Log in

View Full Version : Global Warming = Bullshit


DarthVader77
2008-10-18, 14:50
Does anyone else think that it's total B.S? Personally, I think it's just a weather cycle like the ice age was.

Trousersnake
2008-10-19, 08:51
Does anyone else think that it's total B.S? Personally, I think it's just a weather cycle like the ice age was.

I don't think it's total Bullshit, come on...When I drive my car it fucks things up. Are you telling me their is no negative effects of drilling oil out of the ground, refining it, moving it across the world, and me putting it into a vehicle that has metals, plastics, paints and dyes and a million other things that make it, and burning that petroleum?

When someone has a soild fuel (wood) heater and cut down a tree that was converting carbon dioxide into oxygen, and BURN it producig all sorts of gases and emitting particles into the air people breath...that's not a bad thing?

Climate Change is real, we have to work with it or else our comfortable little lives will be turned upside down. We can work with it to manage it's affects, or we can not help it and speed up the issues/problems it causes us and animals and plants.

Wisen up for a moment. I'll discuss it with an open mind but I need some decent conversation to work with at least.

I think it's a natural cycle too, I also think BURNING shit in times of extreme temperatures isn't going to help much...

Big Steamers
2008-10-19, 13:35
Look at it this way: the earth either gets hotter or it gets colder.

DarthVader77
2008-10-20, 01:01
i think the overall "problem" is a weather cycle, but yes we are probably not helping with all of the shit we do to the earth. its just been completely thrown out of proportion

negz
2008-10-20, 01:21
Environmentalism has been hijacked by global warming propagandha.

UhMeNoGetIt
2008-10-20, 23:44
Does anyone else think that it's total B.S? Personally, I think it's just a weather cycle like the ice age was.

Amen.


Nobody's saying there aren't any negative effects from pollution, because that's the only problem with it: pollution. affects air quality, etc, but doesn't heat the atmosphere.

I saw Al Gore's "inconvenient bullshit" and can't come up with anything but that name for it. Notice he had to animate things because he has no actual evidence.

btw I still see Florida

Vanhalla
2008-10-21, 18:27
Amen.


Nobody's saying there aren't any negative effects from pollution, because that's the only problem with it: pollution. affects air quality, etc, but doesn't heat the atmosphere.


What about this? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xsKaD169y90)

Are you saying emission of carbon monoxide has no effect on thermal equilibrium?

Global warming is only part of the story: burning coal in power stations produces waste gases that combine with water in the atmosphere to form clouds of sulfuric and nitric acids.
The acidic clouds can be carried far away from the source of pollution before dumping their load as rain.

Fact: acid rain is responsible for massive damage to ecosystems. Damages plant leaves, kills fish, and leaches vital nutrients, such as calcium and magnesium from the soil.

DarthVader77
2008-10-21, 21:16
look, if we just left the world as is, it would very slowly, but eventually heat up(obviously happening now) or cool down like Big Steamers said. however, we definitely are not helping slow down the climate change/cycle. i just cant believe that al fucking gore got a nobel prize for "an inconvenient truth", or was it for something else? either way thats also bullshit

moonmeister
2008-10-21, 21:32
I know that the Climate is a big subject with the freighter-loads of data that that entails? Yet, it is true that Northern permafrost is melting. The Arctic sea ice was at it's second lowest this Summer (last year was a bit lower). Polar bears are staying on land longer because the new ice forms later.

Robins are being seen by the Inuit. They don't have a word for "robin", because they never used to see them. Siberian lakes are disappearing as the permafrost under them melts, allowing the water to sink into the ground.

Mind you some glaciers are growing. Alaska had a cool Summer, which allowed large snow accumulations to remain.

Northern Winters have been generally milder since 1970.

It is always weird to me that people are so casual in their thinking that they easily conflate & confuse no "man-made global warming" with "no global warming period"?

Just not the same thing at all.

wolfy_9005
2008-10-22, 17:13
Isnt the earths climate regulated by the sun? Isnt the sun showing signs of lesser sun spots which indicate magnetic field strength and ultimately the suns strength? And with less sun strength, then it means less warmth, which means were going to be looking at a very cold future. It's funny how in less than 300 years we'd have used all the gas, coal and oil that is profitable to obtain. And with no coal, oil or gas, most people will be unable to warm their homes, as we have become so reliant on this. Eventually people will wipe-out the forests to keep themselves warm, which leads to mass erosion, which will increase salinity to a point where nothing will grow that we can eat, which leads to mass famine, disease, and ultimately death.

