-
Anyone living in and around Southwestern Ontario could have told you that. Not that I dispute Global Warming claims, but this article doesn't prove anything. It will be hard to know what the trends are until we have more data in my opinion.
-
I think the "naysayers" dispute the claims that man is causing global climate change.
"We don't say this winter is evidence of the influence of greenhouse gases," Lawrimore said.Your post count means nothing.Comment
-
Dennis Miller will just joke about how we rely on records from some drunken farmer in 1890 to compare with today's records. Therefore it must be meaningless.43-922-863 Shut up and play your guitar.
Comment
-
I think that few outside those that wear tinfoil hats while never bothering to go to the library and do their own research are debating whether or not the earth is warming. Much scientific evidence over the last 50 years backs up the assertion that it is.
The real debate is in whether or not humankind's actions are the cause of it.-D.
ICQ: 202-96-31Comment
-
Comment
-
It really is something that now the weather itself is politically charged.
"Talking about the weather" up 'til recently was cliche for talking about nothing of consequence or value. Now the line, "What do you think of the weather we're having?" sparks debate, anger, suspicion of an agenda.BaDoink
skype: tsgliderComment
-
This is exactly what I have been saying all along.
As I have said before also, I want weather data from the last 500,000 years before I can show ANYTHING as being a "trend".
The Earth is old (yes, more than 5,000 years old - sorry Godfans) and therefore has gone through a LOT of weather changes.
Can God just install a new AC machine?Comment
-
Mars apparently is also seeing side effects from our fossil fuel consumption..
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english...ent_479848.htmComment
-
I think you are slightly off on your estimate here... several sources online for this.
Modern geologists consider the age of the Earth to be around 4.567 billion years (4.567×109 years).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
Human Species traces back about 200,000 years, modern man around 10-40000 years depending on the source and criteria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human
Last edited by XSV; 03-16-2007, 09:25 AM.
Managed - E3 QC 2 x 500 GB SSD's / 32 GB RAM / 100 Mbps On Gig Port + 10 TB CDN Traffic $299/mo 
** NEW MANAGED 10 TB CDN SERVERS FROM $199 PER MONTH - 50% Off Trial Code: AMNOCDEAL**
DIY DEAL: Unmanaged Root Server Plans - 50% OFF For Life! • Windows + Linux • Coupon Code: SUMMERDED16Comment
-
oh jeez.I think you are slightly off on your estimate here... several sources online for this.
Modern geologists consider the age of the Earth to be around 4.567 billion years (4.567×109 years).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth
Human Species traces back about 200,000 years, modern man around 10-40000 years depending on the source and criteria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human
Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
lol.. no you can't put it that way. Thats like saying you were drunk before you consumed the alcohol
There is interaction in nature, but the man does not increase temperature directly. He pollutes co2, which cause the rise in temperature above the normal fluctuations.Comment
-
None taken - thats exactly why I posted it - noted also that the UN has decided that the temperature change is directly related to human activity in their recently released report
Of course the criminals running the US right now decided that scientists are no longer allowed to talk about their opinions if they travel abroad - they have a very specific "party line" that thye have to tow if they will be speaking outside of the US (including what they can say about polar bears LOL)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...&feed=rss.news
fortunately in that same article the Dept of the Interior does specifically say that it is the US Govts position that global warming is due to greenhouse gasses
Comment
-
O'rly?
Water vapor is a naturally occurring greenhouse gas and accounts for the largest percentage of the greenhouse effect. Water vapor concentrations fluctuate regionally, but human activity does not directly affect water vapor concentrations except at very local scales.
Last edited by Splum; 03-16-2007, 12:02 PM.Comment
-
I agree that global warming is happening, I could care less how it is happening, because I know eventually mother nature will correct it
but it is going to get worse before it gets better, that is what worries me
but when mother nature corrects it, we better watch out
Comment
-
You arent comprehending. Solar activity and fluctuations in the earths orbit and axis are more likely the cause. Its a natural warming trend. The c02 is a biproduct of the increased temperatures. Its also a natural thing that exists and is produced by nature.lol.. no you can't put it that way. Thats like saying you were drunk before you consumed the alcohol
There is interaction in nature, but the man does not increase temperature directly. He pollutes co2, which cause the rise in temperature above the normal fluctuations.Comment
-
You are right that the nature and cosmic events cause fluctuations. Winter/summer is a perfect example if you look on monthly scale.
But when you start looking at the longrange scale, from iceage to iceage, and you look at level of co2, it has never been as high as now. The humans has never polluted as much as now, and I doubt the correlation is a coincidence. If someone can prove this highest level of all time is caused by nature alone, well then its good news. Otherwise, lets stick to the facts and deal with it, as we did with the ozon-layer problem
Comment
-
.
.
