Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.

Global Warming Reversed In One Year

Collapse



X
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    I'm not a scientist but whether global warming exists or not shouldn't determine whether people pollute the **************** out of the environment and frivolously consume finite resources. I believe it's fair to say that consuming and polluting things on the scale we are now is not good for our health, whether it affects the environment or not. Just look at China, some of their major cities are so polluted that it's noticeably increased respiratory diseases and cancer.

    Denying the fact that 6 billion humans affect the Earth's environment is like denying evolution.
    http://www.quincymumford.com/

    You can't always write a chord ugly enough to say what you want to say, so sometimes you have to rely on a giraffe filled with whipped cream.
    -Frank Zappa






    Originally Posted by Devil is Dill


    Weebz is the chorus in the Greek tragedy that is Guitar Jam.

    Comment


    • #47



      www.poparad.com

      Comment


      • #48
        We are in the period following a solar maximum right now. The sun is chilling.

        Comment


        • #49
          Anjinsan, you're my buddy and a great guy, but I disagree with you here... and not only that I think you're flat out wrong in several ways.

          20-30 years to remove the C02 that we put up there?

          What about the C02 that mother nature puts up there? How long until we get rid of that? Are we trying to? I mean geologically we are at A PERIOD OF EXTREME LOW LEVELS OF CARBON DIOXIDE IN THE ATMOSPHERE. <--- read that 20 times please. So being that there is less C02 in the air now than there has been throughout MOST of the planet's history...why do we want to make the levels lower still?


          This is flat out incorrect. Ice cores show that we have the highest levels of atmospheric C02 in 800,000 years.

          http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5314592.stm

          I'd hardly call that an period of "extreme low levels"

          If you look at this graph you can see the MASSIVE spike in greehouse gasses as the industrial revolution took hold and gained momentum.




          Every creature on Earth emits C02. Every plant. Every micro-organism. Then of course the planet itself releases C02. Massive amounts of it.


          This is again, untrue. Plants emit oxygen, and clean the air of C02. Plants are the great moderators of the atmophere's C02 levels, and that's why its' so important to protect rainforests and ****************.

          Also, there are a lot of micro-organisms that do not emit C02, but rather consume it, anaerobic bacteria for instance.



          Global warming being man made...seems retarded. We are a lot less important than you believe. I do not care HOW many science guys got million dollar grants for proof of a correlation.


          Not thinking we can impact the earth seems retarded, from my point of view. Clearly we can... and are and anyone who thinks we aren't is simply ignorant of what's really going on. Sorry to have to put it that way, but I'm not retarded either my friend..... and neither are the scientists who dig up ice-cores and plot the dots that tell us how our activity has affected the environment over the course of our history.

          Comment


          • #50
            Truly, the only people I've ever seen railing against the idea of global warming or saying **************** like humans can't impact the climate are very conservative republicans..... and lately republicans have not shown science to be their strong suit, let's be honest with ourselves here.

            I've noticed also that the people who are usually arguing against global warming to me personally are people who tend to be far less educated and knowledgeable in science than I am.......just as a general rule.

            Comment


            • #51
              Truly, the only people I've ever seen railing against the idea of global warming or saying **************** like humans can't impact the climate are very conservative republicans..... and lately republicans have not shown science to be their strong suit, let's be honest with ourselves here.


              It's not so much that science isn't their strong suit, but rather that they are very selective about when they defer to experts. No free markets if anthropogenic GW is true? Oh well, anthropogenic GW must be false. God didn't (directly) create humans if contemporary biology and anthropology are correct? Oh well, the biologists and anthropologists are wrong. Ideology trumps scientific credibility and expertise everytime.

              Comment


              • #52
                It's not so much that science isn't their strong suit, but rather that they are very selective about when they defer to experts. No free markets if anthropogenic GW is true? Oh well, anthropogenic GW must be false. God didn't (directly) create humans if contemporary biology and anthropology are correct? Oh well, the biologists and anthropologists are wrong. Ideology trumps scientific credibility and expertise everytime.


                Yes, kind of what I'm getting at is that people who rail against the idea of global warming or human impact on nature are generally much more motivated by politics than by their deep knowledge of the science behind these ideas.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Yes, kind of what I'm getting at is that people who rail against the idea of global warming or human impact on nature are generally much more motivated by politics than by their deep knowledge of the science behind these ideas.


                  Agreed - and then they have the audacity to claim that people who defer to the experts are motivated by politics! More than just a little bit of projection.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    The thing about global warming is that it may be happening, but it probably wasn't caused by human consumption. Warm periods have happened in the history of the earth before humans were around, how do the global warming people explain those?


                    Don't forget about our neighboring planets that parallel our temps, that's another hard one to explain.
                    Real Men Play Telecasters!

                    Were you doing better when "rich" people were makin' money, OR are you better off now?

