Discussion: Global Warming and Other Environmental Issues

Status
Not open for further replies.
Uh... yeah, no. The human race is just a bunch of animals. Sure, we're able to affect our surrounding environment in ways most other animals cannot, but we're still animals. The planet has been here long before us and it will be here long after us, and no amount of change we can cause in the environments and species on this planet could EVER kill, harm or end the world. It's as simple as that.
:up:
 
I used it correctly, didn't I? Grammar ain't my strongest subject.
 
Then at least be honest about it, THAT I can respect (kinda), but pretending that you're trying to save the world when all you want to do is save yourself (or worse, your comfort zone) is just selfish and dishonest.
 
I used it correctly, didn't I? Grammar ain't my strongest subject.
Well, no. You should have said "affect." The verb.

Of course climate change is real. The climate changes all the time and it's been changing constantly for centuries, and it'd be incredibly arrogant to believe that homo sapiens is the first and only species to effect (or is it "affect", that always screws me up) their environment.
So, you could say:

"We are affecting the climate."

And/or

"What effect are we having?"

For example. Still, this mistake pales in comparison to the following:

I don't think people are worried about the world. Their worried about "their" world.


:thing: :doom: :thing:
For that mistake, *****-slapping is in order. C'mere, Richards. :cmad:
 
I'm still all for a new Ice Age.
Hello Ms. Anne Thrope! :)

Also, yes, the planet will be here long after we're gone...but can't we concede to the fact that we're generally treating the environment like crap and that it would be nice if we, y'know, didn't treat it like crap because we have to live here?
 
I don't hate people, I just think that the species and society would be better off with less of us. I have confidence that humanity is capable of surviving the next Ice Age, if it occurs in our species' time.
 
Come visit Metamorpho's Blanket and Jacket Emporium for all of your cold weather needs. It will be open in time for the end of the world.
 
Secondly, I keep getting this vibe from posters like Heretic that if AGW is in fact shown beyond a shadow of a doubt to be a lie that this somehow means that our carbon emissions are having NO dire effect on the environment. This isn't their necessarily their fault: their ignorance isn't helped by the fact that one of the major problems produced by our emissions is one of the least-publicized. Some of you probably know that I'm referring to ocean acidification, a topic I happen to be quite passionate about and for which there is no contradictory evidence. In fact, isotopic analysis quite easily confirms our role in ocean acidification to a degree of certainty never attained by studies of the changing climate.

So, yes, there IS a strong need for legislation and policy change concerning our carbon emissions.

You misrepresent me COMPLETELY.

There are some major, major issues with pollution and the health of our planet. I want us all to focus on those things and clean up the planet.

However, the data...the data that has not been altered...shows that the earth is cooling, not warming. Global Warming...the trillion dollar scam that has killed millions...is a fraud. Instead of focusing on REAL issues, and you mentioned a few, the environmental movement has been hijacked and focused on a non-threat.

The environmentalists should toss these scientists under the bus. They are worthless to your cause. They should be condemned, arrested...dealt with. Then we can immediately refocus the movement into areas that desperately need attention.

Our water is not clean, nor is our air. We need to accept the fact that we have been lied to and move on...and focus on REAL science. We cant even go back and check their data to get the real results because it has been thrown away. All thats left is the value added data, which is a work of fiction. I dont think we have to defend fictional science just because we want a clean world.
 
I don't know the validity of this statement but I do know that it will happen if we don't keep in check our carbon output. The Earth will correct itself somehow. I would rather live in harmony with nature than abuse it and then pay for it. I am no hippie but I do think we are ruining this planet and I do think we will pay for it some day.

Global warming is real....in fact, it is common sense. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. That is fact. When we burn fossil fuels, we output immense amounts of CO2. When we chop down forests, we destroy the plants that convert the CO2 into oxygen. We then put farms for cattle that also have huge CO2 outputs where a forest once was. So yes, we are changing our environment. The oceans are becoming more acidic...that should be proof right there that we are causing a lot of CO2 to remain unconverted and absorbed else where. What is also fact is that after every period of immense global warming, this planet has undergone an ice age. The Earth was correcting itself. Our planet has seen many ice ages. Another one will happen again. So, do we just go about our lives and do what we want...or do we find a way to keep the Earth from going over the edge and sending us into another Ice Age???
 
Last edited:
Global warming is real...yet the only research data that shows that it is real is that data that has been tampered with, with peer reviews forbidden and data destroyed and new data invented to replace it.

The untampered with data shows global COOLING.

In your post you even admit that the earth has had wild temperature changes many times before humans ever thought of inventing a car or factory. Maybe, just maybe the sun has something to do with it...unless yu think the science shows that man made carbon dioxide has traveled back in time to alter temperatures in the distant past.

One of Al Gore's boys discovered a way to eliminate carbon emissions with a new way of tilling soil. His research showed it would eliminate ALL of it. He was fired.

Common sense may say that global warming must certainly be happening, but science does not. Odd that a few months ago the "science was settled" and now that its been proven to be a fraud science no longer matters because we have common sense.

And once again...the scam artists have dropped "global warming" as their cause. It is now "Climate Change" meaning summer and winter are unnatural and man made...rain is mad made, the morning dew is the result of man...everything is...and we must be taxed.
 
