Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous group job interview | Columbia, this is Eagle, ready to dock, over. Next »
Gentlemen, the next time we meet to claim the earth is getting hotter, I suggest Death Valley in July. Then maybe we won’t have a raging blizzard making us look like damn fools.
(Barack Obama)
Picture by: dunno source Caption by: dunno source via Advanced Lol Builder
 | waggle238 on Progress Poker |
 | MrsQ on Number One Threat to Russ… |
| MrsQ makes srsly obt… on Hero’s Shawarma |
 | Geary on Progress Poker |
| waggle238 on Progress Poker |
 | Stinky Whizzleteats on Hero’s Shawarma |
| Geary on GREECE |
| MrsQ on Hero’s Shawarma |
| Geary on GREECE |
| Geary on GREECE |
Cheezburger Company Blog
I Can Has Cheezburger? - Lolcats n Funny Pictures 
Lolcats - Lolcats n' Funny Cat Pictures
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies 
Animal Capshunz - All of the Internet's Animals. Captioned
Animal Videos - Cute and Hilarious Animal Videos
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode. 
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz 
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
If Style Could Kill - OMG Style!
Lovely Listing - Strange Findings in Real Estate Listings
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
global warming means crazy storms and weather patterns, including winter storms. It doesnt mean the planet will be instantly desert…
Way to miss the point entirely. You might as well have just said “First.”
i get the point, im just sick of hearing people say “GLOBAL WARMING? I DONT BELIEVE IT, THIS WINTER IS FREAKIN’ COLD!”
morgan: So Global Warming can yield colder temperatures? “Alright everyone I’m too hot turn on your ovens to cool your house down.”
Because the global climate system works just like the oven in a house. Would you really bet your education on that?
Well my house is it’s own environment. You Should see the desert of dust.
I saw “Day AFter tomorrow” and as there is some far fetched therories there, I find it very hard to believe that the World Would get Colder with Global Warming.
Yes, Day After Tomorrow was not a documentary. On that, we can agree. Global warming means an average (spatial and temporal) increase in the mean temperature of the globe. Some places might get colder while other places get hotter, but the globe on average will get hotter.
And could part of the warming be b/c the Earth is at it’s closet to the Sun?
Actually, we’re closer to the sun now than during (the Northern hemisphere’s) summer. We passed perihelion yesterday. Aphelion’s not until July 6th.
Maybe you’re thinking of the Earth’s tilt?
I think we’re in agreement here. I asked, could Global Warming be b/c the Earth is at it’s closest to the Sun? So I’m thinking “Yes” has a major factor in our Global Warming.
No, you ignorant fool. Norther hemisphere winter happens when the earth is closest to the sun. So just go back to your blocks, and leave the conversation to grown ups.
Biff: I know that the tilt of the Earth is closer to the Sun in Northern Hemisphere Winter, HOWEVER the ENTIRE Earth (not just the tilt) in it’s orbit [which changes throughout thousands of years, gets closer to the Sun and then farther from the Sun, kinda spiracal (think of three dimensions vice two)] is now thousands of miles closer to the sun than it was a few thousand years ago. So I’m gonna go out on a limp here and say if you a few thousand mile closer to a giant fire ball, you’re probably going to get more heat from it, which in turn would heat the enitre Earth. See that there is a proven fact. So Biff (I’m thinking the Biff from Back to the Future) why don’t you make like a tree, and get outa here.
It’s make like a tree and leave! You sound like a damn fool when you say it wrong!
All right then, leave! And take your book with you!
Um.. If he was thinking Biff from Back to the Future.. Biff is the one who says “Make like a tree and get outta here”.
To which I responded with the “Young Biff/Old Biff Quote” that i didn’t put in quotation marks.
I think?
I got it, Charro.
(Although quotes — quotues? — would probably have helped.)
That’s so queuete.
oh dammit! i missed the back to the future quote. i got stuck on boondock saints.
look up climategate
Aw, do you think mentioning the word “Climategate” makes you look all smart n stuff?
Why? Why must every scandal and semi-scandal and possible scandal get the word gate put after it? Why? *kicks watergate in the shin for starting the whole thing*
Except the cycle you’re talking about is annual. Every year we get closer to the sun (when temperatures drop here in the northern hemisphere), and every year we get further from the sun (when things get really hot here in the northern hemisphere). The global warming temperatures we’re talking about, on the other hand, are on annual and longer scales, so any inter-annual variation is completely irrelevant.
Come on Neb: The Eath’s Orbit around the Sun is not equi distance around the Sun. It changes over thousands of years, getting closer and then getting farther. I’m not talking tilt, I’m talking the ENTIRE Earth, as a whole.
I believe the term I was looking for is the Earth’s Orbit is Chaotic, not Stable.
I suppose you’re thinking of precession, which does not affect the Earth’s average distance from the Sun. The Earth’s annual average distance from the Sun has not changed by more than one part in a million over the last million years.
Here are some interesting orbital characteristics for you to look up: perihelion, aphelion, precession, nutation (well, that’s a rotational, not orbital, characteristic, but it also influences climate).
The argument I think you’re trying to make is that the Earth’s aphelion precesses over a long time scale, and that when the aphelion happens to align with summer in the Northern hemisphere, the (global) climate is affected. This is true, and despite your later comment, it’s not chaotic. It’s very predictable. Also, we’re very aware of it and the effects of it are incredibly simple to model. It’s not the cause for the current heating. In fact, as I previously pointed out, we’re pretty much in the minimum of that much grander cycle.
P.S. I should point out that my Master’s thesis involved orbital precession (albeit Mercury’s), so I’m not talking out my ass here.
No I’m not talking about those terms. (Certifed in Celestial Navigation, taken many a course on how the Sun and other Celestial bodies interact with the Earth.) I know that the Sun is not always on the Equator, and that it ranges from 12.5 degrees North and South (Declination). Dr. Jacques Laskar
believes a little differently than you.
I believe you’ve missed the thrust of the good doctor’s argument. Sure, there’s a minuscule chance that Mercury or Venus will hit the Earth, but on average our orbit is quite predictable. I’m quite aware of orbital chaos (I’ve even modeled it), but to use that to wave away our understanding of what the Earth has done is, forgive me, silly. We know what the Earth’s orbit has been doing, and it’s not been getting closer to the Sun. Oh, it might, and it’s also theoretically possible that a black hole will collide with us (in fact, that might be the cause!).
No, the overall trend of global warming does not correlate to sun activity. That was shown false years ago. Global warming is warming above normal trends, correlation and causation both point to CO2. This has been a known fact for 20+ years.
There overall global temperature is rising, even when normal global temperatures would be dropping. There will still be seasons, it will still snow as part of the annual weather patterns. There will be less snow, it may snow in different places, but long term packs will go away be cause it will be too warm through the year to sustain them. You oven in your house isn’t even close to a good comparison because there are so many outside you house that impacts, where as the earth there are relatively few. The most comprehensive scientific study mankind has ever done show this pretty clearly, sadly ignorant agenda fueled pundits keep take ad hom attacks against the people who did it and read it that it has confused the issue. study up.
global warming can yield crazy weather conditions, not necessarily immediately warmer winters and scorching summers, is what im saying. at least from what i understand, at the offset of global warming we’re not necessarily going to get warmer winters and crazy hot summers and stuff like that, but maybe as other areas are gradually getting warmer over all, more volatile storms will present themselves in both winter and summer because of steadily more dangerous weather conditions. so to simply dismiss global warming because we still have temps below freezing in the winter, or still have winter and snow at all in countries that have cold seasons, is ridiculous. thats all im saying, that global warming isnt as straight forward as the entire planet becoming some parched desert.
Holy crap! You mean to say that global warming will cause the weather to CHANGE?
It all makes sense now. Global warming MUST be caused by man, think about it, since the beginning of recorded history there have been all sorts of incidents of strange weather that no one expected. Now compare that to how many reported incidents there are from BEFORE recorded history: NONE! Coincidence?
I THINK NOT!
That argument has already been floated and shot down. Do try to keep up.
What about the rain of frogs? Hmm? That is totally unexplained! Coincidence? I think not!
Actually, if you get a chance to check the Naked Archaeologist’s special on the book of Exodus, he has some interesting theories on that
Naked archaeologists? *fans self*
It’s not what you think. He’s a balding, nearsighted gnome of a man standing 4 feet tall and carrying a pith helmet everywhere he goes. Oh, and he smells bad too (something to do with the bones or something).
Oh. You got me all excited over nothing *sulks*
for the millionth time, i am not saying gw is absolutely positively and entirely created by humans. im simply saying it exists.
That’s the stupidest thing I’ve heard today.
and you are the stupidest person ever
Charro is the stupidest person ever? That means everyone else is smarter than her? *has brief delusions of grandeur before getting smacked by reality* I..I wish this were true. I wish people were that smart. It would restore my faith in humanity.
If it were true, we wouldn’t have any of these silly, going-around-in-circles arguments on PK where someone like her has to point out that the same incorrect point has already been made ten times!
Wow, ever? That’s pretty impressive. I wonder, can you tell me how something like that is quantified anyway? Since you are clearly much smarter than I am, you must know. Your lack of proper sentence structure, capitalisation technique and punctuation clearly proves your intellectual superiority. Thank you, O Great Val for bestowing your superior wisdom on this, the end all, be all of internet forums!
and im not saying the world is going to get colder either, im just saying the weather will become more extreme.
that actually sounds pretty cool to me!