                    Fuchs ODS 30, BadCat HC15, 63' Fender Blackface Bandmaster, Mesa-Boogie Mark, Mesa-Boogie Tremoverb, Mesa-boogie Heartbreaker, MusicMan 112RD

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Don't forget about our neighboring planets that parallel our temps, that's another hard one to explain.



                      Which neighboring planet has similar temps to us again? Venus will melt your face off, and Mars will freeze your nuts off. Either way you're ****************ed temerature wise on those.

                      In the case of Venus, we know that it's distance from the sun isn't enough to account for the extreme temperature. It's in fact caused by extremely high concentrations of C02 in the atmosphere.....

                      So, what do we learn by looking at Venus? Enough C02 on earth could make it hot enough to melt you. That's no joke.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Agreed - and then they have the audacity to claim that people who defer to the experts are motivated by politics! More than just a little bit of projection.


                        I see it like this....

                        Some people have learned everything they know about global climate change from Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity.

                        Just like some other people have learned everything they know about evolution from creationist websites (but will talk to you as if they believe they have a phd in biology).

                        Similarly Tom Cruise has learned the history of Psychology from Scientology, and therefore he's the leading expert in the world on this subject. Its' the same kind of delusion.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Which neighboring planet has similar temps to us again? Venus will melt your face off, and Mars will freeze your nuts off. Either way you're ****************ed temerature wise on those.


                          I think he meant that the changes in temperatures of those planets parallel the change of temperature on Tellus.

                          Don't know if it's true though. I should research that.
                          Anyone seen Dano?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            20-30 years to remove the C02 that we put up there?

                            What about the C02 that mother nature puts up there? How long until we get rid of that? Are we trying to? I mean geologically we are at A PERIOD OF EXTREME LOW LEVELS OF CARBON DIOXIDE IN THE ATMOSPHERE. <--- read that 20 times please. So being that there is less C02 in the air now than there has been throughout MOST of the planet's history...why do we want to make the levels lower still?

                            Every creature on Earth emits C02. Every plant. Every micro-organism. Then of course the planet itself releases C02. Massive amounts of it.

                            Global warming being man made...seems retarded. We are a lot less important than you believe. I do not care HOW many science guys got million dollar grants for proof of a correlation.


                            This post is so off-base it's scary. First off, no one is saying that we need to get rid of ALL CO2. We need to get rid of EXCESS CO2 that have been added not by organisms, but by machinery. Second, it is true that animals release CO2 (and other gasses like methane that also contribute to GW). However, the fact that we breed millions and millions of cows is not a part of the natural cycle. There simply wouldn't be as many cows living if not for us. Furthermore, naturally when cows would take a **************** in the wild, that would be good thing. It would be fertilizer. But now, instead of their **************** helping plants grow, the food we feed them elevates the nitrogen in their ****************, making it toxic instead. There are literally toxic lakes of cow **************** sitting out there in on the big conglomate farms, releasing yet more gases that contribute to GW. It's a big complex process that we've injected ourselves into. You **************** with one gear in a big machine and eventually the machine breaks down.

                            As Roger stated as well, CO2 is not at a low level from what I've read. Sorry if I'm mistaken here, please provide a link. Also, even if you're right that CO2 is at a low level, keep in mind that for a long, loooooooong time, this planet was not hospitable to life at all in any way. So if you're comparing our present CO2 levels to those of 3 billion years ago, when we were getting hit with asteroids, huge volcanoes were constantly erupting, and life hadn't really started yet, then maybe you're right but it's a straw man argument.
                            Originally Posted by Strings74


                            In many ways I agree with Pontius Pilate.









                            Originally Posted by Stella Joop


                            pontius pilot brings up good points.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Truly, the only people I've ever seen railing against the idea of global warming or saying **************** like humans can't impact the climate are very conservative republicans..... and lately republicans have not shown science to be their strong suit, let's be honest with ourselves here.

                              I've noticed also that the people who are usually arguing against global warming to me personally are people who tend to be far less educated and knowledgeable in science than I am.......just as a general rule.


                              My sister has a masters degree in chemistry and does not believe the science behind global warming. Would you say that you are more knowledgeable and educated in science than she is?
                              Barack Obama smells like expired yogurt.







                              Originally Posted by ChuckyB


                              I pretty much believe that if a girl has a vagina, she is 90% of the time worth having sex with.









                              Originally Posted by Gainon10


                              Freedom is a bitch if you don't have thick skin.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                My sister has a masters degree in chemistry and does not believe the science behind global warming. Would you say that you are more knowledgeable and educated in science than she is?


                                Prepare to be barraged with posts akin to "Your sister is not a PhD climatologist so they know better than her!"

                                There's so much politics behind the GW debate any "data" is suspect and I can't see getting worked up over it. Does that mean we shouldn't try to stop polluting the environment though? Of course not!
                                "KA-BONGGGGG!!!"

                                - El Kabong

                                Comment













                                Working...
                                X