http://gamingtrend.com
September 21, 2014, 06:16:29 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Liberal Ice Shelf continues to show how much it hates Bush  (Read 14188 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Ironrod
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3391



View Profile WWW
« Reply #120 on: August 04, 2008, 03:20:23 PM »

Quote from: Blackadar on August 04, 2008, 02:11:00 PM

There are really only two reasons that I can think of (there may be more) people argue about whether it's happening.  The first is religious.  There are some who believe that God placed things on this Earth to be used by man (I forget the exact passage).  Therefore, it's His will that allows us to use these things - after all, He knows how they'd be used.  I understand that reasoning, but it doesn't make for good public policy on scientific matters.  The second is about money - there are a number of business interests that are threatened by the consequences of global warming.  As such, they want to protect their interests and don't want to make any change until all aspects - degree and consequences - are known facts.  Of course, this is an unreasonable position - those things can't be known until after they happen.  But they'll insist on getting that before making any change, which means that they'll seize on any opinion that looks factual as "proof" to try to prevent any public policies from being made.

This op-ed piece from today's Boston Globe will interest readers of this thread. I'm sure it won't change any minds despite the author's credentials, but it does nicely address the "movement vs. deniers" drift that we're talking about now. The kernel:

Quote
Long-time observers of public debates about environmental threats know that skeptics about such matters tend to move, over time, through three stages. First, they tell you you're wrong and they can prove it. (In this case, "Climate isn't changing in unusual ways or, if it is, human activities are not the cause.")

Then they tell you you're right but it doesn't matter. ("OK, it's changing and humans are playing a role, but it won't do much harm.") Finally, they tell you it matters but it's too late to do anything about it. ("Yes, climate disruption is going to do some real damage, but it's too late, too difficult, or too costly to avoid that, so we'll just have to hunker down and suffer.")

(...)

US polls indicate that most of the amateur skeptics are Republicans. These Republican skeptics should wonder how presidential candidate John McCain could have been taken in. He has castigated the Bush administration for wasting eight years in inaction on climate change, and the policies he says he would implement as president include early and deep cuts in US greenhouse-gas emissions. (Senator Barack Obama's position is similar.)
Logged

Curio City Online - Weird stuff you can buy
Curious Business - The Curio City Blog
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #121 on: August 04, 2008, 07:03:54 PM »

That's a very cogently argued piece, and one I (naturally) find very reasonable.  However, as we've just seen here, appealing to reason isn't going to be very effective:

John P. Holdren:  "All three of holders of the one Nobel prize in science that has been awarded for studies of the atmosphere (the 1995 chemistry prize to Paul Crutzen, Sherwood Rowland, and Mario Molina, for figuring out what was happening to stratospheric ozone) are leaders in the climate-change scientific mainstream."

Anonymous internet denizen:  "Like that award means anything anymore, they even give it to terrorists now."
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #122 on: August 04, 2008, 10:39:33 PM »

Gee seems like someone, once again, cant get anything right, and somehow thinks that nobel peace prize, now a worthless award because they award it to terrorists, is the same award as a nobel prize in the sciences.    But if he wants to make up whatever he wants about what someone he disagrees with said, I guess he can.   Just doesnt make what is said true in any way.   And sadly I dont expect him to own up to his error in anyway.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #123 on: August 04, 2008, 10:52:12 PM »

Do you think that there are two separate organizations that hand out Nobel prizes?

What error am I being asked to own up to, exactly?
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #124 on: August 04, 2008, 11:08:56 PM »

The one where you assume that two completely separate awards, are actually magically the same exact award with the same criteria and the same legitimacy.   I know its a hard concept for you to follow, but please try and keep up.     The nobel prizes in science, which are still being awards for scientific achievements, are prestigous awards still.   The nobel peace prize, once they started awarding it to terrorists who ordered people murdered and wanted to wipe entire countries off the map, is no longer a prestigeous award.   I hope even you were able to follow that.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #125 on: August 04, 2008, 11:18:42 PM »

You're hilarious, brettmcd.  I know "don't feed the troll" is a tried and true maxim on the internet, but you're too cute to resist, particularly because of your mangled syntax, spelling, and punctuation.