(apologies for the pun)
/runs away and hides
really :S? it terrifies me i’ve never been through a hurricane or anything and would hate to have to…yer brave!
Hurricanes aren’t scary. A stable house some emergency supplies, and some shutters and you’re safe.
It’s not the hurricanes that are bad, it’s the collapsing levies you need to worry about. Or you could always avoid building a house below sea level.
Or, you could always build a house way below sea level – on the bottom of the sea! (Then you would never have to worry about flooding, right?)
It requires energy for air conditioning to operate. Energy is used to move energy from one place to another. With the addition of energy, one area becomes colder and another area warmer. Greenhouse effects trap more heat/energy, leading to greater weather effects.
GREAT analogy!
Then perhaps it would be best for the world’s greatest minds to start calling it global climate change and completely ditch global warming.
Although I agree that it is it the warming that is causing the climatic changes.
So was man responsible for the “climate change” that caused previous periods of life on this planet to end. I seriously doubt that velociraptors cruising around in Hummers had anything to do with the rising temperatures back then. Have any of you thought of the actual evidence that we have. 250+ million years of climate history in our geological record. Periods of extreme temperatures in both directions. All before man, and all before industry.
That argument has already been floated and shot down. Please do try to keep up.
I don’t know if it’s necesarily been shot down as more ignored.
A little of column A, a little of column B, and perhaps a wee bit of interpretation as to whether it was completely shot down. Regardless, I think we can agree it’s not exactly a new argument.
Here here, lots of people also don’t realize that the change in temperatures will change the deep ocean currents, which will greatly affect what the temperature is.
The current deep ocean currents we have now means that we all don’t die because the Northern Hemisphere is ice (or desert).
Yeah I saw that movie too… thanks. But it’s not the temperature that controls the currents as much as a Salinity.
and now, a dramatic performance of the typical conservative responce to data and facts.
-sticks fingers in ears- LALALALALALALALALA IM NOT LISTENING!! ITS SCARY AND I DONT LIKE IT!!! BLA BLA BLA JESUS WILL FIX IT ALL YES HE WILL I PRAYED EXTRA HARD LAST NIGHT. THERE ARE NO CAUSE OR EFFECTS FOR THE ACTIONS OF HUMANITY LA LA LA LA ITS NOT REAL I HAVE PROOF!! WELL NO I DONT BUT I DONT WANT IT TO BE REAL LA LA LA OBAMA INVENTED TAXS AND IS EVIL.
Damn Bitter you really are turning to a$$hattery. No all conservatives are like that. Second NOT all conservatives are religious. Dude really seriously……..
ok just change the words from jesus will fix it, to there is nothing to fix. and if you dont like your lil cult sounding like that, perhaps you should do something about the way they are sounding.
I do Bitter. See below where I fixed Nebs definition of a Republican. I want my party back. I also want more proof without an agenda prior to proceeding. I would love to have a clean running fuel just for the sheer fact sitting in traffic with my windows open STINKS!!!! But come on…. when a conservative stereotypes a liberal and says all liberals believe this or liberals are stupid for this, doesn’t that irritate you, especially if you don’t believe it. Yes there are conservatives who believe that Global Warming isn’t man made b/c God told them so….. but there are others who believe such a fact b/c we’re awaiting more information, b/c our research of facts tend to leads us to a different conclusion. That’s all.
im sorry if acting like a conservative offends you, perhaps you should act less offensive to others
actualy you’re acting like a bitter troll… :-p And how am I offending others?
I effing ♥ you, bitter troll.
and im pretty sure this caption is referring to that ignorance. i was agreeing.
Interesting. Explain, please, how the changes in climate we’re experiencing now are different from, say, the medieval warm period of 90 AD to 1200 AD, or the mini ice age of 1350 to 1850, from which we are still emerging. (By the way, people were trying to blame a small group of productive folks at the beginning of the mini ice age for the change in the weather, too. They called them “witches” and burned them.)
Also, explain, please, how the miniscule human contribution of CO2 to an already miniscule percentage of the gas, which is actually a lagging indicator of climate changes, can have more influence than changes in the output of solar energy, which are clearly indicated by the presence or absence of sunspots.
Finally, please explain how this is NOT in fact a massive fraud perpetrated to further the agenda of “Social Justice” rather than effect any real influence over a system that has withstood much more than our puny influence over the last several billion years.
Environmentalist answer: Humans are bad, ‘kay? We have to make sure they can’t do any more bad things, ‘kay? Making just a couple of nations stop is gonna work SO GREAT, ‘kay?
(Seriously, whether or not humans are at fault, it won’t make a damn bit of difference if the developed nations cut back on ‘greenhouse gasses’… because the developing nations can’t and won’t cut back while they’re still trying to catch up to everyone else.)
and yeah i dont think cutting back anything will make much of a dent at this point
…way to miss my point ENTIRELY.
to be honest i didnt read it properly. i did miss the point, my apologies. couldnt agree with you either way on that one because again i dont know all the info. all i meant to say by my original post is that global warming exists, whether or not humans brought it upon themselves, and anyone who denies it is foolish. i wasnt trying to make some big political statement or something…
Nice way to double down. Put words in the mouths of those you would argue against and then say it doesn’t even matter because we can’t do anything about it anyway. That’s known as self-denial and defeatism.
Yes, developing nations have to be brought on board. However, we can lead the way instead of shoving others around. Other countries have already demonstrated that you can reduce your admissions while making your country and economy even stronger. That’s the way we get developing nations on board. We improve efficiencies, develop greener technologies, and then share our knowledge with developing countries.
Really? Which countries? And when? I’ll bet they didn’t try to introduce ridiculous emissions restrictions in the middle of a recession.
I don’t have any objection to cutting emissions. I do object to the way the current US government (and, it seems, the bunch in Copenhagen) want to go about it. And given how little effect any of the help given to developing countries seems to have, especially in the last ten years, I don’t think it will make much difference any time soon.
Which countries and when? Most of Europe, and they were doing it while the economic Chicken Littles over here were saying doing so would destroy our economy.
Of course, an even better strategy than saying that doing anything will destroy our economy is saying that doing anything will do nothing.
Which countries? Basically all of Europe, dude. When? In the early nineties. We’ve been trying to get you Americans on the bandwagon for almost two DECADES now.
Reducing emmisions won’t destroy your economy, trust me, that’s just what the rich, lazy bosses wan’t you to think.
Detroit’s Big Three are sending their assassins for you now. I’d hide. Anyone who criticizes letting big business do whatever they want no matter what harm it causes just to make more money is just a tree-hugging hippie with a crush on Al Gore in this country and clearly doesn’t want our nation to ever recover from the recession. Because you know, the only way to have economic growth is to to destroy the f’ing planet.
You tell ‘em Rando Twenty Ten!
Haha, let them come. I don’t even know who or what “Detroit’s Big Three” are. What would they look like, when they come to murder me? I’d like to be prepared.
You’ll know them by their noxious emissions.
Well, they’ll have to get a catalytic converter installed to reduce those noxious emissions, if they want to set foot in my country.
*imagines a doctor installing a a catalytic converter on someones bum*
You know what I get a kick out of? People calling it a “Cadillac converter”. Makes me wonder where I can find a little piece of equipment to turn my ride into a Caddy.
Where can I get a Lamborghini converter?
“Where can I get a Limbaugher Converter?” There I fixed that for you.
Speaking of “noxious gases…”
“Detroit’s Big Three”? I’m going with Grady Jackson, Gosder Cherilus, and Sammie Hill. They’re pretty big.
Nobody on the Lions counts as big these days. I’m thinking Barry Sanders, Gordie Howe, and Cecil Fielder.
No no no Rasheed Wallace, Ben Wallace, and oh wait…. nevermind.
Who?
Not a Pistons fan I take it.
The green bubble has burst. No these alternative energy sources have bankrupted your country, but they have been a technical drain, and your country is thinking about putting a stop to new construction. The only real option is nuclear power, and yes you are realizing that, and you are starting to construct those instead.
Your joke about U.S ignorance still stands though since we have yet to notice how horribly inefficient these alternate forms are, and are still afraid of big bad nuclear energy.
Actually, France has embraced nuclear all along as part of its green solution. The current bubble has nothing to do with “green”, but you probably already know that.
No, the serious construction of nuclear has been a recent development. Yes, a few may have been an option from the beginning but it’s only recently took off.
Yes I know it’s an overall recession, but that doesn’t mean EVERY single industry suffers, so yes the green bubble in Europe can still pop independently. (Cause “you probably already knew that” sounded mean to me. If not than forget this part)
If by “recently”, you mean the early ’80s, then sure. I was assuming you meant more recently than that. France started invested heavily in nuclear power in the the ’80s. Recently, in fact, the growth of nuclear power in France has been decreasing, not increasing. (It’s still growing, however.)
As for the green bubble popping more than other industries, what’s your evidence?
Not more than, just independently. My evidence is that alternative methods were in decline before the recession.
I notice how all the nuclear power advocates here (in the US) all are so eager to keep the waste in their states. /sarcasm from the home of WIPP
I didn’t say there wasn’t issues involved, but the people who pretend we can just put up a few wind turbines and call it ok, are more crazy IMHO.
What I find annoying are the people who are all in favor of alternative energy until you want to put up a wind farm near their house.
It’s all the same. NIMBY. BTW, there aren’t many homes near our new ‘wind farm,’ and those that are nearby belong to the people who sold the land for it. Yeah, they’re complaining all the way to the bank.
