bushwacked Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Two questions were key: Have mean global temperatures risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and has human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures? About 90 percent of the scientists agreed with the first question and 82 percent the second. The strongest consensus on the causes of global warming came from climatologists who are active in climate research, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role. "I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you're likely to believe in global warming and humankind's contribution to it. The debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes, http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/...rvey/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 I think you need to learn about eugenics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 The only humans that play a role in global warming are those who either: * Drive or are driven * Fly or are flown * Use plastic goods * Pass gas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 nah ...glaciers are melting , sea levels rising , temperatures are higher on the avg but man has nothing to do with it Phooeey ...ofcourse we are screwing up the earth ... we can do that from time to time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 The only humans that play a role in global warming are those who either: * Drive or are driven * Fly or are flown * Use plastic goods * Pass gas I say we shut down all taco stands ASAP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millerx Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 nah ...glaciers are melting , sea levels rising , temperatures are higher on the avg but man has nothing to do with it Phooeey ...ofcourse we are screwing up the earth ... we can do that from time to time Worst defense of an argument ever! Those things have happened in the past and will happen in the future... and the causes in the changes are much more monumental in scale than anything man has given to mother nature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donutrun Jellies Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Soooo, when the ice age happened, who was to blame for the ice creeping down over the world? And then when it ended and the glaciers started to melt back, whose fault was that? And which would the liberals have prevented if they'd been here for both? Hmmmmm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Less population = less human affect on the climate. If only 97% of the hippies were really dedicated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackshi17 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Soooo, when the ice age happened, who was to blame for the ice creeping down over the world? And then when it ended and the glaciers started to melt back, whose fault was that? And which would the liberals have prevented if they'd been here for both? Hmmmmm. Trust me Al would have been all over that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isleseeya Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) Worst defense of an argument ever! Those things have happened in the past and will happen in the future... and the causes in the changes are much more monumental in scale than anything man has given to mother nature. was not much of an argument because it was not an argument it was a statement filled with some sarcasm and your counter was no much of an argument either fact its happened in past and will happen again does not mean here are no issues right now or that man is not conributing to global warming Edited January 23, 2009 by isleseeya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 23, 2009 Author Share Posted January 23, 2009 97% of doctors registered with the American Heart Association claim that smoking cigarettes is detrimental to one's health. I'm going to rationally conclude they are part of a vast conspiracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millerx Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) was not much of an argument because it was not an argument it was a statement filled with some sarcasm and your counter was no much of an argument either fact its happened in past and will happen again does not mean here are no issues right now or that man is not conributing to global warming My counter was playing off the fact that your argument (or statement as you said) had no particular evidence introduced. It had the same intent, which was...to be somewhat sarcastic. Making it the second worst argument ever. What cracks me up the most though, is how adamant people are on either side of this issue. Frankly, I'm not smart enough to know which set of lab coats has got it right. And I'm guessing most here, whether they think so or not, are in that same boat. They take information from their selected authority on the subject and preach it as if it is the word of god. Personally, I was originally on the side of "their is" global warming, but have lately switched to be under "their is NOT" global warming. Who knows, I might one day switch back if I hear some evidence that disproves the other sources that can be causing the climate change and we can narrow it down to just man. All I'm saying is that everyone should keep an open mind and that everyone should think Al Gore is a nut job. Edited January 23, 2009 by millerx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millerx Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 97% of doctors registered with the American Heart Association claim that smoking cigarettes is detrimental to one's health. I'm going to rationally conclude they are part of a vast conspiracy. that's because they stopped getting paid off by the tobacco companies to say otherwise. Duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbimm Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Are we really so conceited that we think we can ruin the earth? Seriously? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Are we really so conceited that we think we can ruin the earth?Seriously? Ummm....yes? We already have in many ways. See the disappearing rainforests for example. I guess it depends on what your definition of "ruin" is. My question is to those that point to past events like glaciers and ice caps melting, have the caps ever melted this quickly before? I have not done the research to find out. Does anyone know? If they have not, and mankind is not amplifying natural effects, then what is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 23, 2009 Author Share Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) Are we really so conceited that we think we can ruin the earth?Seriously? The crackpots at the USGS claim that the wide-scale subsidence observed in the San Joaquin Valley is because farmers have been pumping fossil water out of limited supply aquifers for only 75 years. I think it’s apparent Jeebus got mad and stomped on the ground when no one was watching. I’m not in support of taking creed to every environmental wack job doomsday scenario. But in light of the consensus opinion of the world's leading experts, to ignore it and pretend we aren't having an effect is less than pragmatic, it’s outright stupidity. Edited January 23, 2009 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 The strongest consensus on the causes of global warming came from climatologists who are active in climate research, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role. I wonder if those scientists have ever heard of self-selection bias. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 23, 2009 Author Share Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) 46%, 64%, 82%, 90%, and 97%. Let us ignore the expert scientific opinion; cause even day to day weather people only agree on a 2:1 basis, I need to hear what Jillian Barbarie and Al Roker have to say before I believe we might have a problem. Edited January 23, 2009 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted January 23, 2009 Author Share Posted January 23, 2009 Ummm....yes? We already have in many ways. See the disappearing rainforests for example. I guess it depends on what your definition of "ruin" is. My question is to those that point to past events like glaciers and ice caps melting, have the caps ever melted this quickly before? I have not done the research to find out. Does anyone know? If they have not, and mankind is not amplifying natural effects, then what is? Simply put, yes scientists are recording an accelerated rise in temperature greater, or at least comparable to the "record" over the last 0.5 million years...however...that isn't the crux. Through ice core data, scientists have shown that global temps are almost certainly driven by C02 levels for about 500,000 years during a cycle of 5 different cooling and warming periods. The main concern is that temperature warmth has lagged ~100 years behind the CO2 levels. Our current CO2 levels, starting at the industrial age, are an anomalous spike compared to those in the last 0.5 million years and basically 100 parts per million higher (or 30+%) than anything the earth has ever put out by itself in that time. You mix it together with incredible urban and industrial development on flood plains and levees, and it really doesn't take a genius to figure out we might have some major problems. Hell, you don't even need to believe in global warming for the potential catastrophes to sink in. Like I said earlier, whatever you want to attribute it to, our 100 year flood plains out here in the NW have become 5 year flood plains causing major damage. I happen to put some faith in our leading scientists and not so much in blogs and political naysayers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Are we really so conceited that we think we can ruin the earth?Seriously? Did you hear about the ozone layer that was being destroyed by our use of CFCs? And the ban on CFCs? And that the hole stabilized as CFCs were phased out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 I say we shut down all taco stands ASAP Not the good ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 Not the good ones. Listen to the man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted January 23, 2009 Share Posted January 23, 2009 would you libs quit beating us over the head with this stuff!!! how many threads are you guys going to start about this hoax!!! 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.