The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 49    Average: 3.4/5]
228 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 28631
Rating: 3.4
Category:
Date: 02/07/11 09:03 AM

228 Responses to Global Warming Skeptics Vs. Science [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of lisalezah
    lisalezah Female 18-29
    255 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:05 am
    Link: Global Warming Skeptics Vs. Science - Where do you stand, I-A-B?
  2. Profile photo of GeniusSolar
    GeniusSolar Male 13-17
    158 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:11 am
    UUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHH
    TO MUCH BRAIN
  3. Profile photo of AfroAussie
    AfroAussie Male 18-29
    73 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:16 am
    people who think global warming is a myth are morons, I didn`t need a chart to show me that.
  4. Profile photo of seetherage
    seetherage Male 18-29
    85 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:19 am
    hm... didn`t the EPA say two months ago, that new findings indicated that carbon monoxide/di production by us Humans are only a very small percentage of what is found to cause green house gases?

  5. Profile photo of Captn
    Captn Male 18-29
    31 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:21 am
    People like to forget that roughly 95% of greenhouse gas consists of water vapor.
  6. Profile photo of 0Sigma0
    0Sigma0 Female 30-39
    525 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:27 am
    Davymid can explain it much better than any picture.
  7. Profile photo of chimmeychang
    chimmeychang Male 30-39
    685 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:29 am
    I am by nature a skeptic. It`s not that i don`t trust science, I don`t trust people doing science. Not to say that scientist are evil or corrupt, and manipulate data to their own ends(which happens, as they are humans)but my lack of faith in scientist actually comes from understanding that we really don`t know the mechanisms that govern the universe. I have faith in the process of science, but not in all scientific findings. That being said, when looking at this question, I think its more important to look at what is at stake, and the motivation behind what we want to believe. Those that believe we may be orchestrating our own demise and seek to change that seem far more likable than those who say "what do you mean i can`t do what i want with no consequences." Sure they may be right, the universe may magically return ever altered substance back into its original form...but is it really worth the risk? and for what, to maintain a mostly hollow existence with materialistic valu
  8. Profile photo of paddy215
    paddy215 Male 18-29
    1677 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:30 am
    "people who think global warming is a myth are morons, I didn`t need a chart to show me that."

    Very few people say its a myth, people just disagree over whats causing it. If you can`t understand that then you are a moron.

    In my opinion graphs like this do your cause more harm than good, when somethings so ridiculously biased it can be pretty hard to take seriously.
  9. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:32 am
    @afroasia:

    Tell that to people in America, who are experiencing the worst snowfall in the last 100 years NATIONWIDE right now.
  10. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:33 am
    Also, I don`t think it`s a myth. Global climate change is real.

    The thing is, it would have happened anyway, regardless of what we are doing. We are only slightly adding to the effect, and it will not be enough to change the end result.
  11. Profile photo of ruthless1990
    ruthless1990 Female 18-29
    3001 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:37 am
    skeptic all the way
  12. Profile photo of Micktrex
    Micktrex Male 18-29
    141 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:38 am
    I`m standing on Mars, far away from all this bullpoo
  13. Profile photo of DeltaForce
    DeltaForce Male 18-29
    32 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:38 am
    True Captn- but water residence time in merely days(~1) compared to 50-100+ yrs for CO2 and and CH4. It`s science
  14. Profile photo of BrimstoneOne
    BrimstoneOne Male 30-39
    2229 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:40 am
    I`m siding the the science. Almost every instance of denial is funded by a corporation that has a vested interest in us people ignoring that we are the problem and that we keep buying what ever the sell us, lies included. 60 BILLION people on this world, You can`t expect me to believe that we`re not having an effect.
  15. Profile photo of Reggae_Dude
    Reggae_Dude Male 13-17
    73 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:42 am
    tl;dr
  16. Profile photo of Bullish
    Bullish Male 30-39
    108 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:43 am
    Skeptics vs science huh? Time will tell. I am skeptical as there are scientists who point out that our entire solar system is warming at similar rates. Possibly the friggin sun has something to do with it???? Think about the $$ to be made for upgrading, reorganizing and cap and trade. Scientists on both sides are funded via private and gov`t funding and can be coerced to give an opinion. I still say we must cut the emissions - it is not a bad thing but don`t act like there is no science supporting skeptics.
  17. Profile photo of rammo34
    rammo34 Male 18-29
    1083 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:44 am
    @BrimstoneOne
    60 billion? )-|
  18. Profile photo of Nlupu
    Nlupu Male 18-29
    229 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:46 am
    If people would just stop farting we would all be ok!
  19. Profile photo of Volsunga
    Volsunga Male 18-29
    1548 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:48 am
    The scientists` facts are correct, but bitching about the end of the world is inaccurate and dishonest. There`s no scientific conspiracy except to over-hype incomplete models to scare people into giving them funding so they can complete them. The people who are the actual liars are not scientists, but the "geoengineers" that tell you that they have plans to stop global warming. They can`t. What does stop it, however is, ironically, pumping CO2 into the lower atmosphere to promote the growth of algae.
    But seriously, why fight it? Even the worst possible scenarios are sea levels rising over a period of centuries (slower than buildings become obsolete, so cities flooding isn`t a problem). A few species that are evolutionary failures to begin with will go extinct (polar bears will be fine, since they do just as well in the taiga). Slightly more powerful weather patterns will develop (slower than the technology to keep people safe from them). There`s no real threat.
  20. Profile photo of DixxyRarr
    DixxyRarr Female 18-29
    2674 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:49 am
    I didn`t like that. It made me hate both sides.
    What I don`t get though, is why some people get so mad when others want to stop pollution? Global warming aside, don`t people understand that smart environmental planning is for the benefit of everyone, not JUST the libs/scientists/treehuggers/etc. etc.
  21. Profile photo of Vithooshan
    Vithooshan Male 18-29
    36 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:52 am
    no patience for ignorance
  22. Profile photo of Golkar
    Golkar Male 18-29
    391 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:55 am
    This post says it as clearly as it gets: Man-made CO2 emissions are driving climate change AT THIS TIME. They are not the only driving force, but yeah, there`s an effect. To not realize that we`re doing at least some harm to the world would be idiotic.
  23. Profile photo of madduck
    madduck Female 50-59
    7552 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:58 am
    firstly, climate change pleae- not global warming. Secondly, yes I go with the majority and feel this is a real problem. however- even if you are a sceptic, surely you do not think it a good idea for us to go on using finite resources, to destroy habitats and drive animals and indigenous people out for our own greed? Our lavish lifestyles are simply not sustainable- so we should stop- no argument about that one surely?
    Do you REALLY need plug in air fresheners for example. ( I hate those)
  24. Profile photo of IrishJesus
    IrishJesus Male 18-29
    483 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:59 am
    Yeah, I`m a skeptic. I`ve talked with professors and scientists on the issue, and the consensus is actually on the skeptic side. Most of them agree that we haven`t release NEARLY enough CO2 emissions to do the warming, and that about 97% is all ocean water CO2 emission. I`m not saying we shouldn`t develop now, cleaner technology, I`m just saying I won`t listen to a ex-vice president who came to the conclusion that we`re making a giant oven.
  25. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:00 am
    "It snows in winter, therefore global warming is a lie."

    No... it`s been predicted that one of the results of global warming is an increased rate of precipitation.

    Snow, it just so happens, is precipitation.
  26. Profile photo of green_batman
    green_batman Female 18-29
    728 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:07 am
    I`m sick of the political bias on both sides. Many environmentalists will change their story to make the data fit and many skeptics aren`t versed enough in science to understand the data or point out where the scientists are really making BS claims. I`ve heard things about last winter being colder and snowier because of global warming. I realize that global warming is supposed to be a long-term things that will not be very visible on the small scale, but then some of the people who support it turn its claims into pseudoscience by thinking it will be dramatic and that every little thing is a function of it, regardless of the logical flaws involved. What we need is unbiased research, but this is such a political hot button that it`s probably not going to happen.

    I do think that we should try to keep our air cleaner and try not to over-exploit our resources, but, as a skeptical person by nature, I have to say that I`m skeptical of the claim that humans are causing global warming.
  27. Profile photo of Volsunga
    Volsunga Male 18-29
    1548 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:08 am
    @Madduck
    Why do you hate air fresheners? We haven`t been using harmful aerosols in any American (and probably European) products since the `70s. Even then, they were killing the ozone, not contributing to the greenhouse effect. Most now are nothing but scented oils that get vaporized.
  28. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:12 am
    "Climate Change" has been hijacked by mouth breathers who renamed it "Global Warming" then every time it snows they claim proof that Global warming is a fallacy. Anyone who`s been alive for 30years has seen climate change first hand. Deniers merely pretend nothing has changed.
  29. Profile photo of mega_luis15
    mega_luis15 Male 18-29
    388 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:14 am
    tl;dr
  30. Profile photo of KwameAreeva
    KwameAreeva Male 70 & Over
    31 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:15 am
    funny how the presentation is skewed from the start by pitting "skeptics" against "scientists". as if the "skeptics" are unscientific. nobody is "for" pollution.
  31. Profile photo of freddyferret
    freddyferret Male 40-49
    11741 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:18 am
    It doesn`t matter, the world is going to end in 2012 anyway.
  32. Profile photo of DomTheDaring
    DomTheDaring Male 18-29
    70 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:18 am
    @ IrishJesus: Let me get this straight. You`re from the south, and you`ve talked with "professors and scientists" on the issue? Reeeally? Professors of what, exactly? And what kind of "scientists"? (And no, the kids making baking soda volcanoes at the elementary school science fair don`t count.)
  33. Profile photo of geppo
    geppo Male 18-29
    52 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:23 am
    TLDR
  34. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    32756 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:25 am
    The right-hand side of this infographic is full of poo. Where does it once mention solar cycles? Which is, you know, the cause of ALL weather on Earth? The Sun!