There was opposition to the Cape Wind project in Nantucket Sound (including from the Kennedys
) and that’s 5 1/2 miles from shore…
Everybody wants to USE power, nobody wants to live near the power plant….
The funny thing is people don’t realize that Wind Turbines still need to use lubrication (ie greases, oils, etc), and to make said turbines takes as much CO2 as it does to make a car. Not to mention the efficiency (speed to power) of the rotor within the power generator is horrible at low speeds.
I didn’t think we grew them, ILPB.
But, it’s a farm! That means we grow it, right?
And we use fairy dust to lubricate the rotors! And unicorns to pull the delivery trucks that bring the turbines to us!
Wind Turbines are a crock for the power needs of our generation. It was great for grinding corn or flour, but to power a town it’ll take WAY too many. Plus I’m waiting for some enviromental group to come out and say Wind Farms adjust the winds to a point that it’ll effect the migration pattern of tsi-tsi fly which in turn will starve the Tit Willow, which makes the Tiguana Cat starve, which leaves the Polar Bear hungry.
*snicker*
You said “tit”.
There are places in the desert where they’ve been using wind turbine energy for years. Somewhere near palm springs I think. Of course they have a crap ton of open space no one wants to build on and enough high winds to make it work. As far as the turbines. The amount of CO2 needed to make a turbine being as low as that of a car isn;t that impressive PB. How many cars are made daily compared to how many wind turbines have been made compared to how much power those turbines have generated compared to how much CO2 emissions that same amount of power would be generated at a coal plant compared to um..my foot? That went on longer than expected to. Anyways, I know that wind turbines aren’t the answer in most places, but they do work well in some areas. Just like solar power would work well in an area that is sunny most of the year, but probably wouldn’t be recommended in say, Seattle.
I’ve always enjoyed driving from Tucson to LA and seeing the windmill farms.
Well property values are more important.
Yeah, Teddy Kennedy really p-oed me on that one. Grr.
We could always shoot the Nuclear Waste straight into the Sun.
but that would make the sun burn hotter and global warming would continue.
alright shoot it into some other person’s sun. Or we could shoot it into the middle of Jupiter where it’ll be crushed to non-particles.
Me and Mr. Norris give you a thumbs up.
I’m guessing you’re not familiar with 2010: Odyssey Two? Either that, or you’re being incredibly on topic with the recent year change.
Neb: Que? Never saw 2010…. tried but it was too slow…
They dumped nuclear matter into Jupiter to ignite it and make a second sun.
By “nuclear matter” I really mean “hydrogen”, IIRC.
Ahhh so I see….. but was it Nuclear Waste? or a nuclear explosive matter, you know the stuff Iran’s “not” *cough* making.
Meh, my memory ain’t so hot. From the much vaulted Wikipedia: “Through a mechanism the novel only partially explains, these monoliths increase Jupiter’s density until the planet achieves nuclear fusion, becoming a small star.”
Ahhh ok….. no longer need to try and watch movie.
That movie was crap. The whole thing eventually came down to a statement about the cold war. 2 hours of my life I’ll never get back. I liked the books though.
I don’t really remember the movie, although I probably watched it because I liked the books so much. (That said, the later books became a tad bit preachy, in an atheist kind of way.)
How does the growth in the solar energy sector fit into that theory of yours?
What area of the world?
London. It’s always sunny in London.
Bah, my previous reply got lost in the ether. I even used the {} trick around the links. Anyways, try doing a Google search on “photovoltaic world production”. That should answer your question.
Any place with sunlight. Which is almost everywhere. Northern Europe isn’t the most sunny place in the world, but it’s still useful.
And what exactly is the efficiency of a Solar Panel?
What do you mean, European or African?
I don’t know… AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Umm, creating electricity for your home and not having to buy it from companies? My neighbours have one installed on the roof of their house, I’m talking central Europe here, not the Sahara.
Oh yeah and added bonus is no nuclear waste left over!
There’s actually an important hidden variable there. By creating it locally, there’s an efficiency gain due to not having to transmit the electricity over power lines.
So I guess you don’t actually know how terrible their efficiency is than?
nd tell me about all the power in the next Hail storm.
Wow, it must suck where you live. Hail pellets so big they blot out the sun.
From what I’ve heard from some people, the biggest issue with solar panels is the cost and trouble of getting it all set up. But I’ve heard from people who say they’ve generated enough electricity to be able to sell it back to the electric company. No word on if they still have to pay rent if they land on that space though.
Zapp: Solar Panels are made pretty much of a glass like material. Strong Hail at times will break said glass. I’d rather pay a monthly bill to a ebil power company to fix power lines and such when there’s bad weather, than have to wait weeks to repair solar panels to get power back on. That’s me, I’m selfish I guess.
Solar panels are now starting to be made of a substance which is installed from rolls–flexible like vinyl, and the snow would slide right off. I’m thinking of installing, given this change, and I live in New England!
{http://www.siliconsolar.com/flexible-solar-panels.html}
With the steadily rising costs of electricity around here, I wish I could afford solar panels…of course it would help if I owned my house.
Hail =/= snow. Heavy snow rarely causes broken windshields like Hail the size of Golf Balls.
ADM: the record set so far for solar cell efficiency is 42.8% efficiency. That’s pretty impressive, IMO, and efficiencies continue to improve.
ILPB: I understand your concern, but is this an actual problem, or just a theoretical problem? I.e., are you aware of this being a problem for people with solar panels?
The guy down the street. Set up these eye sore of Solar Panels, fought the Home Owners association and won. Few weeks later huge hail storm just utterly destroyed the panels. I had a chuckle.
That sucks. Well, I assume if you’re willing to settle for less efficiency, you could add some kind of “hail guard”. I have no idea what impact it’d have on efficiency, though. Given the long term trends for oil prices and solar cell prices, it’ll eventually be cheaper per kilowatt/hour, but I have no idea when that’ll be – or if some other alternative will beat it. (Solar turbines are all the rage right now, and it’s really great for power companies because it requires a centralized generator. They’re too big for individual use.)
I wasn’t even thinking of the older brittle cells. I was thinking about the newer ones that you can bounce baseballs off of.
PB: As far as your concern about being without power in the even of a hailstorm most houses with solar panels are still connected to the power grid so if they lose solar power for any reason they still have the old fashioned stuff to fall back on. Also any power they don’t use (providing they aren’t storing it in batteries instead) goes back into the grid and causes their meter to run backwards. My dad actually gets checks from the power company instead of bills.
DU: If we ALL go to Solar Power and have no Power Grid, then how do we connect to something that no longer exists. I know some people have batteries, but they can only last so long.
Well, if we all got solar power we’d have serious power shortages on overly cloudy days/weeks, especially in the north. I’m not saying that Solar power is the only option, but it is part of the solution.
Dude, I work for a convenience store. My ‘rich lazy boss’ is nothing of the sort, nor does he have any interest in the subject… nor would I discuss with him if he did! I keep my politics out of my workplace, in the interest of workplace harmony.
And as I recall, early nineties were a much better time period than right this second, economically. (I could be wrong. Early nineties, I hadn’t even hit puberty wrong.) Nor do I think that reducing emissions will destroy the economy! I will say, unequivocally, that it will produce an extra burden that can wait a little while longer until we get our economic feet back under ourselves. And, IMO, there are better ways of approaching it than what the current US Congress and President want.
I’d also like to point out that Europeans, on average, are much more willing than your average American to accept government interference in their lives.
oh no no im not saying human beings are necessarily responsible, i dont have any insight into that either way, but i just hate people who deny global warming all together because simply because we get snow storms.
I’ll say it. We are predominantly responsible. We have nearly doubled the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, leading not just to increased temperatures but also to increased acidity of the oceans (since CO2 + H20 makes carbonic acid).
It must be nice to always be right. If it’s warmer, it’s global warming. If it’s colder, it’s global warming. If there is a particularly bad hurricane season, it’s global warming. If there are almost no hurricanes (like last year), it’s global warming. If there are more gnats, less gnats, or if freaking Al Gore has a bald spot, it’s global warming. And when the alarmists realized that the world wasn’t, in fact, warming at the rate they had previously said it was, they changed the terminology to “climate change” in order to make it sound more believable. Now it’s “anthopromofic
I just said if we’re going to discuss climate issues we needed to (if possible) distinguish between anthropogenic and natural changes.
Oh, anthropogenic! I like! *adds the word to her calendar and calls it a word of the day calendar.*
I think you’re passing off your lack of understanding as being someone else’s. Anthropogenic simply means “man made”. (Anthropomorphic means something slightly different and doesn’t make sense in this context, but because I’ve encountered that word more frequently than anthropogenic in my studies, and because they both begin with “anthropo”, I occasionally use the wrong word there. I apologize if I’ve done that and caused some confusion with it.) Global warming is still happening, but global means global, not local. The phrase “climate change” isn’t meant to replace “global warming”, but to expand on it. It incorporates so much more than just global warming. It does, however, include global warming.
…although pop-culture environmentalism (as opposed to hard science) does have a tendency to anthropomorphize the planet and/or Nature in general.
Doesn’t anthropomorphic mean giving human characteristics to animals? (learned that from Non-Sequitur)
Animals or anything non-human. For example, animated films Beauty and the Beast and The Brave Little Toaster both anthropomorphized inanimate objects.
That’s not fair! Those objects were human to begin with! Um..what’s the opposite of anthropomorphic? The humans were turned into inanimate objects by the evil curse! /smartass
Furries?
