- Status
"...there is no definitive proof on global warming..."
By the proof you mean when we all get drowned? Is this the proof you expect? It would be definite, no doubt. B. t. w. is there a definite proof that an atomic bomb may kill you? Ofcourse it may kill many people, but you... don't you need a definitive proof?
By the proof you mean when we all get drowned? Is this the proof you expect? It would be definite, no doubt. B. t. w. is there a definite proof that an atomic bomb may kill you? Ofcourse it may kill many people, but you... don't you need a definitive proof?
"...there is no definitive proof on global warming..."
That is a stupid statement. Global warming has been going on for at least 1000 years, that evidence in un-disputable.
What is crap is this business that man made green house gases are the cause of the climate change. All terrible science and with all the money available for studies this is being promoted by scientists everywhere. They don't want to kill off the "golden goose" that pays for their research grants. It is a monumental disgrace..
Read material from Reid Bryson, the grandfather of mot of the "so called" present day experts.Quit buying into the "greenies" who don't know crap but are like sheep following Al Gore and his political agenda.
That is a stupid statement. Global warming has been going on for at least 1000 years, that evidence in un-disputable.
What is crap is this business that man made green house gases are the cause of the climate change. All terrible science and with all the money available for studies this is being promoted by scientists everywhere. They don't want to kill off the "golden goose" that pays for their research grants. It is a monumental disgrace..
Read material from Reid Bryson, the grandfather of mot of the "so called" present day experts.Quit buying into the "greenies" who don't know crap but are like sheep following Al Gore and his political agenda.
bustapr
Distinguished
- Jan 23, 2009
- 550
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]soldier37[/nom]LOL left wingers all so predictable and I still cant fathom they think we are powerful enough to effect the planet with all this supposed warming. Its an agenda for scientist to make more money for their projects to go along with the global warming bs. Move along nothing new to see here.[/citation]
I suppose you havent noticed all the heat records accross the world. Summers are undoubtably getting hotter and winters are undoubtably getting colder. All effects of global warming.
I suppose you havent noticed all the heat records accross the world. Summers are undoubtably getting hotter and winters are undoubtably getting colder. All effects of global warming.
[citation][nom]wildkitten[/nom]I love how people from the left just call names. And I hate the fact that a site that tries to pass itself off in some manner as jounalistic has a very bad first line.First and foremost, there is no definitive proof on global warming. I would suggest you read the works of Dr. Roy W. Spencer, a climatologist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville as well as a scientist working for NASA. He has extensive works on the subject.And let's not forget, according to radical environmentalists who taught current people like Al Gore, Great Britain was to be under ice by the year 2000. Earth Day was made to warn people of global COOLING. And if manmade global warming is so real, why is there need to do things like fabricate emails and evidence?A lot of people like to use buzz words like "scientific consensus" although one really does not exist. Of course these people forget that at one time in human history, scientific consensus was that the earth was the center of the universe and the sun orbited us. Truth isn't formed by a few people saying something is that way.I also find it very odd that in less than 200 years that humanity has been in the industrial age we have somehow polluted far more than nature itself which puts these pollutants into the air at a far greater rate than human beings could if they intentionally tried to do it.Now I am all for common sense protection of the environment. We all want clean water, we want to breathe clean air. But these "teabaggers" you call them, why don't you look at the grounds where they hold their rallys compared to even radical environmentalists. The Tea Party people actually clean up after themselves.It's so funny how radical environmentalists push things like the electic car. And yes, the electric car doesn't pollute while it's operating. However, it still pollutes, often times with greater impact. How does an electric car get it's power? Batteries. How are these batteris charged? By plugging them in. That means more electricity has to be generated, mostly from coal, because radicals won't allow us to try to progress. And what happens when the batteries have to be disposed of? Sorry, but the environmental impact is actually GREATER by these so called "green" cars.Reminds me of the disposable diaper tirade radicals went on at the end of the 80's/early 90's. "Disposable's take up too much landfill space and don't break down, people MUST use cloth diapers!!!" While it was never argued that they didn't break down, sensible people said let's research first to see what the impact will be by going cloth. Radicals pushed for cloth to make a comeback and it did greatly. What ended up happening was more launcry was being done, so more detergents ended up being put into the water systems. Diaper services made a comeback and more vehicles on the road. All of a sudden the radicals did a 180 and made cloth out to be the evil though people went to cloth because of them.And explain how putting gas back to $2 a gallon would create a recession? If fuel prices were lower that would help the economy.[/citation]
i don't want to do this, but o well.
