February 12, 2009 at 9:40 am
Some aren't impressed by the consensus among climatologists across the globe. So for their benefit, here are just a few organizations and reports with statements concurring with the conclusion that global warming is real, is caused by human activity and is a crisis that must be dealt with immediately:
Federal Climate Change Science Program (U.S. - 2002)
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (2004)
European Academy of Sciences
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
Network of African Science Academies
Royal Society of New Zealand
American Association for the Advancement of Science
European Science Foundation
National Research Council (US)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Society for Microbiology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Institute of Biology (UK)
Society of American Foresters
The Wildlife Society (international)
American Geophysical Union
Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
Geological Society of America
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Medical Association
American Public Health Association
Australian Medical Association
World Federation of Public Health Associations
American Meteorological Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
World Meteorological Organization
American Quaternary Association
International Union for Quaternary Research
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Institute of Physics
American Physical Society
American Statistical Association
The Institution of Engineers Australia
On the other hand, the American Association of Petroleum Geologists have indicated that they believe that the evidence is inconclusive. The fact that they represent the petroleum industry probably has no bearing on their opinion 🙂
It's nice to know that some, if not most, scientists take climatologists seriously--even if John Coleman, the founder of The Weather Channel, does not (Coleman's not a scientist of any kind. His degree is in journalism).
The persons who are telling us that global warming is not caused by human activity today are the same persons who were denying that global warming was even taking place yesterday. Put a dime in their cup and move on.
February 12, 2009 at 9:45 am
Ferks (2/12/2009)
We could debate and argue about Global Warming for an eternity, or until either side is proven correct, but the question still remains..Steve, are you going to keep your Porsche???
😀
Of course!!!!!:D
February 12, 2009 at 9:46 am
Andy Lennon (2/12/2009)
Our analysis of the data warehouse has revealed the following compelling trends:currently, an astonishing 100% of Porsche owners living in Colorado and named Steve Jones are happy with their vehicles, but would like to move to an electric model for altrusitic and noise-reduction reasons. Clearly, it's time for Porsche to adapt to current market conditions...
ROFLMAO
That's great. I think they heard me (and others) on the Cayenne. I'd like one, but I wanted a stick. They made one, though I think the $100k price tag means it's out of my reach until I can find a 12 year old one 🙁
February 12, 2009 at 9:53 am
Hi Steve,
No. you can never reconcile your concern for the environment for your "need" to drive a Porsche. Me, I don't give a hoot about the environment so my driving a Porsche wouldn't be a concern. I will gladly ease your mind and consicence by taking your Porsche off your hands. That way you can live with a clear head and not have to worry. I'll offer you $2,000 U.S. for it. It's a lot cheaper than therapy! 😉
February 12, 2009 at 9:54 am
Chris (2/12/2009)
Some aren't impressed by the consensus among climatologists across the globe. So for their benefit, here are just a few organizations and reports with statements concurring with the conclusion that global warming is real, is caused by human activity and is a crisis that must be dealt with immediately:Federal Climate Change Science Program (U.S. - 2002)
Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (2004)
European Academy of Sciences
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
Network of African Science Academies
Royal Society of New Zealand
American Association for the Advancement of Science
European Science Foundation
National Research Council (US)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Society for Microbiology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Institute of Biology (UK)
Society of American Foresters
The Wildlife Society (international)
American Geophysical Union
Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
Geological Society of America
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
Stratigraphy Commission of the Geological Society of London
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Medical Association
American Public Health Association
Australian Medical Association
World Federation of Public Health Associations
American Meteorological Society
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
World Meteorological Organization
American Quaternary Association
International Union for Quaternary Research
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American Institute of Physics
American Physical Society
American Statistical Association
The Institution of Engineers Australia
On the other hand, the American Association of Petroleum Geologists have indicated that they believe that the evidence is inconclusive. The fact that they represent the petroleum industry probably has no bearing on their opinion 🙂
It's nice to know that some, if not most, scientists take climatologists seriously--even if John Coleman, the founder of The Weather Channel, does not (Coleman's not a scientist of any kind. His degree is in journalism).
The persons who are telling us that global warming is not caused by human activity today are the same persons who were denying that global warming was even taking place yesterday. Put a dime in their cup and move on.
You may be qualified to be a journalist or politician with arguments like this.