Belle and the beast were the only furries! (she liked doing furries, he liked dressing up as a furry). The rest of them were turned into household objects. Furniturists? Silverwarists? Dishesists?
He liked shapeshifting into a big furry would be more accurate.
Yes it does, and I just realized the (wrong) word I was really thinking of was “anthropic”. Damn “anthrop” words…
It must be nice to always be right. If it’s warmer, it’s global warming. If it’s colder, it’s global warming. If there is a particularly bad hurricane season, it’s global warming. If there are almost no hurricanes (like last year), it’s global warming. If there are more gnats, less gnats, or if freaking Al Gore has a bald spot, it’s global warming. And when the alarmists realized that the world wasn’t, in fact, warming at the rate they had previously said it was, they changed the terminology to “climate change” in order to make it sound more believable. Now it’s “human caused” versus something caused by the natural progressions of the cycles of the earth. It doesn’t matter what the data says, AGW people are wrong, because all of the data has been made to relate directly back to GW.
You’re really showing that you’ve only been paying attention to the argument through a filter. The story you’re telling never happened. The world is, in fact, warming at a rate pretty darn close to what was predicted.
0.1 degress per year or something like that?
Actually, I believe the current trend is 0.01-0.02 degrees (Celsius) per year, although it’s more accurate to talk about decadal trends (since annual fluctuations are much wider), which would be about 0.1-0.2 degrees/decade.
Dude we’re talkin degrees F. We’re in America dude, speak American. (which is kind of a mix of spanish, english, made up words, idoit speak, LOL speak, etc….)
OK, so about 0.2-0.4 degrees Fahrenheit per decade (I am allowed to use significant figures correctly, aren’t I?).
Only in American dude, only in American.
Really I was off by a factor of 10…. DAMN you Faux News (I kid I only use Fox News for the Celebrity Gossip, get my real news from Google searches…
)
PS. You realize that 90% of Americans have no idea how to convert degress C to degress F right? They just don’t care how to. Don’t even get me started on Kelvin.
What’s really sad is how many news agencies don’t understand the difference between a change in temperature versus a temperature measurement and how the conversion rules are different (i.e., don’t add/subtract 32 for a change in temperature).
*small voice*
Most science stuff is metric. I suspect because when you’re doing complicated math stuff with your measurements, it’s simpler if the measurements aren’t in arcane odd amounts.
Metirc makes no sense. How can water freeze at 0 degrees? Makes no sense, 32 is a much more logic number.
I’ll confess that although for science stuff I’ll do metric, deep down inside I still think imperially (especially when it comes to temperatures).
Communist!!!
Actually, I think the proper insult is: Republican!!!
Dumb A$$ Bending Over a Table for the Christian Right Republican vice the Old School Moderate Small Government Republican *there I fixed that for you*
(1) How is it different than the medieval warm period? The medieval warm period affected Europe. Global temperatures were not rising during that time period. Nice diversionary tactic with the witches, though. +1 for brilliant BS.
(2) The solar activity cycle is most dominant on an 11-year cycle. Secondary and tertiary cycles do exist, but are much smaller by comparison. Meanwhile, the hottest 8 years in recorded history have happened during that 11-year cycle, with the solar minimum included. As for how the “minuscule human contribution of CO2″ could possibly have an effect, your misinformation is showing. You’ve been duped by where the real fraud is coming from – the same people who told you that tobacco wasn’t bad for you. Please do a little research (real research, you know reading journal articles and not just web-sites) before you post such nonsense again.
(3) Of course, if you subscribe to the conspiracy theories (i.e., “massive fraud”) then you probably don’t think you can trust journal articles. The only people you can trust are those lovely people with the web-sites telling you all about the conspiracy theories.
Interesting. The more you know…
Well clearly the scientists who are warning about global warming are doing it for selfish reasons like…um…well…hmmm, can’t think of any off the top of my head.
Saving the Earth is rather selfish, isn’t it.
If we keep jumping in and saving the Earth, Charro, it’s just going to keep repeating the same stupid mistakes instead of learning from them.
We should have an intervention.
Recognition, I’ve learned that the science community is just like high school (I’m not taking away from honest research). If you don’t agree with the popular scientists at any given moment than you are shunned, and mocked no matter how valid your experiments may be.
Now to be clear, I believe that global warming is real, and I believe that we need to be more responsible, but to pretend that there are no incentives for up and coming scientists to fudge something here or there is just wrong.
Actually, I think it’s the established scientists you have to watch the most. The up-and-coming scientists know their research will be viewed more skeptically. (And, it’s rare to publish an article simply reinforcing what’s already believed – those are called “review articles”. If you don’t contribute something new, what’s the point in publishing your research? At the very least, it should involve a new methodology.)
But, but..the ‘up-and-coming scientists’ brought us the wonders of cold fusion. *sobs*
PS For anyone who wasn’t around for this fun, cold fusion is a crock.
Now, now. Cold fusion might not be a crock. The work of Pons, Fleischmann, and (the often over-looked) Hawkins was quite wrong (check out their errata), but there is some solid theory to suggest that cold fusion might one-day be feasible. (Note: by feasible, I mean for medical purposes, not for energy purposes.)
True story: leaving Hawkins name off the original paper was one of their errata. I’m sure Hawkins is grateful for that particular error.
Almost valid, except that they were (and there some nutjobs who are) talking about power from cold fusion. BTW, this happened around the time my husband got his PhD…in fusion physics.
*and laughter rebounded up and down the halls of the building*
Last time I checked, the US Navy still has a program looking into it. I’m not sure if it’s for medical or energy purposes…
Um, that has a lot to do with the whole classified thing.
Btw, although I wasn’t working on my Ph.D. (IIRC, I was unofficially “post-baccalaureate” at the time), I was taking a nuclear physics class during the whole Pons and Fleischmann (and Hawkins) thing as well. Either that, or very shortly after. Our professor talked about the need to properly calibrate your measurement tools as that was the biggest thing they did wrong. (They improperly subtracted background radiation.) Chernobyl was also around that same time period, so we got a lecture on all of the things they did wrong there, to boot.
PS I kind of think we have to kill you now. Sorry ’bout that.
That’s OK, people have been dying for thousands and thousands of years and the CIA’s only been studying how to kill for a few dozen, so I don’t think they’ve figured out how to kill anyone yet.
Mabs’s computer was actually hijacked by the CIA for that post. I would like to give some helpful tips to our friendly CIA operatives.
1) Don’t tell them you are going to kill them
2) You don’t really need to apologize. It kills the evil CIA look you’re going for.
3)By using Mabs’s computer for your post we now know where you are. Next time change the e-mail address and name when posting.
Wrong black acronym! Bwahahahahahaha!
Yeah, it’s not like they are getting all this attention, being passed off like they are some sort of superior human being.
Are you referring to scientists or oil company executives?
I didn’t know the oil compnay executives were out there claiming to save the world.
Then you haven’t been paying attention. They’re trying to save the world from the evil scientists. Judging by their relative pay, it seems we believe them to be superior to scientists, as well.
Yeah, I think you need to see a new optometrist. You can’t seem to see the scientists that aren’t fudging the records to support their glorious positions.
Those exec’s are actually producing something, and doing so without fudging and guessing.
I think you’re the one who needs the new glasses. You’re confusing a few individuals using questionable methods with the whole crowd.
Nebbi! Are you saying proof by example is not valid? Geez. You’re always spoiling all my fun. *goes to tattle on Nebton to the unnamed black acronyms*
Or maybe I’m noticing the ones caught using the questionable methods have results that are similar to those who haven’t been caught.
Does that mean you’re a subscriber to the conspiracy theory then? I.e., that they’re all in it together? A big mass of tens of thousands of climatologists all in a secret cabal?
The funny thing about that is the idea that you could get that many scientists of any type to agree on anything, including what to order for lunch.
Conspiracy theory my foot. And certainly not tens of thousands of climatologists. Even Al Gore only claims 6,000.
JAC: It’s all good here. If it was Republicans or conservatives caught in such a conspiracy the whole theory would have been dismissed by many many liberals, however when the shoe is on the other foot, it should be ignored. I’m still awaiting a liberal to say, “yeah those a$$es set us back a bit!”. Anyone? anyone?
Not to mention that there are MORE PhD scientists who refute the theory of man made global warming than those who push it. Something like 11,000 scientists known to come out against it.
Sheep will be sheep though… It’s hard to break the brainwashing the global warming followers have gone through.
Good lord, Scythelord. Name 10 Ph.D. scientists who refute the theory of man made global warming. Name 3 with climate science related degrees. You’re thinking of that list that had absolutely no requirement on who was a scientist. I don’t believe even a GED was required.
As for the actual number of climatologists, JAC. I won’t claim to know exactly how many there are. A quick (unreliable) Google search suggests there are thousands of climatologists in North America. So, perhaps there are only ten thousand climatologists globally (as opposed to “tens of thousands”). AFAIK, only two of them dispute AGW, and even those two only partially dispute it.
Oh boy did that make me laugh!!! “superior human being”? Nope! Geek, nerd, egg-head, pocket protectors, can’t get a date, must be in love with her test tubes…
Oo! You forgot — for the lady scientists — lesbian. (Not that there’s anything wrong with that, unless of course you’re not and are trying to get laid!
)
No kidding! I lurves my BF–he likes smart ladies!
What guy worth talking to doesn’t?
Ok how about this, how is it that the Earth had a “Mini-Ice Age” which effected both Northern North America and Europe, without Industrialization?
Because there can be multiple causes for the same event? In this case, we know what the cause is, and there are some pretty good theories for explaining what previous causes were.
Look, if we find someone dead with a knife sticking out of his chest, are you going to point out that animals were dying millions of years before knives were invented or that heart attacks are the most common cause of death and therefore discount that the knife was probably the cause of that person’s death?
We’ve got a (metaphorical) bloody knife sticking out of our chest, and I don’t think it’s much of a reach to say that it’s the cause of global warming. Scientists have been predicting this global warming long before it became undeniable to even those who don’t want to believe it’s man-made.
Or I could say that the man coulda died from a heart attack prior to the knife in his chest.
Or your comparison is a little OBE. We’ve only been studying the Earth’s environment accurately for about 100 years. The Earth ahs been around Billion’s of years. How are to say a snippit of 100 years within a Billion Years is accurate for us to know exactly what is happening. It’s too far fetched in my eyes.
Well, how about we have data from far, far, far more than just the last 100 years? You’re really reaching there. We have tree ring data from living, preserved and fossil trees from multiple locations that gives us good indications of weather patterns over the span of the last few thousand years. We also have core samples of the ice caps going back 500,000 years, (about 100,000 years worth already analyzed) which proves that the level of CO2 in the environment is far higher than at any time in the past 100 millennia, and that the sharp rise coincides closely with the rise of industrialization. We also have core samples from the ocean floor that correlate those findings. No, this is not a snippet of information from the past 100 years. This is the long view of global climate from over one hundred times that long. The general consensus is that global warming is real, and that human activity is a major contributing factor. And when I say general consensus, we’re sort of leaving out paid mouth-pieces of industry, right-wingers who don’t grasp the simplest concepts of meteorology or climatology and somehow think that climatologists are socialists foaming at the mouth to defraud the public for – what reason? No, we’re talking about thousands and thousands of peer-reviewed hard scientific studies by serious climatologists that all come to the same general concluson: The Earth is overall warming up and the six billion people and all their billions and billions of machines and domestic animals are helping to make it happen.
And, even if it is a joke, the caption is a dumb joke, not a smart joke. Limbaugh made this joke, which is about as dumb as it gets.
J.E.: I thought Weather Patterns was different than Climate?
climate has a direct effect on weather patterns. for instance, some places are known for their tropical climate. that means their weather tends to be hotter and humid and behaves differently in a place that has a more distinctly cold climate.
No it doesn’t work that way. Didn’t you read those nasty grams here about Weather =/= Climate, and to stop saying such things.
i think the point being made there was that when people say the climate on the planet overall is getting warmer, it doesnt mean the weather itself is going to be perma-summer everywhere. its just going to get farked up and we’ll see wilder storms, bigger hurricanes and more extreme weather. Perhaps not to the extent of “day after tomorrow” but it’ll still be notable and damaging. so when people use the argument that “hell its freezing here, show me global warming” to say that global warming is a myth (and i mean whether or not its happening at all, not whether or not humans are the cause of it) is a pretty weak argument.
and that you cant use “well the temperatures in that heavily industrialized area arent getting any warmer therefore no evidence that emissions contribute to global warming.” isnt a solid argument either. its not just about higher temperatures.
How long have we studied death? How long have animals been dying? It seems you’ve completely invalidated medical science!
By the way, that’s exactly my point. If you’re really invested in the idea that knives are safe, that’s exactly the kind of argument I’d expect. (Note: I’m not accusing you of being in bed with the knife industry, but I do have my suspicions. Damn knife apologists.)
Nah I prefer my G-U-N… **awais anti-gun lobby to start screaming**
Knives are safe if used appropriately. I’m “invested” in that idea. However the “knives aren’t safe” industry has a lot more invested in the “knives aren’t safe” notion.
I’m resigned to the idea that guns are tools of Darwin…
Darwin, isn’t he that heathen who decided Humans have descended from Apes? **Note sarcasm, believe heavily in Eolution**
Depends on which week you look at the official “model”
Even more pedantically, humans are apes, so how can we have descended from them? (Gorillas, humans, chimpanzees, and orangutans are all apes.)
ADM, you’re not helping your cause there…
Diss missed Sarcasm!!!!!
No, just that what you said reminded me.
That’s all.
Not if you ask that girl in my training class.
What cause? I’m making a joke about how often scientists change their minds. Sorry if you took it another way.
OK, yes, ADM. I’m afraid past experience having nothing to do with you led me to assume you were suggesting that evolution is unreliable because it changes its mind (there’s that anthropomorphic thing going on) all the time.
Nebs: I think ADM was getting at science is an ever evolving thing. What one determines a fact today, might not be a fact tomorrow, that’s all. And with science ever being in flux, how are we to comprehend what is ture and what isn’t. How are we to risk large with a fact that may eentually change in a few years. Now I do agree we need to get away from fossil fuels (they will eventually run out). However the context that they’re killing this planet, not so sure. We really can’t be 100% certain what the standrad Climate Change for the Earth is. Hell it took millions of years for the continental divide to occur, who’s to say we’re done? Who’s not to say that the Earth’s progression into a warming climate is rapid, and is “natural”? Maybe the Dinosaurs went extinct b/c they too drove their hummers to starbucks with styrofoam cups.
I agree we can never be 100% certain, but the conclusion I draw from that is that if we wait until we’re 100% certain before we do anything, nothing will ever get done!
(As for the continental divide, I’m fairly certain that it’s accepted science that it’s not finished. Eventually the continents will collide again. That’s not currently on my list of things to worry about, though. Also, eventually the sun will turn into a red giant. Also, too, not on my current worries list.)
28 BILLION metric tons/year is a “miniscule” contribution?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions
It sounds like a pretty significant amount to me. Probably enough that we shouldn’t assume that it has ZERO effect on the Earth’s complex climate.
Whether human CO2 has *more* influence than solar energy (or any other natural phenomenon) is irrelevant. The obvious fact that climate fluctuates naturally is also irrelevant.
The question that actually matters is whether the 28 billion tons of human CO2 released each year will produce undesirable results.
The vast majority of climate scientists agree that the answer is probably yes.
Your ramblings about witches have not provided any evidence of fraud.
If anything, the motivation for fraud runs the other way, since reducing carbon emissions will cost rich people a lot of money. That is why the vast majority of “scientists” who spout nonsense like you are directly funded by oil and coal companies.
I’m not arguing either way, but do you honestly think that if everyone jumps on board and we put wind turbines up all over the place, or sun panels all over the place that some different rich person will make money off of it.
Arguments that go “I’m right because you’re on the side of a rich person” are just hilarious.
They kind of are hilarious. Though I think the point he’s trying to get at here is that right now the dominating ones are Big Oil and other fossil fuel vested companies. They don’t want to lose their $$$$
Of course someone’s going to get rich off the “newest and greatest energy source”, but that doesn’t discount that companies are financially motivated and if everyone suddenly did switch to wind and solar Big Oil would be dead in the water.
Not the greatest logical argument (in fact there are several fallacies contained therein) but knowing people, it has some merit.
I’ll que up to agree with that. *runs away laughing hysterically before Charro can catch her*
MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABS!!!!!!!
*waves fist*
28,431,741 = MILLION. Not billion.
Volcanoes spew out about 50-250 million tons each year.
Clearly we need to do something to shut down those volcanoes. They must be in bed with Big Oil.
I’m not an expert on volcanoes, but here’s some information from UCSB’s volcanalogy department: {http://volcanology.geol.ucsb.edu/gas.htm}
Of course, the bit about “man’s activities” is a bit out of date. We’re currently dumping more than 100 times as much CO2 into the atmosphere than all of the world’s volcanoes combined.
Meaningless facts, Nebs. They have to place in an internet debate.
“(in thousands of metric tons)” so that’s 28 million times 1000. So yes, 28 BILLION is correct
Meaningless basic math, MLD. Has no place in an internet debate.
For some reason they just don’t listen, Charro.
Meaningless logic, Igloo. Has no place in a discussion with me
Thank you for pointing out the tard.
I’ve heard that “It’s cold outside, so global warming must be fake” line also. It’s not a very good arguement you guys. I think you should stop using it, and instead use science & facts to prove your arguement.
I don’t know much about this debate, but GW is happening. If I’m not mistaken, the debate comes down to whether or not human beings are the CAUSE of it or are we simply major/minor contributer.
^^^LOL
Epic Sarcasm Win
It’s no use, Obama. To denialists, ONE counter-example trumps decades of research. Here’s another example:
“This lung cancer stuff is a hoax perpetrated by doctors to get more money! My granddaddy smoked all his life and he didn’t get lung cancer.”
Denialists? Hehehehe, as opposed to those who are actively falsifying research and blocking the release of contradictory research? What would you call them, Repressionists? Deceitfulists? Wake up and smell the reality, we’ve all been had, and we’re walking down a path right into the hands of the same people who had us before that want to had us again, and stand to make billions of dollars off us. I guess that’s one good thing about a falling dollar, billions will be all of about 3 yen by the time we’re done with this whole process.
Yes, you’ve all been had, as EWAdams points out, by the same people who tricked you into thinking that tobacco wasn’t bad for you, using the same tactics (FUD) and for the same reasons ($$$). The funniest bit are those who think the real money is in public research, because there’s no way oil companies would pay big money for contradicting research.
It’s funny that you’re also proving his point about the one counter-example, only in this case your one counter-example are one group of researchers. (Funny thing, that – there are thousands and thousands of researchers active in climate science, but one group doing questionable things means their all liars.)
