Global Warming Debate

[don't be an idiot]

I think it will be interesting to hear both sides of the global warming debate. Personally, I think that humans have very little effect on global warming.

[Brains_Behind_Operation]

I think that we probably are to blame for it. It seems to be too much of a coincidence to say that while we have been poluting the air with toxins that very well could cause global warming at an extreme rate compared to what we were doing 150 years ago, we have not affected the world enough to realize its effect even though we have noticed a significant difference during the same time.

But so what? So we are killing the world. Big deal, it has to happen sooner or later. At least it won't happen in my lifetime. I don't want to make dramatic changes to my lifestyle to slow it down a tad.

[Paisleyspeaker]

The earth does have its own cycles of heating and cooling. But we are throwing everythihg off with the large amount of fossil fuels we burn. Our atmosphere is all that stand between us and almost certain death. We need to think before we act, and not be so shortsighted.

[Brains_Behind_Operation]

We've already acted. We've been acting for a century now. Now, if you really care that much about what MAY happen to your children's children's children, you need to start changing what your great great grandparents had started. Reverse the effects if you can. But I feel fine just letting "nature" run its course.;)

[Paisleyspeaker]

I am, I recycle, and most importantly reuse. I almost never buy anything new. My husband and I both regularly ride our bicycles on any trip that we don't need the car for. I also try to buy what I do buy new from companies that use post consumer recycled materials , and that are environmentally responsible.

[Brains_Behind_Operation]

But what real difference does that make in the long run? It's not changing things, it's just delaying them. If you really care what's going to happen to the world after you die you need to start making things better, not just reduce how much worse you're making things
.

[Paisleyspeaker]

Otay panky, just what are you doing to stop it? And just what do you suggest?

[don't be an idiot]

Carbon dioxide isnt the culprit. During the Ice Age, C02 levels were 10 times the amount they are at now.

[don't be an idiot]

And also, you said that we are disrupting normal climate patterns, but I disagree.

The sun
-In 1980, scientists, using NASA satellites finally proved that the sun’s strength was cyclical.
-Cooling periods have been linked to the sun’s diminished brightness and visa versa
-1/2 of the 1.5 degree temp change since 1850 can be attributed to the sun
-the Little Ice Age lasted from 1650-1850, during which (1645-1715) the sun exhibited unusually low radiance (few sunspots, low magnetism), called the Maunder Minimum.
Eventually, the intensity rose enough by 1850 to return the temps to normal
-200-300 years of warming, followed by 70 years of cooling
-13th and 15th cent (cooler temps) conincided with a minimum
-9th and 7th
-since 8700 bc, there have been at least 10 major cold periods

According to milleniums of recorded atmospheric history, the slight warming that is occuring now is nothing different from the normal. The sun's radiance is increasing, the earth's temp is increasing, and this all falls in the normal cyclical pattern. In fact, many climatologists are now predicting a cooling period.

[don't be an idiot]

Plus, if you really believe all of the global warming bullshit, it will be hundreds, if not millenias, before any significant climate change, and by that time, we'll be on mars and beyond.

[Brains_Behind_Operation]

Otay panky, just what are you doing to stop it? And just what do you suggest?


I said before, I really don't care. I don't have any idea of what to do to turn things around, and just being environmentally conscious myself is not going to make a speck of a difference. So why bother? It's like people who insist on dusting and vaccuuming their house daily. You might think that you're seeing a hint of an improvement, but nobody else notices a damned thing.

[Paisleyspeaker]

If everyone was environmentaly conscious then all of our little bits would amount to something. Drops adding up to an ocean and all that rot. Cliche but it is true, we and our parents and grandparents all did our little bit to get us into this mess and if we all did our little bit we could get back out. As a large group we could even force companies to behave, by petitions, badgering our elected officials and boycotts.

[Josh]

The earth is warming and it will cool like it has in the past; it's a cycle. All evidence disproves the planet being in any sort of danger; get over it. A single volcanic eruption can emit more so-called "dangerous" chemicals into our atmosphere than all our cars and plants have combined in the history of humans. If Earth were as sensitive as the media want us to think it is it would have destroyed itself long before we ever got here. They pull this shit every fucking summer; it's just another way they sell fear and keep people glued to the tv set.

[General Septem]

I don't believe it's even happening. That doesn't mean I believe it's not, I just don't believe it is. It just sounds too much like that whole, "Air is short; stop breathing. " kind of thing.

