First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
Post Reply do you believe in climate change?
188 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Sharon Hill, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/9/16 , edited 3/9/16
So just from having 100 years of temperature records. Scientists can tell whats a normal climate for a planet that's billions of years old. I doubt it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0aFPXr4n4. George Carlin tells it how it is.
18690 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F
Online
Posted 3/9/16

jeffcoatstephen wrote:

It's real. This winter proves that humans are negatively affecting the climate. Pollution is destroying our ozone layer causing the sun to fry the Earth resulting in warmer temperatures. I wouldn't be surprised if winter goes away (I hope it does).


dear god I hope it doesn't, my body isn't normal , it doesn't regulate tempature so I stay hot 24 7. warm weather is dreadful for me, and in winter im still hot and walk around in sandals.

also on a side note we need winter for vegetation. it is essential for vegetation to die off naturally to then re grow , new.
27824 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Ohio, USA
Offline
Posted 3/9/16

redokami wrote:


jeffcoatstephen wrote:

It's real. This winter proves that humans are negatively affecting the climate. Pollution is destroying our ozone layer causing the sun to fry the Earth resulting in warmer temperatures. I wouldn't be surprised if winter goes away (I hope it does).


dear god I hope it doesn't, my body isn't normal , it doesn't regulate tempature so I stay hot 24 7. warm weather is dreadful for me, and in winter im still hot and walk around in sandals.

also on a side note we need winter for vegetation. it is essential for vegetation to die off naturally to then re grow , new.


I know but I can't stand the cold. It makes me lazy and get annoyed easily.
35027 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 3/9/16 , edited 3/9/16

AkatsukiDoc wrote:

Yeah take a look into who funds those groups. Guaranteed its a democrat who has an alterier motive. Its not about saving the planet, its about controlling every aspect of your life. For instance someone deciding if you get treated if your sick, to someone deciding who gets drive and who doesn't. Are you going to give up your driving rights to save the world.


A combination of public and private endowments, membership fees, revenue from periodical subscriptions, that sort of thing. Not particularly controversial in and of itself since this is how research is funded in the first place, and you haven't actually pointed to any specific and untoward source of funding. Is merely receiving public funding of any kind now sufficient to compromise the integrity of some of the most reputable and influential chemical, physical, and geological societies in the world? I could understand your suspicions if I were pointing to the opinions of a leftist green think tank or something, but I'm not. I'm pointing to the ACS, the APS, the AMS. You are way over the line and out of order.
5238 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 3/9/16
Climate has never been the same, not even when dinosaurs roamed the earth.
10350 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / United States
Online
Posted 3/9/16


You're trying to have a scientific discussion among what appear to be politically argumentative people....aka, they don't know actual science data.

Insert Deity rest your patient soul.
10350 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / United States
Online
Posted 3/9/16
If you don't believe in climate change you are basically telling me you are a science denier, most likely caught up in the political spectrum rather then participating in the scientific in community. No serious climatologist has doubts about the climate change, but if you wanted to produce an argument the current debate is being waged over A) how much of an impact is climate change in regards to man made climate change & is the Antarctic Ice accumulation off-setting the Arctic loss. Most people are totally ignorant of the ocean acidification crisis that is also becoming more heavily researched within the climate community to investigate ocean temperatures.
10350 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / United States
Online
Posted 3/9/16


I'm going to guess science was never your strong suit huh? But to answer we can ascertain what the atmosphere was like up to millions of years ago by taking ice core samples that have pockets of air encapsulated in the ice. Typically it is done at the poles where the least amount of pollution has been.

You seem like you would be a Ted Cruz kind of guy...how he ever made it to the Princeton debate team is beyond me. Of course rhetorical skills have nothing to do with scientific literacy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCSnKNoyWtw
10350 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / United States
Online
Posted 3/9/16 , edited 3/9/16
188 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Sharon Hill, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/9/16 , edited 3/9/16

Shishiku wrote:


Shishiku wrote:

If you don't believe in climate change you are basically telling me you are a science denier, most likely caught up in the political spectrum rather than participating in the scientific in community. No serious climatologist has doubts about the climate change, but if you wanted to produce an argument the current debate is being waged over A) how much of an impact is climate change in regards to man made climate change & is the Antarctic Ice accumulation off-setting the Arctic loss. Most people are totally ignorant of the ocean acidification crisis that is also becoming more heavily researched within the climate community to investigate ocean temperatures.