Your semantic childishness is pretty pathetic (and erroneous) in this case - the Nobel Peace Prize is administered by the same Nobel Foundation that awards the literature and various science prizes.  You're probably dimly aware that Arafat wasn't the sole holder of the 1994 Peace Prize, and that it was awarded to all three principals in the Oslo Accords.

More germanely to this discussion, do you find that the fact that "all three of holders of the one Nobel prize in science that has been awarded for studies of the atmosphere are leaders in the climate-change scientific mainstream" sways you in any way towards accepting the international scientific consensus on global warming?  If not, why not?
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #126 on: August 04, 2008, 11:34:39 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on August 04, 2008, 11:18:42 PM

You're hilarious, brettmcd.  I know "don't feed the troll" is a tried and true maxim on the internet, but you're too cute to resist, particularly because of your mangled syntax, spelling, and punctuation.

Your semantic childishness is pretty pathetic (and erroneous) in this case - the Nobel Peace Prize is administered by the same Nobel Foundation that awards the literature and various science prizes.  You're probably dimly aware that Arafat wasn't the sole holder of the 1994 Peace Prize, and that it was awarded to all three principals in the Oslo Accords.

More germanely to this discussion, do you find that the fact that "all three of holders of the one Nobel prize in science that has been awarded for studies of the atmosphere are leaders in the climate-change scientific mainstream" sways you in any way towards accepting the international scientific consensus on global warming?  If not, why not?

The only trolls here are you and blackadar, so wrong on your first point.

Why does the fact that more then one person got an award have anything to do with the fact that one of them was a murdering terrorist who should have been arrested and tried for crimes against humanity.

As for the 3rd question, not in the slightest.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #127 on: August 04, 2008, 11:46:32 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on August 04, 2008, 11:34:39 PM

As for the 3rd question, not in the slightest.

This is perfectly indicative of the position of the anti-science crowd.  There is no neutral authority great enough to sway their minds towards something that has been declared anathema by their political and cultural leaders.

edit:  substituted "cultural" for "culture"
« Last Edit: August 04, 2008, 11:52:14 PM by Brendan » Logged
Glycerine
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 610


View Profile
« Reply #128 on: August 05, 2008, 12:30:43 AM »

Quote from: brettmcd on August 04, 2008, 11:34:39 PM

Quote from: Brendan on August 04, 2008, 11:18:42 PM

You're hilarious, brettmcd.  I know "don't feed the troll" is a tried and true maxim on the internet, but you're too cute to resist, particularly because of your mangled syntax, spelling, and punctuation.

Your semantic childishness is pretty pathetic (and erroneous) in this case - the Nobel Peace Prize is administered by the same Nobel Foundation that awards the literature and various science prizes.  You're probably dimly aware that Arafat wasn't the sole holder of the 1994 Peace Prize, and that it was awarded to all three principals in the Oslo Accords.

More germanely to this discussion, do you find that the fact that "all three of holders of the one Nobel prize in science that has been awarded for studies of the atmosphere are leaders in the climate-change scientific mainstream" sways you in any way towards accepting the international scientific consensus on global warming?  If not, why not?

The only trolls here are you and blackadar, so wrong on your first point.

Why does the fact that more then one person got an award have anything to do with the fact that one of them was a murdering terrorist who should have been arrested and tried for crimes against humanity.

As for the 3rd question, not in the slightest.

So...what happened to not responding to anything else Brendan posts?  Guess that one flew right out the window, eh?

Global warming is real, it's happening, and it's so obvious that I really can't see how any intelligent person can deny it.  Just in my short lifetime I've watched my summers and winters drastically change.  I can remember winters in Indianapolis back in the early 80's that started before Thanksgiving and didn't let up until mid-March.  We don't get winters like that any more, at all.  We do get snow, but not so much that it stays on the ground all winter long.

The naysayers can naysay all they want, but the facts don't change.  It's real, it's a problem, and if we don't do something soon we really can't say what type of world we'll be leaving for our children and grandchildren.  The problem is it's different, it's change, and naturally that's going to scare some people to death.  The polar icecaps could be completely gone, yet you'll still have some jackass insisting that "there's nothing to worry about".  I'll leave you with one final quote:

"Wanting people to listen, you can't just tap them on the shoulder.  You have to hit them with a sledgehammer, and then you'll notice you have their complete attention."  - John Doe, Se7en

I think this pretty much sums up the collective consciousness of the ultra-conservative mindset.

glyc
« Last Edit: August 05, 2008, 12:33:28 AM by Glycerine » Logged

brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #129 on: August 05, 2008, 02:19:34 AM »

Quote from: Brendan on August 04, 2008, 11:46:32 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on August 04, 2008, 11:34:39 PM

As for the 3rd question, not in the slightest.