Basically, some countries will have large amounts of arable land that is usable, and countries will fight viciously to keep it. Someone will get reckless and use nuclear weapons, resulting in retaliatory strikes which will cause a "nuclear holocaust". Very few people will survive, and the radiation will pretty much kill everything on the planet. Some people will inevitably survive, which will bring us to square one, again. Eventually, life will build up again, and hopefully someone does something smart and doesnt fuck up as bad as we have.

damn....

Hopefully it isnt too soon. Anyone think this is plausible? BTW im not on any drugs, which surprised me when i wrote this :)

Possible way to help conserve our time left:

Build nuclear power stations, use them to power Reverse Osmosis plants, and pumps to help irrigate our more barren lands(deserts, etc). We could plant mass canola, preferably GM'd to grow very quickly and produce lots of good-quality oil. We already know a regular diesel car will run off canola, so it can hopefully keep our supply lines open(read: trucks, trains, etc). Not sure about planes, so we might have to resort to using ships again which will mess up the worlds economy (more so then now possibly). But as it will stop our reliance on fossil fuels, we can give ourselves more of a chance(which is what we want, but not need....).

Also, you are forgetting the earths built-in self defence system: the oceans. If it gets too hot, they oceans will evaporate to form a layer of clouds. Even if it only lasts for a few days, the temperature of the earth will drop by a fair bit. If it rains, then even more. Basically, the oceans will inevitably save us, but what most people think is we can keep dumping shit in there. If people actually respect it, then when it comes around to it, there wont be so much shit in there so it can actually evaporate to save us.

Plausible?

Thanks for reading if you did,

TL/DR: my theories.

EDIT: (more stuff...) I agree global warming might be real, or it could just be a freak heat wave. Maybe the earths core is decomposing at a faster rate then usual(assuming it has radioactive particles in it, like some scientists believe).

DarthVader77
2008-10-22, 21:08
check this out. its pretty cool/an alternative like wolfy mentioned. www.thevenusproject.com

ellementlady89
2008-10-22, 22:10
It's a natural weather pattern.
I'm so tired of this fucking "go green" shit associated with global warming. Planting trees and buying cute little tote bags that say "recycle" won't stop global warming you fucking cunt.

Big Steamers
2008-10-23, 05:11
pollution. affects air quality, etc, but doesn't heat the atmosphere.


If I were to pollute the atmosphere with a very hot gas, would this event heat the atmosphere?

wolfy_9005
2008-10-23, 09:36
It's a natural weather pattern.
I'm so tired of this fucking "go green" shit associated with global warming. Planting trees and buying cute little tote bags that say "recycle" won't stop global warming you fucking cunt.

we needa plant more tree's.....

i like to breath oxygen...

moonmeister
2008-10-23, 09:44
we needa plant more tree's.....

i like to breath oxygen...

Let's take & share her's around. She is probably just wasting her share... :)

It doesn't hurt to cut down on pollution & plant some trees. I'm unsure of all the causes of "Warming". As is any honest person. How much man? How much the Sun? How much from "X" Factors?

Pollution is for sure though.

wolfy_9005
2008-10-23, 15:18
haha yeh....but if we plant more trees/stop cutting down so many then we dont have to worry so much about this whole "pollution" thing.

And marijuana loves carbon dioxide, maybe we should plant heaps of it? And use the fibers to make clothing etc, and smoke the bud, and whatever else we can do with it.

DarthVader77
2008-10-23, 21:10
And marijuana loves carbon dioxide, maybe we should plant heaps of it? And use the fibers to make clothing etc, and smoke the bud, and whatever else we can do with it.

all plants rely on carbon dioxide, but ik what u meant :) i still think that we cant be reliant on oil and natural gas though, it will eventually run out no matter where we drill or how much we have. we should really start using other methods of energy like wind, solar, tidal.

wolfy_9005
2008-10-24, 07:42
:)

And we can sell the bud for profit hehehe

DarthVader77
2008-10-24, 21:25
definitely

Real.PUA
2008-10-26, 22:34
Atmospheric CO2 levels have increased drastically due to human activity. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. If you accept these facts and still don't believe in global warming, you must explain why the earth is not warming due to the increase CO2 levels. If you reject these facts, you are nothing but a retard.

DarthVader77
2008-10-27, 00:19
the same way i can explain the ice age:

it was an massive earth weather cycle/climate change

Real.PUA
2008-10-27, 01:28
Global warming theory claims the CO2 is warming the planet. Please explain why you think the CO2 is not warming the planet. This has nothing to do with past climate cycles.

