Cool. You've given me another myth to adress."To believe that humans who first appeared about 20.000 years ago on this planet cause global warming is just arrogant - or stupid."The entire earth's supply of oil and coal for which it has taken MILLIONS of years to accumulate, is being completely burnt within a span of two HUNDRED. The other assertion you're making, that makind is too insignificant to harm the planet, is just ignorant, considering the existing stocks of fish and square miles of forest are a fraction of what they were at the begining of the century.
Increased insolation accounts for less than 20% of the observed effect. You show these things, absolve yourself of responsibility, when the lion's share of blame still should go to the humans, and the humans will need to fix it. Either that or starve when the droughts happen, and it will fix itself because there will be fewer people to burn coal. Its up to you.The earth is reemitting less of its received heat to space than it did just 10 years ago. Please keep confounding that fact with that its getting more heat to begin with.
here was my quote "Now, there's plenty of arguments against global warming; such as Limbaugh's assertion that volcanoes emit more global warming gas than humanity ever could.So, instead of using infantile theory/fact logic that anyone who took a high school science course could refute, why don't you resume pulling things out of your ass like the rest of the deniers?"If you'd noticed, I was being quite obviously sarcastic. Just read the sentance that was under that one
@kozureokami Thank you for the links and info. I started googling up some info on what you suggest. However in only a few moments of searching the only articles I could find are ones that state that the solar theory is inaccurate and unrelated. World Radiation Center - <a class="user" href="http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant">http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant</a>Real Climate (climatology science site) - <a class="user" href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192">http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192</a>A good quote from that site that I think sums it up nicely. This comes after how they discuss how unique the mars atmosphere is in its fragility. A major dust storm will change the climate fairly commonly. "Thus inferring global warming from a 3 Martian year regional trend is unwarranted. The observed regional changes in south polar ice cover are almost certainly due to a regional climate transition, not a global phenomenon, and are demonstrably unrelated to external forcing. There is a slight irony in people rushing to claim that the glacier changes on Mars are a sure sign of global warming, while not being swayed by the much more persuasive analogous phenomena here on Earth."Thank you for at least posing a counter-argument and not blithering like most folks do in comments =)
kozureokami wrote:"One last thing - Digging a story on whatever subject is supposed to make readers aware of the SUBJECT. It doesn't mean you have to agree with everything said in it."A discussion of skepticism is fine, by this article should not be Dugg, because it continues to propagate:1) Cherry picked anecdotes ("Alaska has been really cool lately") when the subject is AVERAGE global temperatures.2) Arguments attacking media sensationalism ("The NY Times in 1912 declared X", "The Chicago Tribune declared Y") instead of actual scientific studies with significant weight (IPCC).3) Arguments using climate phenomena that may have existed (Little Ice Age, Medieval Warming Period), but really are not useful as arguments against anthropogenic climate change.Etc.If you can find an article that doesn't KEEP REPEATING this crap, I'm all ears.
Could cause an ice age. If we're wrong and our response is overly dramatic... setting up giant mirrors in orbit and the like. To be fair. I don't think we're wrong. The earth would be just as happy, more so than now, with 1890 levels of CO2 and methane.And I apologize for the quality of my posts in this and the last global warming thread, my rhetorical skill goes out the window when I get really angry.
Now, repeat after me, “GLOBAL WARMING CAUSES GLOBAL COLDING”, Hell! Thirty years ago we (the True Faith) were preaching that the New Ice Age would be followed by a new warm age - the equation is flexible, it can be expressed any which way. The key feature is to remember that the planet is angry with us over our wicked, wicked ways.
