User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:53:09 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Really ? I think you chose the easiest thing you could find. Or you go to a shitty college. I took extra British lit extra chemistry and extra history ( American and Alabama and history research) and a bunch more outside of my major What's your major ? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
And you were expecting what, exactly, when you signed up for this course.  To knock out a GenEd requirement. This class seemed to be one of the least painful on the list. Damn. What happened to history, literature, foreign language ? Those should be Gen Ed choices as well You chose poorly Learn American or move back to Mexico. Most of the literature / history classes were about minorities, feminism, or homosexuals. Aaaand climate change it is! Really ? I think you chose the easiest thing you could find. Or you go to a shitty college. I took extra British lit extra chemistry and extra history ( American and Alabama and history research) and a bunch more outside of my major What's your major ? I chose it because I invest a lot of money in energy (oil, gas, solar, utilities, etc) and wanted to get a better understanding of some of the processes involved as well as the liberal view point on many of the choice because, lets face it, the liberals will win the climate change argument and I want to be appropriately invested. I'm a business (probably finance) major. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:55:39 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Oops. Let me find an ARFCOMMER who funded his own research to present the real, unbiased data. And I guess you missed the citations on the EPA site I linked... Just because the EPA posted the graph doesn't mean they did all the research. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html</a> LoL Your .GOV links made his case Oops. Let me find an ARFCOMMER who funded his own research to present the real, unbiased data. And I guess you missed the citations on the EPA site I linked... Just because the EPA posted the graph doesn't mean they did all the research. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/24/german-professor-nasa-fiddled-climate-data-unbelievable-scale/ The NASA material most of the APG BS is based on was falsified and at this point anyone who isn't willfully ignorant knows it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:56:17 PM EDT
[#3]
All 3 of the "facts" presented to you are false. Look them up and get the real facts and counter to the professor. Also, the earth has been warming and cooling since GOD created it, and there isn't much mankind can do about it excluding a major nuclear war. Global Warming is nothing but a ruse for more taxation and a one world government.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:56:40 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are seashells in Colorado. Earth changes. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here. There are seashells in Colorado. Earth changes. I blame a big flood a few thousand years ago for those. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 6:57:44 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I blame a big flood a few thousand years ago for those. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here. There are seashells in Colorado. Earth changes. I blame a big flood a few thousand years ago for those. There is significant evidence suggesting another process. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:00:18 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/24/german-professor-nasa-fiddled-climate-data-unbelievable-scale/ The NASA material most of the APG BS is based on was falsified and at this point anyone who isn't willfully ignorant knows it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html</a> LoL Your .GOV links made his case Oops. Let me find an ARFCOMMER who funded his own research to present the real, unbiased data. And I guess you missed the citations on the EPA site I linked... Just because the EPA posted the graph doesn't mean they did all the research. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/24/german-professor-nasa-fiddled-climate-data-unbelievable-scale/ The NASA material most of the APG BS is based on was falsified and at this point anyone who isn't willfully ignorant knows it. Ah, perfect. More than just "climate change is bad because government". I'll be sure to read that--thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:01:43 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All 3 of the "facts" presented to you are false. Look them up and get the real facts and counter to the professor. Also, the earth has been warming and cooling since GOD created it, and there isn't much mankind can do about it excluding a major nuclear war. Global Warming is nothing but a ruse for more taxation and a one world government. Okay, I'm on board with that but help me out. Disprove the graph I posted earlier (because that was one of her key pieces of "proof"). |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:02:41 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ah, perfect. More than just "climate change is bad because government". I'll be sure to read that--thanks. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted:... http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/24/german-professor-nasa-fiddled-climate-data-unbelievable-scale/ The NASA material most of the APG BS is based on was falsified and at this point anyone who isn't willfully ignorant knows it. Ah, perfect. More than just "climate change is bad because government". I'll be sure to read that--thanks. I guess I was thinking you were aware of/had dug into the Climategate stuff. The fraud is staggering. It's way beyond disingenuous...a lot of people should be fired and probably many in jail over it. If not in jail at least charged and censured in some way so they can never trick a trusting public with deliberate, politically motivated lies again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:03:42 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is significant evidence suggesting another process. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here. There are seashells in Colorado. Earth changes. I blame a big flood a few thousand years ago for those. There is significant evidence suggesting another process. Earth was created with age but that's a whole new thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:04:45 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Earth was created with age but that's a whole new thread. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I don't know, but I can find fossilized shells and shark teeth in my area and we're 90 miles from the coast. I'd say it was warmer a few years before humans got here. There are seashells in Colorado. Earth changes. I blame a big flood a few thousand years ago for those. There is significant evidence suggesting another process. Earth was created with age but that's a whole new thread. Not for me. I won't dignify a thread on that topic or the possibility the Earth is flat. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:05:02 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I guess I was thinking you were aware of/had dug into the Climategate stuff. The fraud is staggering. It's way beyond disingenuous...a lot of people should be fired and probably many in jail over it. If not in jail at least charged and censured in some way so they can never trick a trusting public with deliberate, politically motivated lies again. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:... http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/11/24/german-professor-nasa-fiddled-climate-data-unbelievable-scale/ The NASA material most of the APG BS is based on was falsified and at this point anyone who isn't willfully ignorant knows it. Ah, perfect. More than just "climate change is bad because government". I'll be sure to read that--thanks. I guess I was thinking you were aware of/had dug into the Climategate stuff. The fraud is staggering. It's way beyond disingenuous...a lot of people should be fired and probably many in jail over it. If not in jail at least charged and censured in some way so they can never trick a trusting public with deliberate, politically motivated lies again. Honestly I never really cared enough to really dig into it. Always just assumed it was mostly made up nonsense but this class has motivated me to look into both sides of the argument. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:06:48 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Honestly I never really cared enough to really dig into it. Always just assumed it was mostly made up nonsense but this class has motivated me to look into both sides of the argument. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted:... Honestly I never really cared enough to really dig into it. Always just assumed it was mostly made up nonsense but this class has motivated me to look into both sides of the argument. It will be an eye-opener. I don't envy you being in a class taught by a climate change believer. It is essentially like a cult or religion. You might have to play along for the sake of your grade. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:07:27 PM EDT
[#13]
Read two books.
Global Warming-Alarmists, Skeptics and Deniers: A Geoscientist Looks at the Science of Climate Change Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, Updated and Expanded Edition |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:08:50 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not for me. I won't dignify a thread on that topic or the possibility the Earth is flat. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Earth was created with age but that's a whole new thread. Not for me. I won't dignify a thread on that topic or the possibility the Earth is flat. Hey, I can respect that. We're all entitled to our own opinions. I wouldn't believe it either if I wasn't a Christian, though I suppose there are some Christians who reject it as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:15:38 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It will be an eye-opener. I don't envy you being in a class taught by a climate change believer. It is essentially like a cult or religion. You might have to play along for the sake of your grade. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:...
