Global Warming
- Started
- Last post
- 643 Responses
- inteliboy0
mother: clean your room
deathboy: [insert 2 page matter of fact opinion on why it's inevitable his room dirty, part of life, solar flares will destroy their house anyway and therefore should not bother cleaning it up]- haha clean ill clean my room but mother i dont think i can clean the entire worlddeathboy
- come one only one boy can dust and vacuum so muchdeathboy
- and if that window stays open with the wind im afraid i cant keep up with all of the dirtdeathboy
- but ill try. and if you force me to work nonstop cleaning the symptoms of a problem i think ill suffer more than i need toodeathboy
- deathboy0
its good to practice the 3 Rs and be responsible for waste and try to minimize impact on the environment. its self serving and people should be concious of it.
And i see the biggest human contributing factor to human environmental changes is increased population. After all if the human factor is the problem than the human is the problem. Hard to deny that. So let those who feel strongly about it start calling for population control instead of regulation. Let those who love the environment enough decide to stop reproducing. Regulation to curb human populations without creating suffering for some is a fallacy. Im curious if the tune would change. Id like to see the people moral and mental gymnastics in that feat.
Of course the quagmire in controlling birth rates is dillution of the gene pools based on man law and not natural law. Who reproduces and liberties of individuals. I wont make that call but nor do i make the call for mans law to magically control climate change. its the catch22 protaginists of human effect always ignore. If u believe it and u have a kid what is going to stop an average 70 years of pollution from that one kid. Do you think there is some sort of philosopher stone that will wipe the slate clean without a price.
I say let ignorance play its part but not in the legal system. Hate to say it but so far survival of the fittest has worked. Screw security of the cowards and their protectionsim. Be personally responsible and vote with every dollar you spend. Do what benefits you including the small scale recycling stuff. Try not to harm others out of your fear. And make the best life you can for yourself knowing you have no security. It is what it is.
Just seems like the 1% making people jump at ghosts. Funny im curious how much of the 1% is based in washington DC. I read recently that washington DC has surpassed silicon valley as the wealthiest place. Or who knows maybe theyre the 10% stealing the wealth of 1% who knows.
Either way ill continue my own conservational environemnt stuff. and you guys bitch about it and willfully ignore what u do that supports what u hate. at least im honest about what i do.
- deathboy0
its good to practice the 3 Rs and be responsible for waste and try to minimize impact on the environment. its self serving and people should be concious of it.
And i see the biggest human contributing factor to human environmental changes is increased population. After all if the human factor is the problem than the human is the problem. Hard to deny that. So let those who feel strongly about it start calling for population control instead of regulation. Let those who love the environment enough decide to stop reproducing. Regulation to curb human populations without creating suffering for some is a fallacy. Im curious if the tune would change. Id like to see the people moral and mental gymnastics in that feat.
Of course the quagmire in controlling birth rates is dillution of the gene pools based on man law and not natural law. Who reproduces and liberties of individuals. I wont make that call but nor do i make the call for mans law to magically control climate change. its the catch22 protaginists of human effect always ignore. If u believe it and u have a kid what is going to stop an average 70 years of pollution from that one kid. Do you think there is some sort of philosopher stone that will wipe the slate clean without a price.
I say let ignorance play its part but not in the legal system. Hate to say it but so far survival of the fittest has worked. Screw security of the cowards and their protectionsim. Be personally responsible and vote with every dollar you spend. Do what benefits you including the small scale recycling stuff. Try not to harm others out of your fear. And make the best life you can for yourself knowing you have no security. It is what it is.
Just seems like the 1% making people jump at ghosts. Funny im curious how much of the 1% is based in washington DC. I read recently that washington DC has surpassed silicon valley as the wealthiest place. Or who knows maybe theyre the 10% stealing the wealth of 1% who knows.
Either way ill continue my own conservational environemnt stuff. and you guys bitch about it and willfully ignore what u do that supports what u hate. at least im honest about what i do.
- i totally on purpose posted twice becuase im super duper seriousdeathboy
- OH MY GOD...homo!!!Hombre_Lobo
- :D teeeeeheeesHombre_Lobo
- heh!deathboy
- i agree, deathboyCanHasQBN
- omg1
♻
- ukit21
Sadly, the chance that humanity will avert catastrophic climate impacts has dropped sharply this year (see “The failed presidency of Barack Obama, Part 2“). And that means it is increasingly likely we face a world beyond 450 ppm atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, which in turn means we likely cross carbon cycle tipping points that threaten to quickly take us to 800 to 1000 ppm.
It is a world not merely of endless regional resource wars around the globe. It is a world with dozens of Darfurs and Pakistani mega-floods, of countless environmental refugees “” hundreds of millions by the second half of this century “” all clamoring to occupy the parts of the developed world that aren’t flooded or desertified.
In such a world, everyone will ultimately become a veteran, and Veteran’s Day and Memorial Day may fade into obscurity, as people forget about a time when wars were the exception, a time when soldiers were but a small minority of the population.
And if we don’t act swiftly and strongly to stop it, the worst impacts could last a long, long time (see NOAA stunner: Climate change “largely irreversible for 1000 years,” with permanent Dust Bowls in Southwest and around the globe and Nature Geoscience: ocean dead zones “devoid of fish and seafood” are poised to expand and “remain for thousands of years”).
So when does this start to happen?
Thomas Fingar, “the U.S. intelligence community’s top analyst,” sees it happening by the mid-2020s:
By 2025, droughts, food shortages and scarcity of fresh water will plague large swaths of the globe, from northern China to the Horn of Africa.
