I Am Bored

Loads of viral videos, games, memes, lists and social networking for when you're bored. Updated every day, so visit often.
LatestPopularMost BookmarkedMost EmailedTop RatedMy FavoritesRandomChat
AllGamesFunnyEntertainmentQuizzesWeirdTechLifestyle, Arts & Lit.News & PoliticsScienceSportsMisc
Submit Content  





rss

friendsmore friends | add your site
Asylum

Holy Taco

Funny Videos

BuzzFeed

NothingToxic

Oddee

Mousebreaker

Online Games

Eat Liver

Online Games

Gorilla Mask

Full Downloads

Norway Games

Damn Cool Pics

Kontraband

Extreme Humor

X Hollywood

I Dont Like You

123 Games

Hollywoodtuna

Funny Games

Cool Stuff

Viva La Games

X - Vids

Smit Happens

Funny Videos

Funny Stuff

ebaumsworld



Back to Listing

Global Warming: Still Think It's A Myth? [Pic]

Hits: 47375 | Rating: (2.5) | Category: Funny | Added by: fancylad
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next >   Jump to: Bottom    Last Post
mikeacello
Male, 18-29, Western US
 112 Posts
Thursday, June 17, 2010 5:45:48 AM
That hunk of ice looks like a mushroom cloud.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16905 Posts
Sunday, June 13, 2010 4:19:24 AM
Puddingbrood: You obviously haven't even looked at either of them, They are highly scientific with referenced sources to peer reviewed & published science. I suggest you stick to the sandbox, Because you're not mentally out of diapers yet.

Puddingbrood
Male, 13-17, Europe
 72 Posts
Sunday, June 13, 2010 1:33:58 AM
CrakrJak, you're linking us those unreliable websites because there are no scientific websites that don't support the global warming theory. Except if you count the biased articles from newspapers in the US.

-acceptance-
Male, 18-29, Europe
 165 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 7:34:59 PM
Wohoo.. ur kids gonna love their time in the college when they freezing lyk dinosaurs ^.^

skine
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
 724 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 7:07:00 PM
A good rule of thumb: If somebody uses the word "Darwinism," then they don't understand evolution or how it works.

vooper
Female, 13-17, Eastern US
 110 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 3:57:47 PM
xKiesix: I don't think you understand the concept of Darwinism, don't throw about big words and think it gets you credibility.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12051 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 2:07:02 PM
I will continue driving my car to work and my kids to school and NOT pay the extra 50 cents a month to recycle cause I'm saving money for them to go to college.

Wow.... just wow.

Pancake57
Male, 50-59, Canada
 16 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:44:47 AM
Not a myth. A religion. Of the Left.

Aquaeous
Male, 18-29, Europe
 425 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 8:44:17 AM
I don't think you should use the word Darwinsim; you clearly don't understand what it means.

xKiesix
Female, 18-29, Midwest US
 445 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 8:24:30 AM
Also, climate change is a natural occurrence anyways. Dinosaurs, mammoths, and the likes faced the hardship of climate change and eventually died out because it's called "Darwinism". I believe most liberals agree with that statement, which makes me wonder why they cry like little girls every time they see it in action.

xKiesix
Female, 18-29, Midwest US
 445 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 8:21:27 AM
madduck...if you really think so, you might want to consider lifting yourself off the face of the earth. It's probably better for everyone involved.

I, on the other hand, still have a job and will continue to not care about what annoying middle-aged hippies say. Really, do you even have kids? Or a significant other for that matter? And no, trees are not included.

No matter what you claim is fact (without any references mind you), I will continue driving my car to work and my kids to school and NOT pay the extra 50 cents a month to recycle cause I'm saving money for them to go to college.

Aquaeous
Male, 18-29, Europe
 425 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 7:45:31 AM
[i]"Scientists do agree on most important aspects and tend to accept the most probable theories as such, but are far from being all-agreeing."[/i]

That depends what statement you are applying it to. If it is to the statements "climate change is occurring" and "man made greenhouse gas emissions are a significant contributor to this", then there is overwhelming scientific support for these statements, and no credible refutation. There are granted many issues that don't have everyone agreeing (e.g. albedo effects identified in the IPCC 4th assessment). However for the above two statements there is strong evidence and agreement across the scientific community.

[i]Also there are a lot of largely unsupported hypotheses, that are perfectly valid logically, but have no way to be proven, so they just stand as ideas to be further (dis)prooven later.[/i]

I'm not sure what you're thinking of here. Could you give an example?

madduck
Female, 50-59, Europe
 5401 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 6:36:37 AM
Oh dear God- it is not warming / Cooling or painting sodding pink. It is human driven climate change. The science is there, we are buggering up rather fast, we need to stop. We have no right to destroy the planet we live on - our children might be needing it. We are an inconsequential species the earth can do without- we should not spoil it for others.

Kiwigirl2
Female, 30-39, Australia
 1051 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 5:54:20 AM
Has global warming overtaken religion as the newest contentious issue?? Believers vs non-believers???

KucheKlizma
Male, 18-29, Europe
 193 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 4:37:55 AM
I largely disagree on the 99% consensus part.
Scientists do agree on most important aspects and tend to accept the most probable theories as such, but are far from being all-agreeing.
Also there are a lot of largely unsupported hypotheses, that are perfectly valid logically, but have no way to be proven, so they just stand as ideas to be further (dis)prooven later.

Aquaeous
Male, 18-29, Europe
 425 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 4:11:10 AM
"48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question. - Gallup 2010"

Surprising as it may seem, scientific fact is not based upon opinion polls. The average American is not a scientist, and tends to rely on the media for their knowledge (or as we have seen in this thread, empirical and local observations that ignore the global science and come to horrible conclusions).

Hell, the blame mostly lies with the picture painted in the media; i.e. "one expert says this, the other disagrees," rather than the fact that 99% of the science is consensus and it is 1% of radicals/sceptics/doubters are painted as having an equal ranking and equal scientific pedigree in the argument.

KucheKlizma
Male, 18-29, Europe
 193 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 3:34:19 AM
Lol it's not "damage" when it's an enviormental cycle, that has nothing to do with human activity.
Also if there are consequences - bear in mind that change in temperature is pretty slow, so if we eventually manage to find conclusive evidence it won't be too late to react.
"Global Warming" is a hippie scam, having no scientific background whatsoever and being not very different from 2012 and The Mother Goddess garbage. I absolutely refuse to give a crap about it.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16905 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 3:32:03 AM
davymid: What I abhor is the scaremongering 'The sky is falling' rhetoric that has been ingrained in the environmental movement since it's inception. Sorry but I've heard a lot of these scares in my lifetime and none have come true, or will. Fear motivates people to do irrational things in haste. The recent 'swine flu' scare is a good example, And it fizzled like a bad fart.

It has been far warmer in the past and that warmth was beneficial to mankind because it opened up more arable land and the plants grew faster. The polar bears lived through that period just fine, and so did other species.

Eventually you will see the 'chicken little' predictions were false, Our children have nothing to fear but fear itself.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12051 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 2:43:26 AM
Crakr, you keep telling yourself whatever it is that helps you sleep at night. Doesn't matter anyways, by the time the Arctic has an ice-free summer you'll be an old man, who has already done your damage.

I feel sorry for my kid who is going to inherit this f*ck up, and I feel sorrier that I'm going to have to explain to her that I knew some of these guys who said it wasn't happening.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16905 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 2:25:39 AM
davymid: So you attack a website's owners, But ignore the peer reviewed science of Craig Loehle.

Should I then go and list the people funding the AGW farce ? The same people that would rake in billions from 'cap & trade' legislation ? You believe they are totally unbiased and free of taint ?

48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question. - Gallup 2010

Out of 21 'Top Priorities' Global Warming came in dead last with only 28%. - Pew 2010

The facade has cracked and more and more people are realizing AGW is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.


davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12051 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 2:00:26 AM
From their website, they have four staff members. A Chairman (Craig D. Idso), a President (Sherwood B. Idso... hint- he's the dad), a Vice President (Keith E. Idso) and the secretarial help is one Julene M. Idso. Talk about a family business. It's like the Von Trapps on speed.

Again, you'll respectfully understand my sentiment of listening to the international scientific community over one American family (having said that, the Idsos have done pretty well from their business venture, ExxonMobil alone gave them 90,000 bucks. Not bad for a day's bullsh*tting, for a family business).

Once again, I'll choose to ignore your misinformed pseudoscientific diatribe, while watching the boats set sail from Newfoundland to the now-open North-West Passage. As I said before, stick to politics. You're good at that. Leave the science to the scientists.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12051 Posts
Saturday, June 12, 2010 1:57:53 AM
Damn, I said I was done and you went and baited me Crakr. Alright, let's (t)roll.

The link you posted was from a site called "ScienceSkeptical". That, by itself, should raise a few alarm bells even among the most intellectually disadvantaged. One pauses to think if they're skeptical about science when they drop by the doc's to get their antibiotics, or if their skepticism of science precludes them from having a website on the intertubes.

Moving on from that, the original post is from "CO2 Science". Nice website. They've even manufactured a "Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change" which all sounds swell.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16905 Posts
Friday, June 11, 2010 10:58:13 PM
Mann’s “hockey stick” reconstruction fails without the inclusion of the unique bristlecone pine tree ring series.



Forestry expert and mathematical ecologist Craig Loehle published a reconstruction restoring the Medieval Warm Period and which suggests that our thermometer records are based in the coldest period of the last 2,000 years, relative to which we are warming. In this study, eighteen 2000-year-long series were obtained that were not based on tree ring data. It was reconstructed from a variety of sources, including ice cores and sediment.

CrakrJak
Male, 40-49, Midwest US
 16905 Posts
Friday, June 11, 2010 10:50:23 PM
Davy: So your claim is that the medieval warm period is merely a 'European' artifact ?

Then why does it show up 'Globally' ? Global Medieval Warm Period

Face it Davy, Mann lied and he was caught.

davymid
Male, 30-39, Europe
 12051 Posts
Friday, June 11, 2010 10:27:32 PM
What they DON'T say is that the first graph is for EUROPE ONLY. The second graph is for THE ENTIRE NORTHERN HEMISPHERE OF THE PLANET. The latter is not an evolution of the former (evolution, there's another thing you think is a lie), it's a completely different dataset. Needless to say, the lower graph is entirely more relevant on a global scale. I also checked out the author of that article - his background is in Hygiene and Law.

Forgive me if I end this debate here, I'm spent. You keep on getting your information from right-wing political websites, I'll choose to instead get my information from the international peer-reviewed published scientific literature in respected journals.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next > 

You Must be Signed in to Add a Comment

If you've already got an I-Am-Bored.com account,
click here to sign in.

If you don't have an account yet,
Click Here to Create a Free Account
 

Back to Listing ^top


Bored | Suggest a Link | Advertise | Contact I Am Bored | About I Am Bored | Link to I Am Bored | Live Submission | Privacy | TOS | Ad Choices | Copyright Policy |
© 2014 Demand Media, Inc. All rights reserved.