Global Warming is over.

[herbivor]

good god you're obtuse

the poll question doesn't even ask what your side says the poll proves. it does not ask if climate change is caused by human activity, only if human activity has had an infuence.

that is far different than what you and others would have us skeptics believe.

Q2.*“Do*you*think*human*activity*is*a*significant*contributing*factor*in changing*mean*global*temperatures?”

Mind= Blown:loco:

No on here (or anywhere) has stated that human activity alone causes the climate to change. That's fucking ridiculous. All we are saying is that it is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures in recent decades. We're basically saying "Yes" to question #2.

In the PBS documentary, a reporter for the National Review was curious why no one was talking about climate change, so she went around and tried to asked the same question as #2 to all of the GOP congressman. In every case, they refused to answer the question or would run from her escaping in the elevator to avoid answering. It has become political suicide in recent years for any Republican to agree with the scientific consensus. So they all just avoid answering the question. Even Romney changed his position in the last 4 years from firmly agreeing that humans are significantly contributing, to "the science is not settled" mantra. The science has in fact gotten stronger in the past 4 years, yet the politicians have quieted.

Again, you should watch the documentary to know where your disinformation is coming from and why you are receiving it. You'll have to have a lot of pride and or ignorance to continue indefinitely with your position on this.

[Thizzelle]

It's not global warming as much as it's HELL on the rise!

[CorvallisBMW]

^WTF does that mean?

[gwb72tii]

Mind= Blown:loco:

No on here (or anywhere) has stated that human activity alone causes the climate to change. That's fucking ridiculous. All we are saying is that it is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures in recent decades. We're basically saying "Yes" to question #2.

i'm not letting you get away with this satement
your side maintains that humans are the proximate cause of climate change, not just that hhumans have a significant influence.

i hadn't even realized the poll and its small sample size of 79 climate scientists was the "consensus" you guys hold up as proof until i ran across it by accident. a sample of 79 climate scientists, all publicly funded, out of the many thousands of climate related scientists it not a representative poll. i am surprised you think this is a valid argument

and i will watch the documentary somewhere in between the world series game

[rwh11385]

i'm not letting you get away with this satement
your side maintains that humans are the proximate cause of climate change, not just that hhumans have a significant influence.

i hadn't even realized the poll and its small sample size of 79 climate scientists was the "consensus" you guys hold up as proof until i ran across it by accident. a sample of 79 climate scientists, all publicly funded, out of how many thousands of climate related scientists it not a representative poll.

How did you get so much hay to build all these strawmen?

[BraveUlysses]

i hadn't even realized the poll and its small sample size of 79 climate scientists was the "consensus" you guys hold up as proof until i ran across it by accident.

Post some quotes of people in here endorsing this to prove you're not 100% full of shit.

This is why nobody takes you or your posts seriously--don't delude yourself into thinking you contribute anything to this forum when all of your posts in this thread consist of you posting articles and demanding people prove to you that the article is wrong.

You are the definition of troll.

[nando]

^WTF does that mean?

Nobody knows.

[CorvallisBMW]

Nobody knows.

It's the Apocalypse! Hell is coming to Earth! That's why it's Hot! Everyone repent and praise the baby Jeebus!

Maybe that's what he meant?

[gwb72tii]

brave, if you don't recall the debates that have occured in this blog about consensus, than you haven't been paying attention. it comes up all the time.
do a search

[BraveUlysses]

brave, if you don't recall the debates that have occured in this blog about consensus, than you haven't been paying attention. it comes up all the time.
do a search

To quote one of your more eloquent contributions to r3v:

prove it pinhead. answer the questions or u lose the debate.

[cale]

Post some quotes of people in here endorsing this to prove you're not 100% full of shit.

This is why nobody takes you or your posts seriously--don't delude yourself into thinking you contribute anything to this forum when all of your posts in this thread consist of you posting articles and demanding people prove to you that the article is wrong.