For poorer countries, climate change “could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back,” Fingar said, while the United States will face “Dust Bowl” conditions in the parched Southwest“¦.
He said U.S. intelligence agencies accepted the consensual scientific view of global warming, including the conclusion that it is too late to avert significant disruption over the next two decades.The conclusions are in line with an intelligence assessment produced this summer that characterized global warming as a serious security threat for the coming decades.
Floods and droughts will trigger mass migrations and political upheaval in many parts of the developing world.
- qoob0
New emails leaked by climate change opponents
- panacea-1
http://www.washingtonpost.com/op…
What happened to “climate change” and “global warming”?
The Earth is still getting hotter, but those terms have nearly disappeared from political vocabulary. Instead, they have been replaced by less charged and more consumer-friendly expressions for the warming planet.
President Obama’s State of the Union address Tuesday was a prime example of this shift. The president said “climate change” just once — compared with zero mentions in the 2011 address and two in 2010.
When he did utter the phrase, it was merely to acknowledge the polarized atmosphere in Washington, saying, “The differences in this chamber may be too deep right now to pass a comprehensive plan to fight climate change.” By contrast, Obama used the terms “energy” and “clean energy” nearly two dozen times.
That tally reflects a broader change in how the president talks about the planet. A recent Brown University study looked specifically at the Obama administration’s language and found that mentions of “climate change” have been replaced by calls for “clean energy” and “energy independence.” Graciela Kincaid, a co-author of the study, wrote: “The phrases ‘climate change’ and ‘global warming’ have become all but taboo on Capitol Hill. These terms are stunningly absent from the political arena.”
In 2009, the Obama administration purposefully began to refer to greenhouse gas emissions as “carbon pollution” and “heat-trapping emissions.”
------------
This guy is such a phony and full of ingenuousness, I can't keep up with the load of BS he spews. I feel sorry for the people that were duped into voting for this clown, it's all just a bunch of rhetoric and lies.
- panacea-1
Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/scien…The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.
The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.
‘The ten-year projection remains groundbreaking science. The period for the original projection is not over yet,’ he said.
Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show there should have been ‘steady warming from 2000 until now’.
‘If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories,’ he said.
- panacea-1
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB…
No Need to Panic About Global Warming
There's no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to 'decarbonize' the world's economy.In September, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever, a supporter of President Obama in the last election, publicly resigned from the American Physical Society (APS) with a letter that begins: "I did not renew [my membership] because I cannot live with the [APS policy] statement: 'The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now.' In the APS it is OK to discuss whether the mass of the proton changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?"
In spite of a multidecade international campaign to enforce the message that increasing amounts of the "pollutant" carbon dioxide will destroy civilization, large numbers of scientists, many very prominent, share the opinions of Dr. Giaever. And the number of scientific "heretics" is growing with each passing year. The reason is a collection of stubborn scientific facts.
Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now. This is known to the warming establishment, as one can see from the 2009 "Climategate" email of climate scientist Kevin Trenberth: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." But the warming is only missing if one believes computer models where so-called feedbacks involving water vapor and clouds greatly amplify the small effect of CO2.
The lack of warming for more than a decade—indeed, the smaller-than-predicted warming over the 22 years since the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began issuing projections—suggests that computer models have greatly exaggerated how much warming additional CO2 can cause. Faced with this embarrassment, those promoting alarm have shifted their drumbeat from warming to weather extremes, to enable anything unusual that happens in our chaotic climate to be ascribed to CO2.
The fact is that CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a colorless and odorless gas, exhaled at high concentrations by each of us, and a key component of the biosphere's life cycle. Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase the CO2 concentrations by factors of three or four to get better growth. This is no surprise since plants and animals evolved when CO2 concentrations were about 10 times larger than they are today. Better plant varieties, chemical fertilizers and agricultural management contributed to the great increase in agricultural yields of the past century, but part of the increase almost certainly came from additional CO2 in the atmosphere.
Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.
- ukit21
- comon ukit,
I read this article too and I'm pretty sure you didn't understand bollocksgeorgesIII - Not hard to understand, it's Rolling Stone not a science paperukit2
- comon ukit,
- utopian1
New research rebuts fracking-global warming connection
Replacing coal with natural gas cuts the creation of greenhouse gases that cause global warming, a Cornell University researcher has concluded, rebutting the findings of colleagues at the university in Ithaca, N.Y.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/busine…
DRILL BABY DRILL!!!
DRILL BABY DRILL!!!
DRILL BABY DRILL!!!
DRILL BABY DRILL!!!
DRILL BABY DRILL!!!
DRILL BABY DRILL!!!
- lowimpakt0
"A formerly sceptical climate scientist says human activity is causing the Earth to warm, as a new study confirms earlier results on rising temperatures.
In a US newspaper opinion piece, Prof Richard Muller says: "Call me a converted sceptic."
Muller leads the Berkeley Earth Project, which is using new methods and some new data to investigate the claims made by other climate researchers."
- I'm no AGW-sceptic, but I am concerned about the spin around this .. http://www.popularte…detritus
- set0
I sed to make a perfect poached egg in exactly 5 minutes. A few months ago they started becoming hard after 5 mins. It now takes me exactly 4 minutes to make the perfect poached egg...
The only possible explanation is globalw warming.
- lowimpakt0
buy a bigger egg
- teh0
Best part of the movie 2012.
- utopian1
Satellites reveal rare levels of Greenland ice melt
Nearly all of Greenland’s ice cover at least temporarily melted at the surface during an usually warm stretch in mid-July – a level of melting not seen there in 123 years, NASA said.
- tell the truth, you didn't read itgeorgesIII
- actually yesutopian