    Until this video is explained I remain a skeptic.
  35. Profile photo of furryblob
    furryblob Male 18-29
    574 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:27 am
    Don`t argue with thermometers.
  36. Profile photo of dang007
    dang007 Male 30-39
    596 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:28 am
    "A thickening layer of carbon dioxide pollution.."

    Good grief who wrote this?
  37. Profile photo of DixxyRarr
    DixxyRarr Female 18-29
    2674 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:32 am
    Volsunga: I think she doesn`t like the ones that plug into the wall, because they waste electricity.
  38. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36643 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:32 am
    I`m tired of being nagged about this.
    North America & Europe have cut back as much as we can.

    Until the highly populated "emerging" nations that relly mostly on coal with NO emission standards are brought into check, {China, India etc} there`s just nothing we can do. So quit nagging the developed nations.

    I`m more concerned over the plastic-island floating in the ocean from all the bottles and bags we throw into the oceans every day.
  39. Profile photo of fiizok
    fiizok Male 40-49
    591 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:36 am
    Once again, I have to side with the 97% of experts who say that man-made climate change is real.
  40. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:43 am
    Tell that to people in America, who are experiencing the worst snowfall in the last 100 years NATIONWIDE right now.

    Severe changes in weather...but not at all related to climate change, no, not at all, not in the slightest, isn`t happening, can`t happen, no, not at all, never.
  41. Profile photo of Jowsh
    Jowsh Male 18-29
    1237 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:49 am
    Denying the existence of global warming is just ridiculous.
  42. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:50 am
    North America & Europe have cut back as much as we can.
    ------------
    So long as neighborhood housewives drive themselves to jazzersize in their Hummers the quote above is untrue.
  43. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:53 am
    Until the highly populated "emerging" nations that relly mostly on coal with NO emission standards are brought into check, {China, India etc} there`s just nothing we can do. So quit nagging the developed nations.

    That`s one of the elephants in the room.

    If the UK suddenly stopped all internal combustion engines and jet engines and fossil fuel power stations, it would only be about 10 years before the continuing increases in emissions from China alone outweighed the reduction from the UK in this impossible scenario.

    To be blunt, they`re the problem.

    I`m convinced that humanity is worsening climate change. Given how bad it has been in the past, that`s a genuine cause for concern. We could potentially unbalance it enough to really screw ourselves.

    But there`s no point in some countries skimping while others continue to worsen their pollution.
  44. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:01 am
    I am in favour of pushing cleaner energy sources, though, including from taxes to a reasonable degree. Firstly, fossil fuels are not infinite and what`s left is increasingly difficult and expensive to extract. Secondly, it`s really not a good idea to have your civilisation dependent on countries hostile to it.

    What narks me is waste. For example, solar power in the UK, especial photovoltaic, is ridiculously impractical. At best, it would take at least 50 years to generate enough electricity to recoup the cost of the panels...which is longer than the life of the panels. That`s a very generous estimate - many estimates are never because you`d get a better return from putting the money in savings.

    The government is spending shiploads of public money paying for the panels and installation. Money that could be spent on developing renewable power that would work here, like wave and tidal.
  45. Profile photo of collegebound
    collegebound Male 18-29
    3745 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:10 am
    ""North America & Europe have cut back as much as we can.

    ------------
    So long as neighborhood housewives drive themselves to jazzersize in their Hummers the quote above is untrue."

    ^

    "Tell that to people in America, who are experiencing the worst snowfall in the last 100 years NATIONWIDE right now."

    we are? well damn...
  46. Profile photo of mst3k
    mst3k Male 18-29
    79 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:11 am
    here`s the bottom line, i think the government has other technology that doesn`t even need fuel or what ever produces "C02." why would they release that technology and stop making TONS of money in the fossil fuel industry? i think its a scam all around. but thats just me.
  47. Profile photo of MrTwidget
    MrTwidget Male 30-39
    795 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:15 am
    I`m sure global warming is happening, but isn`t it true that Earth naturally follows a cycle of temperature changes? These types of fluctuations are always going on. Perhaps we are speeding up the process with our pollutants, yes, but how can we be sure we are not just speeding up the inevitable anyways?
  48. Profile photo of meepmaker
    meepmaker Male 30-39
    6694 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:17 am
    I call shenanigans.
  49. Profile photo of taylor_stone
    taylor_stone Male 30-39
    2688 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:18 am
    Anyone who has watched the series called How the Earth Was Born can easily discredit most of the findings involved in Global Warming research. All the climate changes are easily explained by typical cycles that the planet has been going through since it was created.

    In the beginning, this was a ball of molten rock and it just HAPPENED to get hit by a meteor, which created the moon. This massive snowstorms we`ve been seeing in the US is just proof that those 4 or 5 years we went without a lot of snow are coming back to bite us. There isnt a single place on earth that can`t claim they`ve seen some form of bizarre weather pattern at SOME point. Its nature, and its NOT man caused...
  50. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:22 am
    doesnt change what crazy people think
  51. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:32 am
    "Anyone who`s been alive for 30years has seen climate change first hand."

    Yes. I remember when summers were hotter and it rarely snowed. (here in the south)
  52. Profile photo of Pennybored
    Pennybored Male 18-29
    13 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:34 am
    Studies show the earth is warming up and it`s due to CO2. However the CO2 we produce artifically is hardly anything compared to how much CO2 is produced collectively by every other animal on the planet. So even if we stopped producing CO2 entirely, it would make little difference to climate change. Statistically mankind is not the cause of global warming, it is a natural process. So if that`s the case the real question is, why would scientific bodies, be it independant or government or whatever, try to convince us it`s mankinds fault?
  53. Profile photo of IRockYeah
    IRockYeah Male 40-49
    2619 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:37 am
    Bollocks
  54. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:39 am
    So if that`s the case the real question is, why would scientific bodies, be it independant or government or whatever, try to convince us it`s mankinds fault?
    ---------
    Because the worlds scientists have gotten together to screw with your simple mind.
  55. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:43 am
    What madest meant to say, was "to improve scientific funding on things like alternative energy, and thus making it easier for them all to get funding increases."
  56. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36643 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:45 am
    "Tell that to people in America, who are experiencing the worst snowfall in the last 100 years NATIONWIDE right now."


    There`s a record "something" every 100 years. Last year as mild, this year it snowed. And it`s only snowing in a few states. Here in San Diego... lovely and sunny. A tad bit warmer than usual.

    so global warming is the cause of both hot and cold weather ? make up your minds Science Guys!
  57. Profile photo of Dr4k
    Dr4k Male 18-29
    575 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:46 am
    I`m going to go ahead and believe in global climate change. What with the majority of scientists on earth backing it. Also I`m a follower of the "better safe than sorry" line of logic.
  58. Profile photo of chimmeychang
    chimmeychang Male 30-39
    685 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:47 am
    If you are too lazy to read something, why bother commenting that you are too lazy to read something? I simply cannot grasp that feeling people get to express their bad qualities.
  59. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:49 am
    Also, plants soak up oxygen, and produce CO2.
    --------------
    Plants soak up C02 and produce oxygen dimwit.
  60. Profile photo of Volsunga
    Volsunga Male 18-29
    1548 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:50 am
    "Also, plants soak up oxygen, and produce CO2.

    KILL THE AMAZON OMG IT`S KILLING US! ;)"

    You got that ass backwards, man. However the Amazon DOES produce more methane and other greenhouse gasses than it converts CO2 into O2. We would be better off without it from a purely "global warming" viewpoint.
  61. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:53 am
    @madest: Yeah that`s right. WTF I got too excited hahaha.

    Post deleted for dumbassedness.
  62. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:54 am
    Here how bout this.

    Humans soak up oxygen and release CO2.

    OMG KILL THE PEOPLE THEY ARE KILLING US! lol
  63. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:57 am
    @volsunga:

    Thanks for showing that my frak up produced SOMETHING relevant.

    Embarrassed.
  64. Profile photo of aquaman1227
    aquaman1227 Male 18-29
    683 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:57 am
    I should participate in these arguments since I`m majoring in Meteorology but, hey, I`m too lazy right now. Global warming is real, there`s my two cents.
  65. Profile photo of SilverThread
    SilverThread Male 30-39
    3431 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:57 am
    I don`t contest that the climate is changing. My contention is the idea that the climate would ever remain stable. That does not happen. The climate is in a constant state of flux moving in a cyclical and predictable pattern and just like during the spring time thaw on a seasonal level, we are experiencing a thaw on a climatological level too.

    We are still experiencing an Ice Age.