[General Septem]

The earth is warming and it will cool like it has in the past; it's a cycle. All evidence disproves the planet being in any sort of danger; get over it. A single volcanic eruption can emit more so-called "dangerous" chemicals into our atmosphere than all our cars and plants have combined in the history of humans. If Earth were as sensitive as the media want us to think it is it would have destroyed itself long before we ever got here. They pull this shit every fucking summer; it's just another way they sell fear and keep people glued to the tv set.
I have to say, I'd be sooner to believe this than I would all the hype about global warming.

[melanie]

man shouldn't wait for another millennium to effect some changes. our nature needs to recover and fast or else there'll be nothing on this planet... start what you can start now coz it will be our own good and for the next generation

[Paisleyspeaker]

Like I said I believe the Earth does have it's own heating and cooling cycles. Climatologist say there was a mini iceage around the time of the revolution. But I have a hard time believing that everything we are doing has no affect at all. There is a hole in the ozone layer, is there a record of that happening before?

[Josh]

That hole is getting smaller. Record that. It doesn't matter what you have a "hard time" believing; it doesn't change the facts.

[Paisleyspeaker]

I am glad the hole is getting smaller. I have read a lot on the atmosphere and it is scary how delicate it if for something that protects us from so much.

[Josh]

Delicate? .. Why do you think that?

[Paisleyspeaker]

Delicate because there is a balance that is dependant on so many things. The rotation of the earth, the strenth of earth's magnetic fields, and other factors, including the chemistry of it. The chemistry had shifted before, the dinosaurs breathed methane.

[Josh]

You restated what you said but with detail; that still doesn't answer my question. Why do you think the earth is delicate?

[General Septem]

The chemistry had shifted before, the dinosaurs breathed methane.
Perhaps they should've just stopped eating at Taco Rock. :D

[Paisleyspeaker]

Not the earth , but it's atmosphere. The Earth is pretty hearty, it could loose all life and it's atmosphere and not be bothered in the least. We would'mt be happy, but in the big picture it matters little. There are scientist that susupect and are working to prove that some of the other planets around us had thicker, heartier atmospheres it goes along with the theory that Mars had water , and life.

[Josh]

*sigh* .. Why do you think Earth's atmosphere is delicate?

[Paisleyspeaker]

delicate (adj.) Frail in constitution or health.

I thought I had answered that question, but I will repeat it. Because the balance of conditions that keeps it here is to tenuous. Because it depends on so many factors like earths rotation and magnetic fields, and it's own chemistry to keep doing it's duty. It keeps water and warmth in, and cosmic radation and the cold of space out. If you were to alter just one of it's variables it would spin off. And probably because it is , well just air, and doesn't give one the feeling of strenth and stablilty.

[Josh]

You think people could make "it" "spin off" by doing whatever it is we're doing now that you think is a threat? If so what do you think we're doing that is so dangerous to our planet or atmosphere or whatever the fuck it is you fear for?

[Paisleyspeaker]

I really don't know if we could effect it like that. But I don't think the polluters are checking or studing the total effects of their actions. I grew up in a superfund site, I am very familiar with what large companies will dump, lie about, and fight having to clean up. I have no proof we are doing anything, but there is little proof that we aren't. I just have an abiding mistrust of large corperations. I am careful to put my opinions down as just that, things I believe, or I think, unless I can prove it. I don't think there is much proof of either side, because there are natural cycles that we haven't been around long enough to really understand, we can't say for certain what is us and what is not. But that lack of proof should not prevent us from trying to understand the consequences before we continueto act.

[Josh]

Evidence shows that what we do (with cars and plants and such) doesn't do so much harm to our atmosphere. It's too bad for you that you can't see the importance in proving something that is curently all speculation versus the unimportance of disproving what there isn't any evidence to support in the first place.

[Paisleyspeaker]

I did a little surfing and didn't find the evidence you speak of. I did find some interesting papers saying both that some projections were overstated and things like the sea level rise won't be as dramatic as some have said. And that trees produce a third of the methane gas on earth, one of the big three greenhouse gases. So trees were not as "green" as they thought, If you know of a site in particular that has the evidence on it, pass it along.
As for the unimportance of disproving. If you don't know what something is going to do , it has a fifty percent chance of going either way. And that testing will both prove and disprove people taking either position. My hometown had a GE in it. They made tranformers using PCB's, and they dumped the PCBs in the rivers, and dumped all over the plant. And they gave free fill to the city, and the citizens. They said there was nothing wrong with it.They said they had studies that said it wouldn't hurt anyone. It wasn't until independant studies were done, that the link to liver diseases and cancer were uncovered. GE still denies that is dangerous. They had to close schools and parks because of the levels of the chemicals in trhe soil.

