Poll Question: Is Global Warming Real?
teddyballgame
10 years ago
tonygraz, you may be confusing that with one of your "brilliant" congressman that thought that too many troops capsize Guam.


The biggest fools are in the Dem Party in Washington D.C.
Brewha
  • Brewha
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
10 years ago

tonygraz, you may be confusing that with one of your "brilliant" congressman that thought that too many troops capsize Guam.



The biggest fools are in the Dem Party in Washington D.C.

teddyballgame wrote:


You're NOT Republican????
teddyballgame
10 years ago
tonyg can write his own bad material brother, he does't need you shooting holes in his comedy boat.
Brewha
  • Brewha
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
10 years ago
True...true....


Sorry Tony, I,,,,I,,,,couldn't help myself. 💤
tonygraz
10 years ago
No problem Brewski, and T-ball is not a republickin, he's nuts.



69
frankj1
10 years ago
[quote=teddyballgame]Interesting read about Richard Lindzen a former meteorologist from MIT./quote]

Dude! Please read the Forum Rules. Your side is only allowed to disparage sources from the likes of MIT, Harvard, or any and all other institutions of higher learning located in places like The People's Republic of Cambridge.

Sorry. Can't have it both ways, and I haven't razzed you in a while.
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
10 years ago

bgz, I suspect that your information is coming from opinions people have put out there, not from NASA. You should have a look at there actual data and conclusions.

And as resilient as the ecosystem is, I think mankind could murder it in its sleep.

Brewha wrote:



This is the article I read.

http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses 

I'm not denying that we are pumping sh17 tons of co2 in the air, I'm saying that we were supposed to be dead already from predictions long ago.

I think we're moving along just fine as a species.

There's incentives to utilize new power sources and new solar tech is rapidly being pumped out. Scientists are constantly figuring out new ways to optimize existing tech.

Developing countries are trying to implement alternative power sources including China.

IMO, nuclear is the way to go, most bang for your buck... people are afraid of nukes, but what ever.

We'll be fine, still not buying the doom and gloom stuff.

Killing a planet is hard, don't care what you say.

Even if we did manage to completely wipe out humans (probably have better luck trying to crack an AES 256 key), the cockroaches and tardigrades will survive!
tonygraz
10 years ago
I'm not concerned with the antartic, but with the ice melt in the artic. If the melting changes the ocean currents as predicted it will likely have a devastation effect on the climate. Just look at what the warming in the pacific has done to some aquatic species.
QMPASH
10 years ago
You may be right but consider: if all human activity were to end today, it would take 1000 years to drop world-wide temperatures 1 degree. That seems to suggest that something else is at work besides pollution. But don' t worry. In about 5 billion years our Sun will become a red giant and, long before that happens, this argument will have become academic.
frankj1
10 years ago

This is the article I read.

http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses 

I'm not denying that we are pumping sh17 tons of co2 in the air, I'm saying that we were supposed to be dead already from predictions long ago.

I think we're moving along just fine as a species.

There's incentives to utilize new power sources and new solar tech is rapidly being pumped out. Scientists are constantly figuring out new ways to optimize existing tech.

Developing countries are trying to implement alternative power sources including China.

IMO, nuclear is the way to go, most bang for your buck... people are afraid of nukes, but what ever.

We'll be fine, still not buying the doom and gloom stuff.

Killing a planet is hard, don't care what you say.

Even if we did manage to completely wipe out humans (probably have better luck trying to crack an AES 256 key), the cockroaches and tardigrades will survive!

bgz wrote:


it may not be the actual energy that is feared, but rather disposal of the waste. I must admit I am surprised that after so many decades, no truly safe solution exists.
bgz
  • bgz
  • Herf-A-Holic
10 years ago
They keep trying to obtain stable fusion... just always seems to be 10 years out.

But ya, storing waste is a bit of a problem... but they have gotten more efficient over the years both in terms of amount of waste and amount of usable power.
DrafterX
10 years ago
we should just dump in outer-space somewhere.... 😟
tailgater
10 years ago



Even if we did manage to completely wipe out humans (probably have better luck trying to crack an AES 256 key), the cockroaches and tardigrades will survive!

bgz wrote:



Not to mention the Kardashians...

tonygraz
10 years ago

we should just dump in outer-space somewhere.... 😟

DrafterX wrote:



And hope the rocket doesn't malfunction on the way up.
DrafterX
10 years ago
It's always somethin with you huh... 🤐
Brewha
  • Brewha
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
10 years ago
We should put the nuke waste in line at the DMV - I would never be seen again....
victor809
10 years ago

http://conservative50.com/climate-change-what-do-scientists-say-prageru/

MACS wrote:



So because I'm a masochist I watched that bit of tripe.
The video is described as "Summarizes the science behind climate change".... did you actually watch it? Did you think it summarized ANY science?

The only science it actually mentioned was global mean temperature... and they played a fun slight of hand there. His quote "has gone up 1 degree since the 1800s, but CO2 emissions should only have an impact from the 1960s" is laughable because it assumes that the audience is just going to nod their heads and say "yeah!"....

So I looked up "global mean temperature" at the NASA site. It is recorded from the 1800s on.
But prior to about 1930 it goes up/down all around.... then it starts edging up. Then about 1965 it starts an almost nonstop climb.... here's the link if you want:
http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/ 
You could keep that line running realatively flat all the way back to 0AD (if the data existed) and then claim "global mean temperature has gone up 1 degree since 0AD, but...." it's a bull**** statistical slight of hand.

Again, I don't care about global warming. Burn the planet to the ground if you want. But to mask tripe like that video as anything other than propaganda is just disgustingly anti-intellectual.
MACS
10 years ago
Now there's a surprise. Victor wants to argue.

It's non-stop with you. The way you talk on this forum, it's as if God, Himself endowed you with the knowledge of everyfuckingthing.

I did watch the video. The guy is an atmospheric physicist that taught at MIT. Pardon me if I take his word over yours.
victor809
10 years ago
His word about what?
I agree he's an atmospheric scientist and should have much more data to discuss than I'm seeing in that video.

So tell me, what has he said in that video that delivers the value of filming an atmospheric scientist? That there are two groups of scientists? That there's media? That he's in one group of scientists and then there's another?

But by all means, just continue complaining that I'm disagreeing with something you chose to post...

...what's even most irritating is that your little passive aggressive bs about "endowed you with the knowledge...blah blah lah". I pointed out exactly what I looked up and where I looked it up. His video had exactly one point of data which any moron could double check. I chose to look at it. You can feel free to look at it too, and disagree with my assessment. Or you can whine that I'm pretending to know more than everyone else... because that's a real productive way to discuss things.
Users browsing this topic