Is Global Warming real?

Average global temperature, got to average summer and winter months. Overall it is a very clear warming trend since the industrial revolution.
 
It wasnt Glenn Beck that I was highlighting on though, If I were than I would deffiantly not post it on NS because I know alot/most of you are raging liberals that disagree with pretty much with everything he says, youd probably wouldnt even believe that he's hungry even if he told you he was. For the hunderth time, Its about Lord Monckton and his data. Its just a starter to a debate, in which is supported by several facts presented to you by woozy(thank you). So my question is this, why is Glenn Beck "invalid" on this issue? How would you know?
 
grizzlyn.jpg
 
The global warming debate is the classic debate between liberals and conservatives.

Logic and science against blind allegiance and "faith".

No scientist, using logic, would ever come to the conclusion that Glen Beck has a anything intelligent to say. The first law of thermodynamics prevents it.
 
Id bet you that liberals out weigh conservatives 5/1 on NS. Lets face it, our industry seems to be comprised of mostly liberals. Even the canadian NS staff endorsed Obama staff last year.
 
Did you read what Rowen posted though? I understand it was started like Yakov Smirnoff (or however the fuck you spell his name) was the start of that joke but the rest of it just confuses me.
 
I like to think of myself as a conservative, however I am a believer in climate change and human's impact upon it. So there's one conservative for ya, that understands the science behind the topic.
 
but the idea behind man-made global warming is that co2 is causing the warming. Not the 'temperature changing the co2 levels'.
 
Nope, I watched the video you posted, read all of woozy's posts, and have taken in information from other sources. If you asked me a year ago what I thought on climate change I would say that it was utter bullshit, but then I began reading articles, studying data, and taking courses at school with professors in the field. I have seen and still take into account both sides of the argument.
 
the guest speaker was on GLENN BECK's show! god damn your stubborn.

and here's how i know -

"Why do we have automatic citizenship upon birth? We're the only country in the world that has it." - Glenn Beck

-anyone ever been to ireland?
 
just read this... it's appropriate in principle.
"Incidents like the Eastern Illinois spraying* raise a question that is not only scientific but moral. The question is whether any civilization can wage relentless war on life without destroying itself and without losing the right to be called civilized."
from Rachel Carson's Silent Spring.

*http://books.google.com/books?id=D-MDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA85&lpg=PA85&dq=sheldon+il+spraying&source=bl&ots=kY5tgcl6d4&sig=ehm946UI1_G6uULN2HTy9q8ofR8&hl=en&ei=BUcCS9aMDIaMnQe-04hh&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CCMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=&f=false
 
Rachel Carson makes great points but has also been said by some on the side that supports it that she was a bit far out there.
 
No.
well... yes, actually, everyone has been said to be crazy by whoever opposes them, in this case DuPont executives... or any other chemical company exec she rightfully pissed off.
glenn beck is fucking far out there in the opposite direction.
far out to the conservationist left is Derrick Jensen... he's definitely out there, but he's also right about a lot of thingshttp://www.derrickjensen.org/purchase.html
 
I took an Honors science class last quarter and my professor was one of the higher ups in the Physics department and we had a Biology prof in there too as a second professor and the Biology professor says she makes some great points but there ARE times where she goes to such an extreme that it is completely unrealistic to go to.
 
the earth will always have its ups and downs in weather, its not always going to be how u expect it, weather changes! its suposed to go from cold to warm and what not
 
I'm not saying that you're wrong, but I'm not saying you're right. We do not know for certain either way as of now, but does that mean society shouldn't change? Society needs to change to be sustainable in more ways than just climate change.
 
If you look at history though, society rarely changes because "it should". It is usually some form of bloodshed or something that causes society to change the way they act or what they do. Even then it doesn't always work, just look at the Crusades.... nothing changed and that is quite possibly the bloodiest portion of history.
 
yea true, but if we do not change there are a lot of factors going against us... I'm reading the book "The Long Emergency" right now and it really puts in perspective how fucked we are if we don't make some changes in mind set and action. Hopefully we don't get to the point of 'blood shed.' I'm not saying it's all doom and gloom, I think we have the ability and technology to make society sustainable, it's a matter of whether people will accept changing their lives.
 
Generally, it takes some form of force to have someone accept changing their life. Like me, I have been trying to lose weight for years and it took my buddy physically and forcefully dragging me out to go work out with him to change.
 
We will need to change but much like other doomsayers Kunstler only takes into account small factors and does not take the whole scope. There will be plenty of oil until new technologies arrive.

Read "The singularity is near" by Kurzwile that is a more positive futurist approach to the future get rid of this long Emergency BS that has already been proven to be incorrect on several of his predictions.
 
hahaha very true and you made me lawl.
Tasche, thanks, I'm lookin into that book right now, still going to read Long Emergency, seems to have most of his stuff right.
 
