Printable View
Present me your evidence that global warming is caused by our co2 emissions and I will show you why every piece of evidence you present to me is either untrue, illogical, irrelevant, or just plain old junk science. And if you just wanna come here and say how stupid I am for saying global warming is fake dont bother, I want debate not name calling.
At least you're not arguing that global warming isn't happening.
I honestly don't see why people get all up in arms about lowering CO2 emmissions and creating more alternative energies.
switching to alternative energies would be extremely beneficial for the economy (at least in the US anyway) We spend so much damn money on foreign oil. Several millions (billions? forgot the ammount...it's alot though) of dollars everyday leaving our country.
furthermore investing in alternative energies would create a shit-ton of jobs for the American people. It really seems like a win-win to me.
Cleaner air/environment, more jobs, not contributing to global warming (CO2 is a greenhous gas, whether it's significant or not is beside the point), and a more financially independent country.
Not to mention Oil isn't going to last forever, we are going to need to find alternatives within the next 1-100 years anyway otherwise we will face an unprecedented economic collapse from waning oil supplies. Better to invest now than to wait and be completely fucked. Note: I put 1-100 years because it's almost impossible to know when the oil supply is going to start it's decline.
In conclusion, I honestly don't even think it matters if global warming is caused by CO2 emmissions, we should be doing all we can to lower them and spur alternatives anyway.
We cant do anything about global warming. It is the sun thats causing it not us.
what's the point? you've already pre-rejected every possible citation of evidence. You said it yourself, you want debate, not answers or conclusions. Instead, we'll just spend all that mental energy considering the health of future generations.Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
global temperatures have been on the rise since way before the industrial revolution so its pretty ovious that we havent really been causeing it, the earth doesnt just stay the same temperature all the time, its been way hotter than it is now before and of course there have been ice ages.
yes this is true what that doesnt mean we arent expediting the process and making it worse. just cause its already happening isnt a good enough reason to not try and do something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dest
The exponential warming recently doesn't follow the patterns of natural climate changes in history. Even polar glaciers indicate that the co2 content in the atmosphere is currently abnormally higher than compared to the ice samples that dated 200,000+ years ago. If the earth is naturally warming, we are definitely compounding it to an unhealthy and unnatural degree. Assuming it is merely a cyclical phenomenon, warming would allow species to thrive where they didn't before and diseases would move farther north and it would be a climate less consistent with human civilization. If it is natural, why not do something about it anyway to protect ourselves?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dest
It'd be nice if it wasn't actually a threat, much nicer than just believing it's not a threat. Seeing that this is the scariest reality humankind has faced, it's not a surprise that you guys have set your brains on obstinate disbelief
Here's the thing about oil, it isn't when we run out of oil thats the problem it's when the overall peak in production occurs. After it reaches it's peak it will start a decline. The second this decline happens and oil isn't able to supply the tremendous demand, we are going to start seeing economic problems. Now if we have alternatives in place which would be awesome for our economy, we would be alright, and even better off for it.
However, if we don't have any substatantial alternatives in place when this decline in oil starts to happen we are going to be stuck in shit creak without a paddle. Even worse if our emmissions are contributing to global warming and we reach that tipping point we are going to be slammed by the two largest disasters to ever grace mankinds presence.
I think it is completely irresponsible in every way imaginable not to increase alternatives and lower emissions. because if no action is taken, we are almost gaurenteed to be completely fucked.
The reason you think that co2 causes glbal warming is because of the hockey stick graph. Well the blade of the hockey stick is taken from a volcanoe which gives off shiotloads of co2 compared to an ice sample. Changing the location of the testing site creates two variables which are obviously extremely different making it totally invalid.
Other planets in our solar system are experiencing the same global warming as us and they have no humans there. It is therefore abovious that it is the sun.
IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THERE IS GLOBAL WARMING OR NOT.
There could be a fast approaching ice age for all I care. It doesn't matter.
We should be lowering emissions and investing in more alternatives to oil.
Your point is completely invalid and doesn't matter. Aliens could be causing the globe to get warmer for all I care. If we don't invest in alternatives now, we could be completely fucked.
All the things we should be doing to combat "global warming" we should be doing anyway, even if the globe all of the sudden starts to cool rapidly, We should still be investing in alternatives.
Let me ask you this. Is it really worth the risk?
If we don't act now and we do start running out of oil, we will be fucked beyond reason.
If global warming is being caused or even just helped a little by CO2 emissions and we dont act, we will be fucked beyond reason.
If oil never runs out and global warming is a complete hoax and we do decide to act, then WE ARE STILL BETTER OFF.
It's a win-win-win-win-win situation if we do lower emissions and invest in alternatives.
It's a lose-lose-lose-lose-lose situation if we don't lower emissions and invest in alternatives.
End of story.
I agree with what you said. Global warming is a hoax but even though we are being tricked we are better off because we need to stop being dependant on oil. I think there may be a few reasons that we are tricked into believing global warming, some good and some bad.
1) To make us lower our dependancy on oil which is good
2) To try and keep china from developing which is good for america but is generally bad.
3) To hand over much more power to the United Nations which is someting I hope never happens.
But global warming is definitly not caused by human co2 emissions.
