?
Do you Believe in Global Warming?
?
Do you mean "Do you believe in man made Climate change?". Because that would be a better questionimo
Man made climate change is a total lie. Global warming caused by other factors such as the Sun or the Earth is likely true IMO.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Ne-IEE
6w7 sp/sx
6w7-9w1-4w5
Yes it exists.
Next topic plz.
Global human warming? Not really..
Climate warming? Yes, I cannot stand Mexican temperatures we are having right now. 30C at 9am = SOS!
Man made climate change deniers are literally worse then ******.
It's happening, all right. Someone get a fan for LID, quick!
i love the options
Of course man-made global warming is possible, e.g. when @Hitta farts it raises the temperature in an average-sized room by 0.778°C.
wait people are still denying man made climate change...?
strange.
People still don't know that the African Union demands $67 milliard each year from developed countries for climate change.
Strange..
a liberal (i.e. jewish) hoax, like vaccines and public schooling.
they need to burn the whole planet down so everyone will shut the fuck up about it.
Tectonics. Antarctica wasn't ubicated at the South Pole in former geological eras.Originally Posted by William
Ok.
I still think brushing air and water pollution under the carpet like it's not a big deal is extremely ignorant. Global warming aside.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...ter-scientists
NASA disagrees...
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
This ignores the fact that we are not in an ice age because of the actions of humans, and that if we were not in a naturally occurring ice age, the problems we are going to suffer as a result of enhanced global warming would be much, much worse. The carbon dioxide that is being released by humans is from ancient reserves and is not yet cheaply and quickly recoverable...i.e. we are severely compounding on the problem.
gais wut f evrytim da temprture goez up n dat chart iz bcauz humanz keep cumming bak n smoking up all da coal n shit da earf haz wut makes da temprture go wai da fuk up n dat killz dem until next tim da earf haz grown enuf coal n shit fo dem 2 cum bak???
there's a huge difference between believing "in the government" and believing in NASA...
Wouldn't you say that the US government actually has a history of running contrary to what has been established by climate scientists?
How about the United Nations?, The African Climate Policy Centre. The European Union, The World Bank (Just to name a few)? One big global conspiracy because...?
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
This is hardly evidence.Who funds NASA? How does the money flow?
There are mountains of evidence that global warming doesn't exist. But I suppose people will look for what they want to see and believe what they want.
Over 30,000 scientists agree with me.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
And for the sake of balance: The 30,000 Global Warming Petition Is Easily-Debunked Propaganda
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
William, I bet you are also anti-vaccination.
(Which is a huge reason there's now a rise in whooping cough and measles... And polio).
It makes sense on a theoretical level that releasing large amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere in such a short amount of time would increase the earth's average surface temperature. The data appears to support the notion that the temperature is increasing and is correlated with increased levels of CO2 being emitted into the atmosphere. This is mostly coming from human activity. Unfortunately, it is the end of good science when political parties become involved and only agree with data that supports its political preferences. When we have a hotter than average summer, the liberals shout "Global warming!" and when we have a colder than average winter, the conservatives shout "So much for global warming!"
Apparently this petition has such scientists as Perry S. Mason, Michael J. Fox, John C. Grisham, and Dr. Geri Halliwell
I am no expert on this and can only cite others, but here are some opposing viewpoints to consider. I am not trying to win a debate, just trying to point out that it might be a bit more complicated than you suggest, @William
I guess aerosol has been suggested as a possible cause. I don't know how reliable this is. NASA has suggested this, too, but that will not convince you. Aerosol use may even offset global warming until it is outlawed entirely, apparently.
Apparently, temperatures have not leveled off, according to some.From 1975-1997, the Earth was getting warmer.
From 1997-Present, temperature increases have leveled off and have been statistically insignificant. But because we are near the 'top' of the curve, the evidence people point to about the past 13 years of past 17 blah blah blah have been the warmest on record since 1880, is actually true.
This makes no sense. Global warming, regardless of how it was caused, has a profound influence and not a a good one. If, as you say, we have a possible hand in it and that there are things we can do to influence it, then how can you say it is not a big deal?My understanding is overall we are on an upward, warming trend, dating back to the Holocene period 11,700 years ago.
The beginning of the Holocene period was the LOWEST the temperatures had been in the past 100,000 years.
Even the best evidence provided by those believing in global warming shows that temperatures have escalated to a high-point every 100,000 years, even before modern industrialization/pollution has taken place.
Looking at the past 800,000 years, out of 7 of the 8 times the temperatures have reached a peak high-point, in the next 30,000 years following the peak, the temperature has dropped drastically by at least 5 degrees Celsius.
Long story short: Do I believe man has contributed to a global increase in temperatures? Possibly. I think it would be irresponsible to refuse any of the blame, and there are certainly things within our power we can do to make the environment better. However, global warming and cooling has been occurring for not just THOUSANDS of years, not just MILLIONS of years, but BILLIONS of years. Therefore, it's not a big deal.
Climate scientists did say that this estimate was aggressive, but adjusted the number to 2022-30. Antarctic sea ice is getting thicker, land ice is diminishing. The melting land ice makes the ocean levels rise, not the sea ice.P.S. Al Gore predicted that the Arctic ice caps would be completely melted by 2012, when they've actually increased in size by 50% since 2012. Lololololol @ Al Gore.
You know, like I said, I am not an expert on this, but reading a few sources with no regard for how they reached their conclusions is not going to put you in a good position for a debate. You have your information from biased conservative sources and it might be a good idea to dig a little deeper. At least acknowledge your sources.
And lololol and condescension is just bad form and overall annoying.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
D'uh we're making it hotter. All that can be argued is how big of a deal that is in the long run.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
Earth has a high turnover rate when it comes to species. It just takes time. Extinction and new creation in a repeated cycle. It will happen with or without us. Earth is a self-balancing entity.
"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate"
“My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.” —C.G. Jung
You must not have read this report. Specifically Section 2.4 Attribution of climate change, which states (emphasis original):
Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic GHG concentrations.
Then there's also the findings by a panel convened in 2010 as part of the America's Climate Change project by the National Research Council published here in Advancing the Science of Climate Change. It says,
... there is a strong, credible body of evidence, based on multiple lines of research, documenting that climate is changing and that these changes are in large part caused by human activities. While much remains to be learned, the core phenomenon, scientific questions, and hypotheses have been examined thoroughly and have stood firm in the face of serious scientific debate and careful evaluation of alternative explanations. (p1)
Some scientific conclusions or theories have been so thoroughly examined and tested, and supported by so many independent observations and results, that their likelihood of subsequently being found to be wrong is vanishingly small. Such conclusions and theories are then regarded as settled facts. This is the case for the conclusions that the Earth system is warming and that much of this warming is very likely due to human activities. (p21,22)
It looks like you're on the wrong side of science on this one.
It is very difficult not to feel that anti-vaccination people should be left to the consequences of their actions. Darwinian principles would act over them for the betterment of mankind...
What a pity other people would suffer because of their bad decisions; that's what will happen, as you are poiniting out.
Last edited by MensSuperMateriam; 06-15-2014 at 12:14 PM.
Bwahahahhahahaahaha,
Hkkmr administration.
The problem is that in many cases, the kids of those anti-vaccination people are the ones who suffer.
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
how can you pick sides and mention random studies so effortlessly? why are you so quick to put studies on a pedestral? you know how many things can get altered till they reach us, or are presented in a certain way, on purpose. how independent are independent studies?
in many cases ,vaccinating toddlers can't be avoided and i guess that it's easier to live with oneself by believing that everything is ok. then again it is said that we are undergoing a collective mutation little by little, which will strengthen the human organism in some aspects(and unstrengthen in others?) but stuff will be going on ,on the way there. climate change is very good for money laundering, interest pushing and misinformation.
maybe the will to pick a side and the eventual choice is a matter of perspective, priorities and horizons. you just decide to build upon the most commonly accepted basis,which definitely has its advantages,till it doesnt. oh you "serious", level-headed people.
Last edited by Kalinoche buenanoche; 06-15-2014 at 02:43 PM.
cuz science
Reply With Quote