Arguing with a troll is a lot like wrestling in the mud with a pig, after a couple of hours you realize the pig likes it.Comment
-
Yeah it funny how people like hmm dismiss scientists that actually went to college and have degrees and have worked on this. Yet HE a person with absolutely ZERO scientific background is somehow correct. So non-scientists = correct, scientist = incorrect. Um...yeah.
The neo cons deny global warming because they think is will hurt big business to make changes. It won't. It will cost more when your business is wiped out by a hurricane or the city you're in is flooded out of existence.
I don't these type people. They refuse to buy compact fluorescent bulbs even though they SAVE you money. Who doesn't want more money in their pocket. And you're putting less CO2 in the air. This is bad how? You'd think neo-cons would like more money. If you swap out eight 60 watt bulbs with compact florescent ones you save over $400 over the the life of those bulbs. Maybe not a lot of $$ to some, but I can think of 100 things I'd rather do with $400 than give it to the electric company. In a few years when LED lights become the norm you'll save even more.Comment
-
Anyone who invents the internet is probably right about everything else...Comment
-
I could get killed by a car too or fall down the stairs.
Hurricanes are Weather-Related Phenomena
Didn't have those a thousand yrs ago right?
In any case life expectancy is way higher then it was just 200 yrs ago so it still proves nothing..
.
Arguing with a troll is a lot like wrestling in the mud with a pig, after a couple of hours you realize the pig likes it.Comment
-
The government doesn't really believe man is causing the warming. They are just getting us ready for some new corporate regulations and personal carbon taxes.Comment
-
FACT: CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Venus proves that. Even Mars proves it. It's cold, but it'd be 100 degrees colder if it didn't have any CO2.
FACT: Man has been putting CO2 into the air for 150 years.
FACT: Trees breathe in CO2 and produce oxygen
FACT: over the last 150 the amount of forrested in area in the world has shrunk.
So in other words more CO2 and less trees to consume it.
To say that man has no absolutely ZERO effect on our atmosphere is retarded.Comment
-
Don't be retarded you know between 1000 and 1850 man put almost no CO2 into the atmosphere. You have no clue about science and what number mean. I'm sure someon near the equator has not noticed any differences over the last 75 years. Go ask someone from Alaska if things are different. The difference are going to be felt first in the areas near the poles and those difference are going to be the most extreme.
I'm sure Russia loves global warming since that means Siberia will turn into the next great grain belt. Since Russia is basically turning back into it's former self if you are against reducing man made emmisions of green house gasses you support communism.Comment
-
Wow thats a huge amount of CO2 thats causing global warming.Carbon dioxide is a chemical compound composed of one carbon and two oxygen atoms. It is often referred to by its formula CO2. It is present in the Earth's atmosphere at a low concentration of approximately 0.03%-0.06%
Comment
-
i suspect people like splum and stickeryfingerz and 12 clicks are all fuckin retarded....they should be sterilized so they cant reproduce.
i mean give me a fuckin breakTelegram PhoenixBrad
https://quantads.ioComment
-
Im pretty stupid, but I bet I would of gotten my car started without making a phone call if my battery was dead. Common sense goes along way lol. Like turn on the headlights and turn the key over. See if the lights go out. No offense but you did just call me fuckin retarded, so a little jab back is due course Id say.
Comment
-
well heres the thing..the car did turn over..it wasnt deadIm pretty stupid, but I bet I would of gotten my car started without making a phone call if my battery was dead. Common sense goes along way lol. Like turn on the headlights and turn the key over. See if the lights go out. No offense but you did just call me fuckin retarded, so a little jab back is due course Id say.
i didnt know that it needed more to get going
anyway im all in jest
but seriously man....the evidence is all thereTelegram PhoenixBrad
https://quantads.ioComment
-
You all talk about scientists watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU
former director of greenpeace even says its a crock of shit. Guys who had their name fraudulently put on literature saying they agreed with it. At least one guy sued to have his name removed. Scientists from MIT etc disagree with the c02 crap. Watch it then post.Comment
-
the humorous irony of these conversations is that science ultimately seeks truth... no matter what that truth might be. the people making these "scientific" arguments in discussions such as these, are 100% incapable of admitting that there is another side of the argument, much less accept the possibility that they might be wrong. the idea and controversy of Global Warming is degrading from what should be a scientific discussion, to a cult.Comment
-
Huge ice deposits cover south pole of Mars
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/0...eut/index.html
How do you get so much ice if it's WARMING up?
Oh by the way the Mars is warming theory is based on 3 years of data. Yet 120 years of earth data and the jury is still out.Comment
-
stickyfingerz, do you believe that co2 doesn't cause global warming?
have you ever thought about what you're arguing for? if you're right, nothing really matters.
What happens if you're wrong? Frankly, i really hope you ARE right, but what happens dude, if you are wrong?
RComment
Comment