McBoog Posted October 12, 2007 Share Posted October 12, 2007 Pretty much. Dude. Stop posting! You become more momo with every click on "Add Reply". The video you refer to is actually better seen in Google (not broken into parts). I have not refered to it once today (until this post). You are clearly part of the problem and nowhere near helping find a solution! Thanx for your minimal effort though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted October 12, 2007 Share Posted October 12, 2007 Good posting. he had you at "republitards", didn't he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted October 12, 2007 Share Posted October 12, 2007 You are clearly part of the problem and nowhere near helping find a solution! Thanx for your minimal effort though I'll work on aimless rambling, posting multiple gramelins, and posting information from right wing think tank sources that have a vested interest in downplaying the consensus of the scientific community. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonKnight Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Dude. Stop posting! You become more momo with every click on "Add Reply". The video you refer to is actually better seen in Google (not broken into parts). I have not refered to it once today (until this post). You are clearly part of the problem and nowhere near helping find a solution! Thanx for your minimal effort though Why make an organized argument when the only posts you respond are Bushwhacked'd soft balls? You havent once adressed the ice core samples that indicate CO2 levels are the highest theyve been in 160,000 years. Is your assertion that CO2 isnt a greenhouse gas? Thats absolutely not true and has been scientifically proven time and again. Its one of the few variables that is easy to test. Global surface temps rise lockstep with atmospheric CO2 levels. Indisputable proven fact. To the people that cant grasp the correlation between the "Peace" prize and climate change activism. Climate change is the most serious threat to global peace we have ever, as a species, faced. We are already seeing the havoc climate change can wreak in Africa. The hunter gatherers and the farmers are at war and commiting atrocities as I type, fighting over resources that are dwindling that have been counted on for centuries. Whole islands that are centuries old are being retaken by the ocean, displacing, at this early point, thousands. This is just the begining. The environmental movement goes much further than just climate change. Species are dissapering at a rate not seen since the dinosaurs died off. Our oceans are going to be fished clean in, some projections, as soon as 25 years. We cannot survive on this planet, at this point, without the help of a working ecosystem. Trees and fields need to be polinated. Fish need to be allowed access to thier spawning grounds. Fish need clean water to exist. We must maintain a healthy ballence. That means sacrificing the things our parents and grandparents took for granted. Meat should be, at most a weekly or monthly treat. We can not to drive a 2 ton SUV alone to work. It is imperative that we move away from a "disposable" soceity. In Japan you have over 20 recycling bins for trash. Almost everyything is reused. They have the right of it. What is the silver bullet to start to remedy this self destructive cycle? Population control. I know its very taboo to talk about but we need to start thinking rationally. Not through our religous dogmas. Not with our selfish desire to replicate 6 times. We are living longer each decade. We are reproducing exponentially. We are streching the finite resources this planet has to offer dangerously thin. There will be a colapse. It will hurt. We can either change willingly or have change thrust upon us by forces beyond our control. We will be brought low and humbled either way. Science and clear thinking is the only way we can have control of our destiny as a species. You make the call. Diatribe over. Thanx fer reading if ya made it all the way through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 (edited) Why make an organized argument when the only posts you respond are Bushwhacked'd soft balls? Call it what ever you want, but sometimes intelligent discourse isn't worth the wear and tear on the chicken for the egg. Booger posted a propoganda movie a few months back produced by a right wing think tank to discredit the anthropogenic effect, and now he is posting something from a website called John-Daly.com. In an attempt to save face, he cherry picked one single journal article published by the American Geophysical Union, despite the fact their official position on global warming is as follows: Human activities are increasingly altering the Earth's climate. These effects add to natural influences that have been present over Earth's history. Scientific evidence strongly indicates that natural influences cannot explain the rapid increase in global near-surface temperatures observed during the second half of the 20th century. Call my waning motivation on this subject towards the doubters a softball if you want, but I don't see the point in trying to convince dummies to stop cutting their nose off despite their face. Edited October 13, 2007 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Global surface temps rise lockstep with atmospheric CO2 levels. Indisputable proven fact. it's very much disputable which one follows the other, and if anything, the evidence indicates it is CO2 which follows temperature. which if true turns the whole catastrophic anthropomorphic warming theory completely on its head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 The next 3 Nobel Lauretes will be those who fix all the damage that George Bush has caused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 (edited) I'll work on aimless rambling, posting multiple gramelins, and posting information from right wing think tank sources that have a vested interest in downplaying the consensus of the scientific community. CLASSIC! Anything that makes you less secure in your weetardism gets labeled in the classic fashion of uber libs and discounted. A mental midget like yourself, raised in the 5 minute attention span generation is incapable of reading past the title of any of the postings I made. If you want to discredit any of the studies posted by journals originating from those bastions of conservative propoganda, i.e. the US university system, you throw your entire base away momo. You are the most emotionally driven and shallow person on these boards (clearly indicated by your choice of a screen name), and it is actually