[Josh]

Finding an artical on a website isn't any sort of proof; anybody can write something and post it online as "the truth." If you want information I suggest you watch news.

We're not talking about studying an existing something to see if it is what some people might think it is. The subject at hand is an issue fabricated out of nothing. There isn't a "fifty percent chance" that we are doing damage to our atmosphere; the fact is we aren't.

[Prometheus]

We're not talking about studying an existing something to see if it is what some people might think it is. The subject at hand is an issue fabricated out of nothing. There isn't a "fifty percent chance" that we are doing damage to our atmosphere; the fact is we aren't.
You are fucking deluding yourself, big time . Do you take this stance to feel better about being a consumer whore? You need to read The Ecology of Commerce by Paul Hawken.

[Josh]

You are fucking deluding yourself, big time . Do you take this stance to feel better about being a consumer whore? You need to read The Ecology of Commerce by Paul Hawken.

You need to read a fucking newspaper.

[Paisleyspeaker]

I did a little research, I searched the archives of the New York Times, USA Today, Miami Herald, Washington Post, and Time magazine. All the archived articles about 1987-present, seemed to echo the same things, they blamed all sorts of problems ( wild fires, bad hurricane seasons, weed growth etc) on global warming. All seemed to agree that it is a natural cycle. But not one of the articles I found on any of their archives said that humans had nothing to do with it. Most assumed they did. In a Time article James Hansen, NASA's cheif climate scientist, said plainly that were will soon hit the highest temps in over a million years, which he links to high levels of atmospheric co2 emmisions. He said that we had gained 1 degree already and had another degree guaranteed because of the energy infrastructure and car fuel use. If you can give me something more specific than watch the news, I will honestly look into it. Tom Brokaw is telling me the same things all these others are, that it is happening, it is partially nature and part us. And that no one is really sure where to draw that line.

[Josh]

How does saying it's a natural cycle but not specifically saying that people don't have an effect on it leave room for the assumtion that we do?

More Co2 can be emited by a single volcanic eruption than all man-made devices on this planet have combined. I feel like I'm repeating myself. Earth and it's warming and cooling cycles have survied years of such natural disasters and I doubt that our small part will make the difference.

[General Septem]

The hurricanes I can tell you for certain are not because of global warming. There are places in China that release tons more greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, yet the typhoons over there have actually been decreasing.

[Josh]

Hurricane severity as well increases and decreases from season to season in a cycle. In case it wasn't obvious we're at the peak of that cycle now.

[Paisleyspeaker]

Okay Josh, Septum gets a pass on the hurricane thing, because he lives in the Yukon. You live in Florida, and in your 16 years should have picked up a little more about hurricanes than that. They are cyclical, but the intensity of any given strom has to do with water temp. Which is why El Nino and La Nina effect them, and why they tend to be worse during the late summer, then early summer. Each season I seem to spend gours sitting and watching them twirl in the gulf listening to the weather men , and my husband talk about the temp of the gulf and what it means for the storm. I suspect you know this.

[Josh]

You seem to be having a lot of fun attacking my age lately. I will point out though that you doing the research that you do to make arguments doesn't give you experience and that ability has nothing to do with your age.

I didn't say that the intensity of tropical storms and hurricanes were consistantly up and down based only on a cycle. I do know that things like temperature effect it as well, but those are some of the things that also change with the same cycle, and that's why hurricane seasons follow such cycles.

[Paisleyspeaker]

How does saying it's a natural cycle but not specifically saying that people don't have an effect on it leave room for the assumtion that we do?

More Co2 can be emited by a single volcanic eruption than all man-made devices on this planet have combined. I feel like I'm repeating myself. Earth and it's warming and cooling cycles have survied years of such natural disasters and I doubt that our small part will make the difference.


The articles I read all spoke of vehicle emissions, or industrialization as being contributing factors to global warming. And natrual disasters are all singular events, the effects of vehicles and factories are now constant. And you said there was evidence supporting your position, I am still waiting.

[Josh]

Constant? Are you not getting it? The effects of vehicles and factories were are spread over time. That if anything gives our atmosphere time to heal (as it is). But a volcanic eruption emits much more of the contributing chemicals than all human factors have combined. That means even if all those dangerous gases coming from people over the entire course of out existance were emited all at once it still wouldn't compare to the natural "threats" that have been here since long before we ever were.

[Paisleyspeaker]

You seem to be having a lot of fun attacking my age lately. I will point out though that you doing the research that you do to make arguments doesn't give you experience and that ability has nothing to do with your age.

I didn't say that the intensity of tropical storms and hurricanes were consistantly up and down based only on a cycle. I do know that things like temperature effect it as well, but those are some of the things that also change with the same cycle, and that's why hurricane seasons follow such cycles.