This is perfectly indicative of the position of the anti-science crowd.  There is no neutral authority great enough to sway their minds towards something that has been declared anathema by their political and cultural leaders.

edit:  substituted "cultural" for "culture"

Another lie right there calling me part of the 'anti science crowd'.    My beliefs on this have nothing to do with any political and cultural leaders, I am not a republican, havent been for 16 years, and I am not a religious person in any way.   So your assumptions on why I believe what I do are in error and an outright lie, as usual.
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #130 on: August 05, 2008, 02:28:00 AM »

Quote from: Glycerine on August 05, 2008, 12:30:43 AM

Quote from: brettmcd on August 04, 2008, 11:34:39 PM

Quote from: Brendan on August 04, 2008, 11:18:42 PM

You're hilarious, brettmcd.  I know "don't feed the troll" is a tried and true maxim on the internet, but you're too cute to resist, particularly because of your mangled syntax, spelling, and punctuation.

Your semantic childishness is pretty pathetic (and erroneous) in this case - the Nobel Peace Prize is administered by the same Nobel Foundation that awards the literature and various science prizes.  You're probably dimly aware that Arafat wasn't the sole holder of the 1994 Peace Prize, and that it was awarded to all three principals in the Oslo Accords.

More germanely to this discussion, do you find that the fact that "all three of holders of the one Nobel prize in science that has been awarded for studies of the atmosphere are leaders in the climate-change scientific mainstream" sways you in any way towards accepting the international scientific consensus on global warming?  If not, why not?

The only trolls here are you and blackadar, so wrong on your first point.

Why does the fact that more then one person got an award have anything to do with the fact that one of them was a murdering terrorist who should have been arrested and tried for crimes against humanity.

As for the 3rd question, not in the slightest.

So...what happened to not responding to anything else Brendan posts?  Guess that one flew right out the window, eh?

Global warming is real, it's happening, and it's so obvious that I really can't see how any intelligent person can deny it.  Just in my short lifetime I've watched my summers and winters drastically change.  I can remember winters in Indianapolis back in the early 80's that started before Thanksgiving and didn't let up until mid-March.  We don't get winters like that any more, at all.  We do get snow, but not so much that it stays on the ground all winter long.

The naysayers can naysay all they want, but the facts don't change.  It's real, it's a problem, and if we don't do something soon we really can't say what type of world we'll be leaving for our children and grandchildren.  The problem is it's different, it's change, and naturally that's going to scare some people to death.  The polar icecaps could be completely gone, yet you'll still have some jackass insisting that "there's nothing to worry about".  I'll leave you with one final quote:

"Wanting people to listen, you can't just tap them on the shoulder.  You have to hit them with a sledgehammer, and then you'll notice you have their complete attention."  - John Doe, Se7en

I think this pretty much sums up the collective consciousness of the ultra-conservative mindset.

glyc

When he makes up stories and outright lies about me he will get a response.   Thats not going to change.

Winters where I live have been getting colder the past couple years, last year we had

 
Quote
Over the 40 days and 40 nights beginning January 17th, the Twin Cities experienced 20 days of temperatures 6.5 degrees or more below their historical averages, including 11 registering days at -15.5 or more.

http://climate.weather.com/articles/avgtempindexwinter2.html?page=4

So by the same logic you use about how winters seem different to you then they used to be and that means global warming is fact, I can say that it is a crap theory.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #131 on: August 05, 2008, 02:52:29 AM »

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 02:19:34 AM

Another lie right there calling me part of the 'anti science crowd'.    My beliefs on this have nothing to do with any political and cultural leaders, I am not a republican, havent been for 16 years, and I am not a religious person in any way.   So your assumptions on why I believe what I do are in error and an outright lie, as usual.

