Posted: 9/19/2006 10:30:05 PM EDT
| Anybody got links showing that global warming is crap? I'm trying to argue with someone who actually bought what Gore was spewing. |
|
Want to say it's a natural phenomenon? Link this up: www.scotese.com/climate.htm Shows the climate over the last several million years. |
That is one of the best sites I've seen. Easy to read and understand. |
www.reporterherald.com/Top-Story.asp?ID=6894
|
But Al Gore said its happing it has to be true! He’s the father of the internet and invented it! Just look at the grades he got in science in collage! Oh don’t look at his science grades he didn’t do that well. Al Gore is an attention Ho. Global warming is his ticket to headlines. The planet warms the planet cools, it is not static. Ask your liberal friend if CO2 cause global warming why aren’t the temperatures on Mars warmer? And don’t for get ManBearPig!
|
|
Last week's Economist had a special report on global warming. While that newspaper has been beating the drums for years on the need to do something about global warming, the best they could say is that the data shows the world MAY be getting warmer and that there COULD be a link to human CO2 emissions. They admit that the evidence for both those statements cannot be statistically proved with any reasonable degree of confidence. In other words, it's just a guess, but we sure better do something anyway. To say I have been underwhelmed by the evidence linking human activity to global warming would be a gross understatement. |
|
Global warming is really just a sensationalist title for something else, which is a debate over whether we are dangerously contributing excess CO2 into the atmosphere. The thing which I believe Gore refers to is an ice column which goes back 800,000 years and shows a sharp increase in the rate of CO2 present currently vs the past. news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5314592.stm |
Yea… But then it is easy to be underwhelmed by evidence that does not exist. |
The Gloabl Warming acolytes have an answer for this: The particulates we were spewing into the atmosphere then counteracted the greenhouse gases and caused lots of solar energy to reflect off the high altitude particles and back into space. If that is true, then the simple solution to global warming is to pull off all the particulate scrubbers from smokestacks and to hell with carbon restrictions. Fight pollution WITH pollution. Brilliant!  ETA: t-stox will be along soon to tell us how anyone who does not believe in global warming is either an idiot or a tool of big oil. Then Keith_J will be along to bring up a lot of scientific problems with the global warrming hypothesis, starting with the missing carbon. This thread will then degenerate into a personal pissing match between the two. I'm just saying... |
You have no chance of success with a libtard. If you have a dog, do this... Get down on the floor and get up close to the dog. Explain in detail the symbolism, motifs, and the historical contexts and perspectives in "Macbeth". The dog will look at you intensely as if absorbing every word. At the end, say in a loud voice "Do you understand all that I have told you, Fido?" The response will be "Woof". That's because you explained "Macbeth" to a dog and the best response you will get from a dog is "Woof", because it is just a dog and that is how a dog responds to everything. Don't expect more from a libtard. |