I no longer believe in Global Warming.. This video is why.

[mobobuff]

I appreciate your position, but you must realize that you're no different from the people who watch An Inconvenient Truth and then hit the streets with their mindless propaganda.

Don't let any one video change your mind, do some research, read articles, from both sides.

 

[MustangSVT]

3 hrs left for work.. meh

why not im watching it. so far , interesting.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: her209
So does that mean I'm cool to dump my oil down the drain?

..I save mine and use it in my chain saw. You should do the same.

 

[Macattak1]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: AndrewR
What I find amusing is that one of the cultures with the greatest long term mindset, the Chinese, are among the worst contributors to the global warming problem with their immense and increasing use of coal fired power plants. Guess the USA isn't the only place where short term gains are overruling long term considerations...

I think that they'll begin to realize the problem too, or rather I hope they will. Or at least I hope they will. They're in a rapid economic growth spurt, and such growth spurts are periodic things - they are not sustainable in the long run.
Growth like that seems to come on quickly, and everyone assumes it'll just keep its momentum. People get optimistic, too much so. Then the supply is ramped up too much, too quickly, to satisfy the increased demand, demand which is perceived to continue indefinitely. Once it's satiated though, after several years perhaps, then there's a slight recession. It's like an impulsive driver of the market, it moves ahead in pulses instead of at a steady pace. It seems to happen with China, and it happens here. Too much, too fast, or too little, too slowly.

Hopefully China will realize that 1) despite coal being abundant, it still will eventually run out, 2) it pollutes considerably, 3) money can be made off of alternative fuel sources, and 4) reducing emissions isn't only in their best interests.

Originally posted by: Macattak1
Greetings,

Global warming? 1/2 of 1 degree in the last century? That is not 'GLOBAL WARMING'.

It is a political movement that pays the bills for 1000's of people every day. They cash in on it. Just like other causes where we have thrown billions of $'s each year for 30 years and we have no cure. But their sure are alot of groups that make money on that.

To think that the Earth has never changed its overal temp we know is wrong.

The fact that the Arctic is all ice and no land means that if tides change it may freeze more or melt more. When it goes up 10 degrees world wide then call me.

Peace and Blessings.

1 degree Celcius over an entire globe can amount to a significant increase in the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. The oceans have a surface area of about 139 MILLION square miles. Alright, it's "only" 1 degree. That's a hell of a lot of surface area though, which means a hell of a lot of evaporation.

Doing something about global warming can make people rich, as can not doing anything about it. Keep going on the status quo, and fossil fuel producers and those who use their products will continue to bring in high profits. Or, put more money towards alternatives, and the manufacturers and researchers in those sectors will profit.
I'd sooner play it safe, so that in 50 years, when various oceanic currents are shutting down due to your "10 degree world wide" limit, we don't have to make an abrupt transition to a new, more environmentally friendly lifestyle. If we do it now, make the transition gradually, it will make it much easier.

Greetings,

That is a heck of alot of water vapor and surface area. Now if we can just figure out a way to show how dangerous the desserts are and all that area one could have another selling point. This is only an issue of the haves v/s the have nots.

The problem is that their is no global warming. If there was, that means that the BBC should have scared the heck out of everyone with their global cooling decades back. I remember those shows. Greenhouse gases are not our enemies. Water Vapor is not our enemy. Carbon Dioxide is not our enemy. They run at their own cycle. Simply looking at historical temps shows that burning down all the forests in the US, Europe, Asia, South America, etc. did not cause our earth to just keep getting hotter and hotter and hotter.

I am all for living responsibly. I recycle as much paper, glass, metal as I can. My kids turn off the faucets while they wash their hands. I keep my thermostat at 68 in the winter and high 70's in the summer. My house is full of floresents because my family is not good at turning out lites.

Would you take your child to the doctor because they coughed once? Had a feaver of 101 degrees? Tripped and fell? No, that would be an improper use of limited resources and a waste of money.

