Austrialin heat wave

[Static_Martyr]

Global warming is a catalyst, not a cause unto itself.

GW is not some entity that somehow "causes the earth to warm;" warming is an effect, not a cause or catalyst. That's why it irritates me when people use that weak-ass argument, that "we get hot weather every year, that means that global warming is not notable." Nobody's saying, "it's hot, therefore global warming," so I don't understand why anyone would even use that terrible argument in the first place. The argument is that we're seeing a continuing upward trend in temperatures, with records being broken almost every year, and that this indicates that the earth's average temperature patterns are rising gradually.

"Gradually" being a relative term; in a literal sense it's gradual, but on a geological timescale it's actually rather quickly.

[Baldwin]

Nobody ever used that "weak-ass argument". Ever. I said this heatwave isn't notable. Not global warming. This heatwave. It's one event, in one place. It shouldn't be part of any discussion on global warming without a whole bunch of accompanying data.

You've apparently been arguing against a strawman point-of-view that you didn't bother to tell any of us about before you started arguing against it, which is probably why treez (and myself) found it so hard to understand.

[XYlophonetreeZ]

GW is not some entity that somehow "causes the earth to warm;" warming is an effect, not a cause or catalyst.

Semantics. In a literal sense, yes, "greenhouse gas emission" is the catalyst, while "global warming," i.e. the overall rise in Earth's surface temperatures, is the effect. But a catalyst is still at the crux of the problem, and anyone can understand that global warming, in concert with random Earth temperature flux, combine to form every incident such as the Australian heat wave today.

Nobody's saying, "it's hot, therefore global warming," so I don't understand why anyone would even use that terrible argument in the first place.

Actually, people say that all the time, and I think it does quite a disservice to the reality of the global trend towards higher temperatures when they do. What's happening in Australia can certainly be used to illustrate the overall global temperature trends- furthermore, I'd encourage global warming awareness advocates to do so, alongside other examples like it- but you can't just take the event in isolation and say "Ha! Told you so" to whatever global warming denying-strawman you think you see. And yes, that is itself a strawman, and I don't think you or llamas were doing that. Which brings me back to the point of my last post, which was that I fail to see any real points of contention here.

[Static_Martyr]

I said this heatwave isn't notable.

And yet, it is. Even in the report they're stating that normally, when there's a heatwave in certain parts of the continent, other areas are cooler as a result, but that wasn't the case here. It might not be THE MOST NOTABLE THING EVARR!111one!!1, but it's still notable.

but you can't just take the event in isolation and say "Ha! Told you so" to whatever global warming denying-strawman you think you see. And yes, that is itself a strawman, and I don't think you or llamas were doing that. Which brings me back to the point of my last post, which was that I fail to see any real points of contention here.

Which is what confuses me. If you agree that that's not what was being said, then what's the argument/problem?

[Eskimo]

Don't poke the alligator with a stick, fellas. Pretty clear the guy's a zealot, with a predetermined outcome he wants to reach, picking and choosing whichever facts support it.

[XYlophonetreeZ]

Don't poke the alligator with a stick, fellas. Pretty clear the guy's a zealot, with a predetermined outcome he wants to reach, picking and choosing whichever facts support it.

Don't be a dick. Global warming is fair enough, but a single example of heat doesn't define it. We kind of just cleared the air and agreed that there was no real argument at all. So unless you're a tinfoil-hat-wearing global warming denier, you'd recognize that you're not in a position to be calling anyone a zealot.

(Awwz, you thought I was on your side, didn't you? I'm sowwy.)

[Static_Martyr]

Don't poke the alligator with a stick, fellas. Pretty clear the guy's a zealot, with a predetermined outcome he wants to reach, picking and choosing whichever facts support it.

Are you talking about me? lol.

[Eskimo]

What, you think I'm denying climate change?

Wow. Good to see we're getting places here.

[XYlophonetreeZ]

Well I mean, you haven't really said anything of substance in this thread. Yet, you just called someone who hasn't said anything extreme at all a "zealot." I can only assume by that that you're the other extreme.

You're Venom Symbiote, aren't you?

[Eskimo]

Maybez I am, maybez I ain't.

Not really sure how you get denying climate change from anything I said, though. Only that the automatic jumping all over this heatwave as being some attributable thing is dubious as a motherfucker.

My testes, your mouth.