ricksfolly
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2009
- Messages
- 2,236
- Reaction score
- 232
- Location
- Grand Junction, CO 81506
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Maybe there is a global warming threat, maybe not. It doesn't matter because people won't change their life styles. It isn't that they distrust science, far from it, it's just that the subject isn't in their comfort zone.
ricksfolly
That's why scientists and folks like me try to educate the public on what is happening. People don't want to change their lifestyles, but whether or not global warming is a threat they're going to have to do it anyway. Fossil fuels, after all, are not in unlimited supply. That alone is enough reason to start a transition to alternatives. It's in our best long-term economic and security interests.
Given the atrocities currently going on in the world, what makes you think that God would intervene and prevent this specific one?It just sounds to me like they are saying God's not in control and can't handle it, which I don't believe.
Have you seen the ozone layer recently? The great big hole in it is slowly healing - at more or less exactly the rate predicted by those 'lying' scientists who warned people about CFCs in the first place.or that no one will be able to go outside in 10 years because the sun will burn them through the Ozone (Which thank godness was a lie).
If a science teacher's job isn't to inform children about what science says, what is their job?You just don't do that, it's not your place and the children can't do anything about that. It's up to the parents to take care of stuff like that.
I don't believe man is capable of causing Global Warming. Consider me in rebellion from having it shoved down my throat all through the 90s. The Bible says the earth will be destroyed by fire, so maybe it's getting time for that to happen, but I know that when a country gets away from God, one of the first things it does is to start worshipping the creation rather than the Creator, and it looks like that is what might be going on. It just sounds to me like they are saying God's not in control and can't handle it, which I don't believe. Whatever's going on, He's got it under control. I also don't think it's right for teachers to traumatize 4th graders by telling them oil is going to be gone in 30 years or that no one will be able to go outside in 10 years because the sun will burn them through the Ozone (Which thank godness was a lie). You just don't do that, it's not your place and the children can't do anything about that. It's up to the parents to take care of stuff like that.
Given the atrocities currently going on in the world, what makes you think that God would intervene and prevent this specific one?
I don't know what you mean. I mean I don't think that man is the cause, and I don't believe the earth will end except how the Bible says it will. By saying we as humans can save the planet doesn't sound right to me because God's taking care of everything, period. Weather it's happening or not, it's in God's control. Sorry, all those save the planet commercials kinda bug me.
Have you seen the ozone layer recently? The great big hole in it is slowly healing - at more or less exactly the rate predicted by those 'lying' scientists who warned people about CFCs in the first place.
Nobody told us anything about it healing 15 years ago, just that we'd only be able to go outside for 10 minutes a day in ten years.
If a science teacher's job isn't to inform children about what science says, what is their job?
There is such a thing as age-appropriate material and tact. Of course, I'm for leaving children under 12 as innocent and worry-free as possible, which I know in this day and age is nigh impossible. But maybe I just had a thoughtless teacher when I was that age. *shrug*
We can be the man who lives by the river, or we can build ourselves a helicopter.
Also, those things you said about teachers are grossly exaggerated.
Oh boy, you never met MY teachers.I can't exaggerate with them...
I don't believe man is capable of causing Global Warming. Consider me in rebellion from having it shoved down my throat all through the 90s. The Bible says the earth will be destroyed by fire, so maybe it's getting time for that to happen, but I know that when a country gets away from God, one of the first things it does is to start worshipping the creation rather than the Creator, and it looks like that is what might be going on. It just sounds to me like they are saying God's not in control and can't handle it, which I don't believe. Whatever's going on, He's got it under control. I also don't think it's right for teachers to traumatize 4th graders by telling them oil is going to be gone in 30 years or that no one will be able to go outside in 10 years because the sun will burn them through the Ozone (Which thank godness was a lie). You just don't do that, it's not your place and the children can't do anything about that. It's up to the parents to take care of stuff like that.
Well, your teachers were stupid and wrong.
Acid rain has decreased significantly because we took the step to reduce the pollution that causes it. It was a serious problem, now much less so.
The ozone layer is slowly healing because the entire planet realized how much damage CFC's were causing and we took action to drop their use. It was potentially a very serious problem, although not to the degree your teachers described it. That danger is subsiding.
