Global warming isn't real

weather its real or not is moot. Why cant we just take some precautions and try to help the earth. If it turns out to be a non issue then we can just say well fuck but its ok we conserved oil and increased air quality. If it is real then we are FUCKED and we would have wished that we had done something so the who argument is pointless.
 
how can you say global warming isnt being affected by humans? WE are the ones making the air thicker and making it more difficult for heat to escape the planet. the heat accumulates over time and humans making it more difficult for heat to escape sure as hell is contributing to global warming
 
how can you accurately document a graph from 400 000 years ago? although i do see it as a well estimated guess. natural flutuations do occur
 
it could be, my area (calgary/banff.....canada for those who dont know) had the earliest EVERYTHING. All the hills opend early with 100+ bases and tons of pow. Could precipitation not be a part of Global warming?

p.s. i didnt bother reading everything. so dont hate if i said the same thing as someone else.
 
to whoever started this shit. a) you have no proof. your first site is some random idiot who posts on everything from global wareming to the kennedy assassination. your second source is B.S, and has really nothing to do with whether or not gas emissions has anything to do with global warming, and it says that she has a phd but it doesnt say in what and i tried google scholar ing her and she isnt findable, and ive never heard of her "institute", and your third source merely tries to explain what bad science is, but doesnt directly show that science thats going on now is bad science( which it isnt, byt he way). and in fact, your fourth source si pointing out that medieval global warming may never have happened, which is actually defeating your cause. so why is anyone going to listen to your bullshit?

finally, lets say CO2 isnt the cause of global warming, stopping its emission will clean our air up for one thing, the planet will smell better, we should stop cutting down trees for that same reason, and stop using energy because the process of cultivating energy warms up our lakes and kills the fish.
 
i did a 35 page research project on global warming for my senior project.

the scientists who claim global warming is not real blame it on other things, like sunspot cycles. which may have an effect, but aren't the real issue.

facts

1) the greenhouse effect is real.

2) CO2 is a greenhouse gas

3) man is releasing CO2 at a much higher level than nature

someone please show me how this logic doesn't work....
 
even if global warmin was real it woudnt ever get to an emtremely bad point of it, because the earth will run out of oil in 40 years
 
Your total lack of logic is appalling. Wow. I really don't have anything to say to this other than please keep your uninformed opinion to yourself to prevent stupid theories from gaining support.
 
At one point in the earths history, I forget if its the pensylvanian period or whatever, the time where all of our fossil fuels originated had twice as much CO2 in the atmosphere as today. That was natural, and clearly our presence on this earth hundreds of millions of years later kinda disputes that the earth was destroyed by the natural gas.

Just for fun, lets deconstruct your logic.

1) The Greenhouse effect is real: I wont get into the sources part, but ok lets assume this is true.

2) C02 is a greenhouse gas; very good, that and water vapor which kind of occurs normally in things called CLOUDS.

3) Allready stated that this is false.

you have a 4th one that you implied and did not write

4) Therefore man is the cause of global warming. Deconstructing this, and we assume that 1 and 2 are correct, but is disputed. In the end we have calculated that greenhouse gases are the sole reason why the earth is warming. But Alas, this is not true. The sun, the natural decline and enlargement of the deserts, the glaciers that were formed by an ice age (and therefore alien to this world) are melting which could all be other causes of global warming, especially when put together. People think that glacier melting is "caused" by global warming, but there is no scientific experimentation which supports this. People automatically assume that correlations imply causality, which is a MASSIVE no-no in the field of science. Instead, the glaciers, which were produced only because a comet hit the earth and blotted out the sun for a considerable period of time, represent a return to normality. It explains the acceleration of global warming doesnt it? Think about it, the smaller the glaciers and poles are the less heat requires the same portion of them to be melted. You can see this when you watch an ice-cube melt, the rate of melting increases as it melts. Simple calculus, although a little counterintuitive at times because it also coincides with surface area of the ice cube.

Is there anything wrong with this explanation? What about Solar output explanation? What about a combination of all these factors, doesnt that seem the most likely? If it is in fact a combination, then man is certainly hurting himself, but not in the drastic way Al Gore and NOT a prominent scientist will have you believe.
 