Your actions are far more demonstrative than your words.  Your response was "not in the slightest" - without any further qualification.  I eagerly await an explanation of the circumstances under which you would change your position on global warming.  So far, it appears to be wholly anecdotal in origin.  That's not science; that's just fluffy-headed emotional "feelings".  Where's the beef?
Logged
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #132 on: August 05, 2008, 02:56:22 AM »

Quote from: Brendan on August 05, 2008, 02:52:29 AM

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 02:19:34 AM

Another lie right there calling me part of the 'anti science crowd'.    My beliefs on this have nothing to do with any political and cultural leaders, I am not a republican, havent been for 16 years, and I am not a religious person in any way.   So your assumptions on why I believe what I do are in error and an outright lie, as usual.

Your actions are far more demonstrative than your words.  Your response was "not in the slightest" - without any further qualification.  I eagerly await an explanation of the circumstances under which you would change your position on global warming.  So far, it appears to be wholly anecdotal in origin.  That's not science; that's just fluffy-headed emotional "feelings".  Where's the beef?

You have already told me how and why i think as I do on the subject, so why bother changing your precious preconceived and totally in error notions of me?    You seem to have far more fun with the fictitious things you have made up in your own mind.  And I would hate to take away the only things you seem to find enjoyment around here from, which is making up others arguments for you to disagree with them on.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #133 on: August 05, 2008, 03:05:58 AM »

brettmcd, my "preconceived and totally in error notions" of your thoughts are, y'know, based on your posting history.  If you actually cared about changing my mind (and to be clear, I know you don't), you'd engage in a good-faith conversation about the topic of global warming; I've given you plenty of reasonably sincere requests to explain your thought process. 

Instead, you prefer to troll the thread, just like you troll every other political thread, so what's left to do?  Nothing but enjoy myself while staying on topic, and hope that Blackadar and Ironrod continue to contribute additional analysis and new background information to mull over.
Logged
Blackadar
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3458



View Profile
« Reply #134 on: August 05, 2008, 12:53:08 PM »



Nope, no warming in here!
« Last Edit: August 05, 2008, 12:55:53 PM by Blackadar » Logged

Raise the bridge! I have an erection!
WalkingFumble
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 652



View Profile
« Reply #135 on: August 05, 2008, 07:35:30 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 02:56:22 AM

Quote from: Brendan on August 05, 2008, 02:52:29 AM

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 02:19:34 AM

Another lie right there calling me part of the 'anti science crowd'.    My beliefs on this have nothing to do with any political and cultural leaders, I am not a republican, havent been for 16 years, and I am not a religious person in any way.   So your assumptions on why I believe what I do are in error and an outright lie, as usual.

Your actions are far more demonstrative than your words.  Your response was "not in the slightest" - without any further qualification.  I eagerly await an explanation of the circumstances under which you would change your position on global warming.  So far, it appears to be wholly anecdotal in origin.  That's not science; that's just fluffy-headed emotional "feelings".  Where's the beef?

You have already told me how and why i think as I do on the subject, so why bother changing your precious preconceived and totally in error notions of me?    You seem to have far more fun with the fictitious things you have made up in your own mind.  And I would hate to take away the only things you seem to find enjoyment around here from, which is making up others arguments for you to disagree with them on.


seriously...stop beating around the bush and tell us why you think its phony. 
Logged

XBL: I3L00DFUMBLE  -  132,578     |     PSN: WalkingFumble     |     Nintendo Revolution:  1440 9434 2198 4442
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #136 on: August 05, 2008, 07:58:38 PM »

Quote from: WalkingFumble on August 05, 2008, 07:35:30 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 02:56:22 AM

Quote from: Brendan on August 05, 2008, 02:52:29 AM

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 02:19:34 AM

Another lie right there calling me part of the 'anti science crowd'.    My beliefs on this have nothing to do with any political and cultural leaders, I am not a republican, havent been for 16 years, and I am not a religious person in any way.   So your assumptions on why I believe what I do are in error and an outright lie, as usual.

Your actions are far more demonstrative than your words.  Your response was "not in the slightest" - without any further qualification.  I eagerly await an explanation of the circumstances under which you would change your position on global warming.  So far, it appears to be wholly anecdotal in origin.  That's not science; that's just fluffy-headed emotional "feelings".  Where's the beef?