Geeez! I wouldnt have thought of getting that lot of feedback....@RetsudoMan I'm really sorry but you have to work on your reading-skills.1. When/Where did i say there is no global warming?I said its prolly not caused by humans - not that it isnt happening.2. I really doubt you read my comment completely:heres what i said about pollution: "I live in a big city myself and I hate the smell of car, airplane and industrial produced crap blown in the air"heres your comment:"go rent a biodome, then sit inside it running dozens of petrol engines and generators. If pumping s**t into the atmosphere isn't harmful, you should be fine, right?"3.You say:"Everything he said has been debunked"First question: by Whom? Second question: Does the NASA know that their observations on Mars have been "debunked" ? Maybe you should call and tell them.I didn' say that these links are the ultimate truth about global warming - I just say there are millions other things to consider on this subject than 1 UN Report and these links are in my opinion interesting to start with researching.@jivatmanx"The entire earth's supply of oil and coal for which it has taken MILLIONS of years to accumulate, is being completely burnt within a span of two HUNDRED"1. How do you know what the entire earths supply of fossils is? This is a Myth itself.2. Compared to the history of our planet as far as we (think to) know it, humans are insignificant. Yes we live in an eco-system.Actually we ARE part of an eco-system. Of nature. Man IS nature. Everything what man does is Nature. Building Nukes, polluting the environment, fighting senseless wars is nature. What will die isn't the planet - it is MAN. Like a million species did before. Thinking that humans are above Nature is what I call arrogant - cause this type of thinking is based on religion - On the thought that Man is superior to animals and plants and whatever else is existing on this planet. We are just another Species. BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION so you dont need to feel attacked - that isnt my intention at all.@slammydSee I don't know whats the point in digging any story then. If I start research on whatever topic I like to get as much Information as possible, to view it from multiple angles - thats what for me is the process of building an opinion.And even if this story is maybe kinda creepy - that doesnt mean its not interesting to read - as I said you dont have to agree with it but u should be aware of it - especially if you not agree.I'd like to end this with an anecdote...There was a time not long ago when it was a FACT that we are living on a disk and that you will fall off it if you sail out too far. Today we know better.P.S.: I'm not a native english speaker so go ahead and make fun of me if I make stupid spelling mistakes ;)
**P.S.: I'm not a native english speaker so go ahead and make fun of me if I make stupid spelling mistakes ;)**No Worries, Mate!Your arguments are bang-on.I find it interesting that the ones who embrace the whole "global warming" panic are the ones who have a problem with exploration of details - not "facts", not "theories", but DETAILS.Most of the people I know who deny the panic do not deny facts.Climate is in CONSTANT change. To believe that humans have enough impact to *destroy* the planet is supreme arrogance to the n'th degree.I'm going to go smoke (outside) & then gas up the car!!(ha ha ha)
soxfannhFeb 25, 2007
Fine this article may not be the best but definitely look at kozureokami's post above.
jivatmanxFeb 25, 2007
Cool. You've given me another myth to adress."To believe that humans who first appeared about 20.000 years ago on this planet cause global warming is just arrogant - or stupid."The entire earth's supply of oil and coal for which it has taken MILLIONS of years to accumulate, is being completely burnt within a span of two HUNDRED. The other assertion you're making, that makind is too insignificant to harm the planet, is just ignorant, considering the existing stocks of fish and square miles of forest are a fraction of what they were at the begining of the century.
afreytFeb 25, 2007
Increased insolation accounts for less than 20% of the observed effect. You show these things, absolve yourself of responsibility, when the lion's share of blame still should go to the humans, and the humans will need to fix it. Either that or starve when the droughts happen, and it will fix itself because there will be fewer people to burn coal. Its up to you.The earth is reemitting less of its received heat to space than it did just 10 years ago. Please keep confounding that fact with that its getting more heat to begin with.
jivatmanxFeb 25, 2007
here was my quote "Now, there's plenty of arguments against global warming; such as Limbaugh's assertion that volcanoes emit more global warming gas than humanity ever could.So, instead of using infantile theory/fact logic that anyone who took a high school science course could refute, why don't you resume pulling things out of your ass like the rest of the deniers?"If you'd noticed, I was being quite obviously sarcastic. Just read the sentance that was under that one
shawnosaurusFeb 25, 2007
@kozureokami Thank you for the links and info. I started googling up some info on what you suggest. However in only a few moments of searching the only articles I could find are ones that state that the solar theory is inaccurate and unrelated. World Radiation Center - <a class="user" href="http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant">http://www.pmodwrc.ch/pmod.php?topic=tsi/composite/SolarConstant</a>Real Climate (climatology science site) - <a class="user" href="http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192">http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192</a>A good quote from that site that I think sums it up nicely. This comes after how they discuss how unique the mars atmosphere is in its fragility. A major dust storm will change the climate fairly commonly. "Thus inferring global warming from a 3 Martian year regional trend is unwarranted. The observed regional changes in south polar ice cover are almost certainly due to a regional climate transition, not a global phenomenon, and are demonstrably unrelated to external forcing. There is a slight irony in people rushing to claim that the glacier changes on Mars are a sure sign of global warming, while not being swayed by the much more persuasive analogous phenomena here on Earth."Thank you for at least posing a counter-argument and not blithering like most folks do in comments =)
slammydFeb 25, 2007
kozureokami wrote:"One last thing - Digging a story on whatever subject is supposed to make readers aware of the SUBJECT. It doesn't mean you have to agree with everything said in it."A discussion of skepticism is fine, by this article should not be Dugg, because it continues to propagate:1) Cherry picked anecdotes ("Alaska has been really cool lately") when the subject is AVERAGE global temperatures.2) Arguments attacking media sensationalism ("The NY Times in 1912 declared X", "The Chicago Tribune declared Y") instead of actual scientific studies with significant weight (IPCC).3) Arguments using climate phenomena that may have existed (Little Ice Age, Medieval Warming Period), but really are not useful as arguments against anthropogenic climate change.Etc.If you can find an article that doesn't KEEP REPEATING this crap, I'm all ears.
