RJM62
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2007
- Messages
- 13,157
- Location
- Upstate New York
- Display Name
Display name:
Geek on the Hill
You're going to have trouble convincing some folks from India, who revere the cow (which is your mother) that cows are bad. They don't eat them, but they have a lot of them and they roam and fart and eat freely. Cows are good.
That could make for an interesting and amusing argument. You could pit the anti-meat wackos, the AGW wackos, and the anti-religion wackos against the pro-developing-nations wackos, and let them all duke it out. The fact that all four groups tend to also be leftists should make that much more amusing.
-Rich
That could make for an interesting and amusing argument. You could pit the anti-meat wackos, the AGW wackos, and the anti-religion wackos against the pro-developing-nations wackos, and let them all duke it out. The fact that all four groups tend to also be leftists should make that much more amusing.
-Rich
Love it when hippies fight
First you have to believe that CO2 is bad. It is not, water is more of a green house gas than CO2. It is plant food.
Good lord, is that really what people believe?
Plants do not consume CO2. They convert it into other carbon forms to grow, and then when they die the carbon is released back into the environment. It's a closed-cycle, and neither increases nor reduces the atmospheric CO2 over time.
The problem we have with carbon is that we're releasing enormous amount of it which have been sequestered under ground as oil for millions of years, and doing it all at once. That throws the cycle out of balance completely, and is already changing the climate drastically. Higher CO2 levels may increase plant growth, but that plant life will not somehow reduce the levels back to what they should be. In the meantime the Earth will continue to get hotter and the oceans will continue to get more acidic.
There are legitimate discussions to be had about climate change and ecological impacts, but dismissing it because you know CO2 to be "plant food" is absurd.
Your scaring me man! Can you point at an example that I can see with my own eyes of us already changing the climate drastically?
Your scaring me man! Can you point at an example that I can see with my own eyes of us already changing the climate drastically?
Yep. And just because the Earth has natural cycles of life doesn't mean we shouldn't prevent ourselves from making the planet less pleasant while we're around.Earth's balance will be maintained, we just won't be around to see it, doesn't matter if caused by a change in solar cycles, asteroid, or man induced.
Sure they do. It's not a secret factor that explains global warming (though it may contribute).Variables in solar activity is something no one ever seems to talk about.
Why didn't you post the pic from 2013????
"Arctic sea ice minimum in 2013 is 6th-lowest on record"
http://climate.nasa.gov/news/986/
It's the 6th lowest in the 33 years they have been able to check it, wtf does that matter???? Talk about an agenda.
One volcanic eruption does more "environmental damage" than all the cows ever living on earth. Why these left wing wacks want to cherry pick their issues is hard to understand.....
It matters because you implied that the first graphic wasn't significant because 2013 had tons of ice when it didn't. My post was only to refute your (apparent) assertion that arctic ice was doing well when in fact the larger trend is very negative.
Anyway, why does everyone have to have an agenda? Do you think I sit around trying to come up with ways to fake global warming? I'm just in favor of not trashing our planet -- that's my agenda -- what is your agenda of being a global warming (or global climate change, I don't care what you call it) denier?
Dude (dudette), you can't do anything about volcanic explosions, and they can cause extinction level events as well if they are big enough and the tipping point is met, it's happened. The more we load the atmosphere, the smaller the volcanic event needs to be to reach the tipping point. It's really hard to believe that some people can't work this stuff out, but then I hear our elected officials talk...
Good lord, is that really what people believe?
Plants do not consume CO2. They convert it into other carbon forms to grow, and then when they die the carbon is released back into the environment. It's a closed-cycle, and neither increases nor reduces the atmospheric CO2 over time.
The problem we have with carbon is that we're releasing enormous amount of it which have been sequestered under ground as oil for millions of years, and doing it all at once. That throws the cycle out of balance completely, and is already changing the climate drastically. Higher CO2 levels may increase plant growth, but that plant life will not somehow reduce the levels back to what they should be. In the meantime the Earth will continue to get hotter and the oceans will continue to get more acidic.
There are legitimate discussions to be had about climate change and ecological impacts, but dismissing it because you know CO2 to be "plant food" is absurd.
My agenda is not to get taxed into oblivion by GW zealots...... From the article you posted, it was described that the ice recovered substantially from 2012, mainly due to the weather, go figure. Think about it, 33 years worth of data, 6th lowest, it means nothing.
My agenda is not to get taxed into oblivion by GW zealots...... From the article you posted, it was described that the ice recovered substantially from 2012, mainly due to the weather, go figure. Think about it, 33 years worth of data, 6th lowest, it means nothing.
