For the sake of all the "climate skeptics" and especially those who hang on (scientists) "high stakes", you should know that: in the scientific world there are those who raise doubts about the causes of the warming, there are no skeptics about the warming itself
For the sake of all the "climate skeptics" and especially those who hang on (scientists) "high stakes", you should know that: in the scientific world there are those who raise doubts about the causes of the warming, there are no skeptics about the warming itself. Those who nevertheless claim that "there is no warming" are invited to explain the following phenomena:
Let's start at home: until about 10 years ago, the average rainfall in Eilat was 2.5 cm per year, in recent years the average has dropped to 1.5 cm per year. The desert climate in the country "rises" more and more to the north. As a resident of Eilat, I check the thermometer often, until a few years ago the mornings in the winter were... cold, around 6 degrees, in the last two winters the mercury did not drop below 11 degrees.
Asia: lakes are drying up, the Himalayan glaciers are melting, India and China are facing a lack of water, "permafrost" areas are thawing and turning into swamps that emit methane.
Africa: In the Sahel countries there is a continuous drought of about 10 years. Mount Kenya and Mount Kilimanjaro are losing their glacier cover, as are the "Mountains of the Moon" in Uganda.
Europe: spring comes early every year, heat waves kill people and cause damage to infrastructure, in the south of the continent...water shortage.
Australia... is experiencing a multi-year drought and extensive forest fires.
North America: In California, the water level in the reservoirs is dropping, fires (perhaps started by criminals) are fueled by hot winds and are burning huge areas.
In Canada, coniferous forests are being destroyed by the pine beetle, the spread of the beetle was limited by the Canadian cold... cold that is not there.
The southern border of the "permafrost" areas in Canada moved 150 km north in the last half century,
South America: glaciers at the top of the Andes ... melt and disappear, glaciers in the south of the continent become ... lakes.
Antarctica: Glaciers that "separated" from the Eastern Ice Shelf in Antarctica were seen "sailing" near New Zealand.
Arctic Sea: In the North Sea, an open sea passage is created from ice for longer and longer periods.
Coral reefs: in all equatorial and temperate regions, the corals "bleach" after the high water temperature causes damage to the symbiotic algae, corals bleach... and die.
So, either all the facts are not established, or there is another factor (besides warming), an unknown and unknown factor to science that causes the warming phenomena?
43 תגובות
For 5,
How are there cold waves?
It is very likely that due to the warming of the earth (which is due to us due to the emission of carbon dioxide) we will create the next ice age. We will melt all the ice that contains fresh water that will prevent the circulation of heating/cooling the water in the oceans, which of course affects the weather.
The cold waves result from the violation of this balance (and also storms, etc.).
Welcome to the ice age (if we don't stop heating the ball).
Tamir, as long as warming is the scientific consensus, this will be the situation on both YNET and the science site. It is impossible to invent new science for anyone who wants to take a populist but scientifically incorrect position.
I don't understand how a website that claims to be scientific displays such a shallow, populist and worthless article (scientific and otherwise). pure shame. Even below the level of YNET. How low will you go?
Mr. Rosenthal:
Your pretensions to write "scientific" articles does irreparable damage. Check yourself before the act.
Go do your homework, or at least spare us your fundamentalist preaching.
Do yourself a favor and stop obsessing... the debate is about the cause of the warming and not about the warming itself... I tell you this: either the academy is influenced by ideological fashion and does not let the facts confuse it - or you are simply serving the economic interests of those who profit from the phenomenon. Knowingly or unknowingly, you have become a political instrument in untrustworthy hands. Successfully. And don't worry - reality will slap you in the face just like before.
Also regarding the dramatic information about the white reefs
Here is information about reefs that have bleached as a result of -
Cold! ...in South Florida!
http://tinyurl.com/CoralBleaching
I have already pointed out the results of believing things based on reports of this kind.
It hurt you for some reason but these are the facts.
There are many astronomers who watch the sky all the time. There is the SETI project.
They found nothing.
There are laws of nature that apparently make this impossible.
Regarding telepathy - this has never been demonstrated in a controlled experiment. Here, too, there are only anecdotes and this phenomenon is also apparently in contradiction to the laws of nature.
Many such reports have been proven to be false or erroneous.
There are some who did not have information that would allow this to be done and that is obvious. If I report tomorrow that today I saw an alien, no one will be able to disprove it.
In short - there is much more against these reports than there was against the reports in the blood plots that did not rule out any natural law and so many resources were not invested in an unsuccessful attempt to falsify.
At the same time there are reports of sightings of the Holy Mary, spirits and demons and much more.
