GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   U.N. climate panel says global warming man-made (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=702147)

stickyfingerz 02-02-2007 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby (Post 11843771)
What you raving about now? Did anyone mention "experts"?? You would not know either way Sticky. There sure are no experts around here ;-)

Tho there are a few clueless sig whores who specialize in fucking up threads for postcounts - not that they have any personal agenda on the topic - least that's what they said, remember?? *lol*

I dont know why I waste time typing to you. lol This whole thread is about the U.N. climate panel and their 2500 experts. Yet they ignored the opposing opinions some of which were experts that they themselves asked to testify. BAAAAA!!!!!

psili 02-02-2007 03:23 PM

Those articles just showed me that a few dozen scientists disagree with a bunch of other scientists.


Webby 02-02-2007 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11843801)
I dont know why I waste time typing to you.

Yea? I don't know either - you have nothing to offer. Take a tip - don't! :1orglaugh :thumbsup

stickyfingerz 02-02-2007 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Webby (Post 11843820)
Yea? I don't know either - you have nothing to offer. Take a tip - don't! :1orglaugh :thumbsup

Wow you fit all that thought into less than a paragraph? I was sure you would need at least a 500 word essay to cover that. Rambling on about this and that while missing the full point. :winkwink:

The Sultan Of Smut 02-02-2007 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11843801)
I dont know why I waste time typing to you. lol This whole thread is about the U.N. climate panel and their 2500 experts. Yet they ignored the opposing opinions some of which were experts that they themselves asked to testify. BAAAAA!!!!!

OK now when exactly is an argument resolved? The conclusion released today was the collective opinion of climatologists from 130 different countries which embrace different values, politics, and economies. They all came to the same conclusion.

There's always gonna be a dissenting opinion but when the score is 2500 - 10 I must say the game's over. I mean c'mon there's a bigger per capita pool of scientists today that believe we're harming the planet as compared to the per capita number of scientists that had to argue the Earth was round.

elitegirls 02-02-2007 03:35 PM

complete bullshit

fuck you un, fuck the nwo!

psili 02-02-2007 03:39 PM

On a lighter note, not only should you not eat yellow snow, but pending further investigation, it might be wise to not eat orange snow as well:

Quote:

MOSCOW, Feb 1 (Reuters) - Russia's Emergency Ministry planned to fly a chemical laboratory on Thursday to the Omsk region in southern Siberia to analyse oily yellow and orange snow which has covered an area home to 27,000 people.

"A special mobile chemical laboratory will enable us to carry out express analysis of the snow at the site," Viktor Beltsov, a spokesman for the ministry, said.

The snow covered a 1,500 sq km area with 7,280 homes, Beltsov said.

Omsk is a heavily industrial city with a number of oil and gas refineries.
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L01708971.htm

Webby 02-02-2007 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11843869)
Wow you fit all that thought into less than a paragraph? I was sure you would need at least a 500 word essay to cover that. Rambling on about this and that while missing the full point. :winkwink:

You have read any report by the IPCC, have qualification to offer any opinion, spoken to anyone involved in environmental issues or involved in environmental protection in any way??? *lol*

You have some point to make somewhere in a dispute among professionals?? I doubt any of them care...

But can you tell them what your issues are and give more thought to "why I waste time" blah?? Damned if I know, but your wasting my time :winkwink: :thumbsup

Lazonby 02-02-2007 04:59 PM

Webby's a hardcore socialist. He's a liar and manipulator by definition. Always entertaining though. Carry on the show.

directfiesta 02-02-2007 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazonby (Post 11844447)
Webby's a hardcore socialist. He's a liar and manipulator by definition. Always entertaining though. Carry on the show.

socialist ... He is a fucking capitalist, just like me ...

Liar ? Manipulator ? please show proof or STFU ....

BTW, I see you complete Photoshop for Idiots 101.

Congrats :thumbsup

Lazonby 02-02-2007 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 11844504)
socialist ... He is a fucking capitalist, just like me ...

Liar ? Manipulator ? please show proof or STFU ....

BTW, I see you complete Photoshop for Idiots 101.

Congrats :thumbsup

Go suck your manboobs asshole.

Webby 02-02-2007 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 11844504)
socialist ... He is a fucking capitalist, just like me ...

Liar ? Manipulator ? please show proof or STFU ....

BTW, I see you complete Photoshop for Idiots 101.

Congrats :thumbsup

Socialist? Capitalist? Communist? Well... whatever we are, it's more than Lazonby ever will be - he's just totally useless with nothing to offer but delusions of having two cents to rub together :)

spanky part 2 02-02-2007 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11842042)
SHHHH!! Scientists are never ever ever wrong. :mad:

You're right, there is no global warming. All those anomalies that are going on world wide, are nothing to worry about. You are a complete idiot.:321GFY

stickyfingerz 02-02-2007 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanky part 2 (Post 11845335)
You're right, there is no global warming. All those anomalies that are going on world wide, are nothing to worry about. You are a complete idiot.:321GFY

Bet alot of people who didnt believe there was an ice age coming in the 70's were idiots too huh? There was lots of "proof" then too.

Splum 02-02-2007 07:47 PM

========== CLUEPON REDEEMABLE IMMEDIATELY ==========
These scientists have an agenda... they need more money to study this new dilema. Dont you think that if the scientists REALLY thought this was bad they wouldnt have burnt up millions of gallons of jet fuel, billions of gallons of gasoline, flatulated, smoked and used equipment that increase the size of the ozone hole?
=================================================

spanky part 2 02-02-2007 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum (Post 11845484)
========== CLUEPON REDEEMABLE IMMEDIATELY ==========
These scientists have an agenda... they need more money to study this new dilema. Dont you think that if the scientists REALLY thought this was bad they wouldnt have burnt up millions of gallons of jet fuel, billions of gallons of gasoline, flatulated, smoked and used equipment that increase the size of the ozone hole?
=================================================

Once again you prove your brilliance.

Ozone has NOTHING to do with global warming. The ozone problem was fixed years ago. You republicans sure are a stupid lot, aren't you? If you can't make it past 6th grade, you are a lifetime member of the republican party.

spanky part 2 02-02-2007 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11845458)
Bet alot of people who didnt believe there was an ice age coming in the 70's were idiots too huh? There was lots of "proof" then too.

Stick your head in the sand all you want, but we are all in for big trouble. Republicans , democrats, and independants. Even Bush (your hero) now agrees there is global warming.

Even the geico cavemen know there is global warming. :thumbsup

Splum 02-02-2007 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanky part 2 (Post 11845682)
Once again you prove your brilliance.

Ozone has NOTHING to do with global warming. The ozone problem was fixed years ago. You republicans sure are a stupid lot, aren't you? If you can't make it past 6th grade, you are a lifetime member of the republican party.

Its called being sarcastic you dumb fuck, years ago they were bitching about the ozone layer and how by 2020 the world would be exposed directly to space radiation. That doesnt look like its going to happen does it? Since when does a scientist use words like "90% chance" of man made global warming lol I thought SCIENCE was exact? They cant prove it, also how the fuck can your lame ass defend it when you CONTRIBUTE to the very problem you claim to fight. Talk about hypocrisy. You tree fuckers crack me up. I think I will let me SUV run all night in honor of your stupidity.

spanky part 2 02-02-2007 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum (Post 11845703)
Its called being sarcastic you dumb fuck, years ago they were bitching about the ozone layer and how by 2020 the world would be exposed directly to space radiation. That doesnt look like its going to happen does it? Since when does a scientist use words like "90% chance" of man made global warming lol I thought SCIENCE was exact? They cant prove it, also how the fuck can your lame ass defend it when you CONTRIBUTE to the very problem you claim to fight. Talk about hypocrisy. You tree fuckers crack me up. I think I will let me SUV run all night in honor of your stupidity.

The reason there isn't a problem anymore, is because we did something about it. Remember when they changed air conditioning systems and aerosol deoderants? The scientists weren't wrong,we fixed the problem.

I would love to meet you. I bet you're real winner. Fat as fuck, living in a shitty apartment and driving a 1976 gremlin.:1orglaugh

Webby 02-02-2007 08:47 PM

There are around five lower forms of human species on GFY with very little clue of any subject known to man.

But... someone with a sense of humor blessed them with a mouth to speak and entertain others - which they do very well, while having not one clue when to shut up to avoid showing their ignorance....

Congrats to all :thumbsup

psili 02-02-2007 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splum (Post 11845703)
I thought SCIENCE was exact?

Someone posted somewhere that science is theory, tests to prove / disprove that theory, rework the theory and rework the tests. It seems fact, or the exactness of science, only remains as fact as long as a certain theory isn't refuted by a better theory and tests, or some shit like that.

*shrug*

stickyfingerz 02-02-2007 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanky part 2 (Post 11845765)
The reason there isn't a problem anymore, is because we did something about it. Remember when they changed air conditioning systems and aerosol deoderants? The scientists weren't wrong,we fixed the problem.

I would love to meet you. I bet you're real winner. Fat as fuck, living in a shitty apartment and driving a 1976 gremlin.:1orglaugh


Haha yup we fixed the Ozone layer... OR answer B it never ever changed size since it was first found. It shifts and changes with the season just as it always has.

spanky part 2 02-02-2007 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11845828)
Haha yup we fixed the Ozone layer... OR answer B it never ever changed size since it was first found. It shifts and changes with the season just as it always has.

The world is flat, there is a bigfoot, and a lochness moster.

directfiesta 02-02-2007 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanky part 2 (Post 11846057)
The world is flat, there is a bigfoot, and a lochness moster.


... and the sun goes around the earth ....

blwurmnd 02-02-2007 10:08 PM

scary stuff... but what an interesting discussion :lol

notabook 02-02-2007 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directfiesta (Post 11846106)
... and the sun goes around the earth ....

True. :) And the earth is being supported by a giant turtle!

stickyfingerz 02-02-2007 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanky part 2 (Post 11846057)
The world is flat, there is a bigfoot, and a lochness moster.

