Yeah, you know, I think we also have no effect on animals' habitats being destroyed.....
(HEAVY sarcasm...)
I love a good debate but I can't debate this....science is fact. It is our fault. End of discussion. There is no opposing view to science.
Printable View
Yeah, you know, I think we also have no effect on animals' habitats being destroyed.....
(HEAVY sarcasm...)
I love a good debate but I can't debate this....science is fact. It is our fault. End of discussion. There is no opposing view to science.
Plenty of scientist would have absolutely no jobs if it werent for global warming. Nobody really needed that many climatologists until the global warming craze started.
The problem in switching to measuring at a volcano is because they have shitloads of co2 just pouring out. And the graph really starts going crazy as soon as they switched places. Another problem is that we would have no idea whether the temurature rise cause higher co2 or higher co2 causes tempurature rise. Science point to it being the former. Heres a little experiment. Get a two cans of the same exact soda and put one the rifridgerator. Then open them both up at the same time in a day or something. See which one has more co2 coming out.
One of the big global warming things is save the polar bears. Well it turns out that something like 11 out of the 13 species of polar bears in the arctic are actually growing rapidly.Quote:
Originally Posted by cannabis=freedom
the reason why they do studies in the arctic is because the air and ice are almost uncontaminated. there's barely any pollution that would interfere with their research. the same goes for the air around hawaii. it's an island in the middle of the freakin pacific ocean. sure there are volcanoes, but volcanoes have always been there. how come in the recent history it has skyrocketed? to do this kind of accurate and precise work, the places pick the scientists, not the other way around. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...-Mauna-Loa.png ...
That doesnt change the fact that it was a proxy. Did you know that the proxy didnt go back far enough so rather than leaving a gap in the hockey stick graph betwwen the arctic and hawaii, they just shifted the arctic numbers over to the right 86 years and called it a day.
damn dude...put all that crap in one post.
a quadruple post is certainly not needed.
I know I said I dont debate but I have to point out that it seems like everything onequestion brings up is either nonsesence or completely illogical (I dont care about spelling english was not my fist language). Scientist will never have a shortage of jobs, and their are not mutilpe species of polar bear, theres only one (Ursus maritimus), and if there growing how is this done if their hunting, feeding, and breading land is evaporating into the ocean. Hers some links that will help your questions, but more so I hope you will all come to your own conclusions and begin to see what is happeneing it will happen to most of you before it will happen to me. Cananda, London, Russia, you are the first to see the effects, not that we dont see them here we are getting tornados in areas where their have never been tornados for 100's even thousands of years. Their will be drought, and flood in areas where it was never seen
Polar Bear - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Global warming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Global Warming Fast Facts
Well, if the sun is truly the cause of global warming and it the planet is declining than does it really matter if we have oil in a a few decades to a century?
onequestion - after two pages of pwnage are you giving up?
Or do you want more ridicule over a topic you clearly don't understand fully yourself? No offence but you are clearly not a climatologist and don't seem to have much of an idea of how we affect our global environment.
You do know there are people out there that actually want you to think global warming is a lie? They make a lot more $Bank$ than ANY climatologist will ever do.
You are spinning their lies for them - well done. So what's your agenda?
Yes, that was back in the 1970's btw. This isn't a new issue, the IPCC didn't exactly create global warming as a concept ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion