global warming is filled with lies

[XXBlAcKhUnTeRXX]

there is no such thing as global warming

rebuttals are unneeded, but appreciated

[Hostile-Eagle]

At 11/21/07 03:56 PM, XXBlAcKhUnTeRXX wrote: there is no such thing as global warming

rebuttals are unneeded, but appreciated

Yay finally somebody that dosent belive every thing that is on the libral agenda!

Scare World to think global warming check
Elimanate bush working progress

[K-RadPie]

At 11/21/07 03:56 PM, XXBlAcKhUnTeRXX wrote: there is no such thing as global warming

Proof?

[Zelphics]

you must be trying to start a flame on purpose =p

[Idiot-Finder]

At 11/21/07 09:12 PM, Zelphics wrote: you must be trying to start a flame on purpose =p

I hope he is for his sake.

[fahrenheit]

At 11/21/07 08:52 PM, K-RadPie wrote:

At 11/21/07 03:56 PM, XXBlAcKhUnTeRXX wrote: there is no such thing as global warming

Proof?

i need proof that spaghetti monster doesnt exist! because if you cant prove he doesnt exist, that means he exists!

[shatterspike1]

At 11/21/07 10:19 PM, fahrenheit wrote:

At 11/21/07 08:52 PM, K-RadPie wrote:

At 11/21/07 03:56 PM, XXBlAcKhUnTeRXX wrote: there is no such thing as global warming

Proof?

i need proof that spaghetti monster doesnt exist! because if you cant prove he doesnt exist, that means he exists!

That was a retarded comparision. Proof?

[fahrenheit]

At 11/21/07 10:21 PM, shatterspike1 wrote: That was a retarded comparision.

i shouldnt have expected you to understand whats called sarcasm. im sorry.

Proof?

and this is the point, the burden of proof lies on the person trying prove a point.

[cellardoor6]

Sigh...

Global warming is happening. Only a complete idiot will say that it's not.

The point of debate is whether or not human behavior is causing it, and whether or not a deliberate change in human behavior will slow or reverse it.

I for one believe in global warming but I don't believe that humans are causing it. The earth has gone through natural fluctuations in temperature and periods of abrupt warming similar in degree to what is happening now. This happened long before the industrial age, long before humans had the ability to emit carbon dioxide into the air to any significant degree. So it's illogical to suggest we're causing it now, and even more illogical to suggest that we're causing some horrific, cataclysmic event.

[RedSkunk]

www.ipcc.ch

[Musician]

"There are so many well-meaning conservatives around here who just assume global warming is only presented as a moral issue for political reasons." - Randall Munroe

^this guy has the best views on everything

[SadisticMonkey]

Here is 23 pages disagreeing with you.

[cellardoor6]

I'm growing tired of having to be a broken record in this issue.

At 11/22/07 12:52 AM, Musician wrote: Durr....

At 11/22/07 02:52 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Durr... linky.

Global warming is taking place, I get it. But it's illogical to claim that we're causing it.

Why? Well, global warming has happened to a similar degree FOUR SEPARATE TIMES in the about the past 1000 years alone (go to page 16 of that PDF). All four of the previous times of global warming were around 1000 years ago (900-1100 years ago)... during a period when humans couldn't produce greenhouses gases to any significant degree. Therefore, it's obvious humans couldn't have caused the global warming back then, if of course only pollution in form of carbon emissions causes global warming in the first place.

If global warming happened back then when there was no way humans caused it:

1) Where is the logic behind the claims that we're causing it now?

2) Where is the logic that this time around it's going to cause irreparable damage to the our climate if it didn't back then?

3) Should we willingly damage our economy by adhering to emissions cuts under the banner of "save the earth" when there is no real evidence our behavior is causing climate change?

Nope.

Don't you find it a little ridiculous that people are resorting to scare tactics to make people think the fucking end of the world is nigh due to global warming?

Did we have coal burning power plants back then? Did Americans drive Suburbans, Escalades, and Hummers back then, let alone exist? Did George Bush exist back then with his oil and Halliburton/Jews/Hitler/Cheney/Rummie/Ar nold Schwarzenegger and whoever else we can possibly blame for it?

Nope.

[bcdemon]

I think global warming is happening, and I think were a partial cause of it. You can't say that all the crap were spewing into the air from cars, factories and so on isn't doing a damned bit of harm, well you could, but you would be an idiot. Yes the planet has gone through warming and cooling trends in the past, but it's never had to deal with the shit we have been offering it in the last 100 years.

[thecoreman]

At 11/21/07 03:56 PM, XXBlAcKhUnTeRXX wrote: there is no such thing as global warming

globel warming and the AOTBB are 2 diffrent things.

[cellardoor6]

At 11/22/07 08:19 AM, bcdemon wrote: I think global warming is happening, and I think were a partial cause of it.

Because you've been told we're a cause of it.

You can't say that all the crap were spewing into the air from cars, factories and so on isn't doing a damned bit of harm, well you could, but you would be an idiot.

It's causing harm in terms of pollution, but it's not causing global warming.

I'm not against protecting the environment. I'm against people proposing all-encompassing economic tactics that will damage our economy under the banner of saving the world from global warming, in lieu of the facts. Especially considering those very same people never mention the fact that even if we were causing global warming, the measures they propose give immunity to countries like Brazil, India and especially China.

Yes the planet has gone through warming and cooling trends in the past, but it's never had to deal with the shit we have been offering it in the last 100 years.

Lol... and yet even though has to "deal with" it now, it's not doing anything peculiar compared to what happened before it had to "deal with" it.

[The-Great-One]

At 11/22/07 12:52 AM, Musician wrote: "There are so many well-meaning conservatives around here who just assume global warming is only presented as a moral issue for political reasons." - Randall Munroe

^this guy has the best views on everything

Yes...I loved the little comic with that post, and that is exactly what I'm gonna do, when the world is about to end I'm going to get a lawn chair, a snack, a pair of sunglasses, and some sun block. I'm going to sit in my chair and watch the people run in fear of trying to stay alive. It'll be great! Who wants to join me?

[The-Great-One]

At 11/22/07 02:52 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Here is 23 pages disagreeing with you.

HOLY CRAP! It's Like That Movie! 23!

[Zorth]

At 11/21/07 03:56 PM, XXBlAcKhUnTeRXX wrote: there is no such thing as global warming

rebuttals are unneeded, but appreciated

Their is too much proof to doubt it. Global warming is real, but probably wont do much damage until long after the human race is gone. Signs are everywhere. Humans will probably be destroyed by war, disease or resources being depleted. Oil will be used up. the dependence on it is very great. Without oil well lose everything we made (almost everything) including transportation, energy, even the food industry could be damaged. This would lead to famine, chaos, mistrust and destruction.

[Elfer]

Remember the days when people thought that pollution was bad because it hurt the environment, not because of global warming?

That was FANTASTIC. Let's go back to that.

[Musician]

At 11/22/07 05:03 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: HAY GUYS EDITING QUOTES MAKES ME COOL

YAH I KNOW RITE?

hey here's some logic, who has more to lose if global warming turns out to be true? Big business? Isn't it a little convienent that the second global warming gets brought up as a political issue, that these new studies show up trying to disprove former studies?

I'm no conspiracy theorist, but if you don't believe that big business is willing to mess with the facts to stop carbon caps then you must be fucking stupid.

[cellardoor6]

At 11/22/07 04:07 PM, Musician wrote:

At 11/22/07 05:03 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: HAY GUYS EDITING QUOTES MAKES ME COOL

YAH I KNOW RITE?

It's all the rage.

hey here's some logic, who has more to lose if global warming turns out to be true? Big business?

Lol your logic is hilarious.

Even though you don't really have any proof for what you say, you base your conclusion on who MIGHT benefit from it if what you say is shown to be false. Even though you entirely ignore who will benefit and is benefiting from the believe that global warming is our fault and we need to change our ways or else we'll cause an environmental holocaust.

Isn't it a little convienent that the second global warming gets brought up as a political issue, that these new studies show up trying to disprove former studies?

HAHAHAHA

Maybe because that provides the incentive and the context for people to reveal science that has since been overlooked? Or even more likely, the science has always existed and has always been out there but people like you have such an isolated account of it that you are oblivious to the host of evidence that shows your views are based on lies?

I'm no conspiracy theorist, but if you don't believe that big business is willing to mess with the facts to stop carbon caps then you must be fucking stupid.

You must be fucking stupid if you jump on board some irrational, baseless political movement and when your views get proved wrong you have to claim a conspiracy. Nevermind that apparently, the conspiracy is being perpetrated by people on your side of the issue.

If anything, if there's a conspiracy... it's probably being propagated by the global warming establishment that are using their influence to cause world wide panic so that economic measures they want to enforce will be more welcomed by vulnerable minded masses.

The people being global warming are politically motivated, they are just wrapping their goals in the facade of environmentalism so that they can get support for what they propose. It becomes quite obvious that the people behind the global warming hysteria have ulterior motives when they claim the world is going to basically end because of carbon emissions, yet they NEVER, EVER address China and demand that China reduce its emissions. They only focus their attention on western countries, especially the US.

If we're trying to save the world here, why do some countries like China who emits more carbon than the US, receive none of the focus by idiots like you? Oh that's right, because you've been corralled into a herd of mindless sheep and you're so affected by the brainwashing that you automatically cease thinking objectively and instead just follow the trend, lock and step.

[Elfer]

At 11/22/07 04:07 PM, Musician wrote: Isn't it a little convienent that the second global warming gets brought up as a political issue, that these new studies show up trying to disprove former studies?

Not really. It's logical that when something becomes a large political issue, there will be a larger amount of research into it.

It's not suspicious at all, merely a result of a lot more reports being written in general.

[Musician]

At 11/22/07 04:40 PM, cellardoor6 wrote: Lol your logic is hilarious.

It's spot on.

Even though you don't really have any proof for what you say, you base your conclusion on who MIGHT benefit from it if what you say is shown to be false. Even though you entirely ignore who will benefit and is benefiting from the believe that global warming is our fault and we need to change our ways or else we'll cause an environmental holocaust.

obviously I don't have any more proof then you do when it comes to prooving who has the most incentive to lie. But the excess polution isn't helping anyone, companies should be kept on some sort of leash.

Maybe because that provides the incentive and the context for people to reveal science that has since been overlooked? Or even more likely, the science has always existed and has always been out there but people like you have such an isolated account of it that you are oblivious to the host of evidence that shows your views are based on lies?

my views based on lies? you must be trying to get a rise out of me. There are plenty of facts on both sides to support and oppose global warming. Do I believe there's propaganda on both sides? absolutely, but one side has more to lose than the other, and that side is more likely to lie.

You must be fucking stupid if you jump on board some irrational, baseless political movement and when your views get proved wrong you have to claim a conspiracy.

see here you accuse me of being baseless/irrational (see below)

Nevermind that apparently, the conspiracy is being perpetrated by people on your side of the issue.

and here you make a total hypocrit out of yourself.

If anything, if there's a conspiracy... it's probably being propagated by the global warming establishment that are using their influence to cause world wide panic so that economic measures they want to enforce will be more welcomed by vulnerable minded masses.

oh please, so now the people presenting global warming are trying to control the world? do you know just how rediculous you sound?

The people being global warming are politically motivated, they are just wrapping their goals in the facade of environmentalism so that they can get support for what they propose. It becomes quite obvious that the people behind the global warming hysteria have ulterior motives when they claim the world is going to basically end because of carbon emissions

Your continued hypocricy aside, nobody is saying that the world is going to end. But it might cause another ice age, that wouldn't be very fun.

, yet they NEVER, EVER address China and demand that China reduce its emissions. They only focus their attention on western countries, especially the US.

The US is the supposed to be the super power right? I think we should set the example.

If we're trying to save the world here, why do some countries like China who emits more carbon than the US, receive none of the focus by idiots like you?

see above

Oh that's right, because you've been corralled into a herd of mindless sheep and you're so affected by the brainwashing that you automatically cease thinking objectively and instead just follow the trend, lock and step.

How can you even have to balls to try and call me brainwashed? you're the one sitting here thinking that Global Warming is some gigantic liberal conspiracy. and before you try to turn this around on me you should remember that all I'm saying here is that big business doesn't think morally, it thinks financially.

[SlithVampir]

There is nothing more that needs to be said.

[SuperDeagle]

At 11/22/07 05:46 PM, SlithVampir wrote: There is nothing more that needs to be said.

I love Waterworld!
It'll be such a hoot.

[Zeistro]

At 11/22/07 12:42 AM, cellardoor6 wrote: Global warming is happening. Only a complete idiot will say that it's not.

Even a healthy mind can be deluded into believing/disbelieving a fallacious/correct idea, but you're virtually right on everything else you say.

I personally believe in global warming, but are skeptical that it is caused by humans. The reason I say that is because many researchers, particularly ones whose expertise is in the climate, believe that there were fifteen ice age periods prior. This is not surprising, since "Mother Nature" produces more waste than all of humanities industry. Case in point, Mt. Helen eruption.

[Slizor]

I've always wondered why politicians and politics students try to debate the merits of the science behind the idea of global warming. I can accept that there is *some* level of debate going on in the scientific community about global warming and I also know that I can pretty much understand the debate. However, I am not a scientist and the debate that does exist is ridiculously one-sided. Politicians who argue against the idea of global warming do so, not from primarily scientific grounds but, from political grounds - they do not want to have to start developing policies that deal with mankind's continued rape of the environment and piss off their corporate backers. Because of this they clutch at, mostly maligned, minority scientific opinion and present this as the "facts" about global warming.

Well fuck that. I don't give a shit if global warming is just made-up. If mankind makes a number of changes necessary to stop or slow global warming and they don't work because the changes in the temperature of the world is due to other reasons then what have we lost? Few billion dollars worth of economic activity, a few years worth of advanced technological gains, etc. Not much really. However, if we fail to act and global warming does happen, what have we lost? A fucking lot.

It's the rational decision when neither side is sure of the scientific validity of the position.

[SEcrew]

ill try to find what i was watching, it was disc. channel some where, but they said/showed that yes it natural happens, but we are moving it along faster then it should be. by like 10 degrees or something.... ill try to find it by 2morrow night...

[Mutated-Copier]

Yea I believe that the threat is there, but there is verrry far away. Should we take steps to help the ecosystem? Yes. Are we all going to die from the ice caps melting in the next decade? No.