Yep. That’s a fallacy. It’s a generalisation based on a non-representative sample of the people actually researching the problem.
Oh noes! Damn, we’ve all been tricked. And to think, we could have done so much more polluting of the planet instead of trying to make it cleaner. What were we thinking???????
And that whole “gravity” thing is a trick too! There’s no such thing as gravity, why, it’s only a theory! *floats away*
Frankly, I still believe the earth is flat. Nobody has ever been able to prove to me otherwise.
Don’t go near any waterfalls. That’s where the Earth ends, you know.
But then you can see the elephants! And the Great A’Tuin!
Terry Pratchett win.
Please stick to the rivers and the lakes that you’re used to.
See? That’s what comes of not believing in things! They stop existing! Hey! Get back here when I’m reprimanding you! Stop floating off!
I don’t think the weather makes a difference in rather they look like fools or not. They shouldn’t sell themselves short. They do a fine job on their own.
Lol! Good point, especially since they mostly flew in on private jets and drove around in limos the whole time. Cut back? Us? Why don’t they ride bikes?
Evidently, they gave off more CO2 emissions with their private jets than some small countries did during that same time period. I think they took the idea about supporting global warming literally…
I think a funnier LOL would’ve been on the Carbon Footprint of said conference.
Agreed, although it still wouldn’t have prevented the flame war!
Nothing could prevent that. It’s like preventing a flame war on abortion. There are few things the majority of the population can agree on.
1. GW is horrible at public speaking
2. Biden is the Democrats Dan Quayle
3. Obama loves big government
4. WBC is way to fun to mock
5. Straight men will always laugh and gawk at boobies.
Men will always laugh and gawk at boobies. There, I fixed it for you.
No he’s jealous and I think scared of them. He admits it.
I have an asexual male friend that I never inquired on his boobie-loving status. I suppose I should get on that.
Funny how religious beliefs addle people’s brains.
“Man is evil and we’re all going to burn in hell forever!”-for those of you who are a little slow.
Environmentalisn-the last great Christian heresy….and counting.
What? I thought environmentalists thought “Man is evil”?
You forgot Cows, cows are evil too b/c they produce a lot more “Greenhouse Gases” than we do as hoomans.
Do what now?
Odd. It’s sort of like my “Peace Kills” bumper sticker. If you don’t get it immediately, you’re not smart enough to EVER understand.
sigh
Kinda like my “vi sucks” bumper sticker?
*attempts to start yet another flame war here*
Pfffbtt you probably ship Riley and Buffy. Vi is the best potential and she should’ve gotten more face time.
We’re talking about Buffy, right?
¿Que?
I’m afraid I totally don’t get the Buffy reference, although I assume you actually realize that emacs rocks! (“A damn fine operating system, if only it had a decent editor…”)
What not enough nerds here for this flame war?
Not many editors I would imagine.
Ah, but emacs and vi are also the tools of programmers. Real programmers, that is.
Well, those that don’t use butterflies. And for those that do use butterflies, but still prefer emacs, there’s a command for that as well!
You’re a tool!
I do a lot of editing, but I have stupid Word on a stupid PC. Maybe I’ll put a Macbook on my birthday list.
LaTeX on emacs, FTW!!!
Sissy! Vi rocks!!
Vi vi vi… teh numb3r of teh b34st
Do.. what now?
1. Not funny. (Sadly not surprised.)
2. Flamebait! Wheee!
3. Tapdancing shoes!
Agreed, not very funny. However, I think it would have been better if the caption had been added to a picture of Al Gore!!
I don’t think that caption would be funny on ANY picture. There might be a way to rework it into funny, but I doubt it.
Not so long as it’s that backasswards. It’s about as funny as “lol people who don’t hang colored folk are dumb lol.” (note: NOT making a comparison of racism to environmentalism. Making a comparison of not-funny jokes.)
I didn’t know so many people were so dead-set on calling global warming a hoax. But now that I think about it, maybe they have a point. Let’s give every person on our overpopulated planet a big honkin’ SUV to spew fumes into our air supply! That won’t do anything to the environment, no sir!
Big difference between Global Warming and MAN MADE Global Warming. No one really denies that the planet is heating up, that much is obvious. The question is the source of that heating, which these morons are trying to make us believe is from our little cars and aerosol cans. The next time a hurricane is bearing down on the gulf, I’d LOVE to see them try to go out there and aerosol it away. Why not at least give it a shot? Hurricanes are subject to wind patterns, and if we heat up the area enough, it could alter the wind in the area and divert the storm away from a city built below sea level.
Don’t you love using folksy bad logic to disprove science? I know you do!
Right there with you, Nebton, but I am beginning to suspect that this may not be the best forum for a serious debate on climate change…
(and by “this” I do mean “the Internet”. Or “anywhere idiots can get in at no extra charge”, come to think of it)
Yeah, and I should know better. I’ve been down that path before…
I really hate it when this debate comes to PK, because pollutionists have their heads so far up their asses they won’t believe anything about global warming. Of course cutting back on emissions is pure evil because it might hurt the poor, poor oil companies. Won’t anyone think of the oil companies?! And you can’t convince them of anything. You just end up arguing in circles because all it took was for one scientist to say he doesn’t buy the global warming bit, and suddenly all the pollutionists (I like calling them that) are screaming the whole thing is a fraud to make money for alternate energy. What it comes down to is that the pollutionists think we should be allowed to trash the planet at will as long as it makes gobs and gobs of money. Fvcking drives me up the wall.
And to anyone considering responding to this, no, I’m not going to go citing a bunch of proof for you. I’m not wasting my time. You won’t care anyway. Fvck off.
Sorry don’t have my head up my ass. I just find it hard to believe that 100 some odd years of research for something that’s Billions of years old could answer those questions. Some cycles on the Earth last for Thousands of years, yet we can predict with certainity that Greenhouse Gases are causing said Global Warming.
Better safe than sorry. And really, what would it hurt to try to keep the planet a little neater? Even if you think global warming is Al Gore’s evil scheme to conquer Earth, is there something wrong with cleaning up our act? The only reason I ever seem to hear as to why we shouldn’t is that it might *gasp* hurt businesses!
Well it might hurt business, but it’s kind of like to me the Nightly News “Cell Phones give you brain tumors!”, “This crib will blow up your house!!” part of it to me is I don’t like giving into scare tactics and some (not all) falsified reports. It’s another form of control.
Come on, say “Libra Troll” again. It makes me giggle like a little girl.
Sometimes scare tactics are necessary to get people to change their ways. If you say, if we keep polluting, our planet will be a smog-infested rathole, people will go “meh, LA is like that and it’s fine.” If you say if we keep polluting that we’re all gonna die, people will go “wha??? We’re all gonna die???” And then once the shock wears off people will go “meh, too much trouble” and then we’re all fvcked.
Wait, where was I going with this? Oh yeah. People suck. That’s it.
That’s an answer to your previous question about why we need journals.
I’ve never understood that argument. Do you also not believe in nuclear physics, since the vast majority of nuclei are also billions of years old?
Dinosaurs didn’t really exist either since that was hundred of millions of years ago too. Those were probably just giant chickens or something.
Oh, sure, drag evolution into the flame war. Good idea.
*dumps gasoline all over the fire*
Huh?
Rando you fool!
Gasoline will DOUSE the flames! Here, I brought some Hydrogen. Don’t ask me where I got it.
Big difference. You’re not studying behavior of the nuclei over a short span of it’s life and making a general comment about it’s whole.
I prefer this comparison. You watch a human for one minute of say its 100 years of life. In the one minute span the person is happy for 59 seconds, so then you generalize through calculations that that person is happy 98.3% of its time. Or the person is happy for 10 seconds, gets a 10 second phone call with bad news and then is sad for the remainder 40 seconds. And then say it took that person 16.7% of it’s time to change emotions.
Actually, we generally are. Of course, the meaningful difference is that there are an awful lot of nuclei for us to perform repeatable experiments on and only one Earth.
As for your comparison, it’s more like this: We watch a human for one minute of say its 100 years of life. We have historical records of that person’s life since he was much younger, though. In that one minute, the person was happy for the last 59 seconds, and has been getting happier recently. From historical records, we know that mood swing generally take more than a second, so we predict with strong confidence that he’ll be happy for the next second.
To try to pull back out of that tortured analogy (and I’ll admit my analogy is also tortured), we’re not trying to predict the next billion years of Earth’s climate from our 200 or so years of direct instrumental recordings (which have been improving over time) or our 800k years of ice core samples or our millions of years of other indirect evidence. We’re trying to predict the next 20-100 years. If your argument is that we have no idea what the Earth’s climate will be in even a million years from now (let alone a billion), I’ll agree with you 100%. However, we’re interested in shorter time scales where predictions are more reliable.
Not to mention have a more practical application. Who’s to say we’ll even be around in a million years?
“However, we’re interested in shorter time scales where predictions are more reliable” – How often have our predictions been reliable? We can’t even predict the weather for the next week. Or when we will get a tornado. I have to agree with ILPB, we don’t have enough data to make a reliable prediction, especially based on past data (which we only have about 200 years worth).
Actually, our climatic predictions have been rather good. It’s our weather predictions that ain’t so hot.
Still, we haven’t been making climactic predictions for a long period of time.
(lol! climatic I mean)
Climaxtic?
