Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think Mars need some climate change... I didn't realize we could do so fast and easily... silly me, I thought things like that would take millions of years and a whole lot of stuff... I didn't realize changing something by 0.000000000001% would do it... silly me, I didn't realize that it took my money to put into a liberals pocket to fix the world... then that liberal would use part of that money to fund the Democrat party... wow, strange world we live in when politics is so tightly wound with money... err, I mean climate change...
I think Mars need some climate change... I didn't realize we could do so fast and easily... silly me, I thought things like that would take millions of years and a whole lot of stuff... I didn't realize changing something by 0.000000000001% would do it... silly me, I didn't realize that it took my money to put into a liberals pocket to fix the world... then that liberal would use part of that money to fund the Democrat party... wow, strange world we live in when politics is so tightly wound with money... err, I mean climate change...
Confidence men work both sides of the aisle.
And always, the Peanut Gallery.
Last edited by Hyperthetic; 06-01-2014 at 05:09 PM..
We survived acid rain, 3 mile island, ozone depletion, new ice age, overpopulation, red dye #3, countless water and food shortages, Exxon Valdez and every other environmental "disaster" that we have faced for the last 5000 years, I'm sure we will survive this one too. After all, it's not hard to survive something that not's real.
Not only have we survived all of these "disasters" people are living longer, happier and healthier lives than at any point in human history. All while we continue to add to our population.
In other words, the environmental doomsayers are wrong and have always been wrong. Anyone that believes them is a moron.
Um, what?
You do realize that efforts were taken to mitigate nearly all the problems you listed. We have everything from new reactor designs to reduce the risk of meltdowns to removing freon from the environment to restore the ozone layer. We also got rid of countless food additives that caused problems (dyes included), and helped get around various food and water shortages via more efficient technology. Claiming that we "survived" all those problems - while ignoring the effort made to get around them - and thus the problems weren't "real" makes as much sense as claiming cancer "isn't a real threat" because a person had it discovered and treated in time.
Also, I think you're being grossly optimistic regarding "surviving" over-population - it's not as if we're out of the woodwork on that one... finally, just because humanity "survives" doesn't mean it will be pleasant. Plenty of people DIDN'T survive the various things you listed as "not being problems" I'm inclined to think that they might disagree with your nonchalant dismissal of what happened as being no big deal.
Regardless of what level climate change is actually happening - and what amount of it is caused by humans - it is blind folly to assume that nothing is wrong or that we'll survive what happens "just because." That is gross dereliction of duty and is no better than stinking one's head in the sand, hoping nothing bad happens.
Yeah, pretty much everything...When you just make stuff up, you should be able to do better than that....AGW IS rigorously peer reviewed, tested and verified science, not opinion...Consensus of the evidence has always been part of science....
So let's see .... I post this chart that I found elsewhere. It shows that increased volcanic activity combined with decreased solar activity leads to global cooling, sometimes within months. Note that CO2 does not even appear on the chart, proving that CO2 has no effect. I call that settled science. Those who deny the truth of this chart are deniers and worse.
Bet I'd have no problem whatsoever finding a bunch of pseudo scientists to do the peer review.
Climatology is a pseudo science, and those who practice it are pseudo scientists. The rely entirely upon computer models, which are only as good as their assumptions, and the underlying accuracy of the data upon which they base their assumptions.
Real science would begin with, oh, I dont know, maybe a good sized self contained, climate controlled environment into which different imputs could be added to test various hypotheses. Then the results would be published and other real scientists could repeat the publishes experiments and verify the results, if they can be verified.
Are you saying that computer models run by climatologists are peer reviewed? How? By other climatologists running the same program, seeing that they get the same result, and therefore the hypothesis is proven true?
Seems like the AGW crowd is creating tautologies then claiming the results as truth.
If c02 were destroying mother earth there would be calls too END it not TAX it. That shows the true intent of these global warming crooks. They have convinced many to hand over money in the biggest scam ever hoisted on the world and they gladly do it thinking they are saving the world. Meanwhile the same co2 is spit out as was before but now everything is just more expensive thanks to these fools.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Climate Change...Years of Living Dangerously.
