man to hang from the yard arm.

    sorry to have bored yah'all but please understand what you are reading before concluding.


    and a link from my am reading:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/21/AR2007102100761.html?hpid=topnews
     
  15. Philster

    Philster Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2003
    Messages:
    2,939
    Likes Received:
    346
    Location:
    .
    Nah... Too easy...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.