Global Warming Update

Padawan,

Scientists try to convince us they know all. They call the unknown super natural. Imagine what scientists would have said in 1491 if you came up with germ theory and there was no church to stifle science. You would've been laughed at. Your theory would be considered like Deepak Chopra.

Why does everyone around the world experience "old hag syndrome" nearly exactly the same. Science tries to say it's no different than ghosts. They call it super narural, and ignore investigating it. Those who do don't get peer reviewed.

Scientists like neat and tidy stories they can tell. They don't want to look stupid or admit they don't know like the rest of us.

Oh, for your biology question. I'm doing biology on this site. When I do plant crosses. Feminize seeds with a clone I like. When I use rooting hormone. Those are all biology which use chemistry and would work even if no one used evolution anymore. Mendel figured out genetics before Darwin did evolution. That's modern biology and those don't fall apart without evolution as a theory.

kittens are cute because god made them cute. intelligent design can not be proven false because of the cuteness of kittens. i win.

UncleBuck said:

kittens are cute because god made them cute. intelligent design can not be proven false because of the cuteness of kittens. i win.

Click to expand...

And the prize for the example of a logical fallacy is you!

Padawanbater2 said:

Dude, I don't have time to pick apart all that bullshit. Been over it a million times before. All I can tell you is research things more. If you don't accept something like the theory of evolution in the year 2012 as a fully functioning adult, I don't know what else to tell you...

Click to expand...

I researched it all. The point is you don't know, I don't know and the scientists don't know for sure. We might have a good idea how, but that doesn't make it proof positive. You don't know that aliens didn't use the Earth as a big petri dish. And that's the origin of the real ark myth. The more technology we learn, the less we have of Darwin's original theory.

I laugh every time a scientific headline, "omg new breakthrough, eternal life found" Then only days later they're called idiots. Or pretty much everyday a scientist figures out how to surpass the speed of light. Scientists are like Tweeg from Teddy Ruxpin trying to make gold from buttermilk muffins

I must say that climate is not there without weather. It is the average of weather over a period of time after all.

It's amazing how the proponents of MMGW think they can just keep typing "science" and that alone should end the debate. The science of climate projection is laughable at best. The results from these models are dependent on a myriad of educated guesses and suppositions. The results can swing from 1/2 a degree increase over the next 20 years to the end of all life on earth with nothing more than a tweak of the entered data.

Since these Eco-Loons are nothing but zealots of the new religion of ecological alarmism, does it do any good to point out that this same "science" was projecting we would already be up to our ankles in water by now. That the temperature increases would be so substantial that we would already be in dire straights by now. You people are taking a naturally occurring temperature increase and trying to use it to justify your lunacy. You are most likely just as wrong as the spotted owl lunatics that "proved" through science that the lumber industry was killing off the poor little bastards. Well, 30 years later, lives ruined, industry and jobs lost and moved up to Canada and uh oh, what do you know... it was natural selection. No apologies, no restitution to the families that lost everything, because the ends justify the means. MMGW is no different, they have an agenda and will forward ANYTHING to achieve it.

While the earth is warming, you and all the scientists you champion, have NO PROOF that man is definitively responsible. NONE.

The vestigial organ theory of lies was around for a lot longer than global warming. Again it was liberal garbage intended to give assholes like Mr. Tyson ammunition to mock religious people. I'm not even religious and know their agenda.

Liberals think with enough people fooled they can slowly turn us into a Brave New World with a Soma Holiday to shut us up.

Global warming is a big business which makes the government billions of dollars. They justify it by preying on stupid people. Who likes pollution? Who wants to use up precious resources? If you don't believe us, global warming will kill another kitten. It's the same propaganda the church uses with threats of hell.

Padawanbater2 said:

So what's the Eco-agenda?

Decrease environmental pollution, wean off fossil fuels, develop more efficient alternative renewable energy sources?

Jesus Christ that sounds horrible!! We've gotta act NOW!

Click to expand...

Decreasing pollution and developing efficient alternative renewable energy sources are both fantastic goals. Like yourself, Conservatives want the exact same thing. The problem is in the method used and urgency in attaining those goals. Do I think solar power will eventually provide all our energy needs, sure do, hope so. But, I also know that it is quite a ways off, in my lifetime...maybe. Oil and other natural sources of energy will be needed for the next 50-100 years, we will need them to implement and make possible all the developments in alternative energy. Not to mention, fuel is just one of a plethora of products we obtain from oil. Sun and wind won't be providing those applications, ever. The Eco-Loons are useful idiots, nothing more. They hate that which makes their soft, cushy lives possible. The leaders of the movement think they can force technological advances by creating a scarcity and high cost of fossil fuels. It's a gamble at best, and they're willing to bet the house on that gamble. I've seen and listened to these people, I wouldn't trust them to cut my grass and you think we should let them decide how this country approaches it's energy needs? Not a chance.

Padawanbater2 said:

The decades of data that's been collected by THOUSANDS of different sources is sound. The corporations who benefit from keeping people ignorant of the facts spend BILLIONS of dollars per year on propaganda. Just like the tobacco corporations did. It keeps the profits flowing. You people eat it up and claim the science is skewed without showing any evidence to support it.

Again, CS or MLNC, explain to me how a conspiracy of this magnitude could even be possible. MILLIONS of pieces of data, faked. Hundreds of thousands of researchers, all lying.

THAT seems MORE LIKELY to you than huge corporations with enormous fortunes paying off politicians, shit that happens every single day, to ensure the future of their business continues as usual?