I'll let up on your age, and I know the research I do has nothing to do with my age, I just don't like going off half cocked. Experience, the life experience I speak of is not something I can explain right now, in about 15 years, debate a teenager, and you will understand. I was there myself once, there is a certainty in youth.

[Paisleyspeaker]

major volcanic eruptions are often hundreds, sometimes thousands of years apart. You drive your car everyday, the factories run everyday.

[Josh]

I see it now when I try to discuss issues with people my age. But I haven't done or said anything to make you think I don't know what I'm talking about. And I'm certainly not being stuborn about thinking I can't be wrong (not like a 31-year-old who thinks he/she has learned everything there is to learn in this world, and there's no way a teen could correct him/her).

[Paisleyspeaker]

But you are stubborn, and I am only 29. And yes I am stubborn, and I don't think you don't know what you are talking about, I just hold a difffrent opinion, and like I said I am stubborn. If you can show me an article from a respected author or publication, or something of the like my mind can be changed.

[Josh]

I understand that. Right now my girlfriend is on her way to my house and I need to get ready but I'll be on later.

[don't be an idiot]

Hey I'm 15 so we've got you outnumbered with superior global warming thought. HAH!

[don't be an idiot]

The fact of the matter is - despite all of the hype - sea levels are rising a mere .5 mm per year, the earth may be warming or may not be (according to the extent Urban Heat Island Effect is factored in) (even if it is, it is by near 1 degree over the past 150 years), and the change in temperature can be directly linked to a cooling and warming trend which is directly linked to the sun's cyclical strength.

So, you can give all the evidence that you have to say that we are emmitting CO2 and such into the atmosphere at catostrophicly high rates which will lead to sea level rise flooding coastal regions, the climate will change drastically, causing violent weather, etc, etc. Yet, if nothing seems to be reacting, no crisis has emerged, and no signs of global climate change have appeared, well you don't have much of an argument, do you?

[Paisleyspeaker]

So the snows of the Kilimangaro disappearing mean nothing? How about us being at thie highest temp in millions of years? Yes the sun moves and the earth moves, and the tempratures change, but this is the warmest it has ever been. We have tons of evidence of ice ages and it being colder, and then warming, but never warming this much.

[General Septem]

Technically we're still in an ice age. Because of the ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica.

[Paisleyspeaker]

When you stop and think of the absolute zero of space, and the thin blanket of gases we have protecting us being cold or frozen isn't suprising, it's the heat that is amazing.

[dancer]

So the snows of the Kilimangaro disappearing mean nothing? How about us being at thie highest temp in millions of years? Yes the sun moves and the earth moves, and the tempratures change, but this is the warmest it has ever been. We have tons of evidence of ice ages and it being colder, and then warming, but never warming this much.


Let's say your statement "but never warming this much" is true (it is actually not), it proves nothing! Records are meant to be broken and we may just happen to be in the cycle that has broken the record.

Over the more than 5,000 years of Chinese history, the weather has switched that country from east to west, figuratively, numerous times, and vice versa.

[Brains_Behind_Operation]

I don't agree with that. As I see it, an Ice Age is a time when the majority of the world's landmass is covered in ice. These are just the extreme areas of the Earth that are covered in ice. If the world was hot enough that they weren't then I think the majority of the world would be uninhabitable by us. Very far from an ice age.

[General Septem]

I don't agree with that. As I see it, an Ice Age is a time when the majority of the world's landmass is covered in ice. These are just the extreme areas of the Earth that are covered in ice. If the world was hot enough that they weren't then I think the majority of the world would be uninhabitable by us. Very far from an ice age.
That's one definition of ice age, but the technical definition of an ice age is any age where there are large sheets of ice on the Earth's surface. Since this means a "normal" period wouldn't have any ice sheets at all, the melting of Greenland and Antarctica's ice sheets may just be the natural course of Earth's cycles. It would also mean that the tides are actually in a period of regression, and not overcoming the land but rather just returning to where it normally is. Global warming or not, those ice sheets are going to melt sooner or later and there's nothing we can or should do about it. Maybe instead of trying to prevent global warming, we should focus on moving just a little bit inland. After all, we only have a few thousand years.-GS

[don't be an idiot]

So the snows of the Kilimangaro disappearing mean nothing? How about us being at thie highest temp in millions of years? Yes the sun moves and the earth moves, and the tempratures change, but this is the warmest it has ever been. We have tons of evidence of ice ages and it being colder, and then warming, but never warming this much.