batteries when disposed of properly, pollute very little, and i guarantee you that a car battery isn't something most sane people just toss out without a second thought.
here is another fact, powerplants charging a battery is noting major. assuming most of it is done at night. an electric car batter could be charged a number of ways, ill assume fast for if you need a recharge quick, which would draw more power, and slow, for an over night charge. and coal is sadly the lesser of 2 evils when it comes to coal or oil... i want nuclear but thats not happening... god i hate peoples stupidity with that issue.
now lets also look at gas.
currently people are saying that gas is going to die, and we are getting close to running out completely, without really having much to back their claims up, so gas is going up in price, the only way to get it to go down would either be to strong arm them in to lowering prices, which America isn't in a position to do anymore, or spend tax $ on getting gas cheaper. now tax money may not come out of out pockets and from another government...
what you are saying about us polluting, thats true, and its just narcissism at its finest. animals we far pollute more than we do, and we aren't even talking about the ring of fire which constantly puts out more "green house gasses" than we could ever do.
i can go further, but i think i hit the basics.
o yea, there is also the idea of instead of recharging batteries at home, replacing them at gas stations. that way you always have a good battery, and you can get a new one in under a minute, probably faster than you can fill up a tank of gas.
i don't want to do this, but o well.
batteries when disposed of properly, pollute very little, and i guarantee you that a car battery isn't something most sane people just toss out without a second thought.
here is another fact, powerplants charging a battery is noting major. assuming most of it is done at night. an electric car batter could be charged a number of ways, ill assume fast for if you need a recharge quick, which would draw more power, and slow, for an over night charge. and coal is sadly the lesser of 2 evils when it comes to coal or oil... i want nuclear but thats not happening... god i hate peoples stupidity with that issue.
now lets also look at gas.
currently people are saying that gas is going to die, and we are getting close to running out completely, without really having much to back their claims up, so gas is going up in price, the only way to get it to go down would either be to strong arm them in to lowering prices, which America isn't in a position to do anymore, or spend tax $ on getting gas cheaper. now tax money may not come out of out pockets and from another government...
what you are saying about us polluting, thats true, and its just narcissism at its finest. animals we far pollute more than we do, and we aren't even talking about the ring of fire which constantly puts out more "green house gasses" than we could ever do.
i can go further, but i think i hit the basics.
o yea, there is also the idea of instead of recharging batteries at home, replacing them at gas stations. that way you always have a good battery, and you can get a new one in under a minute, probably faster than you can fill up a tank of gas.
Global Warming may not be a "obsolute" place of say at times, given what would say cause the ice to freeze and not as well. But alot the none has been found for something of the interest at times, just probably rather or not this places that what is say acted upon for any increase or decrease of things are variant.
Given ideas of "timetables" , to say well, 10 yrs later, someone is right or wrong has 10yrs "mean-time". After awhile is like, well, ok, but still is what that would amount too for the idea of interest with what is kinda normally going on.
Still much would say well, no worries for much done, but of it though does start to kinda take its place for that might be and not be at anytime though too. Still of it though does kinda find its place within that of say worry or not. Unfortunatly.
Other then that would be ideas of interest to say pretain to it, for what that might be, or not of it as well. Idk, time has its place more then not of the ideas of course. But with them is that of what does make up the difference of interest for that of time. Most is probably placed within say common parts of interest to say that of anything rather freezing or not. Issues of rather that has taken its place for what it normal is or not is place on that of what might say melt or no freeze.
Otherwise maybe more to debate more on or argue, or say something of that is to say for say or along as something said.
People in say "persons" is still fairly small of course but a person does find ways more then not to get into things bigger then themselves, usually the source of say quo for what might be called a problem is find here, stemmed, here more then not as what might to say. Or said.
Probably subjective and perspective for the place of it.
Given ideas of "timetables" , to say well, 10 yrs later, someone is right or wrong has 10yrs "mean-time". After awhile is like, well, ok, but still is what that would amount too for the idea of interest with what is kinda normally going on.
