tell me it isn't so......the sun??

[kronus]

Is anything out of the ordinary going on?

This is the entire question we're all trying to resolve. If I say "yes", you say "why", and if you say "no", I say "why not".

A lot of the mass extinction events are theorized to have been caused by extraordinary events like meteor strikes and large volcanic eruptions. They didn't just happen. YES, the earth has a certain level of natural recovery mechanisms built in (for interesting reasons that will annoy you if you're the type to argue against evolution and natural selection), NO we don't know what that level is. I'm not comfortable relying on it being stronger than the totals of an unprecedented intelligent population's quickly growing output, because we have absolutely zero evidence of that happening before.

[cale]

Why is a rise in global temperatures so amazing? There NEVER WAS a stable global temperature. It has always, over millions of years, been fluctuating. During those millions of years, probably hundreds of species have died, but hundreds have developed. Is anything out of the ordinary going on? No.

There is evidence to say that yes in fact, there is something out of the ordinary going on. You seem ignorant to the fact that a 1 or 2 degree temperature increase over the span of a few thousand years and species either surviving or evolving to cope is in some way evidence for their ability to do so over decades or centuries which will NOT be the case. Has GW been grossly overexposed to be made up as more than it really is? Potentially yes. Is it still a reality that large changes are occurring at an alarming rate and that we could very well be a contributing factor, you bet your ass that it's probable.

[cale]

You mean assuming GW is real...that is ignorance.

There is science to back it up from credible peer revue'd sources, I simply adopt a different stance than you after reviewing what has been made available. Misuse of the word ignorance is ignorant, buy a dictionary

[Fusion]

But it's just as probable as a meteor hitting the earth next week.
We are not superior enough to change the course of things to come, that's rediculous. "Steering" nature in some direction even more so.

What the GW theory is then saying could be summarized as "we've been fucking around without rubber for a long time, best stop now and hope you don't get pregnant, even though we don't know if I'm fertile".

You seem ignorant to the fact that a 1 or 2 degree temperature increase over the span of a few thousand years and species either surviving or evolving to cope is in some way evidence for their ability to do so over decades or centuries which will NOT be the case.

I would actually agree with that, though other species may have a population boom. So if the rise causes extinction, but also development, so be it. Who am I (or Al Gore) to try to mess with the natural course of things.

What you probably meant was that study of ocean species a half year or so ago, the whole thing was sketchy though, to say the least.

[herbivor]

We are not superior enough to change the course of things to come, that's rediculous. "Steering" nature in some direction even more so.

What the GW theory is then saying could be summarized as "we've been fucking around without rubber for a long time, best stop now and hope you don't get pregnant, even though we don't know if I'm fertile".

Wow man. Try not to use analogies ever again. Reading yours is like wrestling a pig in a mud pile.:loco:

To your first point. You are essentially saying GW is not anthropogenic. The 97% of climate scientists that have researched the matter for the past 4 decades would strongly disagree. I'm no climate scientist, nor have I read all of the research documents first hand, but if 97% of the experts that deal with the shit on a daily basis have come to similar conclusions based on mountains of peer reviewed scientific evidence, I think I'll take their opinion on the matter pretty seriously. To outrightly dismiss it would require either intentional ignorance or loads of peer reviewed scientific evidence. Guess which one you have?

[cale]

We are not superior enough to change the course of things to come, that's rediculous. "Steering" nature in some direction even more so.

That is a statement formed of opinion and not fact, there are facts to the contrary. Have you actually went out of your way to educate yourself on the matter or do you just choose to form conclusion on scientific principle based on your unqualified logic and intuition?

[Fusion]

So they're sure the global temperature would've remained at status quo had we not been here?

"All great men are gifted with intuition. They know without reasoning or analysis, what they need to know."
Alexis Carrel

[cale]

You're not getting it, it's not how high the temperature is...it's at the rate in which it's increasing that is the cause for concern. It's been shown that ever since man has been burning fossil fuels temperatures have been continually rising at an ever increasing rate, a rate which they argue should not be happening thus leaving us as the cause.

Edit - so essentially you ignore facts and come to your own conclusions, I conclude you're an idiot. Fortunately with your logic I need not solely rely on your continual examples of ignorance to the topic at hand, but my intuition makes it case closed!

[Fusion]

All scientists aside, the same thing happened in the 70's (irc) except the temps were continually lowering and people were preparing for an ice age.

Btw.: 'Global Warming' is sooo 2010. It's 'Climate Change' now.

[cale]

They are two vastly different processes, but good try....you'll get it soon lil' guy!

[Sailor37]

It's hard to deny the fact that human activity has a negative effect on local environmental cleanliness and health, but to believe that we can influence global temperature is laughable.

You watch.... the liberals will ease off the climate change issue, because no one is buying it, and begin steering the debate towards the detrimental health effects that greenhouse gases, and hazardous air pollutants have on people. That's something that's almost impossible to deny...that you're being exposed toxins hazardous to your health. It's already started with EPA rules put in place over the last few years limiting NOx, CO, formaldehyde emissions from all sorts of stationary equipment.

In some urban areas, you can't even install in a gas-fired turbine or engine driven compressor...it has to be electric, because NOx limits are set to zero, which is impossible to meet. California, New Mexico and Wyoming state laws are unmatched in their ability to hinder progress.

The debate on whether or not climate change is loud and obnoxious, but the fact is emission laws are being slowly passed and implemented without notice of the general public.

[cale]

It's hard to deny the fact that human activity has a negative effect on local environmental cleanliness and health, but to believe that we can influence global temperature is laughable.

You're right, what do the overwhelming majority with degree's on the subject know about it anyway? Must be some sort of liberal agenda! Because...you know, only liberals accept climate change. It's DEFINITELY a political stance.

[z31maniac]

There is science to back it up from credible peer revue'd sources, I simply adopt a different stance than you after reviewing what has been made available. Misuse of the word ignorance is ignorant, buy a dictionary

He can't afford it. He needed a Union job.

[Vedubin01]

Nobel Prize-Winning Physicist Resigns Over Global Warming....

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/14/nobel-prize-winning-physicist-resigns-from-top-physics-group-over-global/?test=latestnews

I guess because he is a nobel prize winning physicist it would not make him any more knowledgeable on global warming?


because its Fauxnews reporting it, its all BS anyway...

[mrsleeve]

^

well we all know they give those out base on merit now adays. After all Al got one for a making a movie to settle the science and the 0 got one on credit for the shit he was/is going to do. :rofl: