Revealed: the secret evidence of global warming Bush tried to hide
215 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Mamok Zalku;16335273]If global warming is real then why is winter so fucking cold![/QUOTE]
[url]http://epa.gov/climatechange/kids/climateweather.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Poltergeist Three;16331959]Point out how many idiots there are on the world doesn't help your argument. For example, this petition can be signed by everyone, regardless of his scientific knowledge, still people use it as some sort of proof (?) that many scientists don't believe in climate change.[/QUOTE]
You realize they have credentials.
[quote]1. Atmospheric, environmental, and Earth sciences includes 3,803 scientists trained in specialties directly related to the physical environment of the Earth and the past and current phenomena that affect that environment.
2. Computer and mathematical sciences includes 935 scientists trained in computer and mathematical methods. Since the human-caused global warming hypothesis rests entirely upon mathematical computer projections and not upon experimental observations, these sciences are especially important in evaluating this hypothesis.
3. Physics and aerospace sciences include 5,810 scientists trained in the fundamental physical and molecular properties of gases, liquids, and solids, which are essential to understanding the physical properties of the atmosphere and Earth.
4. Chemistry includes 4,818 scientists trained in the molecular interactions and behaviors of the substances of which the atmosphere and Earth are composed.
5. Biology and agriculture includes 2,964 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of living things on the Earth.
6. Medicine includes 3,046 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of human beings on the Earth.
7. Engineering and general science includes 10,102 scientists trained primarily in the many engineering specialties required to maintain modern civilization and the prosperity required for all human actions, including environmental programs.[/quote]
[QUOTE=TH89;16330630]...he said, and then did exactly the same thing[/QUOTE]
diff. is i'm not trying to debunk nor prove global warming, only stated my opinion on the matter
Honestly, if anyone ever shows me concrete evidence for either side is when I'll make up my mind, otherwise it's mostly theory.
[QUOTE=snuwoods;16339436]You realize they have credentials.[/QUOTE]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5P8mlF8KT6I[/media]
[QUOTE=rilez;16339664]diff. is i'm not trying to debunk nor prove global warming, only stated my opinion on the matter
Honestly, if anyone ever shows me concrete evidence for either side is when I'll make up my mind, otherwise it's mostly theory.[/QUOTE]
There's plenty of evidence laid out in science journals. You just don't have the scientific background to make an informed analysis, and probably haven't read any of them.
[editline]03:22AM[/editline]
(lol I have, and even the abstracts are totally incomprehensible)
All I know is that it's like 40 fucking degrees where I am. Gaaaaay.
[QUOTE=TH89;16339829]There's plenty of evidence laid out in science journals. You just don't have the scientific background to make an informed analysis, and probably haven't read any of them.
[editline]03:22AM[/editline]
(lol I have, and even the abstracts are totally incomprehensible)[/QUOTE]
Yes, and until that day feel free to ignore any of my talk about global warming. The best anyone in this thread could conjure up is their personal opinion; I doubt [I]ANYONE[/I] here really has a good enough scientific foundation to make an informed analysis.
[QUOTE=SmokyMcPotChron;16302168]If any of you actually read up on global warming from a scientific perspective instead of a "i heard it on the news its true" perspective, you'd notice the sky would be changing by this point.
it's just earth's natural cycle[/QUOTE]
I'd like someone to explain that it's man's fault that the same thing is happening on other planets in our solar system.
[QUOTE=snuwoods;16339436]You realize they have credentials.[/QUOTE]
Oh, for Christ's sake.
I'm going to print out 5 of those and send them in under porn stars' names.
[QUOTE=thisispain;16302311]what about em?[/QUOTE]
Elephant seals were severely endangered to the point that there were only a few thousand left. They're doing much better now though, and they're all practically clones of each other (incest)
[QUOTE=rilez;16340447]Yes, and until that day feel free to ignore any of my talk about global warming. The best anyone in this thread could conjure up is their personal opinion; I doubt [I]ANYONE[/I] here really has a good enough scientific foundation to make an informed analysis.[/QUOTE]
But scientists do, and have. We take their word about everything else; the only reason to make a stink about this is politics, and that's not very scientific.
[editline]04:37AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=SmokyMcPotChron;16302168]If any of you actually read up on global warming from a scientific perspective instead of a "i heard it on the news its true" perspective, you'd notice the sky would be changing by this point.[/QUOTE]
Oh, mister smarty pants.
[img]http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/5821/picture125pqx.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/5192/picture124t.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Neal Snow;16340645]I'd like someone to explain that it's man's fault that the same thing is happening on other planets in our solar system.[/QUOTE]
I'd like you to read the fucking thread because I already debunked this shit.
You guys act like you're scientists and shit jeez
I for one don't really believe in global warming but not because of god damn facts, because I don't want to feel bad about myself for not giving a shit about the environment.
[QUOTE=Batmoutarde;16341504]You guys act like you're scientists and shit jeez
I for one don't really believe in global warming but not because of god damn facts, because I don't want to feel bad about myself for not giving a shit about the environment.[/QUOTE]
That's the spirit
[QUOTE=PrismatexV6;16340771]Oh, for Christ's sake.
I'm going to print out 5 of those and send them in under porn stars' names.[/QUOTE]
What are you suggesting to do?
Screw around with the opposing party for laughs?
[editline]01:06AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Uberslug;16340833]Elephant seals were severely endangered to the point that there were only a few thousand left. They're doing much better now though, and they're all practically clones of each other (incest)[/QUOTE]
It's also worth noting the liberal spin applied to most debated solutions.
Let's take a look:
Out perpetually changing climate - contributing periodic fluctuations in the Earth's atmosphere to the greed of man, and therefore, as proposed by the left, we should tax the bejesus out of everyone, especially the rich if possible. If we don't take action now, we face immediate death. If we do take the proposed actions that are "necessary", we'll achieve a climate that doesn't change, and is [b][i]equal and fair[/i][/b] in nature. The facts of their science would seem to lean towards irrevocable damage has already taken place, but with so much economics involved with this societal rebirth they've proposed, no one is willing to turn down the chance to capitalize on "green-ness"
The key word to their plan is "intervention".
Now, let's take the real world approach:
Being upstanding humans, we leave mother nature to herself and let the environment heal naturally. Polar bears are not dying to begin with, and now most people start yelling about how "you don't care about the polar bears!", when in opposition to the outrageously taxing proposals, and generally bunk science that has been established as a religion. We could have ourselves a much more sustainable society through the adoption of nuclear energy(something rabidly fought against by the left, even though it's a promising and clean energy source), and a guided, not forced adoption of economically sensible vehicles, etc, just to name a few methods. I know that doesn't cover even the most cursory path to a sustainable society, but that's not even the point.
My point in the post is that sustainability entails a completely different feel than what is currently advocated. It's based off of sense and the rejection of waste. AGW, on the other hand, is a perverted guilt trip used to inculcate the minds of young kids.
Oh and quick link : [url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5599916/Polar-Bears-are-not-dying-out-say-scientists-in-book-on-popular-scare-stories.html[/url]
Please refute, why don't you.
[QUOTE=snuwoods;16341979]Oh and quick link : [url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5599916/Polar-Bears-are-not-dying-out-say-scientists-in-book-on-popular-scare-stories.html[/url]
Please refute, why don't you.[/QUOTE]
Polar bears aren't dying out, but there is a projected population reduction of 1/3 over the next 45 years. And this thread isn't about polar bears.
Also, that book is by a medical doctor whose agenda is kind of obvious there.
[editline]06:35AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=snuwoods;16341979]Now, let's take the real world approach:
Being upstanding humans, we leave mother nature to herself and let the environment heal naturally. [/QUOTE]
Something tells me you're not thinking this through. In order to "leave mother nature to herself" we'd pretty much have to magic away all of civilization as we know it.
Unless by "leave mother nature to herself" you mean "continue to increase carbon and other emissions and drill, mine, dam, and log whenever and wherever we can" in which case I feel you should be ashamed of your abuse of the english language
I'm super cereal you guise global warming is real.
[img]http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/southpark/images/thumb/2/23/Algore.JPG/300px-Algore.JPG[/img]
[QUOTE=TH89;16342595]Polar bears aren't dying out, but there is a projected population reduction of 1/3 over the next 45 years. And this thread isn't about polar bears.
Also, that book is by a medical doctor whose agenda is kind of obvious there.
[editline]06:35AM[/editline]
Something tells me you're not thinking this through. In order to "leave mother nature to herself" we'd pretty much have to magic away all of civilization as we know it.
Unless by "leave mother nature to herself" you mean "continue to increase carbon and other emissions and drill, mine, dam, and log whenever and wherever we can" in which case I feel you should be ashamed of your abuse of the english language[/QUOTE]
I suggested we try other methods, nuclear, especially. Is wind really that worthwhile considering the massive amounts of metals, etc. you have to use? Solar seems very viable - algae looks semi-promising.
I'm holding out for fusion - I'll be waiting for a while, but it seems to solve energy needs with very low repercussions.
I also called for sustainability. That means we begin sustainable tree harvesting, mining practices(possibly replace with other materials by means of R&D), etc. I think that can be economically viable, but shouldn't involve the forcing of taxes, crap and trade, etc. that's being Rahmed down our throats without giving any congressmen to review it/cognate what has just been passed, or the inculcating of a science based on models that are based on favorable assumptions.
[QUOTE=snuwoods;16342887]I suggested we try other methods, nuclear, especially. Is wind really that worthwhile considering the massive amounts of metals, etc. you have to use? Solar seems very viable - algae looks semi-promising.
I'm holding out for fusion - I'll be waiting for a while, but it seems to solve energy needs with very low repercussions.
I also called for sustainability. That means we begin sustainable tree harvesting, mining practices(possibly replace with other materials by means of R&D), etc. I think that can be economically viable, but shouldn't involve the forcing of taxes, crap and trade, etc. that's being Rahmed down our throats without giving any congressmen to review it/cognate what has just been passed, or the inculcating of a science based on models that are based on favorable assumptions.[/QUOTE]
I'm not qualified to debate the policy side of things so I'm not going to, but that's fair. Bunk science accusations notwithstanding. I'm very in favor of nuclear too, actually.
[QUOTE=TH89;16340991]But scientists do, and have. We take their word about everything else; the only reason to make a stink about this is politics, and that's not very scientific.
[editline]04:37AM[/editline]
Oh, mister smarty pants.
[img]http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/5821/picture125pqx.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/5192/picture124t.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
wtf is that you???
That's him, blacker then ever
[QUOTE=snuwoods;16341979]It's also worth noting the liberal spin applied to most debated solutions.
Let's take a look:
Out perpetually changing climate - contributing periodic fluctuations in the Earth's atmosphere to the greed of man, and therefore, as proposed by the left, we should tax the bejesus out of everyone, especially the rich if possible. If we don't take action now, we face immediate death. If we do take the proposed actions that are "necessary", we'll achieve a climate that doesn't change, and is [b][i]equal and fair[/i][/b] in nature. The facts of their science would seem to lean towards irrevocable damage has already taken place, but with so much economics involved with this societal rebirth they've proposed, no one is willing to turn down the chance to capitalize on "green-ness"
The key word to their plan is "intervention".
Now, let's take the real world approach:
Being upstanding humans, we leave mother nature to herself and let the environment heal naturally. Polar bears are not dying to begin with, and now most people start yelling about how "you don't care about the polar bears!", when in opposition to the outrageously taxing proposals, and generally bunk science that has been established as a religion. We could have ourselves a much more sustainable society through the adoption of nuclear energy(something rabidly fought against by the left, even though it's a promising and clean energy source), and a guided, not forced adoption of economically sensible vehicles, etc, just to name a few methods. I know that doesn't cover even the most cursory path to a sustainable society, but that's not even the point.
My point in the post is that sustainability entails a completely different feel than what is currently advocated. It's based off of sense and the rejection of waste. AGW, on the other hand, is a perverted guilt trip used to inculcate the minds of young kids.
Oh and quick link : [url]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5599916/Polar-Bears-are-not-dying-out-say-scientists-in-book-on-popular-scare-stories.html[/url]
Please refute, why don't you.[/QUOTE]
yeah um they were being hunted to near-extinction you dont have to go on a rant this has nothing to do with climate change
[QUOTE=Uberslug;16343569]yeah um they were being hunted to near-extinction you dont have to go on a rant this has nothing to do with climate change[/QUOTE]
Hunted by the sacred cow minority Eskimos or something?
No, it very much has to do with climate change. Get real.
Did you even read my post or the one I quoted
[editline]06:48AM[/editline]
Let me explain
[img]http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/6400/99696004058eb9c8.jpg[/img] is not the same as [img]http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/6627/792pxpolarbear20041115.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Uberslug;16343685]Did you even read my post or the one I quoted
[editline]06:48AM[/editline]
Let me explain
[img]http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/6400/99696004058eb9c8.jpg[/img] is not the same as [img]http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/6627/792pxpolarbear20041115.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I wrote the one that you quoted.
I was talking about polar bears, not seals.
[QUOTE=Ickylevel;16302100][url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/26/climate-change-obama-administration[/url]
________________________________________
FACT : C02 and some other [B]gazes[/B] have an impact on the temperature.
FACT : We are producing a lot of them.[/QUOTE]
Oh dear guess I can't look then.
[quote=snuwoods;16343748]i wrote the one that you quoted.
I was talking about polar bears, not seals.[/quote]
WELL I WAS TALKING ABOUT SEALS
god
[editline]06:55AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=AwesomeDino;16343759]Oh dear guess I can't look then.[/QUOTE]
i am producing a lot of gazes
[QUOTE=TH89;16340991]But scientists do, and have. We take their word about everything else; the only reason to make a stink about this is politics, and that's not very scientific.
[editline]04:37AM[/editline]
Oh, mister smarty pants.
[img]http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/5821/picture125pqx.jpg[/img]
[img]http://img136.imageshack.us/img136/5192/picture124t.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
omg TH89 is white after all
[QUOTE=The Saiko;16347302]omg TH89 is white after all[/QUOTE]
Why can't you just let this thread die? Why did you have to bump it for such a stupid reason?
:saddowns:
Global warming huh?
Well I could believe it except the true fact that I'm looking outside right now in the middle of summer, and it's been pissing it down with rain for the last week.
Then again, I live in England.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.