Global warming is real...yet the only research data that shows that it is real is that data that has been tampered with, with peer reviews forbidden and data destroyed and new data invented to replace it.

The untampered with data shows global COOLING.

In your post you even admit that the earth has had wild temperature changes many times before humans ever thought of inventing a car or factory. Maybe, just maybe the sun has something to do with it...unless yu think the science shows that man made carbon dioxide has traveled back in time to alter temperatures in the distant past.

One of Al Gore's boys discovered a way to eliminate carbon emissions with a new way of tilling soil. His research showed it would eliminate ALL of it. He was fired.

Common sense may say that global warming must certainly be happening, but science does not. Odd that a few months ago the "science was settled" and now that its been proven to be a fraud science no longer matters because we have common sense.

And once again...the scam artists have dropped "global warming" as their cause. It is now "Climate Change" meaning summer and winter are unnatural and man made...rain is mad made, the morning dew is the result of man...everything is...and we must be taxed.
 
Rep. Issa: White House refusal to investigate 'Climategate' is 'unconscionable'

The U.N.'s decision this week to investigate whether some of its climate change research had been manipulated constitutes a "direct rebuke" of the Obama administration, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said Friday.

The White House's unwillingness to open a similar inquiry could now only be characterized as "a sad abdication of their responsibility to ensure that U.S. policies are not driven by corrupted science and data," the congressman added.

“The very integrity of the report that the Obama Administration has predicated much of its Climate Change policy has been called into question and it is unconscionable that this Administration and Congress is willing to abdicate responsibility of uncovering the truth to the United Nations," explained Issa, the ranking member on the House Oversight and Governmental Reform Committee.

Motivating Issa's calls for a probe into climate change research -- and the U.N.'s decision to launch one -- was the publication of last month of thousands of e-mails and other documents that global warming skeptics say prove the phenomenon does not exist.

Some of those e-mails contained discussions about how to best portray data sets, among other topics. Scientists maintain their comments have been taken out of context, but those who fiercely oppose the climate change thesis argue the e-mails invalidate all the research.

The U.N. announced it would probe that data this week, mostly because some of the research in question touches on related work either completed or promoted by its own Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).


But the White House has largely dismissed the litany of Republican calls to open an inquiry into that research -- Issa's included -- because its top scientists contend one controversy hardly undermines decades of more reliable research on climate change.

"It is important to understand that these kinds of controversies and even accusations of bias and improper manipulation are not all that uncommon in science, in all branches of science," said Dr. John Holdren, the president's science adviser.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...-to-investigate-climategate-is-unconscionable-

...
 
just so Im current....where is the place that these e-mails were leaked or hacked out of?? is it a place here in the US or located somewhere else??
 
A few MAJOR issues with that video:

It bashes Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck for making a decision on it before even reading the emails. Neither of them reported on ClimateGate until several days after the files were leaked...giving them time to read them...so it seems to bash them with no basis to do so. There are many, many reasons to bash both of them, but this bashing was unwarranted and prbably done just to make their later points seem invalid. Alex Jones was shown as well...and he read the emails several days before the other two.

The next portion of the video goes over the same two points of fraud over and over...stating that those must be the only examples of fraud in the email. It is not. Those were simply the first leaked, so they were heavily reported on.

Then the video moves to defend the "trick" to "hide the decline" in temperatures. The video disregards the fact that it clearly said "HIDE" the decline...and just says that it was a methd of trying to figure out tree ring data. It does so while ignoring both "hide the decline" and "Mikes Nature trick". Odd that the two most important phrases are ignored. He just states emphatically what the "trick" was while ignoring "Mikes Nature". The Trick is Mikes!! You cant separate the two! So, what is Mike's Nature Trick? Top climate scientist Michael Mann fictionalized data in Nature magazine to show a sharp rise in temperatures when the data actually showed a decline. he was caught red handed doing it and it is a very famous story of one of these guys (who is prominent in the hacked emails) inventing data to match the desired outcome. So, when the email says they used "Mike's Nature Trick" it is OBVIOUSLY referring to using the same methods Mike used to hide the decline in Nature magazine. The entire argument in the video is completely wrong (intentionally so) because it hopes you forget that it is Mike's trick the guy was using to hide the decline.

The video then states that we've been cooling since 2008 because we're at the end of an 11 year solar cycle...then IMMEDIATELY shows a graph that shows that we've been cooling for over a decade. What???? The graph only shows to 1955, but if it had gone further back, it would have shown bigger temperatures spikes since it hotter then than it is now.

The rest is complete opinion.
 
The one thing that I didn't get in Al Gore's film A Simple Truth, was when he brought out the graph chart showing temperatures and our past ice ages. I'm wondering if I read or misheard what he was talking about because according to that chart where the spike is at during our present time, it was at the same level or even passed(can't fully remember)the past spikes he himself said were past ice ages.

So technically, was he full of **** and didn't realize it or did I miss something?
 
Can I get stamps there too?

Stamps too, we still mail letters via the Clydesdale express.


Global Warming is our generations version of the street corner doomsday prophets. You know the guy with the big sign strapped over his shoulder saying it's the end of the world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,296
Messages
22,082,056
Members
45,881
Latest member
lucindaschatz
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"