Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

GW: what evidence would change your mind?


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1    Siara

Siara

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,427 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Maryland, USA

Posted 19 January 2007 - 12:40 AM


Critics of the global warming hypothesis:  what evidence would convince you that global warming was, in fact, a threat?

Believers in global warming: what evidence would convince you that, actually, humanity's impact on global warming was negligable?


#2    greggK

greggK

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,756 posts
  • Joined:14 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:alabama, USA

Posted 19 January 2007 - 12:46 AM

Quote

Believers in global warming: what evidence would convince you that, actually, humanity's impact on global warming was negligable?


The evidence is the amount of junk cars.

It is me!

#3    Heebrow

Heebrow

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 244 posts
  • Joined:10 Mar 2006

Posted 19 January 2007 - 12:50 AM

this is rediculous, regardless of "global warmings" exsistence or  not theres no denying were raping the planet so why argue it, the more you disagree to conform to a cleaner new lifestlye the more you go to hell period.

and yes i truely mean that.

He who can see life from every possible perspective, has the upper-hand in life. In that he sees true right from wrong.

#4    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,885 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 January 2007 - 12:53 AM

Quote

Critics of the global warming hypothesis:  what evidence would convince you that global warming was, in fact, a threat?

Believers in global warming: what evidence would convince you that, actually, humanity's impact on global warming was negligable?


Personally, I have no problem with the concept that Global warming may be happening, or even that it is a threat (I'm not really convinced of it, because I believe that we have the ability to adapt ourselves to survive it).  My main question would be what supports the notion that anything we do in either direction would keep it from happening?

Quote

this is rediculous, regardless of "global warmings" exsistence or  not theres no denying were raping the planet so why argue it, the more you disagree to conform to a cleaner new lifestlye the more you go to hell period.
and yes i truely mean that.


Well, you are welcome to your opinoion and all that, but that isn't the point of the topic.


#5    IamsSon

IamsSon

    Unobservable Matter

  • Member
  • 11,870 posts
  • Joined:01 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX

  • ďIf you canít explain it simply, you donít understand it well enough.Ē ~ Albert Einstein

Posted 19 January 2007 - 12:56 AM

Well, part of the issue is that some of us may believe that the world is going through a warming period, but seriously doubt that human activity has had any significant impact on the current trend.

"But then with me that horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man's mind which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?" - Charles Darwin, in a letter to William Graham on July 3, 1881

#6    Siara

Siara

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,427 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Maryland, USA

Posted 19 January 2007 - 01:00 AM

Quote

this is rediculous, regardless of "global warmings" exsistence or  not theres no denying were raping the planet so why argue it, the more you disagree to conform to a cleaner new lifestlye the more you go to hell period.


Ridiculous. I disagree.  I'm a firm believer in global warming, but I think it's useful to ask myself,  'what data would convince me that I'm wrong?'   For one thing, I'd like to think that I haven't become so opinionated that no amount of scientific evidence could change my mind.

I get the feeling that GW critics could not be convinced until the world as they know it turned into a cinder.  It would be nice to think that their opinions could be changed by scientific data.

In my case, if analysis of a number of ice cores showed that this rate of climate change has happened before (especially if it happened in a predictable cycle),  I would re-evaluate my opinion.  I don't think I'll have to, but I'd like to think I'm open to scientific data.

Edited by Siara, 19 January 2007 - 01:02 AM.


#7    greggK

greggK

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,756 posts
  • Joined:14 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:alabama, USA

Posted 19 January 2007 - 01:49 AM

QUOTE
Believers in global warming: what evidence would convince you that, actually, humanity's impact on global warming was negligable?


The evidence is the amount of junk cars.

More evidence is the amount of wars on the globe.  

The atmosphere of the earth is 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen.  The Nitrogen in the atmosphere fused with the Oxygen in the atmosphere in vernal (springlike) temperatures creates Nitrous Oxide, laughing gas.  That little bit helps you get along with your neighbor.  When heat is added to the mixture along with carbon dioxide which is in the atmosphere also, you get Nitric Oxide or Nitrogen Monoxide.

Nitric oxide readily combines with oxygen or air to form nitrogen dioxide (NO2), which can again be separated by ultraviolet light to produce nitric oxide and highly reactive oxygen atoms. These oxygen atoms combine with hydrocarbons producing noxious compounds that irritate the membranes of living organisms and destroy vegetation.

Nitric oxide can have a toxic effect on body cells and has been implicated in Huntington's disease and Alzheimer's disease.

So more evidence of global warming is the presence and growth of Altheimer's disease.

It is me!

#8    frogfish

frogfish

    ஆங்கிலத்த&

  • Member
  • 11,142 posts
  • Joined:19 Sep 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Swamp

  • Flyfishing -- the Art of the Gods



Posted 19 January 2007 - 01:51 AM

Quote

The atmosphere of the earth is 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen. The Nitrogen in the atmosphere fused with the Oxygen in the atmosphere in vernal (springlike) temperatures creates Nitrous Oxide, laughing gas. That little bit helps you get along with your neighbor. When heat is added to the mixture along with carbon dioxide which is in the atmosphere also, you get Nitric Oxide or Nitrogen Monoxide.

Nitric oxide readily combines with oxygen or air to form nitrogen dioxide (NO2), which can again be separated by ultraviolet light to produce nitric oxide and highly reactive oxygen atoms. These oxygen atoms combine with hydrocarbons producing noxious compounds that irritate the membranes of living organisms and destroy vegetation.

Nitric oxide can have a toxic effect on body cells and has been implicated in Huntington's disease and Alzheimer's disease.

Let me know when you actually know what you are talking about, Mmkay?

Nitrogen and Oxygen don't react. They are very stable elements, as you can see by looking at their filled orbitals.

-Frogfish-
Posted Image
Researcher-Prostate Cancer Oncogene Research
University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center

The National Center for Biotech Information
My Photo Gallery: Capturing India

Fishing is a Way of Life!


#9    greggK

greggK

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,756 posts
  • Joined:14 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:alabama, USA

Posted 19 January 2007 - 01:54 AM

Quote

Let me know when you actually know what you are talking about, Mmkay?

Nitrogen and Oxygen don't react. They are very stable elements, as you can see by looking at their filled orbitals.



WHO ARE YOU?

I use what is termed 'Stare Decisis.'

I'm pretty sure you have no idea what I'm talking about.

What fills their orbitals? LOL

Edited by greggK, 19 January 2007 - 02:00 AM.

It is me!

#10    BlueZone

BlueZone

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 590 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ithaca, NY

Posted 19 January 2007 - 01:59 AM

Quote

Believers in global warming: what evidence would convince you that, actually, humanity's impact on global warming was negligable?


I'm another believer.  My understanding is that the average temperature of the earth has literally risen a degree or two in recent history.  If I saw the average temp go down again (several years in a row) I would consider the possibility that the current high was a random fluke.  Evidence showing that this type of change has happened before (tree ring analysis, CO2 content in ice cores)  would make me question my beliefs.

I hope that someone who DOESN'T think we are contributing to global warming answers this.  I wonder how Bush would answer it?


#11    greggK

greggK

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,756 posts
  • Joined:14 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:alabama, USA

Posted 19 January 2007 - 02:05 AM

I wonder how Bush would answer it?

He would give his little devilish grin and say, 'We'll let the scientist worry about that.  He-he.  Next?'

It is me!

#12    aquatus1

aquatus1

    Forum Divinity

  • 19,885 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2004
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 19 January 2007 - 02:07 AM

Quote

WHO ARE YOU?

I use what is termed 'Stare Decisis.'

I'm pretty sure you have no idea what I'm talking about.


It's becoming pretty clear that not even you have any idea what you are talking about.  Incidentally, the concept of Stare Decisis doesn't really apply to science.  It is a legal term, not a state of action.

Quote

What fills their orbitals? LOL


Greggk...you really sound like someone who is trying to bluff his way out of not admitting he is out of his depth.

There's nothing wrong with not knowin something, as long as you don't try to pretend that you do and you are willing to learn.


#13    SilverCougar

SilverCougar

    All hail the gods of Rum

  • Member
  • 10,873 posts
  • Joined:02 Feb 2004
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Kirkland, WA *strikes a pose*

  • The origonal Damneddirtytreehugging-
    paganhippiewerecougarrum pirate.

Posted 19 January 2007 - 02:07 AM

Quote

Well, part of the issue is that some of us may believe that the world is going through a warming period, but seriously doubt that human activity has had any significant impact on the current trend.


Hot hot hotter summers and seemingly coooolder winters *shivers*  It's weird... it's colder then a *censored* yet the ice caps keeps melting.  

Weeee We're all gunna die!! *goes to find some lawn chairs, popcorn, and assorted drinks then sits out to watch*

Doctor_Strangelove: If only I lived in a world with no risk of piss tests. Then I could just sit here and
watch videos on angelfish and become one with nature.

#14    greggK

greggK

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,756 posts
  • Joined:14 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:alabama, USA

Posted 19 January 2007 - 02:10 AM

It's becoming pretty clear that not even you have any idea what you are talking about. Incidentally, the concept of Stare Decisis doesn't really apply to science. It is a legal term, not a state of action.

Yes sir, you are right.  It means my statement are based on the past decisions.  Every word I have said has come from scientific proof on the web.

Stare Decisis means that the rulings of the court are based on past decisions.

In my court, I make the decisions.

Greggk...you really sound like someone who is trying to bluff his way out of not admitting he is out of his depth.

You need to stick to your moderation.  You have no idea what I know!


Edited by greggK, 19 January 2007 - 02:16 AM.

It is me!

#15    drakonwick

drakonwick

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,198 posts
  • Joined:15 Jan 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Battlefield Earth

  • There is no need for temples; no need for complicated philosophy. Our own brain, our own heart is our temple; the philosophy is kindness.

Posted 19 January 2007 - 02:12 AM

Quote

It's becoming pretty clear that not even you have any idea what you are talking about. Incidentally, the concept of Stare Decisis doesn't really apply to science. It is a legal term, not a state of action.

Yes sir, you are right.  It means my statement are based on the past decisions.  Every word I have said has come from scientific proof on the web.
So then where are the links to this proof on the web?


I remember the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multi-armed form and says: "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." I suppose we all thought that, one way or another." - J. Robert Oppenheimer.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users