There you go jumping to conclusions. Do you even listen to arguments from the other side or do you just bow your head and accept everything the IPCC tells you. Global warming is a theory and if you do your homework maybe you wouldn't be so naïve to think that you and the status quo could be wrong. Do your research and watch some vids on youtube that talk about the other side of the spectrum and maybe you will enlighten yourself. I understand if your were indoctrinated by your school when you were young. I was also but i grew up and started thinking for myself. To just believe any graph or argument these climate scientists claim is naïve, and is the problem with your generation and the next. and you are assuming i am a Cruz supporter shows how ignorant you are. You keep believing that pseudo science all you want as for me, it takes a lot more than a fabricated graph and political tools to convince me. Go buy yourself a hybrid maybe you will feel better about yourself as you will be part of the solution not the problem, right.
27257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
39 / Inside your compu...
Offline
Posted 3/9/16
yep a small blip from an eventual ice age
10350 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / United States
Online
Posted 3/9/16 , edited 3/9/16


Congratulations, you can identify a climate organization; although I do not understand why you would have any problems with the IPCC since it is an international committee that works on a volunteer basis for research lol? If they paid their researchers I would be more inclined to agree. & No, I actually have a formal education in climatology, 9 hours of my Geography minor to be exact, so while I may not write you a dissertation on various topics I at least have a decent general knowledge and am literate enough to get through actual published research so I don't have to take journalists arguments/interpretations. Go me.

As far as arguments for the other side, there simply is none rather you like it or not. Or not a scientifically validated or backed argument at any rate. Sort of like autism and vaccinations. Like I stated, the current point of contention is over the ice loss/gain, and the article I posted above goes over another point of contention that is more political then scientific.
188 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Sharon Hill, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/9/16 , edited 3/9/16
Yeah why dont you do some research on the IPCC and find out what there motives are. Once you realize that the global warming argument is political and not scientific then you can move on to more serious topics like solving world hunger and such. That's the problem with the political left, they think that global warming is more of a threat to our nation than radical islam. I have also heard that the ocean levels were going to rise decade after decade. Where is the rise? And when is the next deadline that is the point of no return for the issue.
188 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Sharon Hill, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/9/16 , edited 3/9/16
climate warming - government solution, tax, control and scaremonger, only we can save you...
climate cooling - government solution, tax, control and scaremonger, only we can save you...
climate stagnant - government solution, tax, control and scaremonger, only we can save you...
188 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / Sharon Hill, Penn...
Offline
Posted 3/9/16

Shishiku wrote:



Congratulations, you can identify a climate organization; although I do not understand why you would have any problems with the IPCC since it is an international committee that works on a volunteer basis for research lol? If they paid their researchers I would be more inclined to agree. & No, I actually have a formal education in climatology, 9 hours of my Geography minor to be exact, so while I may not write you a dissertation on various topics I at least have a decent general knowledge and am literate enough to get through actual published research so I don't have to take journalists arguments/interpretations. Go me.

As far as arguments for the other side, there simply is none rather you like it or not. Or not a scientifically validated or backed argument at any rate. Sort of like autism and vaccinations. Like I stated, the current point of contention is over the ice loss/gain, and the article I posted above goes over another point of contention that is more political then scientific.



Yeah why dont you do some research on the IPCC and find out what there motives are. Once you realize that the global warming argument is political and not scientific then you can move on to more serious topics like solving world hunger and such. That's the problem with the political left, they think that global warming is more of a threat to our nation than radical islam. I have also heard that the ocean levels were going to rise decade after decade. Where is the rise? And when is the next deadline that is the point of no return for the issue.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.