Earth wont be destroyed.

The temps with just change and changes that would normally take much longer to occur will happen much quicker
 
so your trying to tell me that global warming is false even tho the past few years have been the warmest on record? there is just too much evidence through such quick changes. the fact that NY only got 40 inches of snow last year and wayyyy more rain doesnt help me in supporting your argument. the fact thats its december now and we still havent gotten a trace of snow also doesnt help. its not a earthly cycle. the first step to bettering the planet is admitting that we have a problem. 6.2 BILLION dirty polution emitting creatures DO have a major effect on the planet. 6.2 BILLION! what about the fact thats its a threat to go outside in some cities because of polution? there has to be a negative effect of pumping so much unnatural shit into the atomsphere that the earth has never seen before. i looked in the news today, and at the north pole for some odd reason, there were water droplets in the atmosphere at -30F. theyve never seen that before. how come?
 
Anything trends under atleast 20-50 year period doesn count.

You cant say that because this year is warmer then last year that global warming must exist.

Tempatures fluctuate from year to year. Three years of warmer temps in NY doesnt back global warming
 
yea but hes saying that recently they have surpassed the range of fluctuation that has been recorded in the last 850k years i think the number was. meaning that fluctuations have been normally occuring for a long time but never in history have they fluctuated this rapidly and beyond all previous temperature fluctuations
 
Using a SINGLE spot on earth in such a short time span is USELESS.

what is 3 years in 850 000 years? Dick all.

Now if this thread of warming occured over 100 years, over the whole contenient, maybe someone might care.
 
Yo im not sure what your talking about because people 100 years ago weren't worried about global warming because they didn't have cars or factories emmitting bad gases into the earths atmosphere. In the past 100 years or even 5 years human beings have been doing serious damage to earth and its atmosphere because of the machines they use. Cars, factories, and any other greenhouse gas emitters are the cause of the temperature rise on earth. The united states is the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases. For those of you who don't know what greenhouse gases are they are the gases that are messing up earths atmosphere. There are natural greenhouse gases that are harming the atmosphere aswell. As the earths temperature rises permafrost in siberia is melting, and when the permafrost melts it releases a gas that is very harmful to our atmosphere. This vicious cycle will continue until the earth is cool enough to stop melting the permafrost. Which will be never if things continue as they are. When I was little I moved from N.J. to N.H. and there were snow storms you couldn't imagine. The first year I was living in New Hampshire there was at least 4 1/2 feet of snow on the ground all winter. The second year there was less snow, but still way more than there is during todays' winters. I am not just reading articles on news sites and basing my opinion on those. I can actually see a difference in the amount of snow we receive, and the temperature outside. Global Warming is a real occurance and has been since the first factory pumped out its first thick, black, atmosphere choking cloud of smoke. When Henry Ford invented the first automobile I am sure he wasn't thinking about the long term effects on the earths atmosphere his machine would cause. Now it is time for an alternatative fuel such as hemp, corn, or any of the others better than oil.
 
I'm not quite sure what the hell you are trying to say...Greenland is melting and not refreezing, ice shelves in antarctica are shearing into the ocean at an unprecedented rate...what conditions exactly are improving?
 
Hi, I think that the Earth's average temps are increaseing but I do not think that it is casued by humans. From the little research I have read, annual human caused C02 output is far less then C02 output from nature, mostly comming from volcanos and oceanic vents.

Spencer Burns

I'm from the great state of Alaska
 
well, he might have a point on some level. running out of oil will probably be one of the best things to ever happen to us in the long run.
 
the fact that temperature change is in a short time is key to global warming. since emitions increase every year basically that means that temp changes should be more abrupt. But maybe the entire world wont warm up that much, but certain areas will warm up by 10 degrees while others may even cool down. and the catch is that if your in the 10 degree area, then your screwed. My point of saying NY is that in the past 3 years ive lived in that targeted area from what i think, judging by our abnormally warm weather. maybe the North east wont be a target of global warming, but at this point it is a target of abnormal weather that cant yet be related to global warming
 
your on Crack, no global warming What the fuck, Australia is in its worst drout in 300 years, The ice shelves are melting, The glaciers in the alps are getting so much smaller, The seasons latter and wierder weather patterns than ever before.