    I do believe that humans are altering out planet, there is no mistaking that, the contention I have is to what degree we are responsible, more importantly, global warming via greenhouse gasses might actually be staving off a glacial advance (global cooling). Take a look at the eastern half of the United States. All that snow out yonder is making life mighty hard, now imagine that sticking around all year.

    Glacial advances are *inevitable*. Global warming is our window of opportunity to prepare for the next time there is a 2 km thick sheet of ice over the Northern Hemisphere.
  66. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:02 pm
    @silverthread:

    Best retort yet. Bravo.

    @aquaman:

    James Spann disagrees with you.
  67. Profile photo of RevWubby
    RevWubby Male 30-39
    64 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:05 pm
    "Record snowfall disproves climate change" is equivalent to "There is ice in my freezer, so the air conditioning is working". Weather != Climate, dumbass!
  68. Profile photo of ragebot
    ragebot Male 18-29
    32 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:06 pm
    Okay Skeptics, if you`re so sure of yourselves, answer me this: What could be the downside of attempting to reduce humanity`s impact on the biosphere? Someone besides the oil companies might make a lot of money? How horrible.
  69. Profile photo of Steelgrid
    Steelgrid Male 30-39
    2700 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:09 pm
    Real simple analogy:

    Think of a glass bong, or the inside of a car that gets smoked in alot, or even a house. How fast and how much does that change color due to residue buildup.

    Our earth is not so different. Its not like the pollution goes out into space, it collects here.
  70. Profile photo of SlimPickins
    SlimPickins Male 18-29
    120 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:12 pm
    lets see. it is i-a-b, so where are the comments about how this is all the dumbass rednecks causing this, hurr hurr hurr.
  71. Profile photo of darkgear6
    darkgear6 Male 70 & Over
    1378 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:13 pm
    *fart* what.
  72. Profile photo of Steelgrid
    Steelgrid Male 30-39
    2700 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:13 pm
    What is really sad is that if somehow, someone finds the perfect scrubber design, or cheap enery with no pollution, and suddenly its cheap enough anyone can use it. The climate chhange that will come from the reduction of these chemicals in the air would result in massive animal dieoffs and weather anomolys. We are screwed no matter how we do things.
  73. Profile photo of Maxables
    Maxables Male 70 & Over
    51 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:13 pm
    I lie somewhere between these two. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. That`s a demonstrable fact. However, I`m not convinced that humans are causing any significant acceleration to our already naturally warming planet.
  74. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:20 pm
    First off, we need to quit calling it global warming, because it`s not an accurate description and causes dumbasses to think that it must not be happening.

    Secondly, I`m for more CO2 and higher temperatures. When these go up we get mega-flora/fauna as well as more diverse ecosystems. It may not be the best plan for what we have now, but I know I want to see some megatheriums and terrorbirds.
  75. Profile photo of bigbaddave
    bigbaddave Male 40-49
    214 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:20 pm
    Climate change is real and happening... and been going on for millions of years. While I think we as humans shouldn`t go and purposely do things to hurt the environment, I don`t believe that we have caused so much damage to have caused a real change in how the earth naturally does things.

    Global warming and cooling has happened repeatedly since the beginning of time and will continue to do so until our sun starts turning into a red giant and global warming will be terminal for the earth.

    Every time I see the term "a consensus of scientist", I laugh a little.. in reality its only a consensus of scientist that agree. For every scientist that agrees with the theory of global warming, there is a scientist that will disagree with it. The only consensus is that there is no actual consensus.
  76. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:25 pm
    Secondly, I`m for more CO2 and higher temperatures. When these go up we get mega-flora/fauna as well as more diverse ecosystems. It may not be the best plan for what we have now, but I know I want to see some megatheriums and terrorbirds.

    ^^^^^^THIS!^^^^^^
  77. Profile photo of canusuck
    canusuck Male 30-39
    789 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:31 pm
    well, I know emphatically that my cats breath smells like cat food-the connection is there and it is undeniable
  78. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:38 pm
    We need to kill all volcanoes they`re not abiding to the kyoto protocol.
  79. Profile photo of McGovern1981
    McGovern1981 Male 30-39
    14268 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:39 pm
    That and China.
  80. Profile photo of Volsunga
    Volsunga Male 18-29
    1548 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:45 pm
    @ragebot
    The measure of reducing humanity`s impact before the technology to do so is mature would cause an enormous burden on the economy that everybody would feel. If you haven`t noticed, it`s those "big, evil oil companies" that are the biggest investors in clean and renewable energy. Why wouldn`t they be? They stand the most to gain from more efficient technologies. That`s why almost all of them have changed their names from "oil companies" to "energy companies".
  81. Profile photo of ha1b
    ha1b Male 13-17
    72 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 12:54 pm
    tldnr
  82. Profile photo of splurbyburbl
    splurbyburbl Male 30-39
    2798 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:05 pm
    I think if we were to systematically murder 90% of the world population, resources and such will be able to play catch up.

    I say we think about killing everyone in Africa first, only because most of the countries there are useless. Then we pick out the next useless countries and so on.

    Ready... GO
  83. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:06 pm
    @volsunga:

    So that`s why they buy more efficient ideas, patent them, and lock it away so they can pull it out next time the people get pissy?
  84. Profile photo of GHudston
    GHudston Male 18-29
    182 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:07 pm
    I don`t care which side of the fence is correct, we still need to find an alternative power supply that doesn`t involve burning up a finite resource that will ultimately run out. Climate change or not, that -is- a problem that we need to solve sooner rather than later and it has the added benefit of killing two birds with one stone; if, it turns out, that there actually is a second bird to kill.
  85. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:19 pm
    "we still need to find an alternative power supply that doesn`t involve burning up a finite resource that will ultimately run out."

    You realize Oil comes from dead things right?

    I was not aware there was a time in history things stopped dying.
  86. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:20 pm
    Auburn, you do realize that we use oil faster than dead things are converted to fuels?
  87. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:22 pm
    There is no scientific consensus that oil is from fossils.
  88. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:32 pm
    @madest, from fossils isn`t the best wording, but hydrocarbons, which are what most fuels are, generally come from living sources. The more complex ones that we dig up require massive amounts of pressure to make, so these are generally found underground where large organic deposits are found. The deposits wouldn`t necessarily be fossils but they were definitely alive at one point. Fossil in the term fossil fuels refers more to the age of the material and not the actual material.
  89. Profile photo of FAKEBACON
    FAKEBACON Male 18-29
    586 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:35 pm
    Zzzz
  90. Profile photo of SPrinkZ
    SPrinkZ Male 18-29
    2279 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:38 pm
    How is Africa useless?...If you only knew what Africa contributes to the world, and has, and did.
  91. Profile photo of Angelmassb
    Angelmassb Male 18-29
    15511 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:40 pm
    So, we agree that we disagree?
  92. Profile photo of SPrinkZ
    SPrinkZ Male 18-29
    2279 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:41 pm
    @Bigbaddave

    Okay. You realize when that volcano went off in Iceland that we actually had lower CO2 emissions because we stopped plane travel in Europe for a while? A volcano puts out less than us on an AVERAGE DAY. We clearly are doing more than Earth `intended`.
  93. Profile photo of Volsunga
    Volsunga Male 18-29
    1548 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:43 pm
    @auburnjunky
    As far as I`m aware, energy companies don`t do that. The corporate espionage between companies forces them to put new things in production as soon as they`re viable so they can get some profit off of it before a competitor reverse engineers it. The problem is, the average person has no idea what a viable technology looks like. That`s where the conspiracy theories come in. The best example is in hydrogen fuel technology. It`s so remarkably inefficient to produce Hydrogen fuel, but the public got word of it and had a collective orgasm just because they`ve been told that fossil fuels are bad and anything else would be better. A few companies kept Hydrogen pet projects around because people would pay them for it, but it`s not a serious investment.

    In almost every case, corporations make the most money by doing what`s most efficient and best for the consumer.
  94. Profile photo of krazzle
    krazzle Female 13-17
    10 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:47 pm
    TL, DR
  95. Profile photo of green_btrfly
    green_btrfly Female 18-29
    751 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:53 pm
    TL;DR

    boring
  96. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 1:57 pm
    Is having no attention span a badge of honor? There`s really no other reason to let us know that you didn`t read the article. If you have nothing significant to contribute to the discussion, then don`t bother. I read the comments for intellectual and entertaining posts. 4 letters and a semicolon doesn`t really help alleviate my boredom.
  97. Profile photo of 42467
    42467 Male 18-29
    743 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:09 pm
    I believe it`s something we SHOULD be concerned about, But I don`t believe it`s as bad as it`s put out to be.
  98. Profile photo of Crucible
    Crucible Male 18-29
    1815 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:12 pm
    Hey kingpong, your comment was TL;DR
  99. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:15 pm
    Thank you crucible, your comment was topically relevant and humorous.
  100. Profile photo of manorrd
    manorrd Male 30-39
    2372 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:17 pm
    Looks like the warming alarmists are still trying to hammer that round peg into that square hole...
  101. Profile photo of jendrian
    jendrian Male 18-29
    2516 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:17 pm
    @SPrinkZ volcanos actually release way way more than mankind, we`re talking about a pretty high ratio (see here)