The UN now wants to get rid of family owned and free range chickens because they are sure that bird flue is going to come through family owned chickens and such. Now, I would think that it would come through the polluted and gross and inhumane and disgusting chicken ranches where they stick 100,000 chicken in to a space the size of my regridgerator. But hey, the shoot them up with heavy meds regularly through feed and such. If you ask me, the UN is doing this wrong. As if they should have the power to do it anyway. Taking Chicken out of the families of the Chinese, Indians, and Africans just makes them less sufficient, takes away their main food staple, and keeps them in poverty. It is not like the UN wants to concede authority to anyone. And Ale Gore is no different. Once had power and authority and wants it back badly. Hence, an excellent idea, that if sold like any other lie for long enough, will propell him back to riches and power.

Peace and Blessings

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

This video brought to you by BP, ExxonMobile and Shell. Thank you for watching.

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

so OP, after reading in this thread about how the video you linked in your OP - the one that made you disbelieve in global warming, twisted scientists' words, and displayed incorrect graphs and charts to fit their agenda, do you still hold the same disbelief?

Who said they did? Its true. There was a medieval warm age, there was a colder age, the climate is changing, and the graphs are true. You're an idiot, go back sucking Al Gore's dick.

TehMac you are truly retarded, and should be banned from the internet.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: techs
B.S. youtube video versus nearly EVERY peer reviewed climate study?
I guess only the internet brainwashed would believe youtube.

Peer reviewed by whom? What good is peer review when dissenting opinions are heckled, reputationally tarnished, or defunded?

All you have left are a bunch of circle-jerking yes-men.

 

[skimple]

Lots of mis-information from everyone in this post. so here are some questions for all of you experts.

1 - Someone please PM me or post a link to one published scientific article that explains how the average temperature of the Earth is emperically calculated.

2 - Someone please PM me or post a link to one published scientific article showing the historical data for average Earth temperatures.

3 - Someone please PM me or post a link to one published scientific article showing the connection between any single or group of "greenhouse gases" and a measurable change in the average temperature of the Earth.

Please do not send links of your favorite celebrity or politician expousing their views on global warming. I only want actual research, published in credible journals .

I am tired of listening to the endless nonsense from both sides. True scientific research can be examined, repeated when attempted by others, challenged, etc. So far, all that I see is forth or fifth party heresay being parroted by people that couldn't spell Scientific Process, let alone explain how it works.

 

[BigJelly]

Originally posted by: edro
We all know about cyclical climate changes. Yes, there are ice ages, and heat ages.

But... Never in Earth's history has there been so much "outside" influence. Carbon from coal power plants and other various exhausts don't worry me nearly as much as CFC release.

Never in history has there been this much CFC in the atmosphere. We know that it deteriorates the atmosphere that protects us from the sun's warming rays.

I'd like to keep our umbrella, even if we don't know for certain the long term effects.

CFCs destroy the ozone layer that blocks UV-B light. Of course there are more CFCs in the atmosphere than every--they're are only man made.
BUT... CFC problem was found and agreed upon by all scientists and were restricted. CFC levels have peaked and started to go down in concentration. Where as global warming causes are not as clear cut and is the reason for the divide between scientists.

What gets me is the scientists oppressed for going against the human causing global warming grain; when scientists can't question theories (or have theirs questioned) scientific process stops.

 

[b0mbrman]

Originally posted by: TehMac
Good for you, I agree the movie is very informational, and very true. As a historian, I have studied and read about climate changes much worse than the one we're going through now. Al Gore is simply a bloody propagandist and he's followed by brain washed penguins.

Yeah, penguins who will soon have to learn how to SWIM because the snow is melting.

 

[shoegazer]

Originally posted by: skimple
1 - Someone please PM me or post a link to one published scientific article that explains how the average temperature of the Earth is empirically calculated.

2 - Someone please PM me or post a link to one published scientific article showing the historical data for average Earth temperatures.

3 - Someone please PM me or post a link to one published scientific article showing the connection between any single or group of "greenhouse gases" and a measurable change in the average temperature of the Earth.

If you're in college you should have access to both of these articles. If not, try a public library.

1+2. Brohan, P., J.J. Kennedy, I. Haris, S.F.B. Tett and P.D. Jones (2006). "Uncertainty estimates in regional and global observed temperature changes: a new dataset from 1850". J. Geophysical Research 111: D12106. DOI:10.1029/2005JD006548

3. Crowley, TJ Science. "Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years" Science 14 July 2000: Vol. 289. no. 5477, pp. 270 - 277 DOI: 10.1126/science.289.5477.270

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: techs
B.S. youtube video versus nearly EVERY peer reviewed climate study?
I guess only the internet brainwashed would believe youtube.

Peer reviewed by whom? What good is peer review when dissenting opinions are heckled, reputationally tarnished, or defunded?

All you have left are a bunch of circle-jerking yes-men.

If you seriously believe this is how science works you really need to learn a thing a two and get off the intarwebs. This story was cooked-up, spun, and perpetuated by the anti-science fools with an agenda (read as bush&co(TM)).

 

[thirtythree]

Marked for later.

 

[Juddog]

Amazing how much FUD big oil can spread by spreading some blood money around.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: techs
B.S. youtube video versus nearly EVERY peer reviewed climate study?
I guess only the internet brainwashed would believe youtube.

Peer reviewed by whom? What good is peer review when dissenting opinions are heckled, reputationally tarnished, or defunded?

All you have left are a bunch of circle-jerking yes-men.

If you seriously believe this is how science works you really need to learn a thing a two and get off the intarwebs. This story was cooked-up, spun, and perpetuated by the anti-science fools with an agenda (read as bush&co(TM)).

..that's right. The neolib's are frothing at the mouth to get their co2 tax and emissions credt racket going. It fulfills their dire wish and desire for all controlling and encompassing BIG GOVERNMENT.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: homercles337

If you seriously believe this is how science works you really need to learn a thing a two and get off the intarwebs. This story was cooked-up, spun, and perpetuated by the anti-science fools with an agenda (read as bush&co(TM)).

I know how peer review works, thank you very much. I also know that sometimes group-think can trump reason and the scientific method. Furthermore, people often have a nasty habit of ignoring extraneous variables and over-emphasising the ones they want to be true.

That being said, I personally don't believe in the 1:1 correlation between increased temps and man's influence upon the planet. There are *WAY* too many variables that are existant within this universe to conclusively say that there is a definitive 1:1 cause/effect.

However, I do firmly believe that you don't sh!t where you eat, so we shouldn't eff this planet up. Direct pollution is plainly evident. Furthermore, even if there isn't a 1:1 correlation, even if there is a 10%, why not do what we can to minimize our impact?

So no, I don't buy into this uber-hype, but I do buy into the idea that we need to curb our pollution.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: iamaelephant
Well on the one hand I have the fact that almost every study published in a peer reviewed scientific journal supports the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis, but on the other hand I have an overdramatised science popularisation. I know which one I trust.

Are you talking about the Al Gore film here? 😕

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: jagec
"Believe in"?

You don't believe the earth is getting warmer? That's...unconventional.

Believing in global warming is like believing in God. It either exists or it does not, and no amount of belief will change or have any effect whatsoever on that.

yes, but belief in one has fundamental implications on the safety and wellbeing of the entire world population. The other being true or not...well, so-the-hell what?

 

[Dyloot]

All we need are the Intelligent Design folks to come over and we'd really have a party going here! I'm guessing that a majority of posters on this subject do not have the understanding to really come to an informed conclusion. I know I don't.

I did, however, see the Day After Tomorrow, so maybe I do have everything I need to form my own opinion. =D

 

[3chordcharlie]

So you used to believe global warming was real, but one video with no science, and a few scientists who managed to gloss things over *even more than al gore* has moved you firmly to the other side.

You're full of crap. You might not 'believe' in Global Warming, but this video didn't change your mind.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
That being said, I personally don't believe in the 1:1 correlation between increased temps and man's influence upon the planet. There are *WAY* too many variables that are existant within this universe to conclusively say that there is a definitive 1:1 cause/effect.

However, I do firmly believe that you don't sh!t where you eat, so we shouldn't eff this planet up. Direct pollution is plainly evident. Furthermore, even if there isn't a 1:1 correlation, even if there is a 10%, why not do what we can to minimize our impact?

Well, the scientific viewpoint was never for a 1:1 correlation. The scientists can read their charts, and they see the some cyclical pattern in temperature that everyone else does. Yes, the earth is naturally going through a warming period. The problem, however, is that it's warming up faster than ever before, and the CO2 levels are going up MUCH faster than ever before. Since there has historically been a pretty close correlation between the two, it's cause for worry.

But no scientist has ever claimed that humans were 100% responsible for the temperature increase...just that we're accelerating it beyond what is natural.

 

[Macattak1]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
That being said, I personally don't believe in the 1:1 correlation between increased temps and man's influence upon the planet. There are *WAY* too many variables that are existant within this universe to conclusively say that there is a definitive 1:1 cause/effect.

However, I do firmly believe that you don't sh!t where you eat, so we shouldn't eff this planet up. Direct pollution is plainly evident. Furthermore, even if there isn't a 1:1 correlation, even if there is a 10%, why not do what we can to minimize our impact?

Well, the scientific viewpoint was never for a 1:1 correlation. The scientists can read their charts, and they see the some cyclical pattern in temperature that everyone else does. Yes, the earth is naturally going through a warming period. The problem, however, is that it's warming up faster than ever before, and the CO2 levels are going up MUCH faster than ever before. Since there has historically been a pretty close correlation between the two, it's cause for worry.

But no scientist has ever claimed that humans were 100% responsible for the temperature increase...just that we're accelerating it beyond what is natural.

Greetings,

That was good up till the point where you hit "The problem, however, ..."

Warming faster than ever before? I guess it was cooling down faster than ever before just a few decades ago? But at a 10x+ greater rate than this heat spell we are speeding into at 1/2 of one degree in 100 years? C02 levels made by man is what % of the whole? What do your numbers state and please do state your numbers?!

Ale Gore is not an ambulance chaser, he is the ambulance and he has river boat and train horns instead of a single siren and he has them going even while it is parked and ideling and waiting for something to happen or be prooven.

A post back or two was right on. Lets lower polution by a resonable % each year. Lets not poop where we live and eat or where others do. But, lets not turn this into UN self contained cities where man is not allowed to enter into great outdoors. Federal funding for this junk science could be better spent on enforcing clean are laws and cleaning up super fund sites, etc. Or we could just not spend it and lower our rising debt.

Peace and Blessings

 

[Greenman]

Just follow the money. Look at who gets paid and who writes the checks. Look at who stands to make enormous profit and who stands to lose. Also note that anything funded by, or done under UN direction is almost certainly tainted.

 

[shoegazer]

Originally posted by: Greenman
Just follow the money. Look at who gets paid and who writes the checks. Look at who stands to make enormous profit and who stands to lose. Also note that anything funded by, or done under UN direction is almost certainly tainted.

Last I checked, scientists don't stand to make "enormous profits."

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: shoegazer

Originally posted by: Greenman
Just follow the money. Look at who gets paid and who writes the checks. Look at who stands to make enormous profit and who stands to lose. Also note that anything funded by, or done under UN direction is almost certainly tainted.

Last I checked, scientists don't stand to make "enormous profits."

It's not the scientists...it's everyone else. Look at Al Gore. He made millions from his film and it is benefiting the democratic party. Look at all of the organizations out there that would lose millions if global warming were disproven. How many people would lose their jobs?

If you think that money doesn't drive this movement then you are very blind, indeed.