I didn't say that the mind is infinite, but infinite, meaning that it continues to develop all the time. Brain processes are also not finite. That is, the processes of transferring information in the brain are open between all parts of the brain. Regarding 36, we probably interpret the word engineering differently. In my eyes, an engineering structure is planned. If you see the evolutionarily enhanced structure called the human brain as an engineering structure, then there is no argument.
But in this discussion, this is not the argument that we need to deal with. Some of the testimonies about telepathy and extraterrestrial aircraft are strong, and have not been challenged so far, for example the same testimony I described in 31 of the American pilot Kenneth Arnold.
There is a large body of evidence that in fact has no explanation, and dismissing it with the sentence "You want to believe in telepathy and flying saucers" is a refusal to acknowledge the facts. That's why I started this discussion 13.
I don't believe in these things.
But based on the evidence - I guess there really is. If I see an appeal to the strong claims, I will accept their denial.
And explain to me more, of course, how evolution means that the structure that will be created will not be an engineering structure.
Year:
You are wrong.
I didn't try to deal with facts because you didn't mention any fact that needs to be dealt with.
You made one unfounded factual claim and you dealt with it but you didn't deal with the obvious rebuttal I provided.
Please explain to me how a non-existent mind can be infinite.
Explain this all the way - starting with the complete absence of a nervous system, through a distributed nervous system with ganglia, and ending with a flatworm's brain that includes about 2000 neurons.
Mr
In the current debate, dealing with facts is your weak point, along with accepting unsubstantiated establishment claims formulated axiomatically.
Nevertheless - one thing I must say:
Your claim that according to evolution the brain cannot be an engineering structure and that even it must be infinite is a wild delusion.
There are even animals whose brains are so finite that they don't exist at all.
Year:
I don't get anything from what you said, but Nadav has already tired me enough.
Do you want to believe in flying saucers and telepathy? free!
Mr.,
I understood that mentioning your name causes the publication of comments to be delayed, so I refrain from using it.
When I ask myself what causes a trial to be produced on evidence of murder in a discussion of principle and silence on telepathy, my answer is as I mentioned on the 26th.
To the point, your response 19 does not require dealing with facts, since there is no debate on this historical claim.
At 30 you suggest looking at the brain as an engineering structure. You know that such a view is fundamentally mistaken, and the essence of evolution.
Like any organism and part of an organism, the brain is definitely an infinite structure for the world.
Not only is the potential of possible experiences for absorption infinite, the human brain's ability to absorb experiences is also enormous, its finality has never been proven, and in fact, in view of people's recollections of experiences they have seemingly forgotten about, even complete forgetting has not yet been proven.
Above all, the way the brain works is infinite. The method of absorption, like the method of retrieving knowledge, is very complex, multi-channel.
The fact that the research tools that exist so far are unable to deal with telepathy indicates one of two things: either, there is no telepathy, I completely agree with this doubt. Or, these tools are not suitable for the study of the phenomenon, I prefer this hypothesis.
No one responded to my claim about the alien evidence. Anyone who participates here knows how to reach countless links on the subject. Some of the evidence is solid because of the strength of the people and the circumstances.
I just want to mention the first testimony about flying saucers, given by a veteran pilot of the US Air Force, over 60 years ago, when there was still no trend in the matter. A man with a technical profession, clear-headed and experienced in his profession, testified that he saw bodies flying at enormous speed, which were completely unfamiliar to him.
Essentially, the subject of aliens and the subject of telepathy are similar in the challenge they pose: a huge collection of evidence, a significant part of which has not been challenged so far, and we still have no real access to investigate it.
Year:
It is not clear to me how stating clear facts can be seen as aggression (unless you are afraid to confront the facts).
I wanted to show you that the matter of the multiple testimonies means nothing and adopting it as a criterion for accepting claims is really dangerous.
Many times people wake up in the middle of the night as a result of a dream in which something happens to their son.
In most cases the matter is forgotten because it has no meaning.
When one time it really happens - they make a mess out of it.
The fact is that they failed to demonstrate it in a controlled way and it's not that they didn't try.
As I mentioned - it also does not exactly fit with the way the brain works (and in a framed article - not even with the demands on it - if you look at it as an engineering structure: the very requirement for the ability to adjust a finite structure to absorb a finite and unknown part of the infinite potential of possible experiences requires Variation in the memory structure of human beings - variation that expresses what they actually experienced. This variation pre-empts the possibility of a common electromagnetic language).