    But that`s not the point, the point is we`re adding extra CO2 into the atmosphere, thus making the process more cumbersome for natural cycles, which results in warming. I`m still a little skeptical about the "alarmism" shown in many places, but not about the fact itself
  102. Profile photo of PringleMan
    PringleMan Female 13-17
    1356 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:17 pm
    why can`t we just say "God did it."?
  103. Profile photo of manorrd
    manorrd Male 30-39
    2372 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:26 pm
    Lol at the word "consensus"
  104. Profile photo of Imikulate
    Imikulate Male 13-17
    12 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:47 pm
    I don`t think we should be going all green gungho because global warming due to humans will destroy the world. But there are plenty of good reasons to "go green"

    Less reliance on fuels that will run out, ultimately cheaper, mainstream-ing of electric cars would get a dangerous and highly explosive fluid out of peoples hands and off every other block. Also, say what you will about temperature but pouring exhaust and chemicals and harmful chemicals in the air and water isn`t very healthy for us...
  105. Profile photo of Hawcon
    Hawcon Male 18-29
    44 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:57 pm
    So what if global warming isn`t caused by humans? We should be trying to make a change anyway, because CO2 emissions isn`t really contributing to peoples` general health. For example, would you want to stand in the middle of a highly trafficed crossroad surrounded by el-cars or noisy, smoke-puffing SUVs?
  106. Profile photo of Jade_Phoenix
    Jade_Phoenix Female 18-29
    407 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 2:59 pm
    TL;DR
  107. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 3:00 pm
    "because CO2 emissions isn`t really contributing to peoples` general health."

    If we don`t create CO2, the plants will suffocate and die.

    There. Redeemed. (those who saw earlier will know lol)
  108. Profile photo of ScottSerious
    ScottSerious Male 18-29
    5316 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 3:03 pm
    tl;dr
  109. Profile photo of Hawcon
    Hawcon Male 18-29
    44 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 3:04 pm
    @auburnjunky
    The plants did well long before humans got on the track
  110. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 3:27 pm
    I`m going to repeat something I said earlier because apparently it was ignored. With high CO2 levels and warmer temperatures we get more diverse ecosystems and bigger plants and animals. This is what happened during the late Cretaceous period and immediately before our Ice Age. Then all the cool stuff died off and we get left with all the boring ones, like squirrels and domestic cats. We need to quit thinking so exclusively about what`s good for us and start thinking about what`s good for the biosphere. I say kick it up a notch and torch everything so we get to this better earth. Maybe humanity`s ecological role is to facilitate this process, did anyone ever think of that? No, because y`all are selfish bastards who want to keep what`s good for you, regardless of the cost.
  111. Profile photo of slayer50515
    slayer50515 Male 18-29
    988 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 3:53 pm
    "The plants did well long before humans got on the track"
    Zing.
    We wouldn`t have a rise if the plants "ate" it all
  112. Profile photo of W2
    W2 Male 13-17
    244 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 4:28 pm
    1.Scroll down to last sentance.
    2.Read last sentance.
    3.Come with conclusion.
    Damn.
  113. Profile photo of charcat
    charcat Female 18-29
    25 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 4:31 pm
    scientists are biased and consensus is not equal to fact.
  114. Profile photo of ScubaFett
    ScubaFett Male 18-29
    176 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 4:51 pm
    I think everyone who read this came out of it with the same opinion they started off with.....
  115. Profile photo of Quackor
    Quackor Male 18-29
    2856 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 4:52 pm
    global warming believers think the world is going to end in 50 years due to climate change. that puts them right next to the 2012 dumbasses
  116. Profile photo of rammo34
    rammo34 Male 18-29
    1083 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 5:01 pm
    tl;dr

    There ain`t sh*t we can do about it anyway.
  117. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 5:02 pm
    global warming believers think the world is going to end in 50 years due to climate change. that puts them right next to the 2012 dumbasses

    I hate to break it to you, but "My big red book of silly propaganda" is not a reliable source of information.

    There may be a few nutjobs claiming that the world is going to end in 50 years, but they are nutjobs. It isn`t a mainstream view.

    Even in an apocalyptic greenhouse scenario, the world doesn`t end. All species become extinct, but Earth carries on regardless.
  118. Profile photo of TysonRP
    TysonRP Male 13-17
    312 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 5:13 pm
    I`m one of those people who realizes that to some degree Global Warming is happening, but doesn`t see it as all that big of an issue.
    Is it important to help out the Earth? Yeah.
    Are there way more important things going on in the world today? Yes
  119. Profile photo of Discobiscuit
    Discobiscuit Male 18-29
    542 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 5:18 pm
    I believe global climate change is influenced by human activity. I also believe it`s massively over-hyped, but not with bad intentions.. Consequences can be very real, for much later generations.
  120. Profile photo of fivezones
    fivezones Male 40-49
    1021 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 5:35 pm
    Ever since scientist became political activists, I no longer know what I can trust or believe.

  121. Profile photo of SwayzeCrazy4
    SwayzeCrazy4 Male 13-17
    234 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 5:37 pm
    tl;dr
  122. Profile photo of FrigginMo
    FrigginMo Male 18-29
    266 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 6:06 pm
    Discobiscuit, you feel that consequences will fall in the later than nearer future. How does that make it any less important? If someone told me I`d be hit by a car and die in 5 minutes, I`d flip. If someone told me that car would hit me in 5 years, I`d still flip. More importantly, I`d flip and make sure I did whatever possible to avoid said event. How is this "overhype," then?
  123. Profile photo of lerie
    lerie Female 18-29
    1265 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 6:19 pm
    Climate change is real. It`s also influenced by human activity. But not only by human activity.
  124. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 6:28 pm
    "Are there way more important things going on in the world today? Yes"

    What could possibly be more important than our environment changing? We do kind of rely on it for food and a habitable place to live. Plus polar bears are f`ing awesome!
  125. Profile photo of GHudston
    GHudston Male 18-29
    182 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 6:30 pm
    @auburnjunkie

    Are you trying to be funny or are you really that ignorant?
  126. Profile photo of inaria
    inaria Female 18-29
    1515 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 6:42 pm
    Too little too late unfortunately. Soon we`ll have Malaria infected mosquitoes in Canada.
  127. Profile photo of CoyoteKing
    CoyoteKing Male 18-29
    2988 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 6:46 pm
    tl;dr
  128. Profile photo of dumbassbufet
    dumbassbufet Male 13-17
    75 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:07 pm
    i hate the ignorant pooes that simply brush off the ACTUAL data
  129. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:12 pm
    @ghud:

    It was a response to something I said earlier. Those who saw understand.

    Pay no mind.
  130. Profile photo of Trojan
    Trojan Male 18-29
    511 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:13 pm
    @auburnjunky You sound as stupid as Michelle Bachmann did trying to explain away CO2 levels. Oh wait...

    auburnjunky
    Male, 30-39, Southern US

    Yep, that explains it.
  131. Profile photo of ggolbez
    ggolbez Male 18-29
    1933 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:16 pm
    The scientific community is no longer even discussing whether or not some type of climate change is happening. How much human affect it is, or if it is part of a natural cycle, I am not sure they have settled on that. But it is happening. The only people disputing that are idiots. They believe what they want to believe, they don`t listen to facts. Where as scientists only believe what the facts tell them, not what their misconceptions force them to. That`s why religious people, and those against global warming, fight so hard to protect their viewpoint. They need to defend it, shelter it. If it was true, it should be able to stand against any criticism. But it doesn`t.
  132. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:39 pm
    @trojan:

    If you would read the god damn comments, you would see that I was fuseeking around.
  133. Profile photo of alikabul
    alikabul Male 18-29
    695 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:39 pm
    I`ll set it up like this...

    if global warming is a scam we have two options - "do something" and "do nothing about it".
    Whatever option we choose here we`re 100% good.

    Fine and dandy... BUT

    if global warming is NOT a scam:
    "do something" = good
    "do nothing about it" = disaster.

    So if we pick "do nothing about it" we have a 50% chance of not f`ing up the world, but if we pick "do something" then in both cases we`ll be 100% GOOD.

    It`s simple logic.
  134. Profile photo of djlazar
    djlazar Male 30-39
    185 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:41 pm
    When I was in grade school, the big scare of the time was the coming ice age and the impending shortage of water. That was in the late 70s. Wonder what the big scare is going to be in another 20 years?
  135. Profile photo of bigbangbilly
    bigbangbilly Male 13-17
    698 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:47 pm
    The impending shortage of water is still a threat.
  136. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:48 pm
    After this harsh winter, If any of you still believe in `global warming` you`re complete morons.

    NOAA foretasted a warmer than usual winter this year, Instead we`ve had one of the coldest on record with record snowfalls in the northern hemisphere and record rain and flooding in Australia in the southern hemisphere.

    I highly suggest you all go watch the Penn & Teller: Bullpoo! show on the scam of "Global Warming".
  137. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:52 pm
    bigbangbilly: We are likely to have record flooding this spring from all the snow melt, A quick glance at the drought index map shows few areas of D4 or D3 drought and the overall index country wide has improved greatly the past two years.
  138. Profile photo of kingpong
    kingpong Male 18-29
    639 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 7:54 pm
    CrakrJak, how about Climate Change, instead? Because that`s the accepted term now, since there are significant climate changes and more extreme weather patterns than usual.
  139. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 8:00 pm
    "The impending shortage of water is still a threat."