humerous to come in the Tailgate occasionally just to see how easy it is to make you look as shallow as you are. You are clearly not smart enough to work your way through any of my current postings nor have the ability or dicipline to read them. You keep going back to my posting of a vid, which should make it easier for an X-Boxer like you that I have not talked about here in these postings. You are clearly to lazy to educate yourself further by reading and understanding other potential influences as well. To discount any source before understanding it shows a lack of desire to truely understand an issue. If it isn't spoon fed to you by CNN or Gore in two minute chunks, you clearly can't process it. Thanx, once again for playing, ya big goober nut! P.S. Yeah, I love using . What about it? Is that your BIG comeback. OOOOOOOOOOOOO, ya got me! I surrender. Edited October 13, 2007 by McBoog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 160,000 years is too short a sample size? JUST WHERE DO YOU GET THIS???? In 1972 (see link to Time magazine article earlier in thread), the "experts were fear mongering a new ice age! That does NOT add up to a 160,000 year sample ya goofball! The whole "Climate Change" thingy is relatively new, but for the sake of argument, we'll say that from the day the article was published, the world has been warming up. 45 years of a global geological/climatological event is not enough to definitively say that the sky is falling! And just for Bushwacked so he can have something to aggresively attack this posting... It's all about you baby :kissyface: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 You are the most emotionally driven and shallow person on these boards Youtube = Science Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Youtube = Science Don't discount his well thought out cut paste chain emails. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Don't discount his well thought out cut paste chain emails. Isn't that cute. The commies are rallying. Funny thing is, the ignorance blazes through. Not a single "chain-mail" posted. One of those posts actually supports the CO2 position. but you are too shallow to bother to really know what is being dicscussed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 Isn't that cute. The commies are rallying. Funny thing is, the ignorance blazes through. Not a single "chain-mail" posted. One of those posts actually supports the CO2 position. but you are too shallow to bother to really know what is being dicscussed! I think the dude in your AV is causing global warming...or at least scaring the Athenae out of people causing more methane gas! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted October 13, 2007 Share Posted October 13, 2007 but you are too shallow to bother to really know what is being dicscussed! If by "shallow" you mean not full of chit, then yes I am.....nobody can be as "deep" as you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McBoog Posted October 14, 2007 Share Posted October 14, 2007 If by "shallow" you mean not full of chit, then yes I am.....nobody can be as "deep" as you. Actually I do Shallow+opinion+lack of analysis of opposing data= full of sh!t... so that leaves you with a full tank Did you read ANY of the posted material? One of the positions I linked gives much more credence to human causation than I believe. The rest of the paper has other points that clearly shows an overall cause/effect of all components to the situation. I would throw cash down you haven't even skimmed the IPCC report! Just let Gore tell you what it said! Now THAT is what I call deep After all, I'm sure he knows what he is talking about, he invented the internet... And knows a lot about buring more fossil fuels that most. The ongoing and ignored "inconvenient truth" Once again, clear proof that unless you carry the absolute, and only the Kool-Ade, position, you will be discounted as a "fill in label here". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
godtomsatan Posted October 14, 2007 Share Posted October 14, 2007 How do you justify standing in judgment of me, a faceless internet stranger? I asked a question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted October 14, 2007 Share Posted October 14, 2007 If the Nobel Peace Prize is really a joke, it's odd all of the right-wing henchmen here are making a big deal out of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 If the Nobel Peace Prize is really a joke, it's odd all of the right-wing henchmen here are making a big deal out of it. you have a point. youre a joke and we rarely speak of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 he invented the internet... Since you are so concerned with being correct, I thought I would help you with that one. Surely you know that placing incorrect statements within a subtext espousing your "correctness" erodes your credibility? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I heard an interesting interview on the radio the other day with the guy who co-founded Greenpeace (Moore?). I think it's safe to say this guy is a friend of the planet and he wants us to clean up our environemntal act. However, he things Al Gore and the climate change chicken littles are full of BS. He was rather emphatic about Gore's use of junk science used to pursue his political agenda. It was interesting to hear an eco guy take this position - not at all what I expected to hear from him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I heard an interesting interview on the radio the other day with the guy who co-founded Greenpeace (Moore?). Glad to see you've come to your senses and decided to trust Greenpeace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 Since you are so concerned with being correct, I thought I would help you with that one. Surely you know that placing incorrect statements within a subtext espousing your "correctness" erodes your credibility? dont call me surely! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evil_gop_liars Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 placing incorrect statements within a subtext espousing your "correctness" erodes your credibility? Remember your talking to McBoog. You know McBoog :idiot: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DemonKnight Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 JUST WHERE DO YOU GET THIS???? Arctic ice core samples... They go back a little further than 45 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted October 15, 2007 Share Posted October 15, 2007 I declare McBoog the winner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.