OK so lets disect your argument. The glaciars of Kilimangaro are disppearing, but this is what we call antectdotal evidence - one obscure event. Here's another example - Greenpeace published photos of a glaciar in Patagonia a few years back, showing the dramatic loss of ice. Unfortunately, for Greenpeace, all the other glaciars around itare increasing (one by 80%) or remaining normal. Gore tells us in the film, Starting in 1970, there was a precipitous drop-off in the amount and extent and thickness of the Arctic ice cap. This is misleading: The survey that Gore cites was a single transect across one part of the Arctic basin in the month of October during the 1960s when we were in the middle of the cooling period.

Highest temps in millions of years eh? Tosh. Well, you must be referring to the infamous "Hockey Stick Graph," made by Mann. It shows temperatures relatively stable for the past phew millenias, unfortunately for enviornmentalists, this just isnt the case. His graph has been condemned by the entire scientific community and sent into exile from scientific research. In fact, during the Medieval warm period (1450-1650) temperatures were, get this, much warmer than today!

And, like I said, seas are rising by a mere .5 millimeters per year, so no worries there. When you hear about glaciars melting, it is often an isolated event, or sea ice, which doesnt effect sea levels. Overall, seas are remaining very calm.

The hurricanes you hear so much about are the effect of a natural cycle, and we went through a similar period in the 50s and 60s. It is called the Atlantic Multidecadal Occilation, and causes warmer sea temps in the Atlantic, along with increased hurricane activity in the gulf.

Actually, we are at the hieght of a normal cycle or warming and cooling. Many scientists now believe that we will soon entire into a cooling period. The warming period that we are experiencing now is at the same rate as the previous warming period, same intensity, and same time frame. Everything actually falls into place, and the warming that we are seeing now coincides with the sun's natural cycle of warming.

The fact remains, that all the warming, and all the trends that we see can be easily explained by real data that goes beyond 40 years ago, as you see many charts do. When you observe the warming we've experienced over the past few 1000 years, it becomes obvious that it is cyclical and corresponds to the sun's strenght. Why then, do enviornmentalists continue to use these graphs that show only 40 years of history. Maybe, because when you look at the larger picture, their arguments become obsolete.

[assholius]

Older people in particular don't give a shit about global warming.Apparrently in the '50s and '60s scientists were scarring everyone about the ice age returning.
Which by the way it's not returning,it's still here,10-20 thousand year indian summers happen during ice ages.

[prairie_looner]

Whether people pooh-pooh global warming or not, some things should be considered.

(1) The earth has in the past, and will continue in the future, to have massive climate cycles. The earth may or may not be in a natural warming cycle right now, but can we afford to take the chance that it's ENTIRELY natural? My opinion is that there is such a cycle happeniong now, AND that humans are adding to and exaggerating that cycle.
(2) Whether causing or adding to global warming or not, the fumes put into the air by wanton use of fossil fuels are POISONOUS, and conserving and cutting back would reduce the pollution.
(3) Sure it's about 8 degrees Fahrenheit right now in western Illinois, but it's 3 in the morning and it's January. That's colder than normal for here, but one cannot "disprove" global warming just because it's cold somewhere. We recently finished a period of 36 days that were above normal. Indeed most models of "global warming" include Europe becoming much COLDER than it is now, because of the Gulf Stream shutting down.
(4) Even if humans aren't causing global warming, shouldn't "we" start trying to find ways not to be so totally dependent on using fossil fuels? There is only a finite amount of fuel available! It took nature many tens of millions of years to create these fuels, and we're depleting them over a course of only a few generations. What happens when humans reach a point when the only remaining fossil fuels are those which are un-Godly expensive and impractical to extract? We'd better have some substitutes firmly in place long before then!
(4) Those who believe that global warming is a myth, HAVE TO ADMIT that the theory merely hasn't been proven. THERE IS NO PROOF THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS **NOT** HAPPENING. In fact, there is proof that it IS happening, though the reasons aren't agreed on. So far, this planet is the only place that we as a species have, to call home. Since there's no proof we're NOT causing global warming, and certainly theories imply that we are causing or contributing to it, how can we possibly afford to ignore it?
(5) The United States is the most powerful and influential nation on earth. Instead of officially treating global warming as though it doesn't exist (and, in the process, propping up dictatorships and enabling terrorists in parts of the world who do not like us at all), the U.S. should become a global role model for fuel conservation, something which would likely influence the rest of the world to take notice. Right now, we have to look at BRAZIL as the role model for this...

