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.
A scam to some, a reality to others. Do you really think that all the pollutants we put into the air doesn't affect the atmosphere. I'm sorry but I want to protect the earth for future generations.
Don't have to worry about future generations--------BO and Planned Parenthood have already taken care of that!
People are getting their "facts" from blogs that have no way of backing up any of the claims that are made? People will believe anything they read on the internet.
People will believe anything they read in the liberal newspapers and anything that comes out of the mouths of the liberal media!
I wonder how many of these people, the ones who bite hook line and sinker, the scam that is being pushed called man-made global warming, realize that they are being used by people who want to eliminate Western civilization and capitalism in order to bring in their utopian marxism?
I sincerely wish you people who are die hard believers in this scam watch the video posted in the 2nd post of this thread. Maybe you don't realize that you are being played for fools, used only as a tool in an attempt to fundamentally transform Western civilization into a marxist culture.
Do some soul searching. Is it possible you are being lied to? Is it possible people are willfully causing you to react based upon emotion rather than use logic and common sense? Is it possible that there is an agenda, one not based on weather, climate, saving the earth, etc. that is driving the claim of the alarmists? Is it possible... ?
(1) Warming not ‘global’. It is shown in satellite data to be northern hemisphere only
(2) It is now not warming. Warming (global mean and northern hemisphere) stopped in the 1990s
(3) Models suggest atmosphere should warm 20% faster than surface but surface warming was 33% faster during the time satellites and surface observations used. This suggests GHG theory wrong, and surface temperature contaminated.
(4) Temperatures longer term have been modified to enhance warming trend and minimize cyclical appearance. Station dropout, missing data, change of local siting, urbanization, instrumentation contaminate the record, producing exaggerating warming. The GAO scolded NOAA for poor compliance with siting standards.
(5) Those who create the temperature records have been shown in analysis and emails to take steps to eliminate inconvenient temperature trends like the Medieval Warm Period, the 1940s warm blip and cooling since 1998. Steps have included removal of the urban heat island adjustment and as Wigley suggested in a climategate email, introduce 0.15C of artificial cooling of global ocean temperatures near 1940.
What is your background and research in? How credible are YOU? Are you saying that scientists are just these conspiracy theorists who claim to know science but don't know jack? Even though they've helped us advanced with technology?
Your arguments are similar to "Earth is actually a rectangle; it's not round, didn't cha know"?
How about stop polarizing people? What is a liberal these days (least in the U.S.).
It's not about being liberal.
But, so long as you have your A.C. on in your home and car, and you're privileged of course you're going to scoff at those who are concerned about sane enough issues like global warming crisis besides what's on TMZ.
Does that make a fact of objection stop being a fact of objection? For instance, if I am not a mathematician, does my claiming 2+2 = 4 become invalid?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kat949
How credible are YOU?
When did science start operating on credibility rather than a strict process of verification, validation, and replication?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kat949
Are you saying that scientists are just these conspiracy theorists who claim to know science but don't know jack?
I am claiming they have not validated their hypothesis. This is evident by their own work. You do know what the scientific method is? Maybe you can point out to us their work and how it has established itself through such a rigorous process? You do understand what science it right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kat949
Even though they've helped us advanced with technology?
Where does this fit into scientific process?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kat949
Your arguments are similar to "Earth is actually a rectangle; it's not round, didn't cha know"?
Ironic. Though completely lost on you I am assuming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kat949
Grow up. Stop being so ignorant and self-hating!
You mean like making appeals to authority, ignorantly condemning others about science while displaying examples of complete ignorance in the process?
What next? Going to throw out "denier", maybe make a few accusations of being paid by the oil company?
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.
