Originally posted by allosteryA null hypothesis is a statistical analysis of data, not an experiment. In this instance it would be to compare the data over the past 150 years and compare that with similar parts of the earth's natural cycles... and that turned out to show that the magnitude of change is significantly different from before.
The ones you really need to watch out for are the "null hypotheses" where a researcher apparently undertook a large, expensive project to prove something IS NOT happening. Why would anyone do that?
Originally posted by MexicoWho cares about that? Think big.
Don't forget,
Rising sea levels - more beaches, and the weather to go with them....
More extreme weather - Means more extreme sunshine, and better snow for the winter sports
More rain for dessicated regions due to more widespread monsoonal weather patterns....
Warmer seas for the fish......
More C02 for the trees to breath....
The list is endless...
😀
Global warming means babes wearing miniskirts 8 months/year.
As a plus, weather will be more windy 🙂
Originally posted by MexicoNow more seriously.. I've done some calculations on my own, and found that global warming due to men can't be that serious. Supposedly good scientists seem to forget important factors in their theories (either to add or to subtract), and there seems to be a huge lobby in both sides.
I think Debates is probably the best place for this:
Has anybody ever found an Unbiased report on global warming? I've done quite a bit of research on climate change and global carbon levels as part of college and now my job..... But I don't think I've every read a paper thats been Unbiased.... They're always either shouting "we're all screwed" (crazy envi ...[text shortened]... can't be good for us.... But I definitely don't think its going to kill us all....
Population growth, lack of resources, and globalization seem a lot more worrying to me nowadays.