[General Septem]

Things should be done about the environment, but it should not be on a governmental level. They have no business poking their noses in everyone's life. Now, if they wanted to subsidize businesses for cutting down on pollution, then that would be something, but it might encourage dumping toxic waste down the shitter instead of actually doing anything about it.

[wawatasei]

well then all you know bodies..you all got it..but you left out one thing...the shit is in the fan and the switch is turnin on soon...stay in your redrick..when you got the cold the cure is in your head...why do you buy food today..dah.why do you pay rent for the next month not the last.dah

[hitekredneck]

the planet is millions of years old...it IS a proven fact that weather is cyclical in nature...all we have to go by is empirical evidence which is based on the records that we do have which only go back so far...
we don't yet have the technology to see exactly how we affect our environment in this aspect, so it cannot be proven either way if global warming is caused by man the parasite, or just a natural occurence.
and i have a question for you pseudo-intellectuals out there...
how in the hell is global warming responsible for COLD weather?
facts, please:cool:

[wawatasei]

yes yes there are many thories.they all have thier facts and interpitations...ONE thing what ever the cycle... we are heading for the climaxes of the resultes of something,,if you think your pearly white ass can never be bitten ,look at history look at the world around you look at the decay of the morales..if you dont wake up stand up take a look around...the WORD is PREPARE

[beatniks-and-politics]

I agree. Preperation is definatley essential and there are meny theories about global-warming and also about the ice age. I also agree with the fact that people have crumbling morals and have to wake up to the idea that if we do not do something about it, our planet/ solar system will end up destroying us. Wether it is going to be in 50 or 50000 years is unknown, but do you really want to leave the burden of our existence on our descendents when we have the power to make small changes now? However miniscule, any change in routine will help. Use more energy efficient lights, bike to work. However small, it is despratley important for the future of our planet earth.
I beleive that the govournment CAN take measures to postpone the effects of global warming aswell. Whether it is closing down fossil fuel plants and replacing them with alternative energy sources [ie wind or tidal power] or funding car companies so they can develop more advanced electric cars

[wawatasei]

yes all pma works and doing something possitive is benificial...but dont hold your breath for the gov.to cure it all ..there mandate is diff.great death and destrution is not new to them....the things at work is very large and only threw great dispare do people get a will that makes gain to all..do what good your heart feels...but be prepared to live without the system as we know it ,,people will work together..just create the kind of people you can work with...the gov said it can not be responsible for everyone....we here in canada will be a little better off ,but the state will take most of our 3 trillion dollars in resource..we will know what the natives felt only a few years ago.

[beatniks-and-politics]

Of course the govournment connot do everything for us, but i think they should at least be making a greater effort. I am actually not a huge fan of our canadian govournment right now, although it is a step up from paul martin, we have no vision. Our country does not know what we want and i think that we should find a candedate who has ideas for the future that will benefit us aswell as the world. We are all suffering from things that can be prevented, be it global warming or where our tax dollars are going. I beleive that we should not be so intertwined with the United States' affairs and pull our troops out of their war zones. We are spending billions of dollars to keep them over seas, billions of dollars that could be put to a better cause than ripping a country to shreds. Billions of dollars that could put towards our environment.

[who897]

I hear the scientific community has once again pissed off the environmentalist by stating the earth warms up every 1500 yrs. Don't know the jist of it, but thought that was kinda funny. I love science.

[beatniks-and-politics]

I hear the scientific community has once again pissed off the environmentalist by stating the earth warms up every 1500 yrs. Don't know the jist of it, but thought that was kinda funny. I love science.

science is pretty fuckin crazeh...

[who897]

science is pretty fuckin crazeh...

Science is pretty fuck awsome, at least for others to prove someone else wrong! I just aint that talented to devote my life to something I hardly understand.

[beatniks-and-politics]

Science is pretty fuck awsome, at least for others to prove someone else wrong! I just aint that talented to devote my life to something I hardly understand.

ppfft I could very probably devote my life to science but whats te point when you can prove people wrong with what you learnt in highschool :D
and I swear i will leave this site in five minutes so i can get sleep! [more to myself than anyone else]

[wawatasei]

sence you are all here to, dido my last comment

[beatniks-and-politics]

sence you are all here to, dido my last comment

what? i think im not following...

[something]

The scienrtists are now sure on that global warming is a fact, but thy are not completely sure about the consequenses from it,so I keep belive that it wont be all to bad:D

[ineedcoffee]

OK... so we're having global warming, or an ice age, or "climate change" - or whatever looming disaster is the flavour of the year.

Yes, there may be evidence to support it now, although the weather data I researched myself in Canada in the early 90's certainly didn't support that hypothesis. I might even believe (now) that we are having global warming. Certainly feels like it this winter where I live! Certainly didn't feel like it in other parts of the world.