Why don’t people understand that what affects the “poor poor oil companines” and all of industry affects us? The cost of everything is related to oil. Food for example. The more we tax business, they more they will raise prices on us. It’s a tax hike on us so that “one world” beaurocrats can go fly around the globe on private jets and eat caviar while they “solve” all the worlds problems.
I suppose for the same reason that people don’t understand that what affects the atmosphere affects us…
That said, I’ll agree that they’ll pass along the costs, but it will also help reflect the true cost of oil, thus giving alternative fuels a better chance to compete.
You mean the Ethanol which made the cost of Corn, milk, cheese, yogurt, cream, baby formula, etc… go up considerably.
I most definitely do not mean corn ethanol. The jury’s still out on other ethanols, in my opinion, but corn ethanol is a non-starter.
We understand that, that’s why we have all those environmental controls on emissions in this country, unlike China and India to name a few… We are already taking the hit for the world. But it won’t be enough I guess unless we are all living in grass huts again and riding horses. I actually like that idea…
I wouldn’t mind that so long as I weren’t still in IL.
Nebs: I think you kinda get my point now. It’s the “Ethanol is clean and will save us!!!” It was pushed on people and it failed miserably, so my concern is some of these other ideas could turn out to epic failures as well.
All good ideas (and all bad ideas for that matter) will be appropriated by anyone who thinks they can make money off them. The corn lobby is invariably included in that. I blame Nixon.
…Corn.
*glares at ingredient list with HFCS*
And who qualifies as an idiot in this case? Given the tone, especially of Nebton’s comments, I’m betting it’s anyone who argues against global warming, or against the methods some people (certain prominent groups) want to use to combat it?
No, it’s people who bring up folksy examples to prove their point, who don’t understand the difference between weather and climate, and who think they know more about science based on their observations of their hair dryers/ovens/freezers than people with a Ph.D., because people with Ph.D. aren’t to be trusted.
Ph.D…you have a PH.D.? ELITIST SCUM! *giggles*
Actually, not yet. I’m working on a Ph.D. in computer science, with a strong amount of neuroscience involved. (My research focuses on artificial intelligence modeled on the mammalian hippocampus.) I also have a Masters in Physics/Astronomy, which amazingly didn’t seem to help me land any jobs…
Mabsba! We have a fellow geek here! ^^^
Yay!!!
Didn’t you know that? Me loves our Nebbi. *hugs*
Nebbi needs a security clearance so she can get a job making things go boom!
Where are the security clearance folk? My warhammer and I will ‘persuade’ them!
Oh, no. The security clearance people are scary.
True story: they LOST my husband’s paperwork one year. Nothing important, just every single job, place of residence, relatives, their jobs and places of residences, etc etc etc. No identity theft danger at all.
Pfft. Everyone knows that PhD’s are just out to scam people out of money. The REAL people you gotta trust are conservative pundits who scream that global warming is an evil fraud. They know a lot more about it than any silly scientist.
Ah. I’m trying to avoid all of those, myself. In case it isn’t blatantly obvious yet, I’m of the opinion that emissions control would be a good thing, but trying to enact expansive legislature on the subject right -this second- would be unwise, and that instead of the current (Democratically) favored restrictions, other solutions should be found.
I have no degree, no credentials. People with said credentials in the appropriate area for the current discussion will be listened to (as will anyone else not actually trolling). But having those credentials doesn’t confer an infallibility or perfect neutrality on a subject. Bias can and does exist in many people, particularly in as heavily a politicized discussion as this one.
True enough. If you can’t put a monetary requirement on an arguement to filter out those without excess money, its not really an arguement worth having.
Let the record reflect that you’re the one who conflated cost and money.
I’m sorry. What did you conflate “no extra charge” with? Certainly sounded like money was a given.
But acting like people shouldn’t be concerned about it nor should they lift a finger to try and lessen mankind’s impact on the environment? That’s like saying since your electric bill will be high anyways, you should never turn anything off in your house.
“flamebait”
why do you have to bring sexual orientation into this?
just because i may have certain feelings towards other humans of my gender does not mean i will necessarily feel strongly compelled to a given side of the argument concerning global warming.
… In the event that you’re serious/offended about it the term flamebait has nothing to do with homosexuals. Flaming refers to heated arguments that end up devolving into people calling each other names and diverting farther and farther from the original topic. “Flamebait” simply means posting with a controversial issue, unpopular opinion, or attacking someone else’s point of view.
Everyone knows that Flamers argue against global warming so they can go on flaming without having to tone down the heat! Kill them! Kill them with fire! Oh..wait…
This post is beyond flamebait.
It’s more like flame lassoing, i’d be hard pressed to find a fellow troll who WOULDN’T click on that ’300′ comments as soon as he saw it.
I don’t know enough about Global Warming to get into an argument about it…. but I know it is colder than a well digger’s ass here in KY.
*jumps on her skis & glides on into work*
Well, I don’t know enough about a well digger’s ass to get into an argument about that, but we now have a mountain of snow in a parking lot outside our grocery store that one could ski down (as long as one didn’t mind having only skiing for 15 seconds). I’m thinking of installing a snow lift. (Central Virginia, FWIW.)
HOW GLOBAL WARMING CAN CAUSE AN ICE AGE:
its as simple as this , there is a current system in the Atlantic ocean
warm water moves to the north and cold water travels south.
water that’s moving can’t freeze.
if to much cold water comes into this system , it stops allowing the water to freeze.
peace out
They weren’t talking about an ice age at all.
I was really hoping that Captain Wow was going to provide more information on well diggers’ asses…
I’m hoping ‘the great divide’ isn’t visible!
Well, they’re fairly normal asses, aside from the fact that they are incredibly cold. Quite similar to cold as “a witch’s tit in a brass bra.”
*facepalm*
Boy am I from Kentucky.
Believe me, it was time to bring all the brass monkeys inside last night. I really kinda hate winter.
HOW GLOBAL WARMING CAN CAUSE AN ICE AGE:
its as simple as this , there is a current system in the Atlantic ocean
warm water moves to the north and cold water travels south.
water that’s moving can’t freeze.
if to much cold water comes into this system , it stops allowing the water to freeze
no peace out this time?
Anyone who is trying to pretend that thousands of factories over the world pumping smoke into the air at all hours of the night and day isn’t going to cause some sort of adverse effect on our planet is a moron. It may be coinciding with natural events, but the point is pollution is a serious problem, and unless we find some way to deal with it, it may eventually kill your great great grandkids.
Except that the natural things of the earth, volcanic eruptions and such, put out much more pollution into the air than all the factories in the world! Ever notice how nice and green the trees and such are right by the highway? Because they love the emissions put out by cars! They suck it up and produce more oxygen. Neat trick, eh? And as for “One group of people lying makes them all liars” Well, fine and dandy, except the ones all exposed for lying, changing data, deleting the real data… they are the ones who are federally funded and listened to by the money people in DC.
No, no they don’t. We put out far more CO2 than all volcanoes “and such” combined. (Granted, volcanoes put out more ash and lava than we do, but that’s not really the topic of conversation, is it?) As for the other stuff that volcanoes put out, they’ve been doing that for millennia, and evolution (assuming you believe in that crazy conspiracy) has prepared plants and animals for ways to deal with it. We’re changing the environment far faster than that. Of course, you could point out that asteroid collisions changed things even faster, but that’s not really an image we want to bring up, is it?
For all the talk about how environmentalists think humans are evil, it’s not really about saving the world – it’s been through worse and will survive, with or without us. It’s the “without us” bit that’s of concern to me.
So what you’re saying is that there should be “Heat Pockets” above areas with high concentration of emissions. However science has been unable to find said pockets. We’ve been hearing this “Enviromental We’re All Dead” since that late 70′s. In the 80′s the Hole in the Ozone above teh South Pole would cause Antartica to melt and the Ocean’s to rise and drown us out, how did thos Sea Levels go in 80′s? Now it’s the opposite, Global Warming is melting the Ice Caps in the North Pole which will kill all Poalr Bears and drown all those on the sea shore. How are those Sea Levels going?
That’s exactly what I’m saying because carbon dioxide gas is a solid that doesn’t disperse and mix with other gases.
Maybe that’s because carbon dioxide gas is a gas…
If that’s what you remember, then you must have been doing drugs in the ’80s. Would you care to provide a single journal article saying any of that? Just one will do…
No, no it’s not, because you made up the previous example.
Not so good. We did miss the estimate a bit. Unfortunately, we’ve underestimated it. I really wonder where you’re getting your facts from, as they’re clearly not from journal articles or other peer-reviewed science.
Wait? So Carbon Dioxide Gas is a Solid? In Science 101 I learned that Gases adn Solids were two different states, and could not exist together, so is either a gas or solid? Thanks!
Wait no C02 is a gas, but you said earlier it was a solid. My conservative/ moderate mind can’t grasp said concepts.
I remember specifically watching the Nightly News (b/c my dad had the remote and Transformers was over anyhows) that the Solar Ice Caps were going to melt due to the higher UV Rays coming in from the Ozone Hole, and if it grew larger not only the caps would melt, but the Humans would bake unless we had 1 Gabillion SPCF Sun Screen.
Yes it is the opposite b/c I didn’t make it up.
Who needs Journals when “Science” is splattered all over the News. Global Warming is a fact, so it shows up in Text Books and Newspaper ARticles, and Webinars. Come on man, I’m not buying Global Warming = Man Made, sorry. I admit polution is bad m’kay, but I also know that trees take CO2 and make O2, so without CO2 trees can’t make O2 which I use to breath. I like breathing.
