Quiz on climate science

[Argonavis (William)]

For those who like quizzes:

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Gl...est/start.html

[TrevorW]

I passed

[space oddity]

Thank you for the link.Perhaps this link should be sent to Mr Rudd and (bit late) to Copenwanken. Being the realist and nerd that i am, i scored top marks.

[el_draco (Rom)]

Somewhat basic, but okay. The question is, since we can't rely on the KRUDDS or "whats his face jesus loving liberal tosser" to do anything about it.... what are each and every one of US gonna do about it?

Here are a few of my actions to date:
- Not flying anywhere anymore.
- Restoring a 5 acre block of rainforest.
- Building energy efficient house.
- Sponsoring a child in a third world country.
- Cut red meat out of my diet almost completely.
- Buying locally and growing our own where possible.
- Relocating work so I dont have to travel so much.
- Going seriously paperless.
- Teaching our children about ecology.
- Becoming active in protecting the environment.

Major "Vice"

I wanna bigger scope

[supernova1965 (Warren)]

Sorry but what a Load of Rubbish put out by Climate Naysayers
DISCLAIMER
I mean that in the nicest possible way and I am not having a go at anyone personally

[space oddity]

I would urge you to check the info from this quiz, you could be surprised. Just dismissing it out of hand is extremely unscientific - a kneejerk reaction. Given the potentially serious ramifications of global warming vs "it is a natural cycle, humans can do nothing" full investigation is essential. An interesting website is climate debate daily . It gives both sides of the arguement, with "calls to action " getting first billing. Wish I had more time to go through all the articles they put on their site - spend too much time on astro sites

[supernova1965 (Warren)]

Originally Posted by space oddity

I would urge you to check the info from this quiz, you could be surprised. Just dismissing it out of hand is extremely unscientific - a kneejerk reaction. Given the potentially serious ramifications of global warming vs "it is a natural cycle, humans can do nothing" full investigation is essential. An interesting website is climate debate daily . It gives both sides of the arguement, with "calls to action " getting first billing. Wish I had more time to go through all the articles they put on their site - spend too much time on astro sites

Sorry if I jumped the gun but as I went into the quiz the questions and expected answers were starting to look decidedly climate change denial city with no room for thinking that it was showing both sides of the argument. I will look at the web page you mention I like stuff that is equal to both sides of an argument

[Lumen Miner (Mitchell)]

Originally Posted by supernova1965

Sorry but what a Load of Rubbish put out by Climate Naysayers
DISCLAIMER
I mean that in the nicest possible way and I am not having a go at anyone personally

I would have to agree on that one.
I couldn't force myself past the first question.

Question 1:

"Global warming" is a real phenomenon: Earth's temperature is increasing.

By making you select "true" or "false", I can see where the whole test is leading.
Not real interested in taking it, if that is the theme / note of the whole test.
How could you possibly answer even the first question, no one can.

[Esseth (Alan)]

It was defiantly one sided, for me this whole issue has become to political not that it matters because it’s a null argument. We have to reduce/cease our reliance on fossil fuels someday...

[KenGee (Kenith Gee)]

Whaaaat how can you have trouble with this question, can you cite a....
oh why bother to go down this route again. You can led a horse to water, but can't make it drink and all that.

Originally Posted by Lumen Miner

I would have to agree on that one.
I couldn't force myself past the first question.

Question 1:

"Global warming" is a real phenomenon: Earth's temperature is increasing.

By making you select "true" or "false", I can see where the whole test is leading.
Not real interested in taking it, if that is the theme / note of the whole test.
How could you possibly answer even the first question, no one can.

[FredSnerd (Claude)]

Originally Posted by Argonavis

For those who like quizzes:

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Gl...est/start.html

What garbage. These are exactly the same kind of cheap tricks the cigarette lobby used for two decades trying to convince people that cigarettes didnt cause cancer (when they knew it did) and lots of people died unnecessarily as a consequence. Did someone really say that this quiz is a balanced and intellegent treatment of the subject. You got to ask. Is that person being honest or just plain gullible?

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by FredSnerd

What garbage. These are exactly the same kind of cheap tricks the cigarette lobby used for two decades trying to convince people that cigarettes didnt cause cancer (when they knew it did) and lots of people died unnecessarily as a consequence. Did someone really say that this quiz is a balanced and intellegent treatment of the subject. You got to ask. Is that person being honest or just plain gullible?

This quiz is interesting for a number of reasons... yep, its political with a motive, but the reality is we are subject to the whims of a planet that is in dynamic equilibrium and if we, as a species, don't take that into account... we will be added to the fossil record pretty quick.

Whether the climate science is right or wrong I don't care, I am not prepared to risk the future of the ONE rock I know I can live on!

I refer back to my original post here and say to you all,

"We can debate the issue as much as we want but it will inevitably come down to individuals doing something about it."