CO2 is absolutely, positively causing the current warming trend. I know, a lot of people don't believe that, but the science is pretty clear on this. You can check out my other thread in this subforum "Some basic, empirical evidence in favor of..." if you want a rundown of the basic scientific principles behind it. The short version is that the exact spectrum of energy that CO2 absorbs is escaping the atmosphere in smaller in smaller amounts coinciding with the global increase in CO2 levels. This is confirmed by satellite measurements that track the outgoing energy.
"Save the planet" is slightly off the mark. "Save ourselves" is what we really mean. The planet itself will be fine, but we're creating a situation that makes it harder for us to live on it. Don't think I'm trying to bash your religious beliefs, but I feel like I have to say that God is not going to save us. Taking a stab at you being Christian, you should remember that your religion teaches that God gave us free will and the tremendous intelligence that allows us to shape the world to fit our needs. We're using that free will to dump gigatons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year. The effect of that is a rapidly warming planet. The consequences are our own doing. Our own choice. People are killed all the time by car accidents, gunfire, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, or cancers and diseases they never had a choice in contracting. God has not intervened in any number of massive disasters that take thousands or tens of thousands of lives all at once. Personally, I'd rather not ignore the problem and assume that I can do whatever I want and God will fix it in the end. If he gave us this planet, would it not be reasonable to assume he'd be a little upset at our damaging it?
Yeah it's better to teach them that judgement day is coming.
Yes, we are sinful humans, and we have really messed up the planet, it's part of our sin nature. This life is nothing compared to eternity, though, and everything is going to be destroyed by fire. Al Gore can't even practice what he preaches, why is that? Yes I love God's creation, but he's gonna remake it to be even more beautiful. And about God intervening, he does take care of people who love him, and he does use trials to teach and mature people, and some things are consequenses of humans messing things up. Third world governments cause their people to die because of greed, that's not God's doing, but he always takes care of those who love him no matter their circumstances.
That's good that it is fixed and healing. I don't mind if people recycle and keep things clean. All I remember though is scare tactics, and I just got so tired of hearing it almost like if they said it enough the world would believe it. Maybe it's getting ready for the Return of Christ, I dunno, but I do know the world won't end until he's ready for it to.
If a science teacher's job isn't to inform children about what science says, what is their job?
CO2 is absolutely, positively causing the current warming trend.
There is very powerful, direct evidence that this is our fault. How do we gather the collective willpower to do something about it?
May I borrow this for my signature line?
I take it you have wonderful sources for all of this?Except...that it's not.
Excpet that the current warming trend, which started in 1650, wasn't triggered by CO2 levels, and since we don't know what caused that to change, we really can't be saying that particular cause still isn't active, now can we?
We can state, categorically, that the current warming cycle is not as warm as even recent cycles. Not to mention that the previous long interstadial period, the one without any people at all, was warmer and had higher sea levels all by it's little lonesome before it was gone.
That there Hockey Stick graph was proven bogus. The IPCC was caught with it's little pinko panties down when it was revealed it was using unsourced articles from Climbing Magazine as it's primary reference for the retreat of the Himilayan glaciers. The global warming gurus were caught plotting to ensure only the right peers, their peers, were on the boards of journals publishing climate propaganda. The world's sea levels ARE NOT rising, that's indisputable. The world's climate runs in cycles long and short, and the causes of the shorter cycles aren't clear at all.
So, the basic prediction for the future is that...in the long term, within less than ten millenia, the corrupt city of Chicago will yet again be under a mile or two of ice.
The other prediction is that politically motivated hoaxes like Anthropogenic Global Warming, even when they achieve cult status and become formal religions, are still hoaxes.
Incorrect! The earth was in a steady temperature/slight cooling trend until ~1850. The cause was most certainly CO2. This is standard skepticism - "Oh we don't know we have no idea what could possibly have done this!" Well, that's wrong. We know a lot about the various climate forcings: the earth's cycle of orbital change, the greenhouse effect, volcanic activity, solar output, and continental configuration, to name the primary drivers.Except...that it's not.
Excpet that the current warming trend, which started in 1650, wasn't triggered by CO2 levels, and since we don't know what caused that to change, we really can't be saying that particular cause still isn't active, now can we?