But isn't it obvious? If the "environmental" researchers, all those people who make their living by forecasting messages of doom, were to admit that the changes in temperature were not something we could do anything about, that they were just part of the normal cycle, those esteemed researchers would lose their jobs (or at least their grant money). After all, why pay someone to provide data on something we can't do anything about?

So... they continue to pump out data to substantiate why they are getting paid. They feed their crap to the media, to politicians, and to anybody else who will listen. Some people (too many) actually believe them.

[General Septem]

If you don't think we're still in the middle of an ice age, you're welcome to come to my house and chip the glacial ice plate off of my driveway. I guarantee you'll need a jackhammer.

[something]

We are in the middle of an ice age. It's very rare in the history of the planet that there's ice on the poles, and in a few thousand years will they grow bigger and cover all of north and northwest europe with ice :eek:

[theicidal maniac]

OK... so we're having global warming, or an ice age, or "climate change" - or whatever looming disaster is the flavour of the year.

Yes, there may be evidence to support it now, although the weather data I researched myself in Canada in the early 90's certainly didn't support that hypothesis. I might even believe (now) that we are having global warming. Certainly feels like it this winter where I live! Certainly didn't feel like it in other parts of the world.

But isn't it obvious? If the "environmental" researchers, all those people who make their living by forecasting messages of doom, were to admit that the changes in temperature were not something we could do anything about, that they were just part of the normal cycle, those esteemed researchers would lose their jobs (or at least their grant money). After all, why pay someone to provide data on something we can't do anything about?

So... they continue to pump out data to substantiate why they are getting paid. They feed their crap to the media, to politicians, and to anybody else who will listen. Some people (too many) actually believe them.

That's garbage. Grants aren't paid for by other scientists. In fact most scientists right now, while atheist, still cater to the Christian population by saying that science leaves plenty of room for belief in the supernatural (when it actually seeks to eliminate the supernatural explanations) because that's where the grant money comes from. Furthermore, if you could prove that global warming was a sham you'd be a star...or at least as close to a star as being a scientist can get you. All legitimate scientists right now are on the GW bandwagon, and that's cause it makes sense, it's tenets have withstood the rigors of peer review, which is VICIOUS! If you were able to REVERSE that you'd be the greatest scientist of the day! Prizes and big-breasted women would be yours for the taking! You'd reach the kind of status that every scientist dreams of. But for some reason it ain't happenin.......................................... ....

[General Septem]

In fact most scientists right now, while atheist,

What makes you think most scientists are atheist?


still cater to the Christian population by saying that science leaves plenty of room for belief in the supernatural (when it actually seeks to eliminate the supernatural explanations)

That's total bullshit, because the supernatural is something that can't possibly be proven nor disproven through physical means. That's why it is supernatural.

[ineedcoffee]

That's garbage. Grants aren't paid for by other scientists.

Never said they were. Grants are paid by government or private corporations that stand to gain financially, or in popularity, by having Global Warming being proven to be caused by humans.


In fact most scientists right now, while atheist, still cater to the Christian population by saying that science leaves plenty of room for belief in the supernatural (when it actually seeks to eliminate the supernatural explanations) because that's where the grant money comes from.

Always a good idea to keep your options open in case you're wrong!


Furthermore, if you could prove that global warming was a sham you'd be a star...or at least as close to a star as being a scientist can get you. All legitimate scientists right now are on the GW bandwagon, and that's cause it makes sense, it's tenets have withstood the rigors of peer review, which is VICIOUS!

I never said global warming was a sham. I said that the causes of global warming haven't been proven - despite all of your misguided beliefs that they have been. True, many scientists are on the "bandwagon" - there is more money on the bandwagon than off. Scientists aren't stupid, they know where their money comes from.

[Ape-Shit]

If there is Global Warming; Does this mean that Hell is getting hotter?:p

[something]

If there is Global Warming; Does this mean that Hell is getting hotter?:p

I guess so. If it gets warmer here it must get warmer there to compeat with us.

[Ape-Shit]

Well, today being Valentines Day and all. When things start getting a little warm in the bedroom tonight....., does that mean I'm headed for Hell.....!:p

[ICU]

Well, today being Valentines Day and all. When things start getting a little warm in the bedroom tonight....., does that mean I'm headed for Hell.....!:p

The raw, and adequate terminology would seem to explain itself once a Man is headed towards the gates of hades. hehehe

Peace bro!

[General Septem]

So my dad's had asthma for a while now, and he has to take Albuterol.