I listed a few things my family is doing and, not suprisingly, we are finding our lives are becoming richer for the changes...

For example:
Action:
- Sponsoring a child in a third world country.

Result:
We, as a family, (including young children), decided to outlaw christmas to do this.
- It costs us $600 p.a. and a little girl gets a life... That meets or exceeds all the "traditional" ideals of christmas we supposedly hold dear I think?
- Our children learn something important about priorities and giving.
- Zero stress for us. We don't even try to "keep up with the commercial crud" and we're amazed at the insanity going on around us as the "stupid season" progresses. How many died on the roads this year?
- Christmas day, we went bush walking as a family... had a ball. Cost $20
- Better for the environment, less landfill etc.
- Tax deductible (for the mercinaries out there)

The hardest part was actually making the change and resisting the "herd mentality" to conform. Two years later... nobody hassles us and our children have thanked us for making christmas so much more fun.

So folks I ask the question again, "What are YOU doing?"

[freespace]

The Quiz is at best outdated, at worst a deliberate attempt to mislead using obsolete and wrong research.

The quiz cites Lassen's work from 91 to argue global warming is due to astronomical causes, not any work of men. However that works has been shown to be false. In fact when Lassen and Thejll updated Lassen's 91 research, they found the correlation stops at around 1980.

This quiz has all the hall marks one comes to expect from detractors of science: using outdated research to cloud the issue. They exploit the fact science is a field which moves quickly and publishes prolifically - for just about any particular belief, if you go back in time far enough, cast your net wide enough, you will find a paper to support your claims. All you need to do is ignore the fact the paper is outdated and more often than not, shown to be wrong.

[Lumen Miner (Mitchell)]

Originally Posted by KenGee

Whaaaat how can you have trouble with this question, can you cite a....
oh why bother to go down this route again. You can led a horse to water, but can't make it drink and all that.

Your one of those people.... Yep everything is all good, it's just a cycle, no need to investigate at all. Job well done.

[supernova1965 (Warren)]

Yes you can lead a horse to water but if it is my horse I will test the water for danger before I will let it drink or drink it my self

[space oddity]

Bottom line - politics and science do not mix.Come to think of it, politics and religion do not mix either. My dad is a senior science academic, he confirms that those who do not tow the official global warming line lose their funding. This amounts to career suicide for an academic- the pollies (those that hand out the grants that are the lifeblood of academia) are pulling the strings. The "science" is biased and therefore not truly scientific. There has to be something fishy when the climatolagists that are beating the AGW drum refuse to share their models and data with other scientists. True science does not just come to a conclusion and then make the data support the hypothesis, it is supposed to be open to scrutiny of the methodology/data to see if the hypothesis holds water. The other thing I find even fishier is that airing the plus side of higher CO2 and warming temperatures are suppressed - branded heresy. This blatant censorship is leading to a one sided arguement. If the AGW brigade were fair dinkum, they would allow freedom of speech to prevail over their current vile censorship ................or do they have something to hide
The cocktail of politics being able to meddle in science is decidedly fishy in taste. I prefer my prawn cocktails to be with cooked prawns-sick of being given the raw prawn.

[freespace]

Ah, the classic formula of:

+ anecdote from a "senior academic"
+ a government/political/commerical conspiracy
+ silencing "the truth"

You know, that's almost exactly the same formula used by 911, moon landing, JFK assassination, etc. conspiracy theorists.

You would think that in the days of the Internet, any censorship on the benefits of increased CO2 and global warming would be difficult. It is not like one can not anonymously publish information on the internet.

You would think that there would be more evidence than simply claims of conspiracies and blatant censorships, which are incidentally so ineffective as to silence the poster.

You would think that given the number of people involved, some of them would have a conscience and speak up. But apparently not - all climate scientists are greedy people with cold hearts and not a shred of dignity or integrity. If only my girl friends can be so good with a secret.

[Peter Ward]

Originally Posted by freespace

The Quiz is at best outdated, at worst a deliberate attempt to mislead using outdated and wrong research.

....

Agreed.

Very much in a similar vein to the claptrap the radio 2UE in Sydney continues to espouse.....

Sadly, the media are poor judges of empirical truth. (never let the truth get in the way of a good story)

[tlgerdes (Trevor)]

I can see a a Holy War coming, let's go get the Infidels, let's have a Crusade.

With terms like naysayers, sceptics and conspiracy theorists, any discussion on this topic is always going to turn into a lynching. This then defeats the purpose of discussion, as people of different views will just switch off and rant in the own fashion.

[supernova1965 (Warren)]

Ok lets be scientific there has been a great experiment that shows what happens in a runaway greenhouse effect it's called VENUS a planet the same size as EARTH roughly anyone want to go live there. As to whether the anti climate change lobby is being censored I find that very hard to believe as you cant even turn on the TV or read a newspaper without hearing from them. In fact I think that they tend to drown out the Science.