Click to expand...

I'll simply direct you to my earlier post, not one scientist has delivered incontrovertible proof that man is the definitive cause of global warming. Until that day, there is no debate. We're talking about the legitimacy of facts that have NEVER been delivered.

Canna Sylvan said:

The vestigial organ theory of lies was around for a lot longer than global warming. Again it was liberal garbage intended to give assholes like Mr. Tyson ammunition to mock religious people. I'm not even religious and know their agenda.

Click to expand...

Were scientists "lying" to people in 1491 about the Earth being flat or did they just not have enough information to make the correct conclusion? I italicized the word 'scientists' for a reason, as the basis of modern science was established WELL AFTER 1491, rendering the scientists of that day... not really scientists at all. However, the point is still valid; were they lying?

The answer is no.

Now apply the example I just used to the appendix. I haven't followed up much on it, just a little of the link you posted, but if there is indeed a normal biological function of the appendix than previously believed, it doesn't mean scientists were lying, it means they hadn't discovered it's true use yet. That's all.

There are entire threads dedicated to the theory of evolution, post this kind of stuff in one of those threads.

Canna Sylvan said:

Global warming is a big business which makes the government billions of dollars.

Click to expand...

How?

and the oil/gas industry isn't big business that makes the government billions of dollars? (while remaining a much larger hazard to public health and the environment)

MuyLocoNC said:

The latest warming cycle you refer to, that just so happened to have ended a smidge over 10 years ago ... the last 10 years of cooling...

Click to expand...

MuyLocoNC said:

... the earth is warming...

Click to expand...

hey dumbass, which is it? is it cooling, like you started this thread claiming, or is it warming, like you now claim?

LOL!

at the start of this thread, if you click back and check your full post, you tried to blame it on....*drumroll*...THE SUN!

which is kind of funny, because we just had record temperatures despite a lull in solar irradiance.

what science do you believe in, flipping a coin to help you decide which dumbass talking points you are going to mouth vomit at us next?

go home, little boy.

MuyLocoNC said:

Oil and other natural sources of energy will be needed for the next 50-100 years, we will need them to implement and make possible all the developments in alternative energy. Not to mention, fuel is just one of a plethora of products we obtain from oil. Sun and wind won't be providing those applications, ever.

Click to expand...

How did you come up with the 50-100 years number?

Fossil fuels are still needed for the transition into other energy sources, but there have already been giant leaps in things like transportation.

Sun, wind, electricity, geo-thermal, nuclear, tides... there are a dozen different ways to produce energy more efficiently.

MuyLocoNC said:

The Eco-Loons are useful idiots, nothing more. They hate that which makes their soft, cushy lives possible. The leaders of the movement think they can force technological advances by creating a scarcity and high cost of fossil fuels. It's a gamble at best, and they're willing to bet the house on that gamble. I've seen and listened to these people, I wouldn't trust them to cut my grass and you think we should let them decide how this country approaches it's energy needs? Not a chance.

Click to expand...

Who are these people? Of anything I've posted, what would lead you to believe I would think we should let those people decide anything?

Or are you just assuming shit?

MuyLocoNC said:

I'll simply direct you to my earlier post, not one scientist has delivered incontrovertible proof that man is the definitive cause of global warming. Until that day, there is no debate. We're talking about the legitimacy of facts that have NEVER been delivered.

Click to expand...

There is no such thing as "incontrovertible proof" of anything. So I guess it's turned into this...

Padawanbater2 said:

There is no such thing as "incontrovertible proof" of anything. So I guess it's turned into this...

Click to expand...

he doesn't understand that in science, we accept the theory with the best available evidence until a competing theory with better available evidence and/or explanatory powers replaces it.

his demand for "incontrovertible proof" is him exposing his dum-dum.

just like his flip-flopping explanation for what's even going with the temperatures. he started off saying it's cooling, no wait, it's warming, no wait, eco-loon this, useful idiot that, stupid bastards that.

i've decided that i will meet him at his level and make with the childish insults so he doesn't feel like he is getting lectured by his 3rd grade science teacher.

Im pretty sure the earth has its ups and downs , and its really not worth arguing about. ice age--really warm over 60,000 years or so. Im no randy marsh but the earth and its cycles are far more complicated than we can imagine.

gasoline smells great

What alternatives? Those don't exist. Believe it or not, but the gasoline combustion engine is the most efficient. Where does electricity come from for electric cars? What holds the.charge? Hydrogen fuel cell isn't that great compared to gasoline. If those alternatives were so great, they'd be selling those to rich eco loons like Bill Gates. People like Gates would love showing how well it works and make others angry that the price is too high. But that's not happening. You alternatives to gas people are the same. You tell me what's the evolution alternative. I don't know. It still needs to be found. Just like your alternative energy. Does that mean we should quit looking? No, unlike you with evolution.

For a direct look at the atmosphere of the past, scientists drill cores through the Earth's polar ice sheets. Tiny bubbles trapped in the gas are actually pieces of the Earth's past atmosphere, frozen in time. That's how we know that the concentrations of greenhouse gases since the industrial revolution are higher than they've been for hundreds of thousands of years.

Computer models help scientists to understand the Earth's climate, or long-term weather patterns. Models also allow scientists to make predictions about the future climate. Basically, models simulate how the atmosphere and oceans absorb energy from the sun and transport it around the globe. Factors that affect the amount of the sun's energy reaching Earth's surface are what drive the climate in these models, as in real life. These include things like greenhouse gases, particles in the atmosphere, and changes in energy coming from the sun itself.