Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

There is no scientific consensus
ifihadahif Posted: Tue Aug 21 06:29:53 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  http://patriotpost.us/alexander/edition.asp?id=547


 
addi Posted: Tue Aug 21 06:41:11 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  oh, for heaven's sake, hif. Give it a rest.

We all know where you stand on this...Global warming is pure fantasy, Al Gore is the anti-christ, and anyone concerned that our present government isn't doing enough to protect the environment is a liberal tree hugging unpatriotic nutcase, etc...etc...


 
DanSRose Posted: Tue Aug 21 11:22:09 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Like the Smithsonian! That liberal pinko organization has totally been pushing the Global Foaming Hoaxing for years!



 
sweet p Posted: Tue Aug 21 17:40:11 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  haha

>As it turns out, there are some other planets in our solar system which are experiencing global warming -- and these planets don't have SUVs.


ohhh ok. i get it. SUVs can STOP global warming, right?



 
Mesh Posted: Tue Aug 21 18:49:26 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Well, whatever. Whether or not Global Warming is a hoax/junk science altogether or is just part of a natural cycle or not, I think it can still be agreed that humans have still had a negative impact on the natural environment in many apsects(especially the marine environment, I don't see HOW that could possibly be refuted) and steps should be taken to reverse this, or at least stop it from continuing.

All in all, regardless of the global warming issue, negative impacts on the environment and the many and diverse ecosystems of this planet should be rightfully recognized and the proper care should be applied to minimize it.



Also, I am stupid.


 
addi Posted: Tue Aug 21 18:52:01 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  sweet p said:

>ohhh ok. i get it. SUVs can STOP global warming, right?


it makes perfect sense if you stop and think about it...
..or get a lobotomy

Hif, you're a great guy and friend, but this obsession with anything Al Gore is beginning to scare me. Are you developing a secret man-crush on him?

: )



 
addi Posted: Tue Aug 21 18:55:55 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Mr. Misses said:

>Also, I am stupid.

Actually that was one of your more thoughtful and intelligent posts in quite some time, meshie...and I'm not just saying that cuz I have a man-crush on you either.

*I waited all day by the phone for your call to tell me you were at the airport here ready to give me my tuesday hug...but it never came.

I feel so...so...so cheap and used!


 
ifihadahif Posted: Tue Aug 21 21:07:03 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>sweet p said:
>
>>ohhh ok. i get it. SUVs can STOP global warming, right?
>
>
>it makes perfect sense if you stop and think about it...
>..or get a lobotomy
>
>Hif, you're a great guy and friend, but this obsession with anything Al Gore is beginning to scare me. Are you developing a secret man-crush on him?
>
>: )
>
Actually I think he's a gay Vulcan.
:-)


 
ifihadahif Posted: Tue Aug 21 21:14:32 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>oh, for heaven's sake, hif. Give it a rest.
>
>We all know where you stand on this...Global warming is pure fantasy.
>
True enough.


 
addi Posted: Tue Aug 21 21:40:28 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>Actually I think he's a gay Vulcan.
>:-)

I don't think it's in a Vulcan's nature to be happy, hiffer.


 
DanSRose Posted: Tue Aug 21 22:32:07 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  The brain eating mutant from Heroes is being the gay Vulcan in the Star Trek prequel. More awesome than clubbing a baby seal.


 
innocenceNonus Posted: Tue Aug 21 23:20:05 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  there were so many inappropriate jokes manifested in that last post, i don't know what to do with myself.

maybe i'll go eat some babies.

or tell a dead baby joke.







oh boy.


 
Posted: Wed Aug 22 00:21:12 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  "The computer models cited by Albert Gore and company are outcome-based, depending on how a programmer varies some of the five million input parameters or the multitude of negative and positive feedbacks in the program."

That's as far as I got before my eyes started rolling beyond my control. I tried to read it, I really did.


 
Mark Posted: Wed Aug 22 06:05:47 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>Al Gore is the anti-christ
this actually made me laugh. In a dutch Christian newspaper today a former host of the Evenagelische Omroep (~Evangelical Network) claims this hype around the climate signs the coming of the anti-christ. He realised this when he saw Live Earth. All those people "bonding". Apparently he thinks its consistant with Revelation 13:13

"And he performed great and miraculous signs, even causing
fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of men." (Holy Bible - new international version 1996)

(linkt to the article. It is in dutch though, so you might need a nice bablefish translation... as I can't be arsed to translate it :)
http://www.nd.nl/document.aspx?document=nd_artikel&vorigDocument=&id=98340

Anyway, like Mesh said, even if the global warming is a hoax we still have a negative effect on the environment.


 
addi Posted: Wed Aug 22 07:56:04 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Mark said:

>In a dutch Christian newspaper today a former host of the Evenagelische Omroep (~Evangelical Network) claims this hype around the climate signs the coming of the anti-christ.

God bless my Mom, but hardly a phone conversation goes by without her mentioning that our time here is almost over. All the prophecies are coming to fruition, and Christ will return any day now to begin his 1,000 year reign on earth.
I just pray that the Rapture happens when I'm fully clothed, cuz nothing would be more embarassing than rising up to heaven just wearing my boxers.

>Anyway, like Mesh said, even if the global warming is a hoax we still have a negative effect on the environment.

Global warming IS happening. That;s not the question. There may be some valid debate over the exact causes of why, but rational beings know that it's real.
And rational beings also know that the role humans are playing to escalate the polluting of our air, land, and water will have serious negative consequences to our future if we don't do something about it...NOW!...regardless of the role it may play, or not play in global temperature increases.

Just plain f*#@ing common sense.


*nice to hear from you Markie Mark


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Aug 22 17:38:54 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>Mark said:
>
>>In a dutch Christian newspaper today a former host of the Evenagelische Omroep (~Evangelical Network) claims this hype around the climate signs the coming of the anti-christ.
>
>God bless my Mom, but hardly a phone conversation goes by without her mentioning that our time here is almost over. All the prophecies are coming to fruition, and Christ will return any day now to begin his 1,000 year reign on earth.
>I just pray that the Rapture happens when I'm fully clothed, cuz nothing would be more embarassing than rising up to heaven just wearing my boxers.
>
>>Anyway, like Mesh said, even if the global warming is a hoax we still have a negative effect on the environment.
>
>Global warming IS happening. That;s not the question. There may be some valid debate over the exact causes of why, but rational beings know that it's real.
>And rational beings also know that the role humans are playing to escalate the polluting of our air, land, and water will have serious negative consequences to our future if we don't do something about it...NOW!...regardless of the role it may play, or not play in global temperature increases.
>
>Just plain f*#@ing common sense.
>
No rational person has said that the earth has not warmed, Christ the article I just posted even noted other planets in our solar system are warming along with Earth.
Perhaps the Earth was warming because we were coming out of the Little Ice Age a few hundred years ago.
My argument is with those who say the science is settled and there is a consensus among the world's scientists. That is just not true. Even more to the point, most of the world's scientists do not work in the area of climatology.
My argument is also with those who would silence those who disagree, like RFK Jr. who called us treasonous and said we should be treated as such. What a dickhead. Or the ignorant bitch on the weather channel who say all meterologists who don't subscribe to man-made global warming ideology should be de-certified. Or Newsweek magazine, who's own editor decried the article, calling us all conspirators.
WTF ?
Rational beings don't necessarily know that global warming is real anymore. There is valid evidence that the earth has actually been cooling since 1999.

My other argument is this. Who is to say this is the optimum climate and we should do whatever we can to see that it doesn't change ? Isn't that just another way of fucking with mother nature since the climate is always going to change as it has since the dawn of time ?


 
addi Posted: Wed Aug 22 18:51:05 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  What constitutes a consensus for you? Complete uninimity among scientists?