So I was in the kitchen the other day having breakfast when I happened to notice the top of the box says "this product is being discontinued due to environmental impact".

The fuck? How the hell could inhalers be impacting the environment?

Well one thing's for sure, they had better come up with an adequate replacement before Albuterol gets taken off the shelves.

[Nobody]

So my dad's had asthma for a while now, and he has to take Albuterol.

So I was in the kitchen the other day having breakfast when I happened to notice the top of the box says "this product is being discontinued due to environmental impact".

The fuck? How the hell could inhalers be impacting the environment?

Well one thing's for sure, they had better come up with an adequate replacement before Albuterol gets taken off the shelves..... There is and its been in exhistance for quite a number of years.... believe it or not, the things your government has been suppressing from 'we the people', for such a long time. Hemptopia.org then go to Illinuminati news. Read the USDA reports.

[unclepops07]

Did you ever hear that beauty about scientists that were trying to alter the genetic make-up of the common cow to stop them farting so much?

Well apparently, along with swamps, they are the biggest omitters of methane on the planet.

It makes sence. LOL!

[General Septem]

Did you ever hear that beauty about scientists that were trying to alter the genetic make-up of the common cow to stop them farting so much?

Well apparently, along with swamps, they are the biggest omitters of methane on the planet.

It makes sence. LOL!

Save the planet, eat a cow? :D

[hitekredneck]

Did you ever hear that beauty about scientists that were trying to alter the genetic make-up of the common cow to stop them farting so much?

Well apparently, along with swamps, they are the biggest omitters of methane on the planet.

It makes sence. LOL!

i heard about that...lol...now why could'nt we utilize this as an "alternate" energy source?...lmfaoo :D
but we gotta be careful with the cows...check this out
http://www.3dweb.no/galleri/stuestolbm/bilder/anim1.swf

[thememan]

Save the planet, eat a cow? :D

That's my motto.

And to the one above me, they do use methane produced in landfills as an alternate fuel source in many place(Don't listen to the hype that hippies tell you about landfills-they are safe, relatively clean, and we are in no way running out of land to use for them).

[JSFFive]

From what I've been able to gather, there used to be two basic factions in the climatology community; those who thought the world was warming, and those who didn't. Now, MOST climatologists do agree that the earth IS warming, but even though the echo chamber seems to want to push the idea of CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases causing the warming, I haven't found a good argument to discount changes in solar activity as being the primary driver.

Indeed, if one looks at the records, it would seem that, over the course of earth's history, solar activity has been MORE of a primary driver of climate change than CO2.

CO2, for most of history, has FOLLOWED temperature change, because it takes time to liberate or sequester carbon dioxide in or from the oceans, because it takes a long time to either completely heat, or cool down the oceans. And there is also the life cylce to be considered, which uses up carbon dioxide in the creation of life.

I think what some climatologists are saying is that, for the first time in human history, we may be putting more CO2 and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than what natural processes are capable of processing. And that this overflow could cause a tipping point, where carbon dioxide BECOMES a primary climate change driver.

My question is, how much?

How much CO2 does it take to actually affect the climate?

Because the present levels of CO2 comprise less than half a tenth of a percent of the earth's atmosphere.

Even still, there doesn't seem to be any doubt that the earth IS warming... Whether it is warming because of fossil fuels or some naturally occurring process, I think that if the seas are going to rise from the Antarctic and Greenland melting, and hurricane activity is going to increase because of it, then the people in coastal cities won't CARE. If we think this warming trend is going to continue, then it at least makes sense to harden the coastal cities.

Heck, we can't even protect a city that ALREADY has levees in place.

.........

[England Expects]

Didn't George cut the funding for the maintenance of the levees? Don't suppose it mattered to him, seeing as it's mainly black folk that live there.

The warming of the Earth is happening at an alarming rate. Of course it could be natural but CO2 emissions are definitely playing a part. If we can reduce these then we should.

[conspiracy]

Didn't George cut the funding for the maintenance of the levees? Don't suppose it mattered to him, seeing as it's mainly black folk that live there.

The warming of the Earth is happening at an alarming rate. Of course it could be natural but CO2 emissions are definitely playing a part. If we can reduce these then we should.

Yup that's it George Bush hates black people. You've got to be kidding me.
From what I hear Tony Blair hates Chinese people and Mexicans.

[England Expects]

Well, you learn something new everyday.

I dont suppose it matters though, seeing as there are very, very few Chinese and virtually no Mexicans over here.

[General Septem]

Well, you learn something new everyday.

I dont suppose it matters though, seeing as there are very, very few Chinese and virtually no Mexicans over here.

Well maybe that's why. :D