Honestly I never really cared enough to really dig into it. Always just assumed it was mostly made up nonsense but this class has motivated me to look into both sides of the argument. It will be an eye-opener. I don't envy you being in a class taught by a climate change believer. It is essentially like a cult or religion. You might have to play along for the sake of your grade. I figured I could spend hours looking at data and research myself but making a thread here first sounded like a better idea. You guys have highlighted a few areas where I'll begin to dig. Currently I believe that we need to cut back on fossil fuels but I'm not going to buy a Prius and hug trees either. I also live in a city that has pollution problems so that's one of the reasons for my dislike of coal. It's an observable issue. Thankfully this professor isn't too bad. He is certainly a believer but he doesn't punish those that disagree. He encourages the discussions. One of the students is a married guy who worked on fracking rigs before the oil crash. It's always interesting to hear his point of view. Quoted:
Read two books. Global Warming-Alarmists, Skeptics and Deniers: A Geoscientist Looks at the Science of Climate Change Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, Updated and Expanded Edition Thanks, I'll check those out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:22:18 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To mitigate that, you'd bury it deeply underground, preferably in a geologically stable mountain. But they don't want to do that. Or you'd recycle the waste, which can be turned into new fuel. But that's a no-go, also. Keep in mind... 'solving' this would actually reduce the politicians power. And we can't have that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't deny that the climate may well be changing. The climate has and always will change. I do deny that mankind is solely responsible for it and that we need to act NOWNOWNOWOMGNOW WE ALL GONNA DIEEEEE the way they want us to. I think the big issue, according to "them" is not the next 5-10 years, but 100-300 years. When we talked about what to do with radioactive waste one guest speaker said one big problem is making signs that can still be read and understood in 1,000 years because some waste will last for a really long time (half-life and all that). If civilization collapses, they don't want some Fallout 3 lone survivor stumbling into a disposal site and dying from radiation. Super dumb argument IMO but whatever. To mitigate that, you'd bury it deeply underground, preferably in a geologically stable mountain. But they don't want to do that. Or you'd recycle the waste, which can be turned into new fuel. But that's a no-go, also. Keep in mind... 'solving' this would actually reduce the politicians power. And we can't have that. Recycling nuclear material is a no-go because of executive order by jimmy carter. Why the hell are the leftists so upset about storing spent nuclear fuel if one of their favorites banned it from being recycled? I have yet to see any real reason why we shouldn't recycle it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:27:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hey, I can respect that. We're all entitled to our own opinions. I wouldn't believe it either if I wasn't a Christian, though I suppose there are some Christians who reject it as well. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Earth was created with age but that's a whole new thread. Not for me. I won't dignify a thread on that topic or the possibility the Earth is flat. Hey, I can respect that. We're all entitled to our own opinions. I wouldn't believe it either if I wasn't a Christian, though I suppose there are some Christians who reject it as well. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:29:14 PM EDT
[#18]
remind your prof that if climate change is due to fossil fuel use, then it is the direct result of environmentalists in the '60s and '70s demanding that the westernized world use "safe" and "natural" fossil energy instead of nuclear energy. but for the environmental movement, fracking and strip mining would have been obsolete 50 years ago.
when he objects that nuclear is dangerous, point out that the leftists in france generate over 80% of their electricity from nuclear, and that the french have never had a significant safety incident (despite basing their program on obsolete american technology). so yeah--climate change is greenpeace's fault. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:30:39 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I figured I could spend hours looking at data and research myself but making a thread here first sounded like a better idea. You guys have highlighted a few areas where I'll begin to dig. Currently I believe that we need to cut back on fossil fuels but I'm not going to buy a Prius and hug trees either. I also live in a city that has pollution problems so that's one of the reasons for my dislike of coal. It's an observable issue. Thankfully this professor isn't too bad. He is certainly a believer but he doesn't punish those that disagree. He encourages the discussions. One of the students is a married guy who worked on fracking rigs before the oil crash. It's always interesting to hear his point of view. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: ... It will be an eye-opener. I don't envy you being in a class taught by a climate change believer. It is essentially like a cult or religion. You might have to play along for the sake of your grade. I figured I could spend hours looking at data and research myself but making a thread here first sounded like a better idea. You guys have highlighted a few areas where I'll begin to dig. Currently I believe that we need to cut back on fossil fuels but I'm not going to buy a Prius and hug trees either. I also live in a city that has pollution problems so that's one of the reasons for my dislike of coal. It's an observable issue. Thankfully this professor isn't too bad. He is certainly a believer but he doesn't punish those that disagree. He encourages the discussions. One of the students is a married guy who worked on fracking rigs before the oil crash. It's always interesting to hear his point of view. A Prius? So a coal or natural gas powered car? The electricity has to come from somewhere. And it will be distributed over an already strained grid.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:32:09 PM EDT
[#20]
I answered 'no', but in reality it's 'yes'. Climate is changing and it will affect how we live - so we need to address it. I don't however think that it's changing as a direct result of us. We probably do influence it to a degree, but 'cause' not so much. i.e. I think change is a natural course of things, we either adapt or we don't adapt, same with every other living thing on the planet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:35:38 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LoL Your .GOV links made his case Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html LoL Your .GOV links made his case Yep |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:38:41 PM EDT
[#22]
Tell that cock gargler that Pangea said that he is going to burn a truck tire every time he hears the words, "man made climate change".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:41:47 PM EDT
[#23]
Environmental conservation is a good idea, making sure we aren't doing harmful things if we can help it.