    Especially since the ice caps are melting (and the glaciers, which are both fresh water).
  140. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 8:06 pm
    kingpong: Ah, The name change game... It`s just a pile of crap by a different name, and it still stinks.

    The so called `consensus` is changing, Many are now worried that we could be entering another minimum solar cycle. `Cold` is a lot worse than `Warm`, when it comes to the climate. I really do wish that it was warming, It would be better for farming, livestock, and humans as well.

    Not to mention my car, Which is `plowed in` with over two foot of snow right now. :-(
  141. Profile photo of mitha
    mitha Male 18-29
    269 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 8:23 pm
    CrakrJak:
    confusing the terms weather and climate is the first reason you should stop calling people morons. The second: We are talking about mid-term effects here. Just because we get 1 cold year this doesn`t mean the whole theory is crap.


    On the topic at large: I believe most of the scientists involved with this will agree that there are HUGE gaps in their knowledge. And that much of the now accepted facts may be wrong. Thats how science works. But the essential point was pointed out by alikabul: Without being certain of our non-involvment, the risk is simply too high. NOT acting would spell certain doom for 90% of mankind. Not that I care, the internet has made me a misanthrope after all.
  142. Profile photo of CosmicKarma
    CosmicKarma Female 13-17
    32 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 8:43 pm
    This is assuming that neither side stands to make any money out of saying what they`re saying...
  143. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:08 pm
    mitha: NOT acting would spell certain doom for 90% of mankind.

    That`s the same scaremongering we`ve heard for a hundred years or more about many things. Not too very long ago in the 60`s the scares were `New Ice Age` and `Over Population`. Science just knew for a fact that were were cooling and knew for a fact that our planet couldn`t support 5 billion people (We have over 7 billion people now, and now it`s `Global Warming`)

    The sooner you learn that people can invent `facts` out of thin air and call them science and scare you into taking drastic actions that will enrich their buddies, The better off you will and the rest of the world will be.
  144. Profile photo of axeman929
    axeman929 Male 30-39
    195 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:15 pm
    Meh, I am in Indiana, could use some warming. And finally I just do not care. Scarcity will rule the day and decide the issue many many years after I am long gone.
  145. Profile photo of handys003
    handys003 Male 50-59
    2402 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:35 pm
    Global warming is occurring. However not all due toward man alone. It`s a natural change that occurs over millenniums. It will happen eventually with, or without us. There is nothing no one, or any society can do about it even if you killed off the human race. Get used to it. It`s another gimmick to get corporations to make profit off peoples fears.

    Soil samples pulled from the Arctic seafloor has shown that global warming has occurred four times before, and then the earth cooled four times before man showed his face on the planet.
  146. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:58 pm
    Quite a lot to get through here, but I hope some might find my input interesting (kinda the point of this website). Sorry in advance for the incoming spam of multiple posts. To set the scene, I`m a professional geologist working in the oil industry, PhD, taught a few undergraduate courses on palaeoecology (climate changes in the past). Trying my best not to be an ass here, not "telling it like it is", just stating where I`m coming from, hopefully some food for thought.

    Fact: Earth`s climate has changed dramatically in the past. In the Mid-Cretaceous period (c. 90 million years ago) geological evidence suggests we had tropical conditions on earth from pole to pole, with no polar icecaps. Conversely, just before the Cambrian at about 650 milllion years, we had the inverse, a "Snowball Earth". If you could step back in time and observe our planet from a satellite, it would look like a pearl. Icecaps all the way to the equator.
  147. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:58 pm
    So, Earth`s climate changes, mainly due to evolution of various organisms on our planet through geological time through the gasses they spew into the atmosphere, though volcanic activity and solar activity have an effect too. However, what we are seeing, from the best of our scientific research (anyone got any better ideas how to advance as a species?) is that the RATE of climate change we are seeing right now is unprecendented. Nature has an effect on our climate. So do 7 Billion humans. Debate if you like how MUCH of an effect people are having on our climate, but to say there is no effect is retarded. Retarded in the extreme.
  148. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 9:59 pm
    Climate Change Deniers, to me, are in the same camp as Evolution Deniers. They`re mostly scientifically illiterate, deeply religious, and far-right conservative. They like to preach that there`s some kind of controversy going on in the scientific community between the deniers and the scientific consensus, which there is not. It`s the "Teach the Controversy!" bullsh*t all over again.
  149. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:00 pm
    There is no controversy. Just as the vast majority of professional scientists agree that Evolution is real, 97% of professional scientists agree that man-made Climate Change is real. . And of the 3% of scientists that remain unconvinced, the same study showed that their average scientific expertise was far below that of their colleagues, based on publication and citation rates, which is the standard measure of the quality of any individual scientist.
  150. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:00 pm
    Having said all that, I do NOT believe that simply capping fossil fuels in western nations is the answer. As Angilion alluded to earlier, other powers are rising, mainly India and China (for now). China alone is building coal-fired power stations at the rate of one per week to supply energy to their 1.3 Billion population. Of what use is a few million people in the US, the UK, France or Germany installing solar panels in favour of oil-fired heaters in the face of such overwhelming carbon-pumping? It`s a stick thrown into the river (which costs us, doesn`t cost the river) in the hope of stopping the torrential oncoming flood. The real problem is simple, it`s glaring, and the remedy is unpleasant. Too many f*cking people on the planet right now. It`s simply not sustainable.
  151. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:01 pm
    Also, surely securing energy (renewable or not) is preferential to relying on oil from the Middle East, which mostly hates you America. Under every scenario, doesn`t it make sense to reduce reliance on what makes your civilization function from the Middle East?
  152. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:01 pm
    As for those saying that oil comes from dead things, so we have lots, you are hugely and retardedly over-simplifying the science of oil and gas extraction. If you think there`s vast deposits of hydrocarbons just waiting to be tapped because lots of stuff died there, please go and tell BP. Cause if they had your expert scientific knowledge in advance, they might have gone to find your easier sources of oil rather than drill to depths we`ve never done before, just to satiate the beast. You know, instead of f*cking up the ocean. We`re pushing the technological envelope every day, and if you think the oil companies are just playing coy, with tons of hydrocarbon reserves just up their sleeve, waiting to be played? You`re wrong. Oil is money, and money today is better than money tomorrow. Believe me, if there was easy oil, it would be out there by now. Skepticism is easy. Science is hard. And the people that find your oil are scientists.
  153. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:13 pm
    Also (still on a roll), I can understand why (some, I said some) right-wing Conservative religious Christians rail against gay marraige, marijuana use, Stem Cell research, sensible abortions, Evolution is a lie perpetrated by leftist commie hippies, lax gun control, the earth`s only 6000 years old, etc. I get that. It`s more or less in your Bible. I can at least see where you`re coming from. However, I never understood why the same people I described above are all about denial that we`re having an effect on the global climate. Not a challenge, just an observation. Where in the Bible does it say "Oppose Climate Change, in all its forms".

    Never understood that one.
  154. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:13 pm
    Sh*t, now I have to ban myself for spamming. Damn.
  155. Profile photo of jbwhite
    jbwhite Male 18-29
    1292 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:32 pm
    Go Packers! oh wait wrong post.

    @davymid
    information and education is not spam
  156. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:40 pm
    Good God Davy!
  157. Profile photo of ukulelemike
    ukulelemike Male 40-49
    129 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:41 pm
    @davymid: The reason we Christians don`t hold to the man-made global warming thing, or at least, the terrible, planet-destroying effects purported, is because the Bible says that the seasons, all of them, will continue as long as the earth remains, and according to that same Bible it won`t be global warming that destroys the earth, but the Lord Himself, and not for at least 1007 years.
  158. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 10:47 pm
    Good God Davy!
    I know. I should be shot.

    And Ukelele, thanks, I had no idea where that notion came from.
  159. Profile photo of Aquaeous
    Aquaeous Male 18-29
    425 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:13 pm
    This is one of the best inforgraphics I`ve seen on here. Sadly the media still like to portray it as a 50/50 divide in the scientific community, rather than the overwhelming consensus that it is.
  160. Profile photo of Aquaeous
    Aquaeous Male 18-29
    425 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:23 pm
    "After this harsh winter, If any of you still believe in `global warming` you`re complete morons."

    Or perhaps it`s slightly moronic to use local conditions as an argument of what is happening globally. The World Met Organisation recorded another net increase in GLOBAL temperatures this past year, even amidst the locally harsh winters in the UK and parts of America.

    There are a number of potential explanations for this, but for someone who is suggesting that Penn & Teller know more about climate science than climate scientists, I really don`t think it`s worth the effort of trying to convince you. Good day sir.

  161. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:32 pm
    "even amidst the locally harsh winters in the UK and ALL of America and Southern Asia and Russia and western Europe."

