Caesar Posted September 9, 2009 Author #26 Share Posted September 9, 2009 What I don't like are countries who are trying to play politics with the rest of the world to support their own selfish agenda. The USA and Australia by not agreeing to the Kyoto Protocol and now its up to China and India, the two most populated, up and coming economies and future industrial powers in the world, who want to dictate terms. We're all in this together, lets stop the political BS! I think the whole thing is political BS. the only way I would even consider it is if all nations agree and sign it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted September 9, 2009 #27 Share Posted September 9, 2009 My point is that, that area has a long history of being dry and then the rains making it liveable over and over. why is it that this time its man made global warming? Because we have increase the level of atmospheric CO2 (a gas known to be a fossil fuel) from 280ppm to 380ppm in around 150 years. Tied in with this we have removed many carbon sinks in the forms of rainforest and have caused serious decline in the planets main source of O2 and main sink for carbon, phytoplankton. Global warming is based on a lot of science, not just on political whim. Also historical planetary conditions are an irrelevance to the current because geographically, the world is very different. For a start Antarctica was not over the south pole which creates the currents around the continent which causes it to freeze creating and ice cap which cools the planet and creates and ice cap in the Arctic. You should go look up some of the real science behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 9, 2009 Author #28 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Global warming is based on a lot of science, not just on political whim. Its called junk science. you try to find a connection between humans that cause global warming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverCougar Posted September 9, 2009 #29 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Obama -- the Messiah -- will, with his cap-and-trade. *keeps her word and beats Pseudo with a nerf pool noodle* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninjadude Posted September 9, 2009 #30 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Its called junk science. you try to find a connection between humans that cause global warming. You do know you're disagreeing with a real scientist. Who, without a doubt, is more versed in the subject that you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 9, 2009 Author #31 Share Posted September 9, 2009 You do know you're disagreeing with a real scientist. Who, without a doubt, is more versed in the subject that you. So we had fake ones in the 70's. we have just as much proof that theres man made global warming then Jesus being resurrected to heaven. I'm not going to get into beliefs because I really don't want to hurt anyones fellings, since thats the prime motivation in this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted September 9, 2009 #32 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Its called junk science. you try to find a connection between humans that cause global warming. Would you like some journal papers (real science) on the subject? Ecological responses to recent climate change Widespread amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by global warming Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model NSIDC:2008 Year-in-Review for the Arctic Attribution of polar warming to human influence Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature Antarctic ice shelf 'hanging by a thread' Even Antarctica is now feeling the heat of climate change Europe to feel the heat of climate change Climate change: A guide for the perplexed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted September 9, 2009 #33 Share Posted September 9, 2009 So we had fake ones in the 70's. we have just as much proof that theres man made global warming then Jesus being resurrected to heaven. I'm not going to get into beliefs because I really don't want to hurt anyones fellings, since thats the prime motivation in this discussion. The first studies showing global warming were done in the 70's. Whether you like it or not, it is accepted by every major scientific institution in the world. There is a lot of science to back it up and it is not a belief. You just saying any science is a belief shows a fundamental misunderstanding in science. Beliefs are not science, evidence is needed and there is a lot in this case. Do yourself a favour and learn something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 9, 2009 Author #34 Share Posted September 9, 2009 The first studies showing global warming were done in the 70's. Whether you like it or not, it is accepted by every major scientific institution in the world. There is a lot of science to back it up and it is not a belief. You just saying any science is a belief shows a fundamental misunderstanding in science. Beliefs are not science, evidence is needed and there is a lot in this case. Do yourself a favour and learn something. They were claiming it was global cooling in the 70's!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 9, 2009 Author #35 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Would you like some journal papers (real science) on the subject? Ecological responses to recent climate change Widespread amphibian extinctions from epidemic disease driven by global warming Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model NSIDC:2008 Year-in-Review for the Arctic Attribution of polar warming to human influence Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature Antarctic ice shelf 'hanging by a thread' Even Antarctica is now feeling the heat of climate change Europe to feel the heat of climate change Climate change: A guide for the perplexed I could give you just as many that claim its all a hoax but I stay away from religious debates especially when feeling are involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stardrive Posted September 9, 2009 #36 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Fact is the planet IS warming which leads to speculation as to the why of it. It could be because the gods are angry with us and need a human sacrifice... oops wrong century and civilization. Two words folks, carbon tax. And they will produce tons of data to expidite it's implimentation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithisco Posted September 9, 2009 #37 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I could give you just as many that claim its all a hoax but I stay away from religious debates especially when feeling are involved. Put up, or .... you know how it goes. Defend your point with real data - no need to invoke the "religious" BS to cover up ignorance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 9, 2009 Author #38 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Fact is the planet IS warming which leads to speculation as to the why of it. It could be because the gods are angry with us and need a human sacrifice... oops wrong century and civilization. Two words folks, carbon tax. And they will produce tons of data to expidite it's implimentation. Isn't everything getting warmer? I mean the sun source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pseudo Intellectual Posted September 9, 2009 #39 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I consider AGW a religion, really. All the evidence disagrees with them; they believe in AGW. Al Gore is their prophet, and Mother Earth is their goddess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted September 9, 2009 #40 Share Posted September 9, 2009 They were claiming it was global cooling in the 70's!!! Not in science their wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted September 9, 2009 #41 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I could give you just as many that claim its all a hoax but I stay away from religious debates especially when feeling are involved. Yeah, look at the sources. Get you head of the clouds, because you have no idea what you are talking about and you have no idea about science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted September 9, 2009 #42 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I consider AGW a religion, really. All the evidence disagrees with them; they believe in AGW. Al Gore is their prophet, and Mother Earth is their goddess. Really! Then why did I post a load of scientific evidence then? Was it all too complicated to read for you? Very apt name you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted September 9, 2009 #43 Share Posted September 9, 2009 (edited) Isn't everything getting warmer? I mean the sun source No, there is no uniform heating from our system as would be seen by a warming trend in the whole system. We don't see that at all. Maybe you should read this paper: Recent oppositely directed trends in solar climate forcings and the global mean surface air temperature Here we show that over the past 20 years, all the trends in the Sunthat could have had an influence on the Earth’s climate have been in the opposite direction to that required to explain the observed rise in global mean temperatures. And yes, this is real science and journal is on of the top science journals in the world. Edited September 9, 2009 by Mattshark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewinn Posted September 9, 2009 #44 Share Posted September 9, 2009 We can put up a thousand links to show climate change is happening. question is how do we stop it. not in 20 or 50 years from now, but today. the current technology isn't efficient practical or affordable. lets face it, we've been "cutting emissions" for a good decade and we're still missing the simplest of targets. infact am sure someone can provide a link to show emissions are still increasing, so its doesn't bode well for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keithisco Posted September 9, 2009 #45 Share Posted September 9, 2009 We can put up a thousand links to show climate change is happening. question is how do we stop it. not in 20 or 50 years from now, but today. the current technology isn't efficient practical or affordable. lets face it, we've been "cutting emissions" for a good decade and we're still missing the simplest of targets. infact am sure someone can provide a link to show emissions are still increasing, so its doesn't bode well for the future. I agree Steve, we cannot stop it now, the best we can do is to ameliorate the worst effects of it. Current technology IS up to the task, unfortunately too many "Town Hallers" with their heads in the sand, do not see it as a problem. China, just this week, has announced truly massive plans for renewable energy sources to provide sufficient power to keep their meteoric rise to Economic Superpower status on track. Please note that I said "Economic Superpower", not "Military" Superpower. When Iran gets its Nuclear power generation what do you think will happen (this is put to everyone)? They will turn off the oil wells that supply 15% of the western world..... this is their real goal. So whilst the USA Neo-Cons are busy deflecting the real debate by trying to ensure that their poorest members never get UHC, the real loser in all of this is the prospect of a cleaner, more sustainable planet. It's no surprise that the neo-cons are hell-bent on anti-UHC, because in October the real debate in Copenhagen on Global Warming kicks off.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 9, 2009 Author #46 Share Posted September 9, 2009 I consider AGW a religion, really. All the evidence disagrees with them; they believe in AGW. Al Gore is their prophet, and Mother Earth is their goddess. It is a religion. they have millions in grant money just to try and find some link between humans and global warming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teej Posted September 10, 2009 #47 Share Posted September 10, 2009 (edited) I consider AGW a religion, really. All the evidence disagrees with them; they believe in AGW. Al Gore is their prophet, and Mother Earth is their goddess. To claim that all the evidence disproves man's contribution to global warming shows a clear lack of familiarity with the issue. Thank you for singling yourself out. It is a religion. they have millions in grant money just to try and find some link between humans and global warming. That's a religion... how? Ironically, that's science in practice there: subsequent research is always needed to back up claims and theories. Not that we would have needed all this research if people would stop the desperate search for any possible way to shake off responsibility. Oh well, a few years ago people completely refused to believe global warming was even occurring; hopefully in a few more years people will get on the ball in regards to the cause, as well. On the flip side, are you claiming that the studies "disproving" global warming are somehow exempt from using grant money? Or are you only in support of using grant money when it suits your side of the argument? Edited a sentence for clarity. Edited September 10, 2009 by Teej Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 10, 2009 Author #48 Share Posted September 10, 2009 That's a religion... how? Ironically, that's science in practice there: subsequent research is always needed to back up claims and theories. Not that we would have needed all this research if people would stop the desperate search for any possible way to shake off responsibility. Oh well, a few years ago people completely refused to believe global warming was even occurring; hopefully in a few more years people will get on the ball in regards to the cause, as well I don't think we really know whats causing man made global warming, there is alot of research some claim it is man made, while some say its not. I think most of the main stream media report that there is man made global warming and refuse the research that suggest there isn't. On the flip side, are you claiming that the studies "disproving" global warming are somehow exempt from using grant money? Or are you only in support of using grant money when it suits your side of the argument? I'm suggesting that if your studies support man made global you will get lots of money. because liberals want to spread this religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattshark Posted September 10, 2009 #49 Share Posted September 10, 2009 I don't think we really know whats causing man made global warming, there is alot of research some claim it is man made, while some say its not. I think most of the main stream media report that there is man made global warming and refuse the research that suggest there isn't. I'm suggesting that if your studies support man made global you will get lots of money. because liberals want to spread this religion. You can suggest that all you want, you are wrong and ignorant, but you can suggest that. How about actually getting an education and reading the links I put up. What I have put up is not mainstream media, it is true, verifiable science and guess what. It is accepted by all fields of science, not just climatology. If you care to advise on what is scientifically incorrect about those papers, I'd love to hear though! Money comes from many different sources. With funding from the government under Bush NASA, NOAA, NSIDC all constantly contradicted his claims. Sorry fella, the only political based argument here is rather ironically, yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted September 10, 2009 Author #50 Share Posted September 10, 2009 You can suggest that all you want, you are wrong and ignorant, but you can suggest that. How about actually getting an education and reading the links I put up. What I have put up is not mainstream media, it is true, verifiable science and guess what. It is accepted by all fields of science, not just climatology. If you care to advise on what is scientifically incorrect about those papers, I'd love to hear though! LMAO I guess we need to do something to save the planet since we only have 4 months. Money comes from many different sources. With funding from the government under Bush NASA, NOAA, NSIDC all constantly contradicted his claims.Sorry fella, the only political based argument here is rather ironically, yours. Bush supports the myth of man made global warming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now