What is absurd if your continued belief in the MMGW hoax. Complete liberal nonsense. There has been no warming in 12 years.
6th lowest out of 33 is not much of a "recovery." Unless we're just having a confusion of terms and you're not realizing that lowest means "worst" in this context.
I don't want to tax you into oblivion or anyone. I do want to stop subsidizing oil and coal. I do want to protect wildlife and the natural beauty (and the natural resources!) of our country. I do want to stop big corporations from pouring money into political campaigns under the guise of "freedom." I want people to realize that drilling in national parks won't put much of a dent in global oil markets. I want to encourage clean energy and conservation instead of "drill baby drill". I'm not anti-capitalist or anti-technology. I'm just pro-science, pro-long term thinking, and pro-informed decisions.
I want my unborn kids to grow old in a cleaner world than we inherited, not a world where we've continued to pump pollution and greenhouse gases into the atmosphere for another couple generations. If that means my taxes go up a bit and Exxon doesn't make as much profit this year, so be it. There's more to life than corporate profits.
Explain how it is a hoax. You're suggesting the vast majority of scientists are working together to intentionally perpetuate this hoax?
Also (this is animated, tap to play it if you're on a phone or something):
Explain how it is a hoax. You're suggesting the vast majority of scientists are working together to intentionally perpetuate this hoax?
Also (this is animated, tap to play it if you're on a phone or something):
I'm not confused, I'm saying that 33 datapoints out of 6,000 (just kidding) out of millions mean nothing in the grand scheme of things and certainly are not enough to establish a trend.
You obviously believe CO2 emissions are a problem, you can easily eliminate most of your emissions by giving up your car(s), disconnecting from the grid(s), growing your own food, heat with wood...... there are many things you can do personally and encourage everyone else to do without forcing this on the rest of us....
The 'science' is contentious. And lately it's looking like the climate change crowd don't have any on their side.
A) How on Earth is a poll of the average American more trustworthy than what well-educated scientists can show us is happening?And that's why the majority of Americans say it's a hoax, and they are right.
Why didn't you post the pic from 2013????
I'm quite lazy. I put in a really simple Google search and took the first thing I saw. Honestly. You could have done likewise but I guess your Google-Fu just isn't up to it.
No, it isn't. I hear this all the time -- that the science isn't settled and it's still up for debate. Shoot, people still say that about evolution.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
There are plenty of scientists who disagree about climate change -- but for every one there's dozens who don't.
Of course, there's still plenty of room for genuine scientific debate about the rate of climate change, the specific effects, and how to mitigate them. I am not at all trying to stop debate based on science. But what there isn't room for is lies and gross misrepresentations of the truth based on people's hunches, feelings, and what big oil tells them to think.
A) How on Earth is a poll of the average American more trustworthy than what well-educated scientists can show us is happening?
B ) This isn't even true. 63% of Americans believe global warming is happening right now. I'm a little disappointed that number is trending down, but regardless, it's hardly a rejection of scientific reality. http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/article/Climate-Beliefs-April-2013
No, it isn't. I hear this all the time -- that the science isn't settled and it's still up for debate. Shoot, people still say that about evolution.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
There are plenty of scientists who disagree about climate change -- but for every one there's dozens who don't.
Of course, there's still plenty of room for genuine scientific debate about the rate of climate change, the specific effects, and how to mitigate them. I am not at all trying to stop debate based on science. But what there isn't room for is lies and gross misrepresentations of the truth based on people's hunches, feelings, and what big oil tells them to think.
A) How on Earth is a poll of the average American more trustworthy than what well-educated scientists can show us is happening?
B ) This isn't even true. 63% of Americans believe global warming is happening right now. I'm a little disappointed that number is trending down, but regardless, it's hardly a rejection of scientific reality. http://environment.yale.edu/climate-communication/article/Climate-Beliefs-April-2013
You just committed the big foo-pah when you said 'vast majority of scientists' which is simply not true.
The 'science' is contentious. And lately it's looking like the climate change crowd don't have any on their side. And that's why the majority of Americans say it's a hoax, and they are right.
Btw. there is real effort to harness cow farts. Ag schools are working on devices to capture the methane while the cows are in a barn and using it to power the farm.
The problem we have with carbon is that we're releasing enormous amount of it which have been sequestered under ground as oil for millions of years, and doing it all at once. That throws the cycle out of balance completely, and is already changing the climate drastically.
So in your world of science majority rules? If the majority of citizens believe in something it must be so? That's science right there!