    Edited for accuracy. Record snow occurrences in these places this winter. I wonder how it is gonna be for the southern hemisphere?
  162. Profile photo of phoneybone
    phoneybone Male 18-29
    1744 posts
    February 7, 2011 at 11:39 pm
    why`s the "scientific consensus" the pro-warming side. there are plenty of scientist on the other side too, that`s why it`s still a DEBATE!
  163. Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 12:05 am
    what kind of terrible "science" believes it has proved something yet answer so many questions with "well we can`t explain that part...." or "we think that`s just an anomaly".
  164. Profile photo of DOR
    DOR Male 50-59
    93 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 12:15 am
    This isn`t a scientific debate; it is a political debate. When you realize that, the rest falls into place.

  165. Profile photo of handys003
    handys003 Male 50-59
    2402 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 1:24 am
    @davymid
    LOL! Professor went on a diatribe. Anyhow Davy 2 things.

    1) Are you that geologist who was with Dan Rather on TV about a year ago talking the basically the same thing with core samples from the Arctic ocean floor?

    2) What do you think of T. Boone Pickens Plan?
  166. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 1:38 am
    "After this harsh winter, If any of you still believe in `global warming` you`re complete morons."

    This is so sad it actually makes me laugh. Literally. MORE SNOW DOES NOT EQUAL A COLDER WINTER. The amount of percipitation (snow) that we got this winter has nothing to do with whether or not this year is colder than last year. It has to do with how much water came down out of our atmosphere. It could very well have been colder last year we just had less percipitation, but because we got a lot of percipitation this year people think it must be colder. WTF people. GROW - A - BRAIN. It can be cold with or without snow. Just because it snowed this year doesn`t mean it`s colder than last year. IT MEANS MORE WATER CAME OUT OF OUR ATMOSPHERE.

    If the average global temperature hadn`t gone up, the glaciers would not be melting! DUH!
  167. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 1:42 am
    MORE SNOW DOES NOT MEAN THAT A WINTER IS COLDER. IT MEANS MORE WATER CAME OUT OF OUR ATMOSPHERE. IT CAN BE COLD WITH OR WITHOUT SNOW. LAST YEAR WAS NOT WARMER, IT JUST SNOWED LESS. THE END.

    -Sorry just had to say that one more time.
  168. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 1:44 am
    Also...

    You can have snow on days that are 10 degress and on days that are 28 degrees. MORE SNOW DOES NOT EQUAL COLDER.

    SNOW DOES NOT EQUAL COLDER! AH AH!
  169. Profile photo of PierreJeanFR
    PierreJeanFR Male 40-49
    1360 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:46 am
    we will all die soon anyway
  170. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:47 am
    "I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple," said noted Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin.

    UN IPCC scientist Eduardo Zorita publicly declared that his Climategate colleagues Michael Mann and Phil Jones "should be barred from the IPCC process...They are not credible anymore."

    A UN lead author Richard Tol grew disillusioned with the IPCC and lamented that it had been "captured" and demanded that "the Chair of IPCC and the Chairs of the IPCC Working Groups should be removed."

    “We`re not scientifically there yet. Despite what you may have heard in the media, there is nothing like a consensus of scientific opinion that this is a problem. Because there is natural variability in the weather, you cannot statistically know for another 150 years.” -- UN IPCC`s Tom Tripp.
  171. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:49 am
    “Any reasonable scientific analysis must conclude the basic theory wrong!!” -- NASA Scientist Dr. Leonard Weinstein who worked 35 years at the NASA Langley Research Center and finished his career there as a Senior Research Scientist.

    “Please remain calm: The Earth will heal itself -- Climate is beyond our power to control...Earth doesn`t care about governments or their legislation. You can`t find much actual global warming in present-day weather observations. Climate change is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth routinely does on its own without asking anyone`s permission or explaining itself.” -- Nobel Prize-Winning Stanford University Physicist Dr. Robert B. Laughlin.

    "I am an environmentalist,” but “I must disagree with Mr. Gore” -- Chemistry Professor Dr. Mary Mumper, the chair of the Chemistry Department at Frostburg State University in Maryland.
  172. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:50 am
    “The energy mankind generates is so small compared to that overall energy budget that it simply cannot affect the climate...The planet`s climate is doing its own thing, but we cannot pinpoint significant trends in changes to it because it dates back millions of years while the study of it began only recently. We are children of the Sun; we simply lack data to draw the proper conclusions.” -- Russian Scientist Dr. Anatoly Levitin.

    “In essence, the jig is up. The whole thing is a fraud. And even the fraudsters that fudged data are admitting to temperature history that they used to say didn`t happen...Perhaps what has doomed the Climategate fraudsters the most was their brazenness in fudging the data” -- Dr. Christopher J. Kobus, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University.
  173. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:51 am
    “Hundreds of billion dollars have been wasted with the attempt of imposing a Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory that is not supported by physical world evidences...AGW has been forcefully imposed by means of a barrage of scare stories and indoctrination that begins in the elementary school textbooks.” -- Brazilian Geologist Geraldo Luís Lino.

    “I am ashamed of what climate science has become today.” The science “community is relying on an inadequate model to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming in order to generate funding and to gain attention. If this is what `science` has become today, I, as a scientist, am ashamed.” -- Research Chemist William C. Gilbert.
  174. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:52 am
    “The dysfunctional nature of the climate sciences is nothing short of a scandal. Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has been done within the Climate Science Community.” The global warming establishment “has actively suppressed research results presented by researchers that do not comply with the dogma of the IPCC.” -- Swedish Climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring, of the Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics Unit at Stockholm University.

    “Those who call themselves `Green planet advocates` should be arguing for a CO2- fertilized atmosphere, not a CO2-starved atmosphere...Diversity increases when the planet was warm AND had high CO2 atmospheric content...Al Gore`s personal behavior supports a green planet - his enormous energy use with his 4 homes and his bizjet, does indeed help make the planet greener. Kudos, Al for doing your part to save the planet.” -- Renowned engineer and aviation/space pioneer Burt Rutan.
  175. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:53 am
    “Global warming is the central tenet of this new belief system in much the same way that the Resurrection is the central tenet of Christianity. Al Gore has taken a role corresponding to that of St Paul in proselytizing the new faith...My skepticism about AGW arises from the fact that as a physicist who has worked in closely related areas, I know how poor the underlying science is. In effect the scientific method has been abandoned in this field.” -- Atmospheric Physicist Dr. John Reid, who worked with Australia`s CSIRO.

    “We maintain there is no reason whatsoever to worry about man-made climate change, because there is no evidence whatsoever that such a thing is happening.” -- Greek Earth scientists Antonis Christofides and Nikos Mamassis of the National Technical University of Athens.
  176. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:54 am
    “There are clear cycles during which both temperature and salinity rise and fall. These cycles are related to solar activity...In my opinion and that of our institute, the problems connected to the current stage of warming are being exaggerated. What we are dealing with is not a global warming of the atmosphere or of the oceans.” -- Biologist Pavel Makarevich of the Biological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

    “Because the greenhouse effect is temporary rather than permanent, predictions of significant global warming in the 21st century by IPCC are not supported by the data.” -- Hebrew University Professor Dr. Michael Beenstock.

    “The whole idea of anthropogenic global warming is completely unfounded. There appears to have been money gained by Michael Mann, Al Gore and UN IPCC`s Rajendra Pachauri as a consequence of this deception, so it`s fraud.” -- South African astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe.
  177. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 2:57 am
    I could go on and on and on with these quotes, but I believe I`ve made my point.

    There is no "Consensus" among those not getting direct governmental funding or not profiting from this scam.
  178. Profile photo of som-tam
    som-tam Male 18-29
    714 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 3:28 am
    if you want to cut down the co2 produced by humans, get sterilized. if all liberals who bleat on about us destroying the earth did that it would greatly decrease the co2 emmisions that the next generation would make.
  179. Profile photo of SapphireHart
    SapphireHart Female 18-29
    412 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 3:58 am
    It was actually colder in medieval times but the Victorians had picnics in February yada yada yada.

    Forget global warming, our latest problem is solving the ever growing population of the world. Look at those stats and tell me you aren`t scared!
  180. Profile photo of Ozmose
    Ozmose Male 30-39
    448 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 3:59 am
    @CrakrJak

    Really?
    I happen to know a former professor of conservational science who stands behind the numbers quite firmly.I should probably let him know he has some government funding coming his way. He thought he was just doing it for free!
  181. Profile photo of GuardinGnome
    GuardinGnome Male 18-29
    2893 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 4:16 am
    This is the first time I say, f*ck you science, you don`t know sh*T.
  182. Profile photo of liklepip
    liklepip Female 18-29
    136 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 5:51 am
    If i was a scientist and wanted to scam the government out of money i would say that we need loads of money to build a new type of nuclear bomb or soemthing onlines of that, and you could get loas considering trident in the uk costs like 70bn and we have pretty much next to nothing. I deffinatly would not come up with global warming.
  183. Profile photo of BrimstoneOne
    BrimstoneOne Male 30-39
    2229 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 6:57 am
    I`d like to point out that the occurrence of snow(vast amounts at that) are indication of a warmer atmosphere. It has to to do with condensation of water in the air. It not necessarily colder (which it should be)
  184. Profile photo of Decor
    Decor Male 18-29
    72 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 7:09 am
    SapphireHart has it, population rise is a much more imminant threat.

    And to the pro `humans have an effect people` this means more people to use more fossil fuels making more CO2.
  185. Profile photo of mcfudge
    mcfudge Male 18-29
    537 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 7:22 am
    Still... after something like this is posted, republicans still feel the need to deny it. Do you guys really hate Al Gore that much? I`m sure if bush had talked about the "hockey stick" charts, every hick from Texas to Tennessee would all be lined up to lick his balls. Right after Rush Limbaugh tells them to.
  186. Profile photo of mitha
    mitha Male 18-29
    269 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 8:35 am
    "what kind of terrible "science" believes it has proved something yet answer so many questions with "well we can`t explain that part...." or "we think that`s just an anomaly". "

    well, nearly every science does this. There are ALWAYS unknown fields. Every good scientist has more questions than answers. Thats why they are scientists and not politicians.
  187. Profile photo of Commentator
    Commentator Male 40-49
    270 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 8:54 am
    If you doubt climate change, go to the closest mirror and yell "You are an idiot!!"
  188. Profile photo of AcidJazz90
    AcidJazz90 Male 18-29
    20 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 9:24 am
    Hey CrakrJak...

    Respect.
  189. Profile photo of Random3
    Random3 Female 18-29
    115 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 9:59 am
    If there was no such thing as global warming then why is it shown as scientific fact in college textbooks? Why has the government made such a big deal about it? You know that a lot of this research is GOVERNMENT FUNDED. Why the f*ck would the government be funding something if it didn`t exist? Especially with the economy the way it is. Northeast Ohio has had one of the worst winters in years. Why is this? This is because temperatures are not cold enough to freeze lake Erie as much as it should. This creates lake effect snow. Lake effect snow occurs when moisture from a large lake rises into the atmosphere and freezes creating lake effect snow. And know that some of you will say "well it`s cold enough to freeze the moisture in the atmosphere." Well yeah, but those are tiny droplets of water Lake Erie is larger than the state of New Jersey! It needs to be VERY cold for it to freeze completely, and it needs to be colder than it is for more of the lake to freeze.
  190. Profile photo of AcidJazz90
    AcidJazz90 Male 18-29
    20 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 10:28 am
    The debate is not whether or not there is global warming occurring, it`s whether human`s have a big / harmful (or any) effect on it.

    Why would government spend money on it if it didn`t exist? Special interests comes to mind. I don`t trust politicians and even if their act is benevolent, they still blow money left and right. Look at the debt.
  191. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 11:23 am
    Ozmose: I did not say every scientist that believes `Global Warming` is paid for their belief. Nice try, but you fail at reading.
  192. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 11:24 am
    Commentator: You first.
  193. Profile photo of skullgrin
    skullgrin Male 18-29
    937 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 11:25 am
    Anyone who falls for this global warming is caused by human co2 emissions is a sheep. The world`s leaders knew that there was an oil shortage and they knew they had to do something to kick people into gear on finding alternate forms of fuel. What better way than to scare them into developing them. Thats what this global warming myth is all about. It is just a conspiracy to develop alternate fuels which we desperately need. There is literally no proof that human co2 emissions have ANYTHING to do with global warming....if you have this proof (that doesnt exist) I urge you to give the founder of the weather channel a call - he has a cool million dollar reward for whoever can provide this proof.
  194. Profile photo of skullgrin
    skullgrin Male 18-29
    937 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 11:46 am
    Really?
    I happen to know a former professor of conservational science who stands behind the numbers quite firmly.I should probably let him know he has some government funding coming his way. He thought he was just doing it for free!

    He obviously isn`t a very good professor.
  195. Profile photo of pigsnout5
    pigsnout5 Female 18-29
    546 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 12:29 pm
    i`m not reading this. too many words about science. maybe one day when i`m really bored i`ll give it another try...till then, i like my picture books ;)
  196. Profile photo of MildCorma
    MildCorma Male 18-29
    496 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 1:35 pm
    @Skullgrin

    And that conspiracy is negative and bad how? I mean really, how can living off renewable resources and lowering pollution be a "omg government conspiracy" when it`s a -good- thing? People like you amaze me, really.

    We are being conned into doing something beneficial for mankind as a whole! But we should rebel against this as it means we are pawns and sheep! Grow up mate, really.
  197. Profile photo of skullgrin
    skullgrin Male 18-29
    937 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 5:37 pm
    @mildcorma

    the problem is that they are lying, have been caught in their lie, but refuse to admit it. There is nothing wrong with finding renewable energy sources, what is wrong is the way they went about it.

    Yes, the ends justify the means - but the means were unnecessary
  198. Profile photo of Tomz
    Tomz Male 18-29
    55 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 7:26 pm
    In one of my climate lectures, the professor showed us a graph representing expected climate change without human impact, and the actual data, over the last 150 years. There was definitely an increase.

    This was obviously used with estimated data from various models. To allow for model error, the data from each end of the spectrum was shown alongside. The human impact still caused a large variation.

    As far as I`m concerned, climate skepticism achieves nothing.
  199. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12387 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 7:33 pm
    When I was in grade school, the big scare of the time was the coming ice age and the impending shortage of water. That was in the late 70s.

    More importantly, it was in the mainstream media and ONLY the mainstream media. If you read what scientists who knew the subject were saying about ice ages in the late 1970s, it was very different.

    Comparing the two just shows that you don`t understand.
  200. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 8:19 pm
    @CrakrJak Blah. BLAH. Blah.

    I don`t care who says what. There are plenty of liars and Charlestons that want to get their name out there in anyway possible.

    Is or is not Co2 a greenhouse gas which has been proven to trap heat? It is. It is a gas that traps heat. WHICH HAS BEEN SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN AGAIN AND AGAIN. No one disagrees that Co2 is a greenhouse gas.

    Now. Have we or have we not released Co2 and other heat trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere in enormous quantities? We have.

    "Since 1750, atmospheric concentrations of CO2, CH4 and N20 have increased by over 36 percent, 148 percent and 18 percent, respectively" - EPA Greenhouse Gas Emissions

    So, do you now propose that gasses scientifically proven to trap heat released into the atmosphere will all of a sudden loose their scientific properties and their ability to trap heat and have NO effect whatsoever on our atmosphere? DO YOU?
  201. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 8:22 pm
    @Crackr

    If that is what you propose, and you think it is not the greenhouse gasses which we released warming the planet then what is? Or do you think that the planet is not warming and the ice caps have suddenly just melted for no reason? Maybe ice changed it`s melting point like those gases changed their properties and lost their ability to trap heat eh?
  202. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 9:37 pm
    NotTHATbored: CO2 is necessary for all plant life on earth, It being called a `greenhouse gas` is like pure oxygen being called a poison.

    Perhaps you are unaware that volcanoes spew far more pollutants into our atmosphere than we do. In fact when Mt. Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines it spewed more pollution into the atmosphere in that single event than mankind has since we`ve lived on planet earth. It injected a 20+ million tons of sulfur dioxide and caused what is believed to be the largest aerosol disturbance of the stratosphere this century. Now did that heat us up ? No, In fact the earth`s surface cooled in the three years following the eruption, by as much as 1.3 degrees. It ejected tens of millions of tons of water vapor, carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen chloride, and hydrogen fluoride.

    Human effects on atmosphere pale in comparison to that. So please step back and seek some perspective.
  203. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 10:04 pm
    @Crackr "CO2 is necessary for all plant life on earth, It being called a `greenhouse gas` is like pure oxygen being called a poison."

    No duh. FYI greenhouse gas is not a derogatory term. It is a term for a gas that traps heat which Co2 does. And yes, you are correct, Co2 and other greenhouse gasses are essential to all life on earth because without them the planet would FREEZE.

    THAT SAID GREENHOUSE GASSES DO TRAP HEAT AND WE ARE PUMPING THEM INTO THE ATMOSPHERE. IT IS GOING TO HAVE AN EFFECT, UNLESS YOU BELIEVE THAT THE GAS WE PUMP OUT MAGICALLY LOSES ITS PROPERTIES ONCE IT REACHES OUR ATMOSPHERE.

    What pollution a volcano pumps out is not relevant, not all kinds of pollution are green house gasses. The reason it caused cooling is obvious, the volcano`s smoke, ash, and other miscellaneous debris blocked out some of the suns rays. The amount of Co2 it put out is relevant but most certainly negligible to the amount we put into the atmosphere EVERY yea
  204. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 10:06 pm
    (continued) We are not volcanos, we put massive amounts of heat trapping gasses into the atmosphere not once every ten years when we erupt, but continually!

    No effect? Really?
  205. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 8, 2011 at 10:19 pm
    @Crackr you know, and not to be mean, this is just in my opinion, but it is people like you who are the problem. People who think their opinion must be right when they don`t even know what they`re talking about. You didn`t even know that Co2 is a greenhouse gas! How can you honestly have an opinion on global warming?! You can look up a bunch of quotes to support your "side" all you want and paste them in, but you still won`t know anything about global warming! You have no idea what is really going on or what the argument is even about! So why then do you have an opinion?!
  206. Profile photo of trudenter
    trudenter Male 18-29
    69 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 12:10 am
    @Crackr
    i don`t know where you got your info, but mankind produces a much greater yearly output of emissions than volcanoes
  207. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 1:54 am
    NotTHATbored: CO2 was only recently deemed a `greenhouse gas` by those very people involved in the `global warming` scam.