You are the definition of troll.

Trolls are aware of what they're doing. He's just an old man, stuck in his ways and cannot be convinced by the overwhelming majority of specialists in a field.

That is the definition of stubborn and stupid.

[herbivor]

i'm not letting you get away with this satement
your side maintains that humans are the proximate cause of climate change, not just that humans have a significant influence.

So are you saying that you would consider it plausible that humans are a significant contributor to the recent climate change but not plausible that humans are the only contribution to a changing climate? I would agree with that.
Again, the question that has always been asked amongst the scientists was if humans were a significant contributor or mostly contribute to recent global warming trends. No one ever asked or ever stated that humans are the sole contributor to global warming as that in unprovable, and no scientist would state that as fact no matter how much evidence we have.

[markt51]

I went to school for Computer science and Archaeology, Just wanted to leave my input on why i dont believe Global Warming is caused by humans alone, and that this isnt just something that came about bc of the way we live.

Anyone who is in Geology, Archaeology, or any other field that deals with Soils, carbon dating of the ground, etc will tell you that "Global Warming" has occurred multiple times over the course of earth's lifetime. In the same sense that the polarity of earths poles change every couple thousand years. Its not an event that is only occurring now, or a few years ago as the media and hippies(i think you know what i mean by hippies....the crazy holy art thou prius drivers) made it out to be. It was/is a natural event.

I will agree that yes, human activity and pollution probably made it effects different than it would have been if we didn't exist. But it would have occurred whether we were here or not. People with big trucks, factories, (insert your human reason here) didnt cause global warming.

First hand evidence i have seen, or reasoning, whatever you want to call it: an excavation site that was studied in Florida, we called it the "Solana Site" was under water at the time it was occupied. The site was a few hundred yards inland, and had evidence of being under water for a long period of time(think barnacles, certain types of mineral deposits that take a certain time underwater to form, and other things with the soil that could be correlated to being underwater). Basically it was under water when the last "Global Warming" occurred, and the seas had risen to a higher level then they are at present.

I honestly dont remember all the specifics about the water levels at the site etc, so maybe my argument isnt as strong to you as i know it to be in my head. But my point is, Global warming is natural, and comes and goes every few thousand years. The event itself isnt man made, but human activities certainly could influence its severity.

Also. What the hell do you think the cycle of "ice ages" are??!?! If you even somewhat accept what has been proven over countless years about the ice ages, then you have to believe in Natural Global warming, not that global warming was man made. There have been at least 5 "ice ages" in earth's life. As said before, its a natural cycle of warming/cooling. And by definition, we are still in the ice age that began some 2 and a half million years ago. So yea, earth is going to warm up, shit is going to melt, seas will rise, and then it will get cold again. Just as it has always done.

[gwb72tii]

markt51, that kind of common sense science based approach will not work in this blog

;)

[rwh11385]

markt51, that kind of common sense science based approach will not work in this blog

;)

How are you reading what he wrote as different from what herbivor just wrote? Does your mental bias building skew his words as you read the post, or what?

So are you saying that you would consider it plausible that humans are a significant contributor to the recent climate change but not plausible that humans are the only contribution to a changing climate? I would agree with that.
Again, the question that has always been asked amongst the scientists was if humans were a significant contributor or mostly contribute to recent global warming trends. No one ever asked or ever stated that humans are the sole contributor to global warming as that in unprovable, and no scientist would state that as fact no matter how much evidence we have.

I will agree that yes, human activity and pollution probably made it effects different than it would have been if we didn't exist. But it would have occurred whether we were here or not. People with big trucks, factories, (insert your human reason here) didnt cause global warming

It's ridiculous that your logical ability is so poor that you choose to read posts as would make your "argument" valid instead of simply constructing a false one.

Maybe you realize that you are unable to actually discuss any issue on any meaningful level with real people, so you naturally construct strawmen to do battle with.