afreytFeb 25, 2007
Could cause an ice age. If we're wrong and our response is overly dramatic... setting up giant mirrors in orbit and the like. To be fair. I don't think we're wrong. The earth would be just as happy, more so than now, with 1890 levels of CO2 and methane.And I apologize for the quality of my posts in this and the last global warming thread, my rhetorical skill goes out the window when I get really angry.
blogagogFeb 26, 2007
Now, repeat after me, “GLOBAL WARMING CAUSES GLOBAL COLDING”, Hell! Thirty years ago we (the True Faith) were preaching that the New Ice Age would be followed by a new warm age - the equation is flexible, it can be expressed any which way. The key feature is to remember that the planet is angry with us over our wicked, wicked ways.
Closed AccountFeb 26, 2007
Geeez! I wouldnt have thought of getting that lot of feedback....@RetsudoMan I'm really sorry but you have to work on your reading-skills.1. When/Where did i say there is no global warming?I said its prolly not caused by humans - not that it isnt happening.2. I really doubt you read my comment completely:heres what i said about pollution: "I live in a big city myself and I hate the smell of car, airplane and industrial produced crap blown in the air"heres your comment:"go rent a biodome, then sit inside it running dozens of petrol engines and generators. If pumping s**t into the atmosphere isn't harmful, you should be fine, right?"3.You say:"Everything he said has been debunked"First question: by Whom? Second question: Does the NASA know that their observations on Mars have been "debunked" ? Maybe you should call and tell them.I didn' say that these links are the ultimate truth about global warming - I just say there are millions other things to consider on this subject than 1 UN Report and these links are in my opinion interesting to start with researching.@jivatmanx"The entire earth's supply of oil and coal for which it has taken MILLIONS of years to accumulate, is being completely burnt within a span of two HUNDRED"1. How do you know what the entire earths supply of fossils is? This is a Myth itself.2. Compared to the history of our planet as far as we (think to) know it, humans are insignificant. Yes we live in an eco-system.Actually we ARE part of an eco-system. Of nature. Man IS nature. Everything what man does is Nature. Building Nukes, polluting the environment, fighting senseless wars is nature. What will die isn't the planet - it is MAN. Like a million species did before. Thinking that humans are above Nature is what I call arrogant - cause this type of thinking is based on religion - On the thought that Man is superior to animals and plants and whatever else is existing on this planet. We are just another Species. BUT THAT'S JUST MY OPINION so you dont need to feel attacked - that isnt my intention at all.@slammydSee I don't know whats the point in digging any story then. If I start research on whatever topic I like to get as much Information as possible, to view it from multiple angles - thats what for me is the process of building an opinion.And even if this story is maybe kinda creepy - that doesnt mean its not interesting to read - as I said you dont have to agree with it but u should be aware of it - especially if you not agree.I'd like to end this with an anecdote...There was a time not long ago when it was a FACT that we are living on a disk and that you will fall off it if you sail out too far. Today we know better.P.S.: I'm not a native english speaker so go ahead and make fun of me if I make stupid spelling mistakes ;)
cncdenOct 22, 2009
**P.S.: I'm not a native english speaker so go ahead and make fun of me if I make stupid spelling mistakes ;)**No Worries, Mate!Your arguments are bang-on.I find it interesting that the ones who embrace the whole "global warming" panic are the ones who have a problem with exploration of details - not "facts", not "theories", but DETAILS.Most of the people I know who deny the panic do not deny facts.Climate is in CONSTANT change. To believe that humans have enough impact to *destroy* the planet is supreme arrogance to the n'th degree.I'm going to go smoke (outside) & then gas up the car!!(ha ha ha)