This is exactly the whole difference - what is the part of humans in this warming and what is the part of nature.
attorney,
As a lawyer your reading is far from accurate. Read my words again and show me where I conditioned my understanding of physics. The Aaronov Boom effect is well known, but do you know a good explanation for the effect? And where did I try to explain the mechanism of telepathy.
And in any case, if there is truth in telepathy, there are still no research tools suitable for its research.
Yair
The Aaronov-Boehm effect is a well-known and well-known effect, and it has nothing to do with the explanation of telepathy.
As mentioned, your arguments do not indicate any understanding of physics.
And as mentioned, there is also no need for special quantum effects to enable the general idea of telepathy.
But first, we need a real scientific observation on the subject.
for 14, 16, 19,
14, in the experiments regarding telepathy, some surprisingly did succeed, indeed a minority, but it should not be dismissed with the stroke of a pen. And anyway, I didn't include it in science, but I wanted to say that it is not the same as creationism or aliens.
16, in the context of the Aharonov boom, many years ago Yosef Tergin spoke on radio with Yakir Aharonov, who said, because I was very surprised, I remember the content of his words, that an electromagnetic field in the United States, I think he mentioned the name Los Angeles, can affect a field in Israel, without time difference. That is, there is some physical communication mechanism that is not explained yet, that works differently from waves. Minds also produce fields.
To 19, your response is really aggressive, and your example is irrelevant. I cannot prove telepathy, and all I wanted to emphasize is that it is better not to underestimate the possibility of its existence. Most of the thousands of reports on telepathy are disinterested, no one against anyone, in stark contrast to your example. If a person reports that he woke up at night and knew that his son, who was far away from him, had died, and his son's death at that hour did happen, we are allowed to doubt the report, but we are also allowed to accept it as a true report.
We are still far from understanding the workings of the brain, so that we can say out of the blue that telepathy contradicts the workings of the brain.
Here is an article by the head of the Department of Geophysics and Planetary Sciences in Tel Aviv:
http://geophysics.tau.ac.il/images/stories/articles/global-warming.pdf
A summary based on the conclusions of scientists in Israel (including Pinchas Alpert and Nir Shabiv)
http://www.actcool.org.il/_Uploads/dbsAttachedFiles/GWREPORT.pdf
And another link to a summary of the opinions of several scientists:
http://www.sviva.gov.il/Enviroment/Static/Binaries/mechkarim/kliot_6-103_1.pdf
Avi - is the number 17,200 zero in your eyes? interesting…
A. Ben-Ner:
Faldor has a clear opinion and he has said it more than once.
He is an expert in climate science - there is no doubt about that - but most other experts think differently than him.
In the current presentation, he somewhat humbles his opinion (that the warming is not man-made) but he still presents things in a somewhat trending way.
For example, on slide 11, he says that after the Holocene maximum, humans got along quite well, but he ignores the fact that the number of humans in the world was much smaller (I didn't check, but I'm guessing more than a thousand times).
There were no populated coastal cities to flood and the amount of water and food resources necessary for humanity were much smaller. Because of the minority of the population, humans could live in the remaining livable areas.
It's different from the situation today and I guess Faldor knows it.
Similar things can be said about the Younger Dryas period, when not many humans lived in the world either.
So what! Now they will sue the deniers?
Mr.
My main point was that there is no need to go into special phenomena in modern physics in order to explain telepathy. This can be done with much simpler physics.
So we have no argument about this.
I don't understand brains, but as mentioned, no such phenomenon has been observed, so there is no need to explain it yet.
As a rule, the fact that we remember in different places and different methods is perhaps less relevant than the way in which we think, if it was done with one mechanism then it would be possible to think of a mechanism that would make it possible to "hear" the thoughts. Physically the mechanism should be possible.
For that matter, to a person who cannot hear in our frequency range, speech might be interpreted as telepathy, and to us a bat's use of what it uses might appear to be "thought power," at least until we were able to perceive and explain it.
His lawyer:
Telepathy does not contradict the laws of physics but it probably contradicts the way the brain works.
The way the different brains work is not similar enough to allow meaningful communication.
The brain cells that if I remember the concept of "car" are not the cells in which you remember the same concept and the memory of my grandmother is not at all in your brain.
There is also evidence that different actions are performed differently in different brains. That is why, for example, some people cannot speak while they are counting in their head and have no problem flipping through the album and looking for a picture (they count through self-talk) while others do not have difficulty speaking while counting but they have difficulty looking for a picture in the album (they count by showing the appearance of the numbers in their imagination ).
Year:
There were also thousands of testimonies of Jews murdering Christian children to use their blood to make unleavened bread.