Keeping tabs on oil companies operations that ruin soil / groundwater for decades / centuries? Yeah, probably not a bad idea. Full on panic that we are about to cook the world from emissions? Probably not the best issue. Either way, I only predict a few hundred years left for humans on earth, overpopulation will occur long before irreversible climate damage, of course overpopulation will speed up the climate destruction, so it's kinda hand in hand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:45:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Below is how your links explains the graph.
Why do they only show temps from the 1900s on? Remember the Little Ice age ended around 1850. The blue band is based on climate models. Who designed the model and how accurate is it? Pink band based on models predicting temperature range. Same question. Who build it and how accurate is it? How accurate have any of the climate models been? The source link is also bad. "This figure shows the observed average global temperatures from 1900 to 2000 (black line) along with the temperature ranges predicted by climate models. The blue band shows the expected temperature range based on climate models that account only for natural forces. The pink band represents the temperature range predicted by climate models that also include emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities. The recent increase in average global temperatures aligns with the predicted temperatures from the model that includes the greenhouse gas emission. Source: USGRCP 2009" |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:46:10 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html Any data that was taken prior to the availability of Satellite data is automatically suspect for 2 reasons. -The accuracy of early temperature measuring equipment. You're looking, at most, at 2F. That's well within the margin of error for anything built in the first half of the century, and probably for a bit after. -The location of said measuring stations. They tend to be in cities, and as time went on, increasingly at airports, because aircraft performance is affected by weight. So they're in the middle of huge expanses of Asphalt. Heat Island, anyone? Sat data isn't available prior to 1979. And it definitely did detect warming up until about 2000 (where, coincidentally I'm sure, your graph ends). Then the temperature went flat, and remains roughly there, though the Obama administration decided last year to throw out the Sat data and use surface data instead to 'prove' their 'the ocean is absorbing it' theory. (Me, I tend to believe the Billion-dollar satellites, and not the 30-cent type-k thermocouple in a ships cooling water intake, but hey...) Also... their models aren't that accurate. I suggest you go grab a few copies of the older versions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's report. You need one from at least the 90's - at some point they made them much shorter, more of an executive summary for politicians and those have MUCH less data. Look at their predictions. See if they were accurate to today. They aren't. Some of the 'new' models are closer, but it takes decades to figure out if they can predict the future, and not just the past. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:46:33 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Climate is always changing, and has since the earth was formed and will continue to change until the sun goes nova. Man does not contribute a significant amount of CO2, compared to the earths natural processes. C02 is a small contributor to the green house effect. The Green house effect is only one of many climate influencers. If anything it stabilizes temperatures. Climate is a mixture of different cycles from different causes that sometimes combine or subtract their effects. Looking at a historical view, we are still working our way out of the last mini ice age, the planet should be warming up a bit. There has been no warming over the past 20 years or so. Warming is good. Longer growing seasons, more food. Historically, the "Dark Ages" was a cooling period marked by long cold dark winters, which reduced the growing cycles in the northern areas (ie. Scandinavia), which is why the Vikings headed south to find food. The Renaissance marked the end of the cooling period, suddenly there was more food available.... So, Climate Change is real and natural. Man's influence on Climate is not an issue. This post belongs in the Arfcom Hall of Fame. Equal parts awesome and win! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:49:04 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oops. Let me find an ARFCOMMER who funded his own research to present the real, unbiased data. And I guess you missed the citations on the EPA site I linked... Just because the EPA posted the graph doesn't mean they did all the research. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's see...it involves politicians, scientists working on government funded grants, and clean energy Obama contributors. Yeah...it's bullshit...all of it. https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/images/science/models-observed-human-natural-large.jpg https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/basics/facts.html LoL Your .GOV links made his case Oops. Let me find an ARFCOMMER who funded his own research to present the real, unbiased data. And I guess you missed the citations on the EPA site I linked... Just because the EPA posted the graph doesn't mean they did all the research. ah shut your sarcastic hole and go read up on the massive frauds of 'anthropogenic global warming' (AGW) at https://wattsupwiththat.com/ Everything - EVERYTHING - the EPA is promulgating about 'climate change' is fraud stacked upon fraud. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 7:54:12 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Warming is good. Longer growing seasons, more food. This actually came up recently, when the Obama administration released a study with how many people a warmer climate was going to kill. They conveniently ignored the - much larger - number that will NOT die when it was cold. Even if they're 100% right - this isn't an all-bad situation. The problem with 'Global Warming' is that the scientists aren't working in a vacuum. They're funded by politicians who want a certain answer. And if you don't get that answer, those politicians try to get you fired, or are even pushing now for it to be prosecuted under RICO. That's not how science is supposed to work. If you read the actual research, and not the executive summaries, you used to get a better feel for what was really going on. (The Exec Summaries told the politicians what they wanted to hear). But people got wise to that practice, and now it has become hard to publish anything that doesn't 'conform'. Science has been hijacked for political ends. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 8:15:25 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
... because, lets face it, the liberals will win the climate change argument and I want to be appropriately invested. I'm a business (probably finance) major. Your agenda is showing. 'Climate Change' as a leftist political cause has already peaked. Societal concern about it is already low and dropping. The dire predictions and outright lies of the chief hoaxers, Dr Michael Mann of the phony hockey stick graph, Gore's bullshit, and even better the massive fraud revelations brought to light by the hacking of the emails of the frauds at the East Anglia Climate Center have all exposed their gross abuses of the scientific method, their falsified and exaggerated models, and their active attempts to conceal their data and methods and to ruthlessly suppress or censure anyone that disagrees with. That ISN'T 'Science'. That's political Advocacy. Furthermore, many of the principals in this fraudulent enterprise have admitted the fraud, in their own words. The co-chair the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for the 7 years admits it's a wealth redistribution scheme 49 Former NASA Scientists Send A Letter Disputing Climate Change Poll: 91% Of Americans Aren't Worried About Global Warming Watts - Over 250 noteworthy Climategate 2.0 emails Climate change shock: Burning fossil fuels 'COOLS planet', says NASA EPA Vows To Lead The Global Fight Against Air Conditioners NASA finds mass gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet greater than losses French Mathematical Calculation Society: Global Warming Crusade is absurd Watt - 99% of surface temperature data consists of 'estimated values' in Fact Watt's seminal work has been in documenting the fraud and abuse in NOAA's nationwide network of temp / humidity measuring stations. Many are sitting in alphalt parking lots, or in the path of large buildign HVAC system exhausts or sittign wtih burning light bulbs inside their enclosures,. The whole network is utterly worthless in terms of 'real' data. "Dramatic Cooling In The Arctic”, Says Former NOAA Meteorologist NOAA fiddles with climate data to erase the 15-year global warming “hiatus” These are all from the last several months. I have several hundred such links / articles over the last 5-6 years, pointing out the massive frauds of 'global warming' and its chief advocates. Legit online media, ACTUAL climatologists, direct quotes from the perpetrators. The whole fucking thing is a fraud and like any good scam, it has just enough 'truths' in it to bluff past most idle inquiries. With a complicit media and leftist-infested academia shoring it up, and a raft of leftist poiiticians eager to use it to impose new taxes and their sick ideology of Control onto the rest of us. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 8:16:23 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
400ppm equals 1/2500th of the atmosphere. Think about that. And that 1/2500th is responsible for about 1/3 of the Earth's greenhouse effect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 8:17:14 PM EDT
[#31]
Subscribed. Good,thread OP.
saw your response on class choice and major Good Reasoning |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 8:23:58 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Okay, I'm on board with that but help me out. Disprove the graph I posted earlier (because that was one of her key pieces of "proof"). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
All 3 of the "facts" presented to you are false. Look them up and get the real facts and counter to the professor. Also, the earth has been warming and cooling since GOD created it, and there isn't much mankind can do about it excluding a major nuclear war. Global Warming is nothing but a ruse for more taxation and a one world government. Okay, I'm on board with that but help me out. Disprove the graph I posted earlier (because that was one of her key pieces of "proof"). The thing proves the fraud itself. 'Models'. Models that can say anything you build them to say. The model-makers (Mann et al) have repeatedly refused to share their data and methods, the EXACT OPPOSITE of the 'scientific method'. They've been repeatedly caught falsifying or artificially constraining data sets. Their models cannot be made to even match historical data, much less be proven to accurately depict the future. They've been caught throwing out the low results and feeding the high outliers back in to get extreme results - which then get put into the sort of visual flooding crapola in Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' - 10yrs & 30-some days ago Gore said these models showed we be seeing catastrophic coastal flooding on a global scale WITHIN TEN YEARS, if we didn't ACT immediately. Maldives are fine. Florida's fine. Some 80% of the Earth's population lives in the Littoral zone. STILL lives in the Littoral zone, right where they were ten years ago. Mann, East Anglia refused to turn over their data sets for independent review. They 'lost' their data. They got caught using solely the tree ring data from something like TWO trees in the Baltic as their baseline measurement for 'global warming' fudge factor in their models. That 'proof' graph is nothing but proof of fraud. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 8:44:55 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The thing proves the fraud itself. 'Models'. Models that can say anything you build them to say. The model-makers (Mann et al) have repeatedly refused to share their data and methods, the EXACT OPPOSITE of the 'scientific method'. They've been repeatedly caught falsifying or artificially constraining data sets. Their models cannot be made to even match historical data, much less be proven to accurately depict the future. They've been caught throwing out the low results and feeding the high outliers back in to get extreme results - which then get put into the sort of visual flooding crapola in Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' - 10yrs & 30-some days ago Gore said these models showed we be seeing catastrophic coastal flooding on a global scale WITHIN TEN YEARS, if we didn't ACT immediately. Maldives are fine. Florida's fine. Some 80% of the Earth's population lives in the Littoral zone. STILL lives in the Littoral zone, right where they were ten years ago. Mann, East Anglia refused to turn over their data sets for independent review. They 'lost' their data. They got caught using solely the tree ring data from something like TWO trees in the Baltic as their baseline measurement for 'global warming' fudge factor in their models. That 'proof' graph is nothing but proof of fraud. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
All 3 of the "facts" presented to you are false. Look them up and get the real facts and counter to the professor. Also, the earth has been warming and cooling since GOD created it, and there isn't much mankind can do about it excluding a major nuclear war. Global Warming is nothing but a ruse for more taxation and a one world government. Okay, I'm on board with that but help me out. Disprove the graph I posted earlier (because that was one of her key pieces of "proof"). The thing proves the fraud itself. 'Models'. Models that can say anything you build them to say. The model-makers (Mann et al) have repeatedly refused to share their data and methods, the EXACT OPPOSITE of the 'scientific method'. They've been repeatedly caught falsifying or artificially constraining data sets. Their models cannot be made to even match historical data, much less be proven to accurately depict the future. They've been caught throwing out the low results and feeding the high outliers back in to get extreme results - which then get put into the sort of visual flooding crapola in Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' - 10yrs & 30-some days ago Gore said these models showed we be seeing catastrophic coastal flooding on a global scale WITHIN TEN YEARS, if we didn't ACT immediately. Maldives are fine. Florida's fine. Some 80% of the Earth's population lives in the Littoral zone. STILL lives in the Littoral zone, right where they were ten years ago. Mann, East Anglia refused to turn over their data sets for independent review. They 'lost' their data. They got caught using solely the tree ring data from something like TWO trees in the Baltic as their baseline measurement for 'global warming' fudge factor in their models. That 'proof' graph is nothing but proof of fraud. Models are readily available. Maybe not all of them. Maybe not in the format you want. But, there's enough out there that you can work through a lot of them on your own. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 9:00:55 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, they use to call it "global warming". Then they were caught red-handed lying about the data, so they changed it to "climate change". It may be getting warmer, it may be getting colder. No matter what though, any change is the fault of the Republicans and the only solution is wealth redistribution.  Right here. Except it was "Global Cooling" before Global Warming. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 9:01:56 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Right here. Except it was "Global Cooling" before Global Warming. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Well, they use to call it "global warming". Then they were caught red-handed lying about the data, so they changed it to "climate change". It may be getting warmer, it may be getting colder. No matter what though, any change is the fault of the Republicans and the only solution is wealth redistribution. Right here. Except it was "Global Cooling" before Global Warming.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/16/2016 9:09:35 PM EDT
[#36]
I pulled a GD and didn't read any replies.
My opinion: It doesn't really fucking matter at this point because the whole thing has become politicized and everything on the subject has been "contaminated" with political BS and opinions. This politicized horseshit is injected into ANY discussion of the earth's climate and weather and it is really fucking sad. The fact that most people roll around in ignorance before participating in a casual discussion regarding weather or climatology really doesn't help matters, either. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 7:58:08 AM EDT
[#37]
I do think climate change IS real. (Voted undecided) It seems we HAVE actually been having strange weather patterns lately. I do think we should do more research on it though. Actual research that does not have a bias. The effect humans are having on the climate? That's the iffy part. I do believe climate change exists but the effect we are having on it is hard to really tell. The changing climate could be caused by natural solar cycles, etc. I do think we should reduce pollution though. I don't want the USA to be like china with smog so thick you can't see in front of you, and everyone sick with respiratory problems. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 8:38:00 AM EDT
[#38]
The only greenhouse gas is water vaopr.
CO2 is a very poor GH gas. Why was CO2 selected over H2O? You would have to ask Maurice Strong, but thank goodness he's dead, although his evil lives on after him. He must have view CO2 as being part of most capitalistic endeavors. And that made it a good target for countrolling wealth and economies. Curious that he went off to live in china for the last decade or so of his life (he was canadian). He didn't seem to ever put much pressure on the chinese to change. But made lots of dictates to his lackeys on how the west, and particularly the USA had to reduce its emissions, and its economic activity. And how about asking the proessor if photosynthesis is a discredited theory? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 8:57:49 AM EDT
[#39]
Climate gonna be changin all the time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 9:04:34 AM EDT
[#40]
If climate change is happening, it is definitely an issue we need to address.
But not in the way liberals think. We need to address it by: 1) Quantifying it and making accurate predictions (something, which as of now, sucks balls...can't make any plans if you can't predict jack shit) 2) Making a plan to best allow the united states remain on top throughout whatever changes may come, by mitigating its negative effects on us, and exploiting its positive ones. 3) Fuck the rest of the world. No socialism. No living in the middle ages. No giving away shit to the rest of the world. ETA::Oh, and I also have a new real life trollish plan. The next time liberals ask why anyone needs an assault rifle, I'll tell them that they will be needed to survive as long as possible during the climate change induced apocalypse, pointing out that we are past the point of no return and a Permian-Triassic scale extinction event is inevitable. Definitely will get them off their "guns are bad" script.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 9:09:00 AM EDT
[#41]
If CO2 emissions were so damned harmful and are going to kill us all, why are they ok with emissions continuing, as long as you pay to do it???