Depends on your definition of "recent." (if you are referring to the medieval warm period, that was a regional effect. it is currently warmer than it was 1000 years ago, globally speaking) Yes, it has been warmer in the past. That doesn't make us incapable of causing a warming trend, nor does it make us incapable of determining why it was warmer before. The atmosphere changes, the continents change position, and probably the most important driver of the earth's regular cycle of large scale glaciation periods is the orbit.We can state, categorically, that the current warming cycle is not as warm as even recent cycles. Not to mention that the previous long interstadial period, the one without any people at all, was warmer and had higher sea levels all by it's little lonesome before it was gone.
See the other thread on "Climategate." The hockey stick was not proven bogus. Several independent investigations have cleared the CRU and Mann's group of data manipulation. The allegations are based on two out of context emails mined from more than a decade's worth of emails. Yet somehow you skeptics take it as gospel while not even understanding the scope of the allegations. Even if it was, the hockey stick is not at all important to the big picture. It's just one temperature reconstruction out of many done used one of several methods. See that graph above. I don't think Mann's "hockey stick" work is even on that one, come to think of it. (edit: looked it up. Mann's work is the blue line)That there Hockey Stick graph was proven bogus. The IPCC was caught with it's little pinko panties down when it was revealed it was using unsourced articles from Climbing Magazine as it's primary reference for the retreat of the Himilayan glaciers. The global warming gurus were caught plotting to ensure only the right peers, their peers, were on the boards of journals publishing climate propaganda. The world's sea levels ARE NOT rising, that's indisputable. The world's climate runs in cycles long and short, and the causes of the shorter cycles aren't clear at all.
Yes, the earth's orbital shift will put that particular forcing into a downward trend. The earth will cool. About 7000 years from now. Personally, I think we should worry more about the forcings we are affecting now and less about the ones we can't affect 7000 years from now.So, the basic prediction for the future is that...in the long term, within less than ten millenia, the corrupt city of Chicago will yet again be under a mile or two of ice.
The other prediction is that politically motivated hoaxes like Anthropogenic Global Warming, even when they achieve cult status and become formal religions, are still hoaxes.
But we can measure it. The sun is not responsible for the current warming trend. When temperature goes up while solar output goes down, claiming the sun did it is foolish.We don't.
Humans don't control the sun.
Head in sand.Humans don't understand the climate cycles.
There's nothing we can do, since what's happening isn't caused by humans nor under human control.
This has been disproven. Higher temperatures lead to higher instances of crop failure, and more CO2 only has a slight increase in crop yields. (and that increase has a sort of cap. Beyond a certain point the benefits stop because the plant is not adapted to drawing in that much carbon) Several mass extinction events coincide with rapid changes in global temperature. There's a limit to how fast the world can adapt, and we're exceeding it.There's also the uncomfortable fact that a warrmer Earth is actually more beneficial for humans. Something about longer growing seasons and the fact that increased atmospheric CO2 leads to better crop yields, not to mention the expansion of arable land as the northern areas warm up.
Explain why 1950 has suddenly become the Year of Optimum Climate in the eyes of the Left.
Religion and philosophy are not appropriate to a scientific (and, unfortunately, political) topic. I regret attempting to engage you in this, because clearly your faith makes you unable to discuss the topic at hand: this planet, what is happening to it, and what we should do about it, if anything. You can discuss armageddon and the afterlife all you want, just do it elsewhere please.
This planet is heating up. Fast. There is very powerful, direct evidence that this is our fault. How do we gather the collective willpower to do something about it?
All right, I'll excuse myself. That's all I wanted to say, and I'm no scientist, just one of the unfortunate 90s kids who had to listen to it, not knowing if it was real or not. And I still don't, but I do notice that Al Gore doesn't act very concerned like he really believes it. And yes, a scheduled End of the World was less scary to me than a completely harsh random one with no mercy. Just trying to voice my view on GW. Cya.
I want to know how Al Gore's (mis)doings affects the accuracy of the science behind climate change. I know politicians and hot air are closely related, but still...What has Al Gore done that is so bad? I just love how he gets lambasted time-and-time again, yet I have not seen any proof of anything. So SB, what has he done... I'm listening.
I want to know how Al Gore's (mis)doings affects the accuracy of the science behind climate change. I know politicians and hot air are closely related, but still...
What has Al Gore done that is so bad? I just love how he gets lambasted time-and-time again, yet I have not seen any proof of anything. So SB, what has he done... I'm listening.
Wait, you're kidding... right? This has got to be a sarcasm. You haven't seen AL Gore do anything bad?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?