If you have a way to prove telepathy you are welcome to go to James Randi and win a million dollars
http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html
Dear friends. (And Dr. Rosenthal among them)
I refer you to a great web article, clear, easy to understand, accompanied by an excellent presentation and in Hebrew,
By Professor Natan Faldor-Department of Computer Science-University of Israel
Name of the article: Global climate change, facts and myths, the complex climate machine of KDWA.
http://www.pmo.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/829182F4-8FAC-42F9-9974-5976A0658C1E/0/Earthsclimate.ppt
The article presents the climate picture in its complexity. In an agenda-free, scientific and objective manner.
Recommended-recommended-recommended.
What if the hole in the ozone? Did you forget him?
Until two or three years ago, he was the "Leader" and "Bon Ton" of the "Environment". Now dim and shine a little……for nothing and why?
Has he started to shrink?
A young and exciting successor has risen to him - "Hatimamot KDAHA".
But gentlemen, the temperatures have been measured here for several hundred years, at thousands and tens of thousands of fixed points on the surface of the globe.
Is it not possible to confirm the claim of warming, and its rate, by the temperature data? It is not "better" than scaremongering like:
There it collapsed..there it was destroyed..there it was washed away…and there it burned…..?
Moreover, I read that, geoclimatic studies show that in the past as well
There have been periods of warming and cooling in DHA, with a frequency that does not necessarily correspond to the precession cycle of the DHA rotation axis
which is the cause of the ice ages in cycles of about 12,000 years (if my memory is correct).
In particular, I mean the study of the composition of the dust in the glacier layers in Antarctica,
From it, conclusions were drawn about the climate in southern Africa, Australia and South America in ancient times.
Well, if fluctuations in temperatures happened in the past, then it cannot be ruled out that they will happen in the future as well. It is true that there is a problem in identifying and evaluating the relative weight of each of the factors.
A final note: it is difficult not to notice and point out a certain characteristic of the KDA warming campaign, which is somewhat reminiscent of the style and dialectic of religion. I mean the element of self-blame, private and collective,
and following it the need for the recognition, of the individual and the public, of the sin and the solution, the catharsis, through atonement and self-correction, of the morals and actions
the sinners This process also has classic social characteristics. There are the many-bad and harmful, there are the few-good and helpful, and there is the one and only pure truth which is the light at the end of the dark tunnel.
Let's hope for the best.
Wow, I'm glad that finally this point was at least understood.
Indeed the main debate is about the blame based on the assumption that the warming is old.
Of course, by the way, the examples you gave are not really relevant, since the warming is measured over a longer period of time than 10 years back. But, leave
This time we will be content with the fact that you finally understood the first step, the main debate is about the blame.
Moshe (15): True.
Yair (13): You didn't understand the physical issues you talked about. Try again.
By the way, I'm not sure that physics should have any problem with the idea of telepathy in the form of waves (EM) that your brain transmits (it seems to me that it happens anyway, to one degree or another), and that another brain will be able to receive and translate. Unless, of course, it's never Not observed. I don't think it contradicts any physics (maybe it would have taken too much energy, besides?)
I also don't think there is any science that theoretically rules out aliens. But a reliable observation is still needed for this idea.
The use of the word "denier" aims to delegitimize anyone who thinks differently from Mr. Rosenthal, in an implicit and contemptuous way.
Yair,
Oops - you brought telepathy into the realm of science a little too quickly.
There is not a single experiment that confirms the existence of telepathy, although many experiments have been done for it.
The thousands of reports certainly do not constitute confirmation of this.
The physical context you mentioned is completely unrelated.
For now at least, telepathy still belongs to the flat world.
my father
Creation theory, telepathy, aliens,
These are three completely different things.
Telepathy, regarding which there are thousands upon thousands of reports of news regardless of the source of the reported fact and the reporter. Physics also allows for such a possibility, through the connection between two photons fired in different directions from a single source, as well as the Aaronov-Boom effect.
Aliens - these are reports that until no evidence is brought against them, their denial stands with the same doubt as their report.
The creation theory really belongs to the flat world.
For my age, the science site and Wikipedia pride themselves on maintaining the scientific consensus. Because otherwise, if we leave every issue to the decision of the majority, we will have very interesting sciences, such as creation theory, telepathic communication with or without aliens, etc.
If you tell, you will see that the number of scientists who oppose global warming is zero. Nir Shabiv also said on several occasions that there is warming, he just believes that it is not caused by human activity.
Dawn:
Nice response, but don't be satisfied with optimism.
Those who can should act - otherwise the optimism will not justify itself.
Anyone who can buy a hybrid car will buy one.