A complete list of authorities is still a logical fallacy. And this isn't even a complete list, since it ignores almost all detractor groups. Nor do major parts of it make any sense at all. I mean really, how much weight does the support of the American Medical Association bring to this matter? You use, as a counter-argument, that a Journalism major doesn't qualify to speak on the matter, but that a group of MDs do qualify? That would be humorous if this weren't something that matters.
The argument has been made that those denying AGW are making money off the denial. The argument has been made that those claiming AGW are making money off the claim. Anything in that regard is just little kids calling each other names.
Facts, figures, numbers, methods, lists of biases, these I will grant weight to. Lists of "she hit me first after I kicked her" type junk, I don't bother with.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
February 12, 2009 at 10:11 am
February 12, 2009 at 10:16 am
Thank you. We can stop debating now 🙂
February 12, 2009 at 10:28 am
skjoldtc (2/12/2009)
Hi Steve,No. you can never reconcile your concern for the environment for your "need" to drive a Porsche. Me, I don't give a hoot about the environment so my driving a Porsche wouldn't be a concern. I will gladly ease your mind and consicence by taking your Porsche off your hands. That way you can live with a clear head and not have to worry. I'll offer you $2,000 U.S. for it. It's a lot cheaper than therapy! 😉
Thanks for the offer, but that's a bit short of what I'd let it go for. After all, I'd have to replace it with another 😛
February 12, 2009 at 10:40 am
Steve Jones - Editor (2/12/2009)
skjoldtc (2/12/2009)
Hi Steve,No. you can never reconcile your concern for the environment for your "need" to drive a Porsche. Me, I don't give a hoot about the environment so my driving a Porsche wouldn't be a concern. I will gladly ease your mind and consicence by taking your Porsche off your hands. That way you can live with a clear head and not have to worry. I'll offer you $2,000 U.S. for it. It's a lot cheaper than therapy! 😉
Thanks for the offer, but that's a bit short of what I'd let it go for. After all, I'd have to replace it with another 😛
Would you cosider trading for 99 Boxster?
February 12, 2009 at 11:11 am
The debate about global warming is mute. The fact is, intense human activity has a detrimental impact on the earth's environment. I see it in the brown tap water that I get when the rains cause landslides in the clear cut forests in our watershed. I've driven through the moon scape around Sudbury Ontario caused by acid rain from all the smelters. The pictures of the holes in the ozone speaks for itself. Call it global warming, global cooling, green house effect, what ever. We are having an impact. Thinking otherwise is delusional.
The real issue is fossil fuels. It's going to run out, that's a fact. It's economically unstable, cheap today, expensive yesterday and going to get more so tomorrow. That's a fact. And most of it is in the hands of some of the worst thugs on the planet. Do we want to continue with this?
We have to wean ourselves off this addictive stuff and we have to start now. Yes, it will be expensive, it will hurt and the short term results will be a trickle but that is all the more reason to get on with it.
So drive your Porsche on a sunny day, but take the bus to work. Insulate your home better then it is now. Wear a sweater to keep the thermostat down. Plant a tree. If we all did a little now, we will save a lot later.
A good read on this topic is a book by William Marsden, Stupid to the Last Drop: How Alberta is Bringing Environmental Armageddon to Canada (and Doesn’t Seem to Care)
Thanks
Carlo
February 12, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Ummm.... back to Business Intelligence for a moment. The article referenced (Aug. 2008) says that:
"For starters, Microsoft recently released its long-awaited SQL Server 2008 to manufacturing. Among this release's many enhancements is a new CDC module and proactive caching in its online analytical processing (OLAP) engine.... Proactive caching is an important capability in the front-end data mart because it speeds response on user queries against aggregate data."
The description of Proactive Caching is correct, but it was introduced to SQL Server's Analysis Services OLAP engine with SQL Server 2005, not 2008. Bascially, proactive caching updates the OLAP cache proactively (hence its clever name) based on updates to the underlying source data, not just after the fact of a user's OLAP query.
As for Steve's comments about BI:
Steve Jones - Editor (2/12/2009)
I'm not against BI, I do think it's a good idea, I just think it's a bit of hassle to implement and hard. And expensive, and I don't think most companies have the patience to make the investment.
