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.
Ah, so you don't know anything about it, you just regurgitate what others have said about it and call anyone "ignorant" who disagrees with you (including the 1000s of scientists who believe man-made global warming is bull).
Also interesting is how you admit to not knowing too much about it, but can say that the peer-reviewed articles from respectable scientific journals I posted are "bull****" arguments. Remind me again who is in a state of ignorance?
The point is that there is no empirical evidence that "global warming" is caused by humans. There is a plethora of credible scientific evidence that global warming is not man-made. Yet, we have politicians claiming that we need to spend billions if not trillions of dollars solving this "problem" that may very well have no solution. Additionally, no one has even proven that global warming is a problem!
Please keep your political and religious views to yourself.
As for the fiance science teacher...hasn't anyone told him that man-made global warming is not proven? How ridiculously absurd. But I'm sure he has enough of a grasp on chaotic dynamical systems to prove it.
Look, 99% of all scientists believe global warming IS man-made!
Being able to find scientists who don't think it's unfounded or a big hoax means NOTHING. There are 6 billion people in the world for pete's sake. I can just as easily find people with credible evidence that the moon landing was shoot in a studio or that the Holocaust never happened.
Secondly, "political and religious views"? Where did that come from? I don't know what that is even supposed to mean. I can see how it is a "political" view but I definitely don't see how it's a religious view.
Carbon Dioxide is part of the natural system that gives us life, we breath it out, plants need it to live and they breath it in and out comes Oxygen... The oceans absort it and puts out oxygen from the plants, it is all in a natural cycle...
There is only so much of it here, we don't create it, it has always been here... it is just another cry for some kind of control....
Many scientists agree that we need to stabalize CO2 levels at 350PPM. CO2 levels are exponentially increasing and it is driving up temperatures. Man is partly to blame for this. However, technology investment will find ways at reducing emissions.
Last edited by GraniteStater; 03-01-2009 at 01:02 PM..
Even if we are not WARMING the planet, we are still polluting and destroying the environment at a tremendous rate to the point it is giving people cancer, the same stuff causing this is more than likely also causing global warming, it is definitely destroying the environment though. Whether it is man made or not, is the question, but ONLY on the heat factor...
There are MANY more reasons to promote sustainability w/o the plausibility of an actual temperature rise.
Pretty much ANY environmental cause is lumped in with the likelihood of man made vs. non man made global warming, and by the political pundits and the far right, the baby is thrown out with the bath water...
Funny thing is, the main people against environmental regulations and pro corporations are going to be the ones MOST effected by it. Sadly, ignorance often wins out.
Coal is also the dirtiest way to generate electricity. Most people realize this and that is why you see so much public opposition to new generation. The list of pollutants include: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, radiation, and mercury.
Many scientists agree that we need to stabalize CO2 levels at 350PPM. CO2 levels are exponentially increasing and it is driving up temperatures. Man is partly to blame for this. However, technology investment will find ways at reducing emissions.
We can't even stablize the Stock market.
All nature has to do is have a few "Natural" forest fires like of late, Volcanic blow to lower the temps and a host of other things that dwarf anything man can do. The CO2 isn't going to change because of us. There is billions of cubic tons of Methane, CO2 and other gases that were absorbed by the oceans that could release on their own when they fell like getting out for a stretch, then what...
Simple rule, clean up after yourself, government only wants to control, they don't give a hoot about the facts.
Coal is also the dirtiest way to generate electricity. Most people realize this and that is why you see so much public opposition to new generation. The list of pollutants include: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, radiation, and mercury.
Good thing we wiped out the Buffalo, there were millions and millions of them, by your standards, they put out tons of Methane gas very day!
Coal that is use in American Power Plants is some of the cleasnest burning plants in the world with rediculous restrictions on the releases from the stacks. Go to China and they are putting some one or two coal fired power plants on line every week, and they are not "Clean Burn" tech. They are blacken the sky tech... so go there and wave your flag.
Funny how Obama during the elections cycle claimed that clean coal tech was the wave of the future and millions of new jobs... so you mean he was lying?
Good thing we wiped out the Buffalo, there were millions and millions of them, by your standards, they put out tons of Methane gas very day!
Coal that is use in American Power Plants is some of the cleasnest burning plants in the world with rediculous restrictions on the releases from the stacks. Go to China and they are putting some one or two coal fired power plants on line every week, and they are not "Clean Burn" tech. They are blacken the sky tech... so go there and wave your flag.
Funny how Obama during the elections cycle claimed that clean coal tech was the wave of the future and millions of new jobs... so you mean he was lying?
The words "clean" and "coal" do not fit into the same sentence and never will. I don't care who backs it. Capturing CO2 emissions and pumping them underground does not make a coal plant "clean", it's just like sweeping the dust under the rug... it's still there.
The words "clean" and "coal" do not fit into the same sentence and never will. I don't care who backs it. Capturing CO2 emissions and pumping them underground does not make a coal plant "clean", it's just like sweeping the dust under the rug... it's still there.
CO2 is part of the life cycle of the planet, more of it and plants thrive, too little of it they die off. Without them, we don't live either. A natural Forest fire puts more CO2 into the air system than all the power plants do...
Next big issue will be too much Oxygen..... They just haven't figured the angle to get the sheeple to get on board yet or where to make the money.
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.