C02 is BAD in large quantities. You can’t ONLY breath C02.
We can’t ONLY breathe oxygen either, we should kill all plants and stop the O2 from being created.
That was sarcasm… Did I really need to add the sarcasm tag? My point is that it’s not a solid.
Either your memory is wrong or your Nightly News anchor was punking you. I’d guess that your memory is wrong.
Not deliberately, but I’m fairly sure you did make it up.
I hope that’s sarcasm, but your later arguments suggest very strongly that it’s not. What you find in non-journals is exactly the kind of bogus pseudo-science you’re complaining about. (That’s not to say that all non-journal information is bogus, just that the untrained eye will have a hard time differentiating.) That’s why we need journals.
I get that you don’t buy that Global Warming = Man Made, but it sounds like it’s pretty much just an act of faith on your part, supported by selective perception and/or selective memory.
As for your argument about trees needing CO2, I’m hoping that was sarcasm, too. If not, let me know, and I’ll explain how there are other, weaker, sources of CO2 that provide all of the CO2 that trees require.
My point is that it’s not a solid.
It is if you bring it to a low enough temperature (I know, like anything else!); dry ice is solid C02. Interestingly enough, you don’t get a liquid state unless you both reduce the temperature and increase the pressure.
There’s also a triple point, where the combination of temperature and pressure allows all three states to exist at the same time.
Now, that’s cool!
yeah it’s called Al Gore’s a$$.
Ah, but carbon dioxide gas is not a solid, is it? Your pedantic argument is exactly why I added the word “gas”, which should’ve made the sarcasm even clearer.
Lol…ok, I think I’m just going to fvck off now. I’m clearly mentally challenged this morning.
Ok Neb: Let’s cut out sarcasm and work this out.
It is a scientific fact that levels of CO2 are in higher concentrations over Industiralized areas. (It’s measurable). However said Industrialized Areas are not necesarily effected with higher temperatures. If the Greenhouse Theory were happening as said, why wouldn’t those Industrialized Areas be subjected to higher temperatures? (IE Heat Pockets, and no Diss not your Pepporoni Hot Pocket in the Freezer :-p)
If I remember correctly, it takes around twenty years for the pollution down here to reach the atmosphere and have any impact.
Once it reaches the atmosphere it has dispersed to some extent, and so the effects would be felt by a much wider area than just over the industrial area.
Did you get that from Fox News?
Weather =/= climate
Until you understand that, there is no point in even talking.
Biff: As you said earlier the grown ups are talking now, the kiddie table is waiting for you.
No valid response = insult.
Yeah, since that’s what Biff did to him earlier, and since “faux news dumb derp” is not an answer……or are you making fun of Biff too?
I’m making fun of EVERYBODY today. It’s my New Years Resolution; take nothing seriously.
But did you have to reply to me with it. So now I reserve the right to call you a Wanker….. Wanker..
Sorry PB. I calls ‘em as I sees ‘em. My comment stands; No valid response = insult.
What about an insult response to an insult response. If you notice Nebs and I had a back and forth without issues. Biff lost those privileges by being an a$$hat. Therefore I’m sorry you still carry the Wanker toll.
your lips keep flapping, but all bitter troll hers is ” IM A SMELLY PIRATE HOOKER”
Bitter take the wax out of the ears, I’m saying “You’re a Pirate Hooker.”
Ugh PB! Did you have to say that? You remember the last time he cleaned his ears? He made candles out of the wax and gave them out as presents! Er…I mean they were very lovely candles Bitter. I still have mine…*mumbles* in a box, buried in the closet..
but they was hot pirates..and bitter troll got PAID
Just don’t tell Mina or Charro you got paid in Rum.
*perks up* Rum?
*burp* The rum’s gone. *throws up and passes out*
Why is the rum gone?
You’re right, the CO2 levels are higher over industrialized areas, and my sarcasm completely glossed over that point. I’m properly chastised.
However, two things: (1) Industrialized areas are effected with higher temperatures. It’s known as the “urban heat island”. However, I’m not aware of any theories that attribute this to increased concentrations of CO2, because (2) heat radiates, conducts, and convects. I.e., if you warm up one portion of an area, it won’t stay heated up, unless you somehow insulate that area. That’s why dads everywhere yell at you to SHUT THE DAMN DOOR!
I think you may have just hit on the solution to global warming. Let’s all leave our air conditioners on and the door open! That way we can cool the outside like our mothers always said we were trying to do! Boom, no more global warming!! *walks off basking in her awesomeness*
I think it’s working already. We’re expecting a high of 5 degrees tonight. Brilliant, froo. F’ing brilliant.
CLOSE THE DOOOOOOR! *freezes*
You are not my mother!! You can’t tell me what to do!!!
*stomps off in a petulant huff due to repressed, maternal-induced anger*
Can we rollerskate on the roof while holding scissors, too?
I think you may have missed the sarcasm when he said CO2 is a solid…
And it’s CO2, not C02
See, I know that and I’ve been typo-ing it all morning. *headdesk*
I’m trying to figure out how you so (apparently) easily figured out he was typing C02 instead of CO2.
The zero is thinner than the O… Zero (0) vs. O
or 0O
Oh (or should that be 0h?), I can see it when it’s pointed out, but it’s not something I’d notice otherwise.
Hey! STFU or GTFO, ya freakin’ nerds.
Wait, Hot Pockets? I’ve got some of those in the freezer.
Never assume anything. It makes an Ass out of U and ME. If environuts think that the earth is better off without people here, by all means let them leave. Hope the celestial door doesn’t hit them in the butt on the way out.
Know what burns me? Not “Global Warming”… it’s the nuts out there telling us that we need to stop meddling with nature. Stop drilling, stop harvesting natural resources, stop getting in the way of the animals. Well, you know what? Then stop telling me that I have to go save the polar bears! They’ve made it through “evolution” they will be fine without me “saving” them. Look what happened to that grizzly bear guy… He got killed BY A GRIZZLY! Al Gore out there telling us that we need to use crappy, expensive, mercury filled light bulbs, drive electric cars, flying around the world, and stop eating meat. Yet when asked if he will do any of that… His answer is HELL NO! You want to make a difference, do it yourself, and don’t tell everyone else how to live, or what to do with their own money.
Good god are you really going to start an argument with stupid 3rd grade jokes? Do you want to not be taken seriously? Did you see anybody else start off their post with “i before e except after c?” NO. I didn’t THINK SO. SUCK IT.
“i before e except after c?”
That’s a weird thing to say…
What makes it even worse is that what I was “assuming” was that mememememe believes in evolution, which has nothing to do with his/her response. It’s like s/he just heard that saying about making an ass out of u and me and was looking for a chance to repeat it.
Natural and manmade pollution is different. And I don’t care who is saying what about it. The fact is that polluting the planet is not the thing to be doing, and we should be finding ways of stopping it. Didn’t you ever watch Captain Planet? Geez.
CO2 is the killer! Everybody run, the CO2 is coming to get you! If you are not afraid of the big evil CO2, you are not a true human, and you deserve to die. It is all justifiable to lye and cover up data and non agreeing research to prove CO2 is evil. It is OK!
Yes, global warming is real, but no it is not even remotely man made. All you believers, please try to remember the last time your government did something really worthy and good for you! What was that initiative, that the government took, succeeded and made the lives of everyone better?!
I am not afraid of CO2, but you and I both know CO2 isn’t the only thing being produced by those factories and cars.
Did you know there’s factories that do nothing BUT produce C02? Well, there’s yer problem!
Now thats funnier than the lol.
I can’t linky, but I’m assuming that it’s CO2 Fire Extinguishing Systems!!!! So now isn’t that a quandry. What creates more Havoc on the environment, the CO2 to extinguish the fire or the fire itself?
Actually, there’s a lot of industrial uses for C02. Including the bubbles in my Diet Coke.
I thought that was Methane….
That would be….disgusting. I’m glad you don’t work in the Diet Coke factory, PB!
Who says I dont? **wicked smile**
That would explain why that pepse I had last week tasted like farts.
Yeah, the factories are producing cheap $1 plastic toys that are played with for ten minutes and then thrown out in the garbage.
The cars are producing transportation for me to get to and from work so I can make money to pay for said toys produced by said factories!!!! 
We DO seem to have a world full of crap we don’t need. I’ll agree with you on that one for sure.
Yeah we do, and it just switched from Christmas themed crap to Valentine’s Day themed crap.
But I love my Necco Hearts. “I Wuv U”
“This concept of “wuv” CONFUSES AND INFURIATES ME!!1ELEBENTY1!!!”
Edodo
Go breath in a tank of CO2 and tell us how that goes for ya.
Since you ask, one big example is the GI Bill. Sends innumerable veterans to college, and generates more money than it costs.
YDI Headstart. Best long term study showed that it saved taxpayers $7 for every $1 spent. BTW, the only thing they measured was prison costs; it’s well-documented that Headstart participants are more likely to graduate high school, but that’s not something that can be easily quantified although we know it puts more tax dollars back because high school graduates pay more taxes over their life time and are statistically less of a drain on social services than non-graduates.
Sounds like one of dem socialust school programs where they teach all dem kids to be commies like Baruck Obuma.
Wow, over the top much? You make me sound even-tempered.
VNV! How could you say that?! Don’t you know pollution is making our world BETTER? Anyone who wants to reduce pollution is just fvcking unamerican!!
I swear my sarcasm is gonna make me stroke out today.
Its part of my insane liberal agenda. *cries*
Yes, it’s true. We shall take over the