OK, I may be a bit biased since I work with companies implementing SQL Server BI every day. But even if it is a bit of a hassle to implement (which you could say about any new project - it's always easier to stick with the status quo), and even if it is hard (most new skills and most things worthwhile could be described as hard - especially at first - and then they suddenly don't seem quite as hard as they did before), it's a lot more of a hassle and lot harder to deal with the results of not making the right business decisions (leaving global warming aside for a moment) because of a lack of visibility into what's happening in the business.
I could go on and mention how CIOs for three years running have told Gartner that BI is their #1 priority, etc. but I won't get into all that... 😉 ... and the solid business reasons why they say that.
Since this is a forum for SQL Server professionals, it's good to know that Microsoft really has done a great job with their SQL Server Analysis Services OLAP platform - and it also provides for a very cost-effective BI solution. The tradtional "pure play" BI vendors have created the impression that all BI solutions must be expensive, but thats not the case with the SQL Server BI platform.
February 12, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Would you cosider trading for 99 Boxster?
Sorry, I'm an air cooled guy. I'd replace it with another 87-90 911, though I'd try for black this year.
February 12, 2009 at 2:46 pm
AspiringGeek (2/12/2009)
Here are two interesting articles. The first is a review of the scientific literature:Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
http://www.michaelcrichton.com/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html
The next is by the late, great scientist, physician, author, & producer Michael Crichton:
The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming
http://www.petitionproject.org/gwdatabase/GW_Article/GWReview_OISM600.pdf
I invite you to print it in color & read it carefully. In this article, Crichton asks:
Is global warming happening?
Is it anthropogenic?
Can we do anything about it?
Should we?
Whatever Michael Crichton was he was not a climate scientist. His claims and fiction about the 'conspiracy' of global warming have been thoroughly debunked. Check out http://www.realclimate.org
February 12, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Carlo Clausius (2/12/2009)
The debate about global warming is mute. The fact is, intense human activity has a detrimental impact on the earth's environment. I see it in the brown tap water that I get when the rains cause landslides in the clear cut forests in our watershed. I've driven through the moon scape around Sudbury Ontario caused by acid rain from all the smelters. The pictures of the holes in the ozone speaks for itself. Call it global warming, global cooling, green house effect, what ever. We are having an impact. Thinking otherwise is delusional.The real issue is fossil fuels. It's going to run out, that's a fact. It's economically unstable, cheap today, expensive yesterday and going to get more so tomorrow. That's a fact. And most of it is in the hands of some of the worst thugs on the planet. Do we want to continue with this?
We have to wean ourselves off this addictive stuff and we have to start now. Yes, it will be expensive, it will hurt and the short term results will be a trickle but that is all the more reason to get on with it.
So drive your Porsche on a sunny day, but take the bus to work. Insulate your home better then it is now. Wear a sweater to keep the thermostat down. Plant a tree. If we all did a little now, we will save a lot later.
A good read on this topic is a book by William Marsden, Stupid to the Last Drop: How Alberta is Bringing Environmental Armageddon to Canada (and Doesn’t Seem to Care)
Thanks
Carlo
Totally agree with you that what we're doing to the environment, through burning fossile fuels and a large number of other practices, is unsustainable, destructive and needs to be fixed.
My only disagreement is with people who demand money for solutions to global warming. "Cap and trade" and all that. That's a scam.
Dirty water, oceanic dead zones, toxic rivers, and so on are not a scam, but many of the so-called solutions to them, are.
On the other hand, take a look at www.dhmo.org. Actually, that page has a very high applicability to the editorial that this thread comes from. It's all about how you use the data.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
February 12, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Global warming has been debunked!
http://www.discussglobalwarming.com/blog
mtucker (2/12/2009)
AspiringGeek (2/12/2009)
Here are two interesting articles. The first is a review of the scientific literature:Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
http://www.michaelcrichton.com/speech-ourenvironmentalfuture.html
The next is by the late, great scientist, physician, author, & producer Michael Crichton:
The Case for Skepticism on Global Warming
http://www.petitionproject.org/gwdatabase/GW_Article/GWReview_OISM600.pdf
I invite you to print it in color & read it carefully. In this article, Crichton asks:
Is global warming happening?
Is it anthropogenic?
Can we do anything about it?
Should we?
Whatever Michael Crichton was he was not a climate scientist. His claims and fiction about the 'conspiracy' of global warming have been thoroughly debunked. Check out http://www.realclimate.org[/quote%5D
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 95 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply