|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
06-19-2011, 10:01 AM
This is veering a bit too far into religion bashing territory. Let`s stop now before the thread has to be closed because of it.
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
06-20-2011, 01:00 AM
Your polar ice photo is from 2003, you'll find more ice if you look at a newer photo. Coincidentally, the ice caps on Mars have also been fluctuating as well, I suppose those pesky Martians had best stop driving SUVs. For a period of time nearly two centuries ago, the Northwest Passage was free of ice. It is frozen over now. Funny that no one mentions Antarctica, which now as the highest ice levels recorded since measurements began being taken.
Last winter saw snow in all 50 states in America, including Florida and Hawaii, something which seldom happens. Here in Tokyo, snow fell 7 times last winter, which is 5 or 6 times more than usual. This is another reason why "global warming" was renamed "climate change". I love how global warming supporters explained that the record cold weather felt in many parts of the world last year was somehow caused by global warming... As for the glaciers, some have receded, and some have been growing. Yosemite National Park and many other North American valleys were once glaciers. More tellling may be the fact that Al Gore bought a multi-million dollar seaside home in California. He apparently isn't too worried about sea levels rising. As a controlling shareholder in Generation Investments Management (which sells "carbon credits" to weeboos), he is making a financial killing from climate change. Dr Pauchuri, head of the UN's IPCC panel (and is a railroad engineer, not a climatologist) also is a managing partner in India's largest alternative energy company, which stands to get billions of dollars in funding from dirty western counties if the IPCC gets it's way.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
06-20-2011, 02:25 AM
Honestly, glaciers melt and grow, it's all periodical. The whole thing is just fear mongering. The planet has warmed up..OMG..we need a global government so we can control those arrogant western governments. ( read USA). It's all huey. The sun is the BIGGEST factor in global warming, ALWAYS has been and anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant, or LYING.
Adapt, improvise, overcome. Learn to live with a warmer climate, scuse me while I go turn on my AC.
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
06-20-2011, 04:23 AM
Remember the time when we were taught not to use products with cfc because they were harming the ozone layer? I think this is just the same case presented in another form of problem.
We cannot really do much to bring it back but we can just prevent further damage that he have inflicted upon ourselves. Global Warming is indeed a big problem and much can be felt now.
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
06-20-2011, 11:20 AM
So when the last Ice age suddenly ended in under 50 years, it was our CO2 emissions fault too? BTW, the last climate change is late with about 50k years, according to data collected from samples taken from Antarctica's km's thick ice.
Pollution is bad, I agree, but CO2 isn't the most pollutant, Lead, sulfur and many more are. CO2 from a SUV driven 1.000 km has less influence in global warming than a fart from the driver does. Global warming has more to do with the reshape of the Earth's surface by our hand and animal farming, than by CO2 emissions from the industry. PPS: What a nice logo this should be: Stop farting for a better future! "Manganese? Is that manga language?" - lol? 
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
06-22-2011, 01:33 PM
The main issue for me in this whole debate is that it is not really a debate of the science. Probably 99% of the people debating have no idea about the science whatsoever. It is a political and social debate. The science is only being brought into question because it's conclusions have brought into question the way we currently live our lives. It is threatening some of the biggest companies on the planet and how we source our energy to live the way we do.
I mean we can see from most of the responses in this thread that most of you haven't got even a small clue of what you are talking about. It would be like me attempting to debate a controversial issue in say the neurosciences. I have no background whatsoever in any sort of medical science or biology or anything like that. It would be ridiculous would it not if I seriously attempted to tell some of the most respected neuroscientists in the world that they were wrong and I knew better than they do? Of course it would but this is what we see all the time in the debate on climate science from supposed sceptics. You see how pathetic some of the arguments by the sceptics are just in the last few pages of this thread. You guys have no idea whatsoever about climate science yet you carry on as though you've got it all worked out. It's utterly ridiculous and incredibly arrogant. I mean really it's just so laughable seeing you guys try and throw in some science (that you have absolutely no clue about) to try and justify your points of view! Did you think the scientists who claimed smoking was bad for you were only in it for the big gravy train of research grants? Did you ever question their motives? Why are climate scientists supposedly these great villains? The science of global warming has been around since the 1950's but it was only once governements started taking it seriously and started talking about actually implementing some measure to reduce CO2 emissions that the science started being questioned by numbnuts like yourselves. I think it's the biggest attack on the integrety of science probably since the days of Galileo and his great struggle against the religious dogma that would have had us believe the sun revolved around the earth. We are seeing an attack on science now not because of religious dogma (well not entirely) but mostly I believe because of economic dogma. We live in times where economic growth seems to be more important than just about any other consideration on this planet. People see policies to reduce CO2 as an attack on growth and progress. And however little they actually understand the science (which in most cases is next to nothing) they have decided to attack it to try and keep the status quo. It's as simple as that. The science itself is unaffected by the debate. It's only the political response to the advice of the scientists which will be affected. And that's democracy. I fully expect that greed will defeat the scientific advice. I guess I lament this so much because I love snow and skiing so very much!!
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
06-23-2011, 01:41 AM
I'm a Science Major Gonative and I'm telling you the whole GLOBAL WARMING thing is a sham. It's whole purpose is to deny the US and other Western powers the ability to maintain a 1st world economy. I'm sorry I have to break it to you that way, but's that's how it is.
Now you can disagree with me if you like, that's fine. But Global warming is far more about polotics and political agendas than it is about helping the planet. That's how I see it, and it's how I'm always going to see it.
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
06-23-2011, 05:27 AM
Quote:
You a funny dude...Go pollute the seas, air, go exploit some little kids in Africa\Asia\Latin America. Go ahead and promote modern day slavery in "third world countries" so you can live comfortably in your great First World Nation....The reason ALONE that you're give us on why global warming is a sham is because of $$ lool. @GoNative I agree with you at a 120% you're absolutely right...
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
06-23-2011, 07:50 AM
Quote:
 The science existed well before it became political and will continue even now that it is very political. The first scientific papers on the role of CO2 as a greenhouse gas were in the mid 1800's. To this date I have seen absolutely nothing to suggest that the science was fundamentally flawed in anyway whatsoever. The first simple calculations of the effect of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere due to the influence of mankind were in the late 1800's. Was is political back then as well? Was it political in the 1950's and 60's when the first Global Climate Models were developed and the first papers on the possible collapse of the Antarctic Ice Sheet were published? What about in the late 1970's when the US National Academy of Sciences report that a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere could lead to between a 1.5 and 4.5 temperature increase globally? Please tell me when did it all start to become political and the science not matter anymore? Right back in the mid 1850's? I've seen plenty of political BS and pseudo-science and misinformation (from both sides) but the real science going on away from all that is what I'm interested in. I've already said that I believe mankind will continue to ignore the science or not do what is really required to avoid catastrophic climate change because of greed. I'm a little beyond caring about that anymore. Greed and stupidity seem to rule this world and it's only got worse in recent decades. The science though still interests me. If you want to discuss it I'm more than happy to.
|
|
|
||||
|
||||
|
06-23-2011, 09:04 AM
Excuse me, but who has much more influence on temp increase, CO2 or methane gas? GoNative, maybe you got a degree, but for me, it's enough I have two Olimpic Diploma's in Mathematics and Science. And btw, my prediction model (developed with my science and math teacher) is used by a few labs around the world and adapted even to climate change prediction.
You need me to explain in detail why 1.000 cows produce more climate changes than 50.000 SUV's? CO2 is just a part of the climate change system, but you're too keen on your believes (almost like religion fanatics) to see anything else. You need to change a lot more things to manage to control this, If you reduce the CO2 by 50%, you will only get a decrease in the entire system of under 1%. You are right, the companies manipulate, but it's because CO2 is the one that they can decrease the easiest and cost efficient (for them). When you want to stop this system you need to work on the entire spectrum, not only on the smallest part (even though it helps, it's less than you can think). I'm sorry but I'm tired of people who think they know everything just by having a sheet that writes University on it.... And really now, I'm not debating that climate change isn't happening, it's really happening, but CO2 has less influence on it than you can think of. "Manganese? Is that manga language?" - lol?
|
 |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
