Global Warming??? F-Yeah!!!!!
- Thread starter N8 v2.0
- Start date
It was a little chilly on my way to work this morning. Which basically disproves every global warming theory right?
Yep. Seasons can't happen if global warming is happening. It has to be 120* all day everyday. And when pink unicorns come out Shrubs' ass....that's truly the sign for |\|8.
SoCal can get snow, where the hell is it in New England!!!
I forgot about this NYC "Snow"
Loved it, too bad Hollywood doesn't put out more movies like it, or at all.
Surprisingly good.
And once again N8 deftly debunks global warming by pointing out one anomalous storm, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that last year was once again one of the warmest years on record. The cognitive dissonance is astounding. I salute you.
But that entire year was just an anomaly...And once again N8 deftly debunks global warming by pointing out one anomalous storm, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that last year was once again one of the warmest years on record. The cognitive dissonance is astounding. I salute you.
and it was 75deg in NYC 1.5 weeks ago. therefore global warming exists, and is going to be 40 degrees above normal temperatures!! OH MY GOD, RUN FOR THE HILLS!!
its funny that global warming cultists can point to a hot day or two in the summer as proof of global warming, but dismiss the same when the temp is colder than normal.
lthumbsdown:
lthumbsdown:
Did you ever wonder why it is now termed climate change rather than global warming?its funny that global warming cultists can point to a hot day or two in the summer as proof of global warming, but dismiss the same when the temp is colder than normal.
Hint - it's to help the intellectually challenged.
You also may want to check what cult means
n8, I'm not a cultist of any kind, but why exactly do you think that just about every scientist with any credibility on the planet believes in this thing?its funny that global warming cultists can point to a hot day or two in the summer as proof of global warming, but dismiss the same when the temp is colder than normal.
If you can find me some concrete evidence to the contrary, I'll be glad to give it a look. Over the past couple of years, now that Im studying science almost constantly, I've seen my opinions evolve. Not because I hate jesus or oil companies, but because its what the evidence suggests. Why are you so steadfast in your denial, honestly?
Also, I havent been studying anything about weather patterns or climate change (although I have written an intensive research paper on the topic AND Im a firm believer in the scientific method), I'll gladly admit that. And I'll also give you that this isnt something as hashed out as say, evolution. I mean there are alot of unknowns at this point, but there is clear evidence that humans are indeed speeding up this process with emissions.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it is all a farce, why would you be against the reduction of emissions and a higher environmental awareness all around (as a effing MTN Biker at least)? I think a less smoggy/oil dependent world is definitely one in which I want to live. Why not you?
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it is all a farce, why would you be against the reduction of emissions and a higher environmental awareness all around (as a effing MTN Biker at least)? I think a less smoggy/oil dependent world is definitely one in which I want to live. Why not you?
And this is a key point in balancng the risks versus the benefits. If we do nothing and global warming is real(as evidence indicates), we ruin the planet. If global warming is false, and take action to reduce emissions the worse that happens long term is that the planet is a little cleaner.
So not only is the vast bulk of evidence pointing to human caused climate change, but the results of no acting are catastrpohic, and the results of overreacting are minimal.
Because sciencetific fact is not based on consensus.
There is plenty of questions and valid arguments as to if global warming exists, and if it does, what causes it, and if humans can do anything about it.
Back in the 20's general consenus was that man could not go faster than the speed of sound, split the atom nor ever land on the moon....
Actually n8, scientific "facts" are rare things. Most of the time theories reach legitimacy by obtaining just what you're trying to marginalize, a consensus. You think evolution never had a study done by some rogue scientist that claimed to disprove it? Like I said, if you've got some of these so called "valid arguments" Id like to see a few, as I mentioned.
When I went into my paper, my initial thesis was something to the effect of, "Despite lots of evidence to the contrary, there are plenty of arguments that suggest global climate change is a natural occurance" and after about two weeks I had no choice but to do a complete 180 on my paper. I couldnt find a damn thing that wasnt questionable at best. What've you got?
well, there are some papers on flaws in the ice core sample methods used to look at CO2 in the past... the 'hockey stick' model has been pretty much debunked as bad science...
Shocking. That's your whole basis?
Post up the debunking. I've got to go to the bank, I'll be interested to read this, tho I remember something similar being posted here and getting smoted fairly quickly.
Post up the debunking. I've got to go to the bank, I'll be interested to read this, tho I remember something similar being posted here and getting smoted fairly quickly.
Ok, go here and follow the discussion:
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/about/consult/debate/intro.aspx?did=1
There is some very interesting arguments being raised on this pro-global warming organization's website.
Because it's his "thing".
I don't understand why anyone even gives nate the time of day.
nate doesn't really believe anything he spews, it's just the "cool" way to be if you're trying to stay in the right wing prick camp. Weak.
actually, it seems like global warming "cultists" point to facts like 2006 was the warmest year on record for the United States, while wackjobs like yourself/drudge point to single event situations to try to disprove any warming is taking place.its funny that global warming cultists can point to a hot day or two in the summer as proof of global warming, but dismiss the same when the temp is colder than normal.
well, this "Climate Expert" tells meteorologists to spread the gospel or be stripped of their certification...
..of course these are the very same meteorologists can't tell me what the weather is going to be this Saturday much less what the climate will be 100 years from now.
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article2165452.ece
..of course these are the very same meteorologists can't tell me what the weather is going to be this Saturday much less what the climate will be 100 years from now.
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article2165452.ece
so what was the cause 112 years ago... which was even hotter?
N8, this is the kind of simple thinking that leads to incorrect conclusions. You dont look at anomolies, you look at trends. Just because you knew one smoker who didnt get lung cancer doesnt mean that smoking doesnt cause lung cancer.
Is it of no relation, in your mind, that rising levels of CO2 coincide with the trend of rising temperatures, and that these jumps also happen to coincide with when man on a large scale began to burn fossil fuels?
Sure, you could write it all off as a random anomoly that just happens to exist, but where exactly is the loss in doing better for the environment by conserving and using less pertroleum products? Most likely, all we're burning is going to have some effect, how can you deny that? Even if it doesnt, there is nothing but positives in scaling back petroleum use, so if it's all "liberal propaganda" it's still for your own good.
BTW, its january and still hasnt been winter yet in TN. I have daffodils sprouting the front yard.
ahahahaha
did anyone here read sen inhofe's press release from last month?
senate site has been timing out; here's a cached page
senate site has been timing out; here's a cached page
Hitting myself in the head with a hammer really does hurt. I have no proof that if I stop hitting myself, that the pain will stop. So I'm just going to continue hitting myself with the hammer....
if scare tactics didn't run public policy I could take an almost empty 4.5oz tube of toothpaste on an airplane, to say nothing about our little excursion into ("...in the form of a mushroom cloud") Iraq. Funny how the administration/republicans hype public hysteria when it suits their purpose.