From everything I've heard and read the vast majority of scientists knowledgable with climate issues do agree that global warming is happening, and that humans are having an accelerating effect on it happening.
Am I saying that every scientist agrees with this? Of course not. If we waited for every scientist to agree on some theory before we accepted it as fact we'd be idiots. There were scientists that scoffed at Galileo's heliocentric view of the universe. There are scientists now that don't adhere to the theory of evolution. This doesn't invalidate those theories because some scientists don't agree with these views.

So when you copy and paste these articles dissing the causes of global warming please don't try to pass them off as valid disproof on the theories presented by Gore and the majority of the global scientific community. It's not a logical step.

Furthermore (yes..I'm beating a dead horse here) it's assinine and dangerous to hold a view that we aren't having a negative effect on the earth's climate. Even if we concede that we don't have all the answers on our effect on the climate, the very real possibility remains that what these "radical nutcases" are saying IS true.
What do the people that are going around saying "Hogwash" to the theory of global warming think we should do? Throw the dice and pray we're lucky? Just keep polluting the environment with toxins, because people just may not be the cause of a rising temperature? How tenable is that? It's fucking ridiculous and irresponsible is what it is.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Aug 22 22:09:46 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>>So when you copy and paste these articles dissing the causes of global warming please don't try to pass them off as valid disproof on the theories presented by Gore and the majority of the global scientific community. It's not a logical step.
>
I don't believe I copied and pasted any articles, if you noticed, I posted a link up there.

>Furthermore (yes..I'm beating a dead horse here) it's assinine and dangerous to hold a view that we aren't having a negative effect on the earth's climate. Even if we concede that we don't have all the answers on our effect on the climate, the very real possibility remains that what these "radical nutcases" are saying IS true.
>What do the people that are going around saying "Hogwash" to the theory of global warming think we should do? Throw the dice and pray we're lucky? Just keep polluting the environment with toxins, because people just may not be the cause of a rising temperature? How tenable is that? It's fucking ridiculous and irresponsible is what it is.
>
And where do you get off putting words in my mouth ? Who is saying we should pollute the environment.
I'm only saying that the global warming alarmism is just that. Alarmism.
The environmental movement that began in the sixties was predicated on lies. See Silent Spring.
That's a fact.
You said Al Gore is an evironmentalist that "walks the walk".
His house consumes 20 times more energy than the average house and Dubya's house in Texas is considered "green",
That's a fact.
Many of the same scientists that are espousing the global warming alarmism today were espousing the coming ice age alarmism in the 70's.
That's a fact.

It is not responsible to wantonly pollute, but it's just as irresponsible to create alarmism over global warming just to get people to subscribe to your idea of how people should lead their lives.

Now that we know much of the solar system is warming as well, what do you suppose is causing it? our SUV's ?
Is it possible it could be THE SUN ?
I don't subscribe to the notion that is dangerous to think we aren't having a negative effect on the earth's climate. First off, what exactly is a negative effect ? Hotter ? Colder?
Or would you consider both to be negative ?
And secondly, the evidence is just not there. As the article says, there is just as much of a chance of a computer model based on ignorance to be as accurate as all the others. There are way too many variables. For instance not a single model can account for clouds, the number one greenhouse gas, and they don't have a program to deal with it. WTF !
I personally consider it assinine and dangerous, to use your own words, to chastise those who have a different point of view from your own.



 
addi Posted: Thu Aug 23 07:26:01 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>I don't believe I copied and pasted any articles, if you noticed, I posted a link up there.

now your splitting hairs. A link, a copy and paste..makes no difference. Your sources are primariliy from conservative anti-environmental sites or authors that promote opinions as fact and dismiss contrary findings as pure poppycock.


>And where do you get off putting words in my mouth ? Who is saying we should pollute the environment.