Still much would say well, no worries for much done, but of it though does start to kinda take its place for that might be and not be at anytime though too. Still of it though does kinda find its place within that of say worry or not. Unfortunatly.
Other then that would be ideas of interest to say pretain to it, for what that might be, or not of it as well. Idk, time has its place more then not of the ideas of course. But with them is that of what does make up the difference of interest for that of time. Most is probably placed within say common parts of interest to say that of anything rather freezing or not. Issues of rather that has taken its place for what it normal is or not is place on that of what might say melt or no freeze.
Otherwise maybe more to debate more on or argue, or say something of that is to say for say or along as something said.
People in say "persons" is still fairly small of course but a person does find ways more then not to get into things bigger then themselves, usually the source of say quo for what might be called a problem is find here, stemmed, here more then not as what might to say. Or said.
Probably subjective and perspective for the place of it.
Kami3k
Distinguished
- Jan 17, 2008
- 575
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]jsc[/nom]"Even though the observed ice loss has accelerated over the last decade, the fate of sea ice over the next decade depends not only on human activity but also on climate variability that cannot be predicted."I'd have much more faith in the claims of the global warning proponents if they had lifestyles that actually showed they believe in it. Al Gore comes to mind.[/citation]
The fact you listen to Al Gore and not the scientists in the relevant fields of science, says a lot about you.
None of it good btw.
The fact you listen to Al Gore and not the scientists in the relevant fields of science, says a lot about you.
None of it good btw.
Kami3k
Distinguished
- Jan 17, 2008
- 575
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]SmileyTPB1[/nom]Until the early 1980s most scientists believed we were on the verge of another Ice Age.[/citation]
BULLSHIT.
Even as early as 1890s people were warning about the burning of fossil fuels causing global warming. As time went on it became more clear that is exactly what is happening.
Lies is all the deniers have, realize that and never listen to them again.
BULLSHIT.
Even as early as 1890s people were warning about the burning of fossil fuels causing global warming. As time went on it became more clear that is exactly what is happening.
Lies is all the deniers have, realize that and never listen to them again.
- Sep 6, 2008
- 3,485
- 0
- 20,730
The_Trutherizer
Distinguished
- Jul 21, 2008
- 126
- 0
- 18,630
It would be awesome if it was not temporary. And relating to all the comments about Al Gore: I give it 10 to 1 that the world would have been a better place right now if Al Gore was not cheated out of the US presidency by Bush 
Generally to everybody who does not understand the science behind global warming predictions I say the following: Your stupid. You trust a mechanic to fix your car, but you won't trust an environmental scientist to predict your long term weather. There's scientists who understand the world a lot better and care a lot more for it than you do who make less than a mechanic.
Generally to everybody who does not understand the science behind global warming predictions I say the following: Your stupid. You trust a mechanic to fix your car, but you won't trust an environmental scientist to predict your long term weather. There's scientists who understand the world a lot better and care a lot more for it than you do who make less than a mechanic.
SmileyTPB1
Distinguished
- Jul 26, 2006
- 86
- 0
- 18,580
@Kami3k
I defy you to produce any reputable evidence of that infomation that does not have a Global Warming Alarmist as it's source.
This is a link to an article in Newsweek from 1975.
http
/www.denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf
There was also an episode of In Search of that talked extensively about the Coming Ice Age.
Both of these have sources from within the Scientific Community that were very concerned that the start of a new Ice Age imminent and inevitable. They were talking to Congress about possible action that might be taken to prevent the start of a new Ice Age.
I do not deny that the climate is warming.
I deny that humans are the sole cause of it and that we any true understanding of how the climate works in the first place.
I defy you to produce any reputable evidence of that infomation that does not have a Global Warming Alarmist as it's source.
This is a link to an article in Newsweek from 1975.
http
/www.denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdfThere was also an episode of In Search of that talked extensively about the Coming Ice Age.
Both of these have sources from within the Scientific Community that were very concerned that the start of a new Ice Age imminent and inevitable. They were talking to Congress about possible action that might be taken to prevent the start of a new Ice Age.
I do not deny that the climate is warming.
I deny that humans are the sole cause of it and that we any true understanding of how the climate works in the first place.
Wish I Was Wealthy
Distinguished
- Nov 23, 2008
- 374
- 0
- 18,930
Ice melt patterns & its flows for some reason help to dictate the slowing down process of the eventual total ice melt,before maybe going back to being similar to pre-iceage times.
Wish I Was Wealthy
Distinguished
- Nov 23, 2008
- 374
- 0
- 18,930
Bad luck about all these free non paid adds being allowed to be chucked up again,because I think that they'd think twice about doing this if they'd have to pay to be allowed to do it...
wiyosaya
Distinguished
- Apr 12, 2006
- 396
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]SmileyTPB1[/nom]...I do not deny that the climate is warming.I deny that humans are the sole cause of it and that we any true understanding of how the climate works in the first place.[/citation]
So does that mean we should just continue to consume a dying resource rather than invest in new sources of energy? Seems to me that the true conservative approach would be to look for ways to conserve a dying resource rather than to P&M about whether or not humanity is behind climate change while continuing to consume that dying resource to excess.
So does that mean we should just continue to consume a dying resource rather than invest in new sources of energy? Seems to me that the true conservative approach would be to look for ways to conserve a dying resource rather than to P&M about whether or not humanity is behind climate change while continuing to consume that dying resource to excess.
Kami3k
Distinguished
- Jan 17, 2008
- 575
- 0
- 18,930
[citation][nom]SmileyTPB1[/nom]@Kami3k I defy you to produce any reputable evidence of that infomation that does not have a Global Warming Alarmist as it's source.This is a link to an article in Newsweek from 1975.http/www.denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdfThere was also an episode of In Search of that talked extensively about the Coming Ice Age.Both of these have sources from within the Scientific Community that were very concerned that the start of a new Ice Age imminent and inevitable. They were talking to Congress about possible action that might be taken to prevent the start of a new Ice Age.I do not deny that the climate is warming.I deny that humans are the sole cause of it and that we any true understanding of how the climate works in the first place.[/citation]
Notice how nothing you said is a peer reviewed science journal.
Wonder why.... (not really)
/www.denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdfThere was also an episode of In Search of that talked extensively about the Coming Ice Age.Both of these have sources from within the Scientific Community that were very concerned that the start of a new Ice Age imminent and inevitable. They were talking to Congress about possible action that might be taken to prevent the start of a new Ice Age.I do not deny that the climate is warming.I deny that humans are the sole cause of it and that we any true understanding of how the climate works in the first place.[/citation]Notice how nothing you said is a peer reviewed science journal.
Wonder why.... (not really)
gm0n3y
Distinguished
- Mar 13, 2006
- 1,548
- 0
- 19,730
[citation][nom]LORD_ORION[/nom]Stop listening to asinine politics and do not engage in the global warming debate.Pollution is bad, stop polluting. The end.[/citation]
This is always my argument when people bring up global warming.
Either way, can't we all just agree that we need to cut down on our levels of pollution? Its pretty hard to argue that pollution is good.
This is always my argument when people bring up global warming.
Either way, can't we all just agree that we need to cut down on our levels of pollution? Its pretty hard to argue that pollution is good.
saint_craig
Distinguished
- Nov 11, 2008
- 2
- 0
- 18,510
Here's the same question I ask the proponents of global warming.
1. Briefly and intelligently explain How much warmer the climate was prior to the little Ice age (Which is currently ending.) Cite facts here.
2. Prior to this time frame Grapes Grew in England. Postulate why now they do not.
3.Explain why NASA sees same trend for Mars, as what is being experienced on Earth. Construe this data with Homo-Sapien Population on Mars and how he has also contributed to global warming there.
If you can do this then I would applaud you in being able to do what no other reputable scientist can do.
Hint: for those of you not able to think on your own the data is laid out nicely for you: http/www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_SimplifiedNutshell.htm
1. Briefly and intelligently explain How much warmer the climate was prior to the little Ice age (Which is currently ending.) Cite facts here.
2. Prior to this time frame Grapes Grew in England. Postulate why now they do not.
3.Explain why NASA sees same trend for Mars, as what is being experienced on Earth. Construe this data with Homo-Sapien Population on Mars and how he has also contributed to global warming there.
If you can do this then I would applaud you in being able to do what no other reputable scientist can do.
Hint: for those of you not able to think on your own the data is laid out nicely for you: http
/www.appinsys.com/GlobalWarming/GW_SimplifiedNutshell.htm- Status
Similar threads
- Question
Facebook
Twitter