Good chance there is bigfoot. We only found Gorillas what 50 years ago? Hell they just found a shark they thought was extinct. World isnt flat. And do you think any money was made with the ban on cfcs? R12 goes for 8 to 900.00 per 30lb canister now. Used to be 49.00 for a 30lb canister. Now prices of r134a are going up, and they are about to make it non consumer available also.

Webby 02-02-2007 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spanky part 2 (Post 11846057)
The world is flat, there is a bigfoot, and a lochness moster.

You know this, I know this, but others don't seem to grasp it.

But... wait for a load of dribble or cut and pastes to prove something - it rarely fails :pimp

psili 02-02-2007 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11846132)
World isnt flat. And do you think any money was made with the ban on cfcs? R12 goes for 8 to 900.00 per 30lb canister now. Used to be 49.00 for a 30lb canister. Now prices of r134a are going up, and they are about to make it non consumer available also.

I'm confused by your statement above. Yea, I'm grabbing from the tree-hugging Wikipedia, but I'm still confused by your statement above.

Quote:

1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane, also called simply tetrafluoroethane, R-134a or HFC-134a, is a refrigerant without an ozone depletion potential and thermodynamic properties similar to R-12 (dichlorodifluoromethane).
Quote:

Dichlorodifluoromethane (R-12), usually sold under the brand name Freon-12, is a chlorofluorocarbon halomethane used as a refrigerant and aerosol spray propellant until its manufacture was discontinued in 1995, due to concerns about damage to the ozone layer. The ozone depletion potential of R-12 is 0.82, which is relatively high.

stickyfingerz 02-02-2007 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psili (Post 11846223)
I'm confused by your statement above. Yea, I'm grabbing from the tree-hugging Wikipedia, but I'm still confused by your statement above.

134a had legislation to also do away with it and have it replaced by another chemical. Which of course would leave all the current cars with r134a unable to do a charge on their own without having a license for it. Which in turn increases the cost of 134a just as they did for r12. Why are they doing that? I think the motives are pretty obvious.

spanky part 2 02-02-2007 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11846339)
134a had legislation to also do away with it and have it replaced by another chemical. Which of course would leave all the current cars with r134a unable to do a charge on their own without having a license for it. Which in turn increases the cost of 134a just as they did for r12. Why are they doing that? I think the motives are pretty obvious.


Ok using your logic, why would the OIL companies and the Bush admin say that global warming isn't happening?

Why do I even try? My 6 yr and 2 yr old kids understand more than these 2.

psili 02-02-2007 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stickyfingerz (Post 11846339)
134a had legislation to also do away with it and have it replaced by another chemical. Which of course would leave all the current cars with r134a unable to do a charge on their own without having a license for it. Which in turn increases the cost of 134a just as they did for r12. Why are they doing that? I think the motives are pretty obvious.

1. Well, obviously money. I'll say that's hands down to anything else. I'll ever concede this whole debate is over money and not lives.
2. 134a replacement - what was the chemical and was how was it cost comparative to 134a as a "friendly" refrigerant?
3. Yes, from the wikipedia article, it seems R12 is back in the market, albeit at a higher price from your findings. Is that a good thing?

stickyfingerz 02-02-2007 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by psili (Post 11846402)
1. Well, obviously money. I'll say that's hands down to anything else. I'll ever concede this whole debate is over money and not lives.
2. 134a replacement - what was the chemical and was how was it cost comparative to 134a as a "friendly" refrigerant?
3. Yes, from the wikipedia article, it seems R12 is back in the market, albeit at a higher price from your findings. Is that a good thing?

r12 was never "out of" the market. It was simply made unavailable for public use. You had to have a certification in order to buy it. I had my certification for r12 and for r22 for home refrigerants. This is something I have a pretty good insight to. R12 was not allowed on any of the cars from I believe 95 and up. While 134 was less of a "threat" than r12 it still is damaging according to what they say.

Here is an article

http://archive.greenpeace.org/ozone/greenfreeze/

Quote:

The Global Warming Potential (GWP) of HFC-134a, the preferred alternative to CFC-12 for refrigerant in the U.S., is estimated to be 3,200 times that of carbon dioxide (over a time span of 20 years). The global warming impact of the worldwide annual production of at least 200,000 tones of R134a equals roughly the CO2 emissions of an industrialized nation the size of France or the UK. In the longer term, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has estimated that HFC emissions, if unregulated, could reach over thirteen times this level or 2,764,000 tones per year in the next century. Consequently, HFC-134a is coming under increased international scrutiny, with pressures beginning to build up for their controls under the Climate Convention.

LiveDose 02-02-2007 11:53 PM

Every aspect of the U.N. is a fucking joke. Come on.

Nysus 02-03-2007 01:06 AM

There's going to be a war between nations wanting to use fossil fuels loosely and those countries concerned and affected with global-warming; mostly the only way for those countries' economies to grow cheaply is with cheap fossil fuel burning engines... and for other electricity, unless we provide them access to nuclear power (basically free) then they'll pollute for that source as well.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123