Whoever can install a photovoltaic system on the roof - should install it.
What enables the progress towards the green vision is not only the ingenuity of humans but also the awakening of the governments to the matter.
I must point out that the Israeli government actually works and has found ways to subsidize - both the equipping of a hybrid vehicle and the self-production of green electricity. This is essential because unfortunately - no one would invest money for the benefit of the planet if there was no direct profit for them.
I am optimistic.
It's true that our ball goes crazy and heats up, but it doesn't matter if it's us or not.
Undoubtedly, our immodest contribution should be moderated and we should strive to stop and that is what is important.
Ray Croswell claims that solar energy, whose output is today as a percentage of all energy produced
Increases and doubles every year. If this is true then this is very good news for you to deliver
A total solution within a decade.
If we have enough energy available to run our tank and more to come
Water desalination and a personal air conditioner 🙂 So we will manage and survive.
I recommend you to watch Bill Gates' last TED talk.
He also supports energy projects based on radioactive waste.
With so much good energy and big money the solutions will come faster than you think.
It has been read more than once in history.
In the first 4/5 years after the Wright brothers managed to fly
The principles of modern aviation were established, there were simply a lot of attempts
And from them the winners were determined.
I am convinced that this is what will happen this time as well.
Humanity is full of vitality and a strong desire to survive
But she also has quite a self-destructive instinct.
We will wait and see 🙂
Avi,
I have been following your views for years.
I have never found an opinion of yours that goes against the "acceptable" in the world considered scientific.
If you put a dog,
I'm the only one here who "dare" to go against "solid" theories...
To mention: also the theory that the earth is flat,
There was a scientific theory that was taught in universities for hundreds of years...
Regarding the link: for your happiness and the happiness of others "walking in the groove",
The public who is not involved in the fields of science is really afraid to express an opinion,
So that they don't think he's stupid...
I'm not saying there is or isn't warming.
What I claim, that the excuses given by scientists cannot prove anything.
incidentally,
I welcome the increase in awareness of maintaining clean air, as a result of the panic created...
Lehazi - the answers and a detailed map are in the following news
https://www.hayadan.org.il/2009-second-warmest-year-on-record-end-of-warmest-decade-2301108/
The cold wave that hit Europe and the USA this year originated from a disruption in the jet stream that flows from west to east and usually prevents cold winds from the north from reaching the south, and besides that, Europe is expected to cool down precisely because of the warming because the softening of the sea water as a result of the melting of the ice will cause a disruption in the body current that allows for reasonable temperatures there .
As for G - look carefully at the map in the article and you will see that it is a very limited area in Antarctica. The rest of Antarctica and especially the areas near the North Pole are warming and the ice in them is melting rapidly.
And most importantly - the cold wave started in December and despite this, 2009 is one of the warmest in history.
Earth is a variable planet.
Weather, earthquakes, volcanoes, glaciers, sea currents, etc.
Man's ability to survive depends on adapting to a changing world.
It is important to note that most of the changes in planet Earth are not related to human existence on earth, the system of the planet consists of many variables.
Simply not true - largely not true, no less and no more. There are certainly thousands of scientists who doubt the warming itself and I wonder how Dr. Rosenthal says things with such absolute certainty, when they have no clue.
Maybe this is what happens when you rely on Wikipedia...
Another degree holder who thinks he has authority...
A- Look at the cold wave that hit Europe and the USA this year. How does that work out?
B. Climate change in Israel is not a global indication. This is a local change.
C- There are areas at the poles where the ice is retreating, but there are other areas where the ice is spreading.
The subtitle of course 🙂
Damo, what are you angry about? It's exactly what the title says...
You could have given up on the article just by reading the title as it is incredibly accurate...
But you probably have a problem understanding the reading... Next time, spend half a minute of your time regarding the meaning of the title - understand it and see if the article suits you or him and save your precious minute and a half
I haven't read such a subjective headline here since 'Triumph of rationality: the Council for Higher Education rejected a proposal of a subcommittee it established for academic recognition in complementary medicine'.
As a Dr. I would expect you to know that the doubts are not about warming but about warming caused by humans. To prove warming you just have to look at the measured temps, you don't have to go as far as "Australia... is experiencing a long-term drought and extensive forest fires", but even if we say that they did rise (even though you surely know that the rise is within the realm of possible statistical error) what do you conclude from this? That the temperature will continue to rise? Should we stop emitting FAD? Should high walls be built around coastal cities?
You have no idea if these are natural fluctuations or if we create them, so explain to me how you contribute to the discussion or simply return the 2 minutes you stole to whoever read your post.