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.
Tossing around a few 'sciencey sounding' words and calling other people 'too stupid' and 'fascist' doesn't mean you have a clue what you are talking about because that answer clearly shows you don't.
What's so different? Do you seriously need someone else to spoon feed you when you find out so easily yourself? There are many reputable sources you could find if you chose to educate yourself.
But if you want a recommendation, you could start at the beginning and learn about the Discovery of Global Warming....
From the American Institute of Physics - by Dr Spencer Weart:
Then follow all the subsections and links, to read all the cited research papers and resources... then get back to us when (or if) you've learnt enough of the basics to even discuss this like a grownup without the name calling.
again you continue the lie
fact: the earth has warmed and cooled many, many times
fact : it is a natural occurrence
fact : man has very little effect/affect on it...1%- to maybe 10%
fact: even if it was a 25% affect, is still would not be man-made/man-CAUSED
the is the lie of you doomers...you think that 10% equals a made/caused
fact: the earth has warmed and cooled many, many times
fact : it is a natural occurrence
fact : man has very little effect/affect on it...1%- to maybe 10%
fact: even if it was a 25% affect, is still would not be man-made/man-CAUSED
the is the lie of you doomers...you think that 10% equals a made/caused
you have been PROVEN to be continuing a lie
Fact: Your posts prove you don't have a clue what you are talking about.
Fact: You clearly have no desire to educate yourself about the basics of climate science, otherwise you would have by now. Did you even click on any of those links I provided to the American Institute of Physics to have a look?
A few questions if I may (to see if your telling the truth above.)
1.) List 2 branches of science (or 2 kinds of scientists) that are connected to paleontology?
- And explain how they are connected?
2.) Would a group of scientists in the same field be more like a tight knit group (or) independent thinking persons?
- And if a tight knit group, what event would cause scientists in the same field to act like independent thinking persons?
- And what event would cause them to become a tight knit group again?
3.) Is there any branch of science that is not connected to another branch?
- If so what branch?
If what you said above is true you should be able to answer at least 2 of the above questions.
Chad.
Isn't it funny that he hasn't answered yet? Perhaps his fingers are flying over the keyboard googling this & that.
Is that so? Yes, I see liberals say that quite often. Oddly enough though, they simply announce it as fact without actually offering any evidence that it is true. Just as you did. And while offering unsubstantiated accusations and baseless conspiracy theories as fact, they actually consider themselves to be intellectually superior. That's the funny part about it.
The amount of scientific information that I have seen posted on this forum tends to get glossed over by science deniers, should I just cut and paste those past posts for you because it seems like you might have missed them?
actually the SCIENCE shows that the earth warms and cools naturally...has NOTHING to do with man
that is the liberal hoax... they say man- made....which is a lie
and teh science also shows that climate change for the last two million years is cyclical in nature. it also shows that there has been a general cooling trend over that same period of time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist There isn't any evidence against anthropogenic global warming. The hoax is by those who want to spread doubt about climate science. Climate science deniers are the gullible ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78
And yet the information I listen to comes from actual scientists....go figure. Anyway, if this is all just a hoax to you, why even bother commenting about it trying to convince people it is just a hoax? Makes me wonder who the ones are that are actually the gullible ones.
you two are arguing the same thing but you dont realize it. nice job arguing amongst yourselves.
fact : man has very little effect/affect on it...1%- to maybe 10%
fact: even if it was a 25% affect, is still would not be man-made/man-CAUSED
the is the lie of you doomers...you think that 10% equals a made/caused
you have been PROVEN to be continuing a lie
I would very much like to see the evidence supporting your 1-10% "fact." Please provide it so that I may be enlightened. It would also be helpful if your evidence could clarify the level of real effect that this translates into to make you conclude that a 10% human cause would be an insignificant climate impact. I'll be waiting...thanks in advance.
LOL... and calling the scientists liars is just fine and dandy!
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.