YOu should go hang at the white house and enjoy a big monkey gang bang with your poor excuse of a monkey president, and his "I cant Aim for shit " vice president and there republican red neck kkk , party..
 
All I want to know is who to blame for the fact that it is now December and it is still 55 degrees and raining in central upstate New York, once "notorious" for freezing climates and "too much" snow...
 
If anyone actually wants a lot of info on this subject read the Michael Crichton book Rising Sun (same author as Jurassic Park, Timeline, Airframe, Congo, Sphere, State of Fear, etc....

Really interesting topic
 
there ya go! lets get out of Iraq.. let it become another North Korea.. and in 2 years once its produced WMDs and set them on paths for the United states. we won't even have to worry about Global Warming cause we will all be dead!

and yess im taking your "finding more oil" for being the reason we are in Iraq which is incorrect

You would be suprised how many other countries we have set up major bases in.. and none of which we set about drilling oil in
 
i did do research you faggot. got that stuff from wikipedia AND another site which i cant find anymore. why dont YOU research before calling me out.
 
Ice Cores. Scientists can drill for ice in antarctica and greenland that was formed thousands of years ago. They then determine the CO2 content of the air trapped inside the ice. They arent estimates or educated guesses. It is fact.
 
how about this.....nobody on this SKIING website knows anything about geology, weather patters, or how anything works in the world. Your all little white kids between the ages of 12 and 19 in high school, who likes to think their badass for posting shit on the net. So how about everybody help out the environment, do your part, help keep our planet clean. There is nothing wrong with that at all. If you think there is, you deserve to be kicked in the nuts, and have shit shoved down your mouth. All you kids are claimers, let this thread die.
 
People like truckerhucker just like to convince themselves that humans aren't causing global warming so that they can sit on their ass and be apathetic. I say, we're never going to prove it either way, whether humans are causing global warming or not, but we are polluting the eart to a disgusting extent and I want to keep it as good a place to live in as possible. So take some god damn responsibility and save gas, don't drive a truck or SUV (some douchebag is going to say that SUVs are stupid unless you take them offroading, but you use a shitload of gas when you're offroading too), and don't support companies that are known to be environmentally irresponsible. It pisses me off that people tell themselves that we're not doing anything just so they can happily drive their jeeps around and not feel bad.
 
A very interesting article published in one of Britain's most respected newspapers a couple of weeks ago suggesting that "global warming" is massively and deliberately over-hyped. It's compelling stuff for anyone interested in the subject:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/05/nwarm05.xml

and a follow up article by the same man published a week later:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/12/nclim12.xml

Al Gore's response was published a week later:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/19/nclim19.xml
 
I will continue to cite global warming as a reason why Bush should be pierced with rusty nails and thrown into a vat of lemon juice. If that fucker is the Anti-Christ of skiing, I will make it my personal duty to make him never forget it. And crucify him on a lift tower.
 
im not ignorant and i dont believe in global warming... im a very open kinda guy... if you watch bobby kennedy in one of his interviews he says in 30 years if we dont stop global warming, people in new york will have to wear gas masks because of it... and that was 1968 and thats almost 40 years ago... i dunno, plus with all that snow everywear in the US...its hard for me to believe it....
 
I went to a speech by al gore in sydney last month and it was great, all hard evidence and statistics once you have heard him talk and seen the movie its impossible to say that its rubbish.
 
you mean 6000 years old like the catholics who know jack shit about anything outside of their restricted beliefs? seriously traditional catholics and from the beginning of catholicism, they've believed the world is only 6000 years old.

years ago everyone KNEW the world was flat.

everyone KNEW the world could only have come into being 6000 years ago.

everyone KNEW that god existed.

now look where we are.

it's not about getting evidence FROM 400 000 years ago. it's about evidence that is 400 000 YEARS OLD, on earth.

why do you think that every strata of earth contains an older and older form of homo or tools and artifacts? the deeper the strata the older the evidence. evidence that has aged that long.
 
yeah i didnt know what to say to him in response to "how did they get evidence from 400 000 yeras ago!"

i almost wanted to say "well you see, first they built a time machine. then they went back, 400 000 years ago, and somehow brought the evidence to the year 2006."

like what the hell.

i would just like to know what level of education he has.
 
There's a lot of really dumb people in this thread.

Look, our air quality is seeing effects from the 70's abuse of pollution. You know back when there were no regulations on what came out of a smoke pipe or what you dumped into the riverbeds.

The thing about global warming is it's such a recently publicized issue. People are finding a way to blame 2 bad years of snow on the east coast on a topic that the average North American household is extremely ignorant to. Science is great, but as Steph pointed out, data can be wrong. Unfortunately back when we believed the earth is flat, this was due to belief, and not even close to being based on any factual evidence. Modern science is not influenced by religion, but mistakes happen. The earth IS more than 3 billion years old. That has been proven and researched.

Now, human existence on this earth has been a minute on a timescale of a year. What I'm saying is, there is no possible way that we can tell what the earth's temperature was like a billion years ago. We can get estimates from geographic suggestions, but we can not determine the weather patterns other than the extremes (ice age etc). Obviously there are certain compounds and chemicals being mass produced by humans, but our earth is very sustainable of its own direction. What I'm saying is, it takes more abuse than you can imagine to shift the earth's climate a considerable amount. I am not saying it is impossible, but it takes a lot of time and a lot of consistent pollution. Unfortunately, we have been polluting for a long time and we are starting to see the effects of it. Mercury overloading in the rivers, much more potent acid rain, and other various forms of long-term polluting consequences.

It is unfair and incorrect to come out and make assumptions such as Hurricane Katrina being caused by global warming. Yes it was a very powerful storm, but it also hit in an area that never expects those types of storms. Gore sort of uses this as a guilt trip and an indirect approach to gain attention to his own publicity, which is very wrong. On his website, Al Gore confidently claims that in 25 years 300,000 people will be killed by global warming...Umm, so how exactly does global warming kill someone? If that means death by hurricanes and other natural disasters, that is not global warming.

If you look at the past 120 years, the 1880's were in a low temperature point ranging at about an average 13.8 celcius. Then it starts to increase as the industrial revolution takes part, but then significantly drops at the time of WW1. Then it increases at about the time of the Great depression. If you look at the actual numbers, and not the misleading graphs that have been shown to alter perception, the earth has recently been about .7 degrees warmer than in the previous early century.

Let's look at a volcano...Volcanoes spit out loads of sulfur dioxide which gets into the stratosphere. Now one of the last major volcano eruptions of the century Mount Katmai in AK erupted and had ash travel as far as Africa. Now a volcano actually produces a much harsher affect on the environment (although it is very short-term) because of the sulfur-dioxide it produces. The year of the Katmai eruption, the average temperature was far lower than what it is today. This could mean a variety of things, but I'll let you guys formulate your own opinion.

Now the earth is indeed getting warmer, but it was also getting warmer in the 40's. The consistency can be judged because the rate of increasing temperature since human industrialization has definitely been faster, but we don't have enough older evidence to determine a solid climate average.
 
In response to the original poster:

All those articles are turning "global warming" into a political issue. Global warming should not be a political issue. This is why it makes me very reluctant to believe people such as Al Gore, Condleezza Rice, or any other political based opinion on global warming. Unfortunately, we tend to hear about these weather patterns from media and political sources so they are skewed in the way that the favoring party would like to hear them.

Also, a point they make in the article is completely wrong. They say in 1998 the world cooled off, and co2 emissions went up. While this is true, the effects of carbon dioxide can be delayed over a period of 10 years maybe even more.

He does make a good point with examples of previous wrongs, but it is much easier to point out faults in the past when you are altering data to make it seem like your opinion is right instead of trying to find out the actual truth.

Now here's where the article really makes a bad call. Determining that overpopulation isn't a real threat. Well, let's look at the population change in the past 25 years...that is something that is consistently increasing to a point where it really is a threat. I firmly believe that overpopulation will kill us all before any sort of natural occurrence.

All in all, a very ignorant and mislabeled title fr these articles caused you to look like an idiot. So, next time you go interpreting data to come to a conclusion, make sure you know what the argument is saying and its purposes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top