Have you lost any weight? Just take 1/2 a scoop of NO Explode that will make you want to work out trust me.
 
I actually went to a seminar with the scientist that did the case study and quite frankly he has NOTHING to gain from his findings and everything to lose. The original funding for this project was from an environmental company and from a branch of the EPA that was trying to get money to promote research for the slowing of "global warming".. im sorry you guys but the prof from MIT was all for the global warming theory when it started and now.. well he sure doesnt seem to think that it is nearly as big of a deal as the public is lead to believe. This meteorologist is anything but a retard and knows more than any of you so stop thinking you know it all and look at the evidence for both cases and you will be surprised what you find. Look at the evidence and make a decision for yourself instead of what the liberals around you have decided to feed you.. sorry to burst your bubbles
 
also, just to add he does believe that it is happening but feels that the overall global trends have shown that the 1 degree gain in this century will have an EXTREMELY small effect and will actually be reversed by the colder years to come..
 
your argument certainly has changed my mind.

"I know a dude, who is way smarter than all of you, who I refuse to name, that I have spent time with, that thinks you LIBERALS are morons, and global warming is a hoax, and the fact that I spent time with him makes me an expert on the subject."

Common bro read some papers on the topic you are wrong. The only arguable points are time frame and human involvement, global warming is scientific fact.
 
Glenn Beck is retarded,

but global climate change is real as it was 500 years ago a million years ago and 100 million years ago. humans have not caused the globe to become a giant oven as everyone thinks.
 
if you read this thread you would understand that most of us know much more about the topic than you and have presented as such. Educate yourself.
 
Well hopefully me attending yale next year and some more lectures from some of the top scientists in the world including Lindzen, the guy that is the world leader in studying this, maybe then I'll be smart enough. And youre right, the person I have gotten the opinion from on this issue doesnt know what he is talking about, even though he is a prof at MIT and is THE world leader in scientific research in this field... get educated kid and realize that you may not be the smartest kid around..
 
^ no offense of course.. cant blame all liberals for thinking theyre the smartest kids in the world.. just the way theyre raised
 
Right. I'm sorry for being Canadian. You completely changed my mind on the topic of Climate change, because you just dropped a name or two, said it's fake, then proceeded to call everyone else stupid. You asked everyone to form their own opinion. We presented ours with facts, and you went to one seminar and were immediately convinced? Sounds a little hypocritical to me. Present some facts to support yourself and maybe I won't dismiss you as a troll/retard. I'm sure many of the "kids" posting in here with developed points are older than you anyways.
Oh, and why does everyone who cares about the environment have to be labelled as a liberal? We all live on the same planet, and everyone affects everything. The earth is not immune to humans, and it just seems like a logical idea to think about how to reduce these impacts and sustain life for further generations. Politics has nothing to do with this. So why does this immediately get labelled as a political debate?

 
If you actually read the thread you would know that I am not a liberal. That's cool that you go to Yale and get really cool prof's. Does that mean that I havn't read reports and data from them AND from just as highly regarded scientists pro-human effected climate change. I'm not saying that I'm the smartest kid in the world, but you seem to think being lectured by leading scientists automatically makes you the expert. I would love to attend lectures by these guys but that doesn't mean that is the answer to climate change. I know the facts and read more of them everyday. I have formulated what I think is my genuine opinion on the issue and support it with data from both sides. (my point of view is not 100% either way, it's a combination of human and natural causes) Whether humans cause it or not we've got to change society to be sustainable. (sorry for endless posts)
 
My parents and industry are pretty conservative so not a liberal because I was raised that way. And I am glad that you can recognize that you don't know shit. Namely because you have a HS education. So I am way smarter than you, and wiser. (based on societies rules, you=0 degrees, me = 2 degrees)

So why am I liberal, well its probably that reality has a well know liberal bias. And since I live firmly planted in reality, I am influenced.

I just can't understand the political issue here. Tons of research says that this is happening. So why try and fight it. The cost of doing nothing is orders of magnitude worse than trying to be more efficient and limit or eliminate carbon emissions? So why are you fighting this you twat? Say all the countless research is wrong, well then we have just become more efficient and created new technologies that will help to power a clean future. If we do nothing and the research is right the earth heats up and in the next 50 years billions of people are displaced, famine runs rampent, and shit gets real.

I understand that you think that Al Gore is a douche, is he? Maybem, but just because some liberal politicians are trying to use this topic to their advantage doesn't make it any less valid. So conservative America fuck off for a little bit, you had your run for 8 fucking years. You ruined the economy, got us in two un-winnable wars, took a shit on the constitution, allowed the largest terrorst attack on American soil ever, and turned the whole world against us. Obama spending a couple trillion dollars doesn't sound that bad so lay the fuck off. God forbid we spend money at home rather than on killing other people in a country that will never embrace us.

/rant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top