DarthVader77
2008-10-27, 21:08
like i have said earlier in the post, the basic concept is a massive earth weather cycle, however, we are definitely speeding up the process with our human activities such as greenhouse gases

Real.PUA
2008-10-28, 02:00
like i have said earlier in the post, the basic concept is a massive earth weather cycle, however, we are definitely speeding up the process with our human activities such as greenhouse gases

In that case, you agree with global warming theory. Welcome to the realm of sane people, including Al Gore and every scientist of stature.

moonmeister
2008-10-28, 04:54
In that case, you agree with global warming theory. Welcome to the realm of sane people, including Al Gore and every scientist of stature.

I wish that there was an unbiased (hah!) site that kept track of all the conflicting climate news stories. For instance I remember one about a NASA satellite that said it showed Sea temperatures staying the same for many years. There are other stories that show a lot of glacier melting in Greenland & others that say "No. It's not so."

Now, of course, what a reporter interprets & reports may be quite different than what a scienctific paper actually says. A source of all public reports with links to their sources? That would be pretty sweet though a bit confusing.

I mean: how many people who talk about climate, mention the warmer Winters in Canada that have occurred since 1970? That is a main reason that the Pine Beetle is infecting C's Boreal Forest.

It's hard to keep track of such a subject without (and who does?) taking notes. Gosh! I've always had an interest in weather. I wish that I'd been keeping notes & had such a web site? I'd get so many hits that I'd never have to have a Real Job!

ps... How are your theories of Finance going... :)

DarthVader77
2008-10-28, 21:17
In that case, you agree with global warming theory. Welcome to the realm of sane people, including Al Gore and every scientist of stature.

i have my own global warming theory. its not the same as al gore and those scientists. they think that its all because of human activity, i think that it is not the main cause.

im not sure how long ago this was. did u hear of the global warming scientists who went to the arctic to measure the depth/size of the arctic ice and left as soon as they got there cus it was too cold? i found that pretty funny. :)

Real.PUA
2008-10-29, 03:18
i have my own global warming theory. its not the same as al gore and those scientists. they think that its all because of human activity, i think that it is not the main cause.


Well a 40% increase in atmospheric CO2 is certainly predicted to warm the planet as we are seeing. What is this other cause that you think is warming the planet more than the 40% increase in CO2?

DarthVader77
2008-10-29, 22:08
Well a 40% increase in atmospheric CO2 is certainly predicted to warm the planet as we are seeing. What is this other cause that you think is warming the planet more than the 40% increase in CO2?

i get what ur saying, but that last statement was a head scratcher but i figured it out(yea!:)). umm maybe the sun? did u know that the methane produced by rice fields in china is also a greenhouse gas? so that could be speeding up the warming.

but once again il say it. its a fucking weather cycle. we are just speeding up the process.

Real.PUA
2008-10-30, 03:26
i get what ur saying, but that last statement was a head scratcher but i figured it out(yea!:)). umm maybe the sun? did u know that the methane produced by rice fields in china is also a greenhouse gas? so that could be speeding up the warming.

but once again il say it. its a fucking weather cycle. we are just speeding up the process.

Natural climate changes happen for a reason. There has to be some force that is changing the climate (if there is no force, the climate wouldn't be changing), what do you propose this force is, if it's not the 40% increase in CO2?

The increase in CO2 is predicted to cause warming, and it explains the warming we observe. There is no evidence that the sun is getting hotter (at least not enough to account for the warming), so that is not a sufficient explanation for climate change. Methane certainly is a greenhouse gas but the concentrations of it are much lower than CO2 and it gets broken down much faster than CO2. Those factors predict that it is contributing less to climate change than CO2 is.

Vanhalla
2008-10-30, 04:04
There has to be some force that is changing the climate (if there is no force, the climate wouldn't be changing), what do you propose this force is...?

Transition of the resonating inner-ether to a higher frequency experience?

Ravendust
2008-10-30, 12:18
Mother Earth doesn't like us /thread

DarthVader77
2008-10-31, 01:47
Natural climate changes happen for a reason. There has to be some force that is changing the climate (if there is no force, the climate wouldn't be changing), what do you propose this force is, if it's not the 40% increase in CO2?

then how the fuck would u explain a an ice age? what would be the force to change the climate there?

Real.PUA
2008-10-31, 17:02
then how the fuck would u explain a an ice age? what would be the force to change the climate there?

Variations in the earth's orbit is one possible explanation, but there are many others.

Point being there is no explanation for the majority of eath's current warming other than CO2.

DarthVader77
2008-10-31, 21:18
Variations in the earth's orbit is one possible explanation, but there are many others.


why cant this be responsible for the warming of the earth? couldnt it be a possibility?