Would you let someone shoot you in the head if they gave you $5MM? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 10:44:32 AM EDT
[#42]
Climate change is an issue, but we do not have enough data at this point to know how much we are contributing if at all.
I'm guessing this is the sun's fault. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 10:49:12 AM EDT
[#43]
If it is man made it will be a self correcting problem.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 10:57:10 AM EDT
[#44]
Climates change. It's natural and if we have any effect at all on it... it is minuscule. Not worth committing economic suicide over.
Pollution isn't exactly good however and we should be seeking economical ways to reduce pollution / cleaner power generation and production methods. Nuclear is that... but the greenies don't like it because it actually works. And their goal isn't actually saving the planet... it's putting down the dissenters to their social plans. The free market will solve it if it is allowed to work and not restrained and perverted by government interference. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 10:59:19 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A Prius? So a coal or natural gas powered car? The electricity has to come from somewhere. And it will be distributed over an already strained grid. http://www.mining.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SNL-Energys-latest-coal-forecast-April-2010-2015-US-net-generation-by-fuel-source-percentage.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
... It will be an eye-opener. I don't envy you being in a class taught by a climate change believer. It is essentially like a cult or religion. You might have to play along for the sake of your grade. I figured I could spend hours looking at data and research myself but making a thread here first sounded like a better idea. You guys have highlighted a few areas where I'll begin to dig. Currently I believe that we need to cut back on fossil fuels but I'm not going to buy a Prius and hug trees either. I also live in a city that has pollution problems so that's one of the reasons for my dislike of coal. It's an observable issue. Thankfully this professor isn't too bad. He is certainly a believer but he doesn't punish those that disagree. He encourages the discussions. One of the students is a married guy who worked on fracking rigs before the oil crash. It's always interesting to hear his point of view. A Prius? So a coal or natural gas powered car? The electricity has to come from somewhere. And it will be distributed over an already strained grid. http://www.mining.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SNL-Energys-latest-coal-forecast-April-2010-2015-US-net-generation-by-fuel-source-percentage.jpg Priuses and other hybrids don't use the power grid. You're thinking about electric cars. Hybrid engines turn off instead of idle, and they use the energy generated from braking to recharge the batteries, which can then be used for driving. Basically it takes energy that's normally wasted and tries to use it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 11:02:20 AM EDT
[#46]
It's man made...but not by the men they are claiming....
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 11:06:12 AM EDT
[#47]
Your professor makes a living off of global warming. I'm sure there's no bias, on his part.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 11:19:06 AM EDT
[#48]
Quoted: I am taking a college class on Energy Choices for the 21st Century. Here are 3 "facts" that were presented in class by a guest speaker: 1. Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere 2. Concentration is increasing due to human activity 3. Earth is 1 degree warmer over the last century The professor keeps blaming republicans for all the problems in the world and saying that most of them deny climate change. So here is the question--is climate change an issue? Why or why not? According to the speaker, melting ice could displace millions of people (if the ocean rises just 1.5 meters). Increasing temperature would change ecosystem. Higher temperatures are to blame for the rise in pine beetles killing tons of trees in Montana. Etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 11:37:31 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If it is man made it will be a self correcting problem. We are all participants in the "21st Century Planetary Climate Experiment". So far, it's been fun. I much prefer the last few summers here in Seattle, much more like the Bay Area than they were 20 years ago. No snow! Warm summers. Tons of rain though. We're already at 44" of rain since October 1st; normal is 29", and 44" is actually over our annual October-October total. In the next twenty or thirty years, we're likely to add another degree and we will all see what happens. Maybe after that, we'll maybe add one or two more. I'm likely to live to see 2040, so it will be educational to see how this turns out. My children will live to see 2070 and they'll be able to report on how the latter half of the experiment goes. Their children will live to see the 22nd century. I wonder how they will feel about the results of our experiment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2016 11:39:49 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Your professor makes a living off of global warming. I'm sure there's no bias, on his part. Just because someone makes a living doing something, doesn't mean they are automatically wrong. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