In so many words...you. When you argue against the possibility that we're having a direct negative effect on the climate you're basically saying we don't need to change our ways of polluting the air with toxic greenhouse gases. It's a fallicy that it's heating up the earth, so let's just stay the course, keep using energy the way we have been and ignore those ignorant alarmists. That is exactly how you come off here with the numerous anti-global warming threads you've started, whether that's your intention or not.


>The environmental movement that began in the sixties was predicated on lies. See Silent Spring.
>That's a fact.

No, hif. That's an opinion. A silly ignorant one if you ask me. To discount the great good started by the environmental movement over the past decades is really silly. And the whole Rachel Carson "Silent Spring" arguement you started some time ago was addressed, so I'm not wasting time on that again.

>You said Al Gore is an evironmentalist that "walks the walk".
>His house consumes 20 times more energy than the average house and Dubya's house in Texas is considered "green",
>That's a fact.

What the hell does this have to do with anything? Does Gore's home energy use have anything at all to do with disproving Global Warming? Does Bush's Texas "green house" have anything to do with his sad environmental policies over the past 6 years? No..it doesn't.


>It is not responsible to wantonly pollute, but it's just as irresponsible to create alarmism over global warming just to get people to subscribe to your idea of how people should lead their lives.

Even if I give you the benefit of doubt and say this Global warming thing is all alarmism. How is it irresponsible to be telling the world we need to limit the toxic greenhouse gases we're putting in the air; that we need to limit our human footprint on the environment? Do you believe that everything these scientific alarmists are suggesting we do to clean and lessen the effect we're having on earth is irresponsible?
Just what is so wrong with others telling us how we need to change our polluting ways to help make this a livable planet for our grandchildren? How dare they!!


>I don't subscribe to the notion that is dangerous to think we aren't having a negative effect on the earth's climate. First off, what exactly is a negative effect ? Hotter ? Colder?
>Or would you consider both to be negative ?

I feel a bit silly even needing to write this.
A negative effect on the earth's climate is anything that we do that contributes to accelerating the death of this planet. That includes spewing toxic waste into the air and water and land, depleting unrenewable resources, and directly causing the extinction of wildlife and vegitation.
I suppose I just put myself in the alarmist environmental nutcase group for you by saying that.


>I personally consider it assinine and dangerous, to use your own words, to chastise those who have a different point of view from your own.

I'll be as sincere as i possibly can be here. I have absolutely no problem with people having different views from me on a variety of issues. I have never claimed to have cornered the truth on complicated problems facing us.
However, when people have views that are irresponsible and dangerous I will speak out against them and publically disagree. I have zero problem speaking out against the practices of many Muslims today. I also have a clear conscience "chastizing" anyone putting forth views that are untenable and harmful to the good of humanity, and I see your position of dismissing the real possibilty of our effects on accelerating global warming (based solely on the thoughts of a few scientists) as worthy of chastisement.


 
addi Posted: Fri Aug 24 10:07:51 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I'm not really sure if it's a good idea to keep this going, but I accidently ran across this article. It's a quick read that does a good job explaining Global Warming in a fairly straightforward and objective manner.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/070716_gw_notwrong.html


 
mat_j Posted: Wed Aug 29 10:05:21 2007 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Mr. Misses said:
>Well, whatever. Whether or not Global Warming is a hoax/junk science altogether or is just part of a natural cycle or not, I think it can still be agreed that humans have still had a negative impact on the natural environment in many apsects(especially the marine environment, I don't see HOW that could possibly be refuted) and steps should be taken to reverse this, or at least stop it from continuing.



Amen Mr M.


Why the hell do we need to throw everything away, waste so much, make things out of plastics that'll be here longer than us and the next dominant species and why the in fucked ass hole of barbie Polymer Mohammed Burton Taylor Slutstein do you need a fucking 4x4/SUV in a city or suburb!!

Status symbols and pointless wankfests on wheels make me angry.






 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]