Policy Perspectives: Global Warming, Ice Ages and Tipping Points
This is tidy article that seems to be a more complete look at all the bits of info all of us have been providing.
what!? making a bold and almost ignorant statement like that calls for you to present your evidence to the contrary, not the other way around. we don't need to prove again what every scientist have found out about global warming.Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
CO2 does have an effect on the heat retention of the atmosphere. The greenhouse effect is real. Still, human intervention has only a minor effect on global temperatures. For all our efforts, nature is still in charge of this planet.
Even if global warming is the problem the alarmists say it is, drastically reducing our CO2 emissions will have such a negative effect on everyone, that even if global warming was reversed it wouldn't be worth it.
Still, even if global warming isn't a big deal, we really need to start using more nuclear energy and less coal. Coal pollutes. A lot. Nuclear power on the other hand, releases no emissions.
I say bring on the climate change! Destroy all those helpless creatures who depend on the ice caps to provide the essential nutrients for living. As for the global scare, us humans can cope. The planet will be warmer, the ocean deeper, the wind will blow harder, the waves will climb higher, and in forty years time, we will be similar to our sister planet, Venus. What can you do stop it? Express your distaste for it all on a cannabis forum.
The evidence you use to support you're statement is astounding.Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
And who says both can't be the cause?
All (well, most) of that carbon that we're putting in the atmosphere was put in the ground during the carboniferous period 300 million years ago. Where did all that carbon come from? Why, the atmosphere, actually. And before that, volcanoes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganj
Our planet is actually still in an ice age. Geologically, it's kind of uncommon for there to be polar ice caps all year. The oldest ice at the ice caps is only about 100,000 years old, owing to the fact that before then, they melted during the summer. But honestly, what we're doing to the atmosphere is very insignificant compared to what's happened to it throughout the geological record.
If you want a debate, you are violating a cardinal rule of debates by making assertions without citing sources. Here is my source which refutes your argument:Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
Bad Astronomy Blog ยป Is global warming solar induced?
I see this is some Debate..............who will debate, to save you from your areas climate desaser?? I would debate with you but, one .....I dont debate, two......if this is a debate then we must be in a parallel univers, casue so far I see blogs, and a cppa artical (I might be mistaken but arnt theyfunded buy the petrolume peoples)
Another thing wrong with this argument is that it is opposite. While everyone thinks that co2 caused the rise in tempurature but it could very well have been that the temp rise came first. When using proxy data there is no way to know.Quote:
Originally Posted by YouAintKnow
Oh, the southern hemisphere is actually cooling. talk about cherry picking.
Damn guys the writing is on the wall for us and we will cheer at our own demise. You can quote me I dont car anymore
dude you're full of crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
"it could very well have been...there is no way to know"...boy, there's no ambiguity there and a lot scientific data and research to back up your claim
you really think you're much smarter and have a lot more evidence to back up your claim than the scientists, professors or other scholars who study this shit for a living? again, where is your evidence?
lmao...are you serious? are you just picking things out of your ass or are you actually referring to specific scientific data that supports your suggestions?Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
The scientist promte this because there is a shortage of wel paying jobs in scientific research right now. If they say that global warming is real they might go poor. A lot of them do it because they know that believing in global warming would be good for us anyway to lower our dependance on foreign oil so its not like they are evil.Quote:
Originally Posted by cacayjunasian
Also data from proxies such as the ice samples we used to get co2 readings, can never be exact and the global warming changed locations to very drastically different locations, the newer one actually is a volcano that spews co2 all day long. No wonder the graph went up.
The graph also proves nothing even if we pretend it isnt junk. It doesnt prove anything. The population of pirates has also been on the decline so you can also argue that that is the reason for global warming.
And here is the southern hemishere coming straight from nasa. http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/New...062417194.html. As you can see, the global warming people do cherrypick evidence.
I completely agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
Yes, the world is getting hotter, but theres no real proof what so ever it's because of us, and untill there is REAL proof, i beleive it's natural.
I'd urge everyone to spray deoderant in the air and rag your cars about for all it's worth!
people don't become geologists to become rich or wealthy, they do it for the love of the job. Geoscientist SalariesQuote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
scientists don't have hidden agendas. they compile evidence from studies and research and lay it out for the masses. that's it. what do scientists gain by a country not being dependent on foreign oil....absolutely nothing. even in these times, we ignore or blow off scientists and their findings. aristotle, galileo, einstein were all outcasts because of their findings, but none of them had hidden agendas. they were just scientists for god's sake.Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
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.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
so you don't like those graphs, i get it. ok, how about these graphs from the same website that you used EO Study: The Migrating Boreal Forest Page 4Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
you can't deny these facts. the fact is that the temperature of the earth is in a direct relationship with the amount of co2 found in our atmosphere. the current warm period is historically at the highest it's ever been in over 450,000 years and you think it's just coincidence we also have the highest levels of co2 in our atmosphere?
did you even read the whole article? it suggest that more research needs to be done to draw any conclusions. it's just a theory. and talk about cherrypicking, the southern hemisphere doesn't even come close to the amount of land that the northern hemisphere has to provide data for a thorough sediment research. they listed chile and new zealand, and not like they have a ton of more places to back up these claims.Quote:
Originally Posted by onequestion
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