You have already told me how and why i think as I do on the subject, so why bother changing your precious preconceived and totally in error notions of me?    You seem to have far more fun with the fictitious things you have made up in your own mind.  And I would hate to take away the only things you seem to find enjoyment around here from, which is making up others arguments for you to disagree with them on.


seriously...stop beating around the bush and tell us why you think its phony. 

Nah I would hate to have to break up the amazing fantasies people here have made up for me.   That I am anti science, that I must just be following orders from republican and religious types, and all of that.
Logged
Eightball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1387


View Profile
« Reply #137 on: August 05, 2008, 09:04:02 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 07:58:38 PM

Nah I would hate to have to break up the amazing fantasies people here have made up for me.   That I am anti science, that I must just be following orders from republican and religious types, and all of that.

The best way to shut people up, is to disprove them with facts.  Break up the fantasies, and educate us.
Logged
Glycerine
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 610


View Profile
« Reply #138 on: August 05, 2008, 09:09:52 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd
When he makes up stories and outright lies about me he will get a response.   Thats not going to change.

You said you were not going to reply to anything else he posted, yet you continue to do so.  Don't split hairs, you said you weren't going to do something and you turned right around and did it.  I've been following this thread since the first post, and it looks to me like you naysayers have had your asses handed to you at every turn.

Quote from: brettmcd
Winters where I live have been getting colder the past couple years, last year we had

 
Quote
Over the 40 days and 40 nights beginning January 17th, the Twin Cities experienced 20 days of temperatures 6.5 degrees or more below their historical averages, including 11 registering days at -15.5 or more.

http://climate.weather.com/articles/avgtempindexwinter2.html?page=4

So by the same logic you use about how winters seem different to you then they used to be and that means global warming is fact, I can say that it is a crap theory.

Yeah, so is comparing 40 days of temperature readings to an observation about weather patterns over the last 30+ years.  A better argument would have been to post mean temperatures in the Twin Cities over the last 10 or 20 years so we can really see if there has been a significant change.

With that I'll end my short lived presence in this thread.  I really don't think any minds are going to be changed here.  You are entitled to believe whatever you want, only time will tell who's wrong and who's right.  Feel free to flame on, but I won't be back to add any more gasoline of my own.

glyc
Logged

brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #139 on: August 05, 2008, 10:32:56 PM »

Quote from: Eightball on August 05, 2008, 09:04:02 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 07:58:38 PM

Nah I would hate to have to break up the amazing fantasies people here have made up for me.   That I am anti science, that I must just be following orders from republican and religious types, and all of that.

The best way to shut people up, is to disprove them with facts.  Break up the fantasies, and educate us.

If only that was true here, but the main participants in the thread who have all those fantasies have shown over and over they cant be dealt with in that way.
Logged
cheeba
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2046


View Profile
« Reply #140 on: August 06, 2008, 01:44:58 AM »

Quote from: Glycerine on August 05, 2008, 12:30:43 AM

Global warming is real, it's happening, and it's so obvious that I really can't see how any intelligent person can deny it.  Just in my short lifetime I've watched my summers and winters drastically change.
This has to be a joke, right? Global warming is a fact because you think Indianapolis is a bit warmer over the past 20 years?

This forum is insane.
Logged
Mookee
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 225


View Profile
« Reply #141 on: August 06, 2008, 02:51:44 AM »

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 10:32:56 PM

Quote from: Eightball on August 05, 2008, 09:04:02 PM

Quote from: brettmcd on August 05, 2008, 07:58:38 PM

Nah I would hate to have to break up the amazing fantasies people here have made up for me.   That I am anti science, that I must just be following orders from republican and religious types, and all of that.

The best way to shut people up, is to disprove them with facts.  Break up the fantasies, and educate us.

If only that was true here, but the main participants in the thread who have all those fantasies have shown over and over they cant be dealt with in that way.


I may not be a main participant, but I read almost everything and I have a very open mind. Educate me. Pretend I'm a blank canvas and paint me with science!
Logged
whiteboyskim
Senior Staff Writer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7848


Hard partier


View Profile
« Reply #142 on: August 06, 2008, 03:05:43 AM »

What if the planet is honestly warming up but instead of it being man-made, it's nature continuing to return to normal after the last ice age?
Logged

Behold the glory of my new blog!
Filmmaking is vision plus faith plus balls, all 3 of which Hollywood knows little about.
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #143 on: August 06, 2008, 03:44:38 AM »

Quote from: whiteboyskim on August 06, 2008, 03:05:43 AM

What if the planet is honestly warming up but instead of it being man-made, it's nature continuing to return to normal after the last ice age?

Thats unpossible, man is EEEEEEEVIL and is the only possible thing that could be causing a problem.    Natural cycles of nature and all that couldnt possibly do something bad to the planet, again only man is capable of doing that.
Logged
Mookee
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 225


View Profile
« Reply #144 on: August 06, 2008, 03:54:47 AM »

Quote from: whiteboyskim on August 06, 2008, 03:05:43 AM

What if the planet is honestly warming up but instead of it being man-made, it's nature continuing to return to normal after the last ice age?

Science!

http://environmentaldefenseblogs.org/climate411/2007/06/29/human_cause-3/

http://environmentaldefenseblogs.org/climate411/2007/07/12/human_cause-5/

Written by some hack: http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/people/faculty/chameides.html

Logged
VynlSol
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 680


View Profile
« Reply #145 on: August 06, 2008, 04:08:41 AM »

Quote from: Mookee on August 06, 2008, 03:54:47 AM


The comments to those articles are quite enlightening!

Logged
WalkingFumble
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 652



View Profile
« Reply #146 on: August 06, 2008, 12:48:32 PM »

Quote from: whiteboyskim on August 06, 2008, 03:05:43 AM

What if the planet is honestly warming up but instead of it being man-made, it's nature continuing to return to normal after the last ice age?

then we should all be happy with that, but shouldnt we still try to cut back on carbon emissions and other pollutants?

or should we just stick with our dependency on fossil fuels?
Logged

XBL: I3L00DFUMBLE  -  132,578     |     PSN: WalkingFumble     |     Nintendo Revolution:  1440 9434 2198 4442
brettmcd
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1355


View Profile
« Reply #147 on: August 06, 2008, 01:36:49 PM »

Quote from: Mookee on August 06, 2008, 03:54:47 AM

Quote from: whiteboyskim on August 06, 2008, 03:05:43 AM

What if the planet is honestly warming up but instead of it being man-made, it's nature continuing to return to normal after the last ice age?

Science!

http://environmentaldefenseblogs.org/climate411/2007/06/29/human_cause-3/

http://environmentaldefenseblogs.org/climate411/2007/07/12/human_cause-5/

Written by some hack: http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/people/faculty/chameides.html



Wow, something posted on a site run by an environmental group, by the rules of this board, any site that has any type of bias to it is automatically invalid, so I am sorry nothing said on that site can be used.   Please try again.
Logged
Mookee
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 225


View Profile
:(
« Reply #148 on: August 06, 2008, 02:57:34 PM »

Quote from: brettmcd on August 06, 2008, 01:36:49 PM

Please try again.

OK!


Quote from: Bob Barr
Former Vice President Al Gore and I have met privately to discuss the issue of global warming, and I was pleased and honored that he invited me to attend the "We" Campaign event.  Global warming is a reality as most every organization that has studied the matter has concluded, whether conservative-leaning, liberal oriented or independent.
-
I commend Mr. Gore  for his efforts and leadership in this area, and urge Senators Obama and McCain to join me in studying, debating, and finding solutions to the problem of energy needs, consumption and effects. 


Quote from: John McCain
Climate change is the single greatest environmental challenge of our time. The facts of global warming demand our urgent attention, especially in Washington.

Logged
dback99
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 136


View Profile
« Reply #149 on: August 06, 2008, 08:18:11 PM »

I found this to be an interesting article on Global Warming, or at least, one professors take on it.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/aprilholladay/2006-08-07-global-warming-truth_x.htm

The more I read on the subject, the more I want to build a bunker...lol  The end is near!!

-Dback
Logged

Xbox Live tag: dback99

Listening to: volbeat!!

Playing: swtor, skyrim, rocksmith, ootp11
Toe
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1493


View Profile
« Reply #150 on: August 22, 2008, 10:16:19 PM »

Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.195 seconds with 84 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.066s, 2q)