Hackers just killed global warming
- Started
- Last post
- 215 Responses
- ukit0
Ayn Rand when asked about her political philosophy said,
"I am not primarily an advocate of capitalism, but of egoism; and I am not primarily an advocate of egoism, but of reason. If one recognizes the supremacy of reason and applies it consistently, all the rest follows."
I wonder what she would have thought of the modern conservative movement.
- Who gives a shit what that lunatic would think about anything?Dr_Sparkleshine
- How is she a lunatic?
Please site clear examples with boisterous claims in the future...identity
- raf0
This is interesting, coming from a mainstream magazine: climatologists agree the warming has reached a plateau (as in: there is no warming) in the last 10 years and have no clue when it'll resume (but are sure as hell it will, their grants and mortgages depend on it).
http://www.spiegel.de/internatio…- Yes. Of course. That's it. The world is controlled by science grants.Dr_Sparkleshine
- *looks at the trillions of dollars just thrown at wall streetDr_Sparkleshine
- pr20
I buy so little I'm pretty much an anty-thesis of consumerism and yet still week after week i put out a huge bag of trash outside. And this is only one person... Multiply it by 52 weeks times 6 billions people... And man you have to be double blind not to see that even if we try hard not to consume we still use up TONS of resources and thus have a HUGE impact on environment.
- No mention of banging hot chicks here. Is everything okay?Horp
- GeorgesII0
Yep, global warming now known as climate change (climate do change) is a religion, just like atheism.
- I'm not sure what u r getting at.pr2
- there was never a debate about the reason nor an actual solution found, we all decided it is a fact that the earth is warming and no diverse thought dumb as it can be can pass trhoughGeorgesII
- warming and no diverse thought dumb as it can be can pass trhough, this is what I call religious extremismGeorgesII
- your priorities are all wrong. whether it is or isn't happening is relevant what counts is that the debate started a global...pr2
- ...environmental awareness.pr2
- there was never a debate pr2, thats what I'm trying to say, you either with us or you're a cook, a skeptical or a denier, global warmingGeorgesII
- warming is like those jesus freak talking of evolution, you either with them or you're nutGeorgesII
- ukit0
On the other hand, wobal glarming is very real, and terrifying
- GeorgesII0
now we go to our weather forecaster
-
IT'S GONNA RAIN
- souljar0010
Ok straight off the bat i haven't read all the emails etc.
But i do find it funny that everyone is so quick to beleive that global warming is all crap. Cause someone who stole a whole lot of emails etc says so. This person has taken a whole lot of email quotes, out of context as people have stated here and highlited certain sentences to make his point.
Kinda seems like he has used this infomation to backup a personal point of view. Isn't that what he is accusing the scientist of doing?
- raf0
Some people here seem to take people who take side of the scientists who don't agree with the antropogenic climate change theory for anti-environmentalists or... I don't know, pollution lovers? Better: Republican pollution lovers. This is very unjustified and more than a simplification, it's simply not true.
Do you think someone who is a global warming skeptic (denier is such a nasty, pejorative word) automatically loves to pollute?
I never had a car, have 3 recycling bins at home (including compost) and take half an hour walks down and back up the hill to throw glass and old clothes into their respective bins. I'm pretty sure most "deniers" I know have similar approach.
Most of all, I do think of the future of the world. And I'm not scared of a warming, I'm scared of the warming fearmongers.There a lot of environmental problems. Deforestation, toxic waste, millions of tons of regular waste, air pollution, water pollution, overfishing – that's just the start. Those are real problems, those things are really happening.
I don't see anyone disagreeing with those. I live on the coast and have to admit, love me some salmon for dinner. But hello, overfishing denial, anyone? Nope. It is quite clear for everyone the seas are being robbed.
I buy farmed if I can, btw.CO2, however, is not a pollutant and despite the propaganda, there is no agreement among scientists as to the role of human-produced CO2 in the atmosphere. There is, nonetheless, a gigantic agenda related to CO2 issues, fat billions to be squeezed out of people.
People are aware something stinks in the CO2 area, that's why there is such a strong opposition.
The anti-CO2 propaganda outperforms anti-pollution voices greatly, something's not on.Far from what souljar 001 suggests, those stolen letters are not leading to conclusions themselves, they are rather something of a tipping point. They show, among other things, that those scientists were likely to bend the data to produce results expected of them. They also show that "peer review process" is full of "peer pressure" and in the end, it all boils down to grant money.
- manonthestreet0
I don't see how conservationism, creating less toxins, and protecting our natural wonders can be seen as a bad thing regardless of the personal cost.
I cannot say that global warming or climate change is in fact real. I just can't see why people would get behind policies that create toxins and don't promote conservationism above anything else.
- raf0
Again, CO2 is not a pollutant. Put heavy metal filters on chimneys, leave CO2 alone. Stop making us calculate idiotic carbon footprint, calculate waste produced instead if you must calculate something.
CO2 is an eco-friendly gas, it stimulates Earth flora growth, even climate alarmists agree with that:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol…- and yet with an excess of it, like billions of tonnes more than usual, you have consequenceseieio
- eieio0
its called the green house effect
- ukit0
As stale as this debate is getting can the science denialists (kidding, guys kidding) at least pinpoint which of these concepts they have an issue with.
a) The amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere determines the climate of the planet
b) Humans have dramatically increased the amount of greenhouse gases (CO2, methane, ozone and others) since the industrial revolution
c) During that same time period, temperatures have slowly but steadily risen
d) Temperatures don't increase in a straight line, they fluctuate year to year but the overall trend is upward.
- raf0
OK, OK now...
I read in many places that meat industry produced something in the region of 20% man-made greenhouse gases. Not sure about that figure, but I figure..Whoever supports IPCC standpoint and doesn't go vegetarian is full of shit (and farts methane!) :)
- eieio0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eff…
all of this stuff has been observed independently all over the world and corroborated since at least the 60s, scientists aren't praying for anything they see the effects and make conclusions
- ukit0
And expecting temps to move upward in a straight line? You really think things are that simple LOL?
Look at the graph, it's pretty clear the temperatures can vary over short periods. Just like today being warmer than yesterday doesn't mean winter isn't approaching.
- Horp0
Well I don't care if it is all a scam. I'm still going to put my glass in one box, my cardboard in another and my plastics in a third so that the Chinese can put them all in the right landfill holes when they arrive in those massive ocean tankers.
Its for the ecology man, I'm doing my bit.
- Instead of flushing my toilet, I pour a bucket of water into it after a dump. That way I save, errr... stuff.Horp