    I know a hell of a lot more and have read more than I care to mention about `global warming`. The problem is that science has revealed that we have been a lot warmer and a lot colder in the past and that those trend seem to coincide with solar cycles, particularly sunspots or the lack thereof (Magnetic pole reversals have had an effect as well)

    Without a doubt the sun fuels our planet and conducts and orchestra of cycles of both flora and fauna. Any excess of CO2 is eventually absorbed by the algae and plants on earth, which then provides the oxygen and food for the animals and us as well. The earth balances itself, repairs itself, humans can do very little to alter that balance even if we wanted too.

    You`ve been fooled into believing that the earth is as fragile as glass, To the contrary it is very robust and strong.
  208. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 2:24 am
    trudenter: It`s been estimated that humans produce 2.9 million tons of CO2 per year, That`s minuscule compared to the amount of suspended carbon already in our oceans, landmass, and atmosphere.

    That`s 1/9th of what Mount Pinatubo spewed out in a few days. Even then the earth did not warm, It cooled. The earth absorbed all that CO2 and all the other `greenhouse gases` (Many far far worse for our planet) as well. And guess what ? We didn`t die, the poles didn`t melt, and the oceans didn`t rise.

    I know where you are getting your info, and it`s a poor source. CO2 is not pollution, It`s a natural part of life on earth and you, I and every human on earth exhales 2lbs, of it daily.

    So unless you are advocating the removal of billions of people from earth, along with the removal all cars, fossil fueled power plants and billions of animals as well, There will be no appreciable change in the earth`s temperature.
  209. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 4:00 am
    @Crackr Nice try, and we`d believe it too, if we were all a bunch of idiots.

    "Any excess of CO2 is eventually absorbed by the algae and plants on earth"

    If the excess Co2 is being absorbed then why is their now 36% more in the atmosphere since 1750 according to the EPA? Where are all these plants and all this algae that is supposed to be absorbing it?

    "Since 1750, atmospheric concentrations of CO2, CH4 and N20 have increased by over 36 percent, 148 percent and 18 percent, respectively" - EPA Greenhouse Gas Emissions

    Also you are way way off on how much Co2 we emit each year, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration in 2008 alone we emitted over 30 million metric tons. Check your facts. 2008 - Co2
  210. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 4:07 am
    Bottom line.

    -The earth is warming causing the glaciers to melt. The glaciers are melting.

    - Co2 is proven to trap heat, it does not lose it`s properties once it reaches the atmosphere.

    -You are wrong about how much Co2 we emit each year. Check the link I provided if you don`t believe me. It is much more than you think.

    -There is 36% more Co2 in the atmosphere today than in 1750, so excess Co2 emissions are not able to be neutralized by "more plants".

    - Humans produce over 30 million metric tons of Co2 a year.

    - Co2 traps and holds heat

    - HUMANS CONTRIBUTE TO GLOBAL WARMING!
  211. Profile photo of skullgrin
    skullgrin Male 18-29
    937 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 6:27 am
    CrakrJak is the only one in this thread right now who knows anything they are talking about. NotThatBored, I`m sorry but you sound like an idiot. You have no idea what you are talking about. You`re simply repeating what you have been told to believe by the people behind the global warming scam.
  212. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 2:06 pm
    @Skullgrin Yea well your a name caller, and in my experience name callers aren`t that bright, which is why they resort to name calling.

    The earth is warming.

    We know that Co2 traps and holds heat in. NO ONE disputes that Co2 holds in heat. We put Co2 into the atmosphere. Co2 does not lose its properties once it is in our atmosphere. Excess Co2 is not absorbed by plants. Excess Co2 stays in the Atmosphere. We put 30 million metric tons of Co2 into the atmosphere per year. Co2 traps heat. Humans contribute to global warming.

    Don`t tell me that I just repeat things from the global warming "scam" REFUTE MY LOGIC FOOL. YOU CAN NOT!
  213. Profile photo of skullgrin
    skullgrin Male 18-29
    937 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 4:04 pm
    theres no need for me to refute your arrangements, they already have been. CrakrJak did a great job at that. It`s too bad that we wont know each other in 20 years when all of this global warming forgery really comes to pass. I`d love to see the logic you come wp with then.
  214. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 4:46 pm
    NotTHATbored: Perhaps you are unaware but that data, from the 18th century, comes from ice cores. Ice cores are taken from glaciers, under that much pressure ice squeezes out all sorts of dissolved solids and gases. That is why glacier water is some of the purest natural water in the world. Those can not be taken as being an accurate snapshot of what the atmosphere was like back then.

    For one thing we burned wood for fuel back then and it produced far more soot per pound than the same pound of coal burned in a modern power plant. What you see rising from power plant stacks is mostly water vapor, The EPA requires all coal fired power plants to have "Scrubbers" to capture most all of the carbon (aka soot).

    Even if your claimed figures were correct, Which they aren`t, That`s still nothing compared to the trillions of tons of suspended carbon on earth.
  215. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 4:51 pm
    CO2 is only a `greenhouse gas` in a closed system, like in an actual greenhouse for growing food, and it helps us grow that food, That`s why we build them.

    Excess CO2 does not just float around in our atmosphere forever, Plants absorb it, and the more of it there is the faster and better plants grow, again this is why we build greenhouses for food and grow flowers.

    Do you get it now ? I sure hope so.
  216. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 6:58 pm
    @Skullgrin I`m just going to ignore you because you yourself have nothing to say, so there`s no point in communicating with you any further. I tried to converse with you but it appears that you may not be intelligent enough to have a conversation with.

    @Crackr who are you to say that the EPA and the U.S. Energy Information Administration put out false data? Give me one reliable source that says we only put out 2.9 million tons of Co2! You`re full of crap!

    Further you can say that the ice cores readings taken in the 1700`s are unreliable BUT what about the increasingly high readings we`ve seen just since the 1950`s? According to your theory shouldn`t plants have been able to absorb our current Co2 output?

    Perhaps given time that extra Co2 would be absorbed by plants that would then die trapping Co2, however it seems quite clear that plants and algae are not able to compete with the massive amount of Co2 we are putting out. ESPECIALLY when you take into acc
  217. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 6:58 pm
    (continued) ESPECIALLY when you take deforestation into account.

    I hope you get it now!
  218. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 7:04 pm
    @Skullgrin Also I just want to say that your @$$ kissing makes me sick. You haven`t said one thing that contributed to this conversation. Your just here. Let me and Crackr have our disagreement and butt out. If you want to lick Crackr`s @$$ please get a room somewhere else.

  219. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 7:04 pm
    ** You`re **
  220. Profile photo of Linkenberger
    Linkenberger Male 18-29
    1164 posts
    February 9, 2011 at 9:11 pm
    TL;DR

    Greenhouse is bunk.
  221. Profile photo of skullgrin
    skullgrin Male 18-29
    937 posts
    February 10, 2011 at 6:37 am
    theres no need for me to refute your arrangements, they already have been. CrakrJak did a great job at that. It`s too bad that we wont know each other in 20 years when all of this global warming forgery really comes to pass. I`d love to see the logic you come wp with then.
  222. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    February 10, 2011 at 7:23 am
    Especially since the ice caps are melting (and the glaciers, which are both fresh water).

    Unfortunately that`s just going to get mixed in with salt water. :-(
    Which, granted, could REALLY dilute it significantly which would negatively effect aquatic life throughout the world. :-( :-(
    Furthermore, wildlife on land is VERY dependent on the oceans. :-O
  223. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    February 10, 2011 at 7:28 am
    [quote">All species become extinct, but Earth carries on regardless.[/quote">

    We could very well be one of those species.

    Hell 2.4 billion years ago there was species of bacteria which killed itself by over-producing oxygen.
  224. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    February 10, 2011 at 8:07 am
    the contention I have is to what degree we are responsible

    I`ll certainly agree that is the issue right now. But who knows maybe this won`t be an issue 30 yrs after we`ve taken real steps to address it.

    I for one chose an energy power plan that is 100% renewable energy over a plan that was a dollar cheaper per kilowatt-hour and is only 3% renewable energy (according to the state of Texas). Specifically the price ratio was 8.50/7.50. So I figured for the extra buck it was well worth it. I certainly hope there a LOT of people who have/are/will follow(ed/ing) my example because every drop in the bucket counts.
  225. Profile photo of Aquaeous
    Aquaeous Male 18-29
    425 posts
    February 10, 2011 at 10:24 am
    *Checks back in*

    So in summary, CrakrJak continues to engage loudly in sophistry without seeming to have a basic understanding of the science, and a few idiots seem to go along with it, presumably impressed by his ability to copy and paste uncited, unverified quotations.

    ...and @NotTHATbored, I think I love you.

  226. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 10, 2011 at 10:06 pm
    @Aquaeous Yep that sounds about right! LOL and thank you ;-D
  227. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10731 posts
    February 10, 2011 at 11:57 pm
    I can`t find the link to this page on the homepage.

    What happened?
  228. Profile photo of NotTHATbored
    NotTHATbored Female 18-29
    1101 posts
    February 11, 2011 at 2:06 am
    ??? Shows up for me on page 5. Ha ha, kind of makes me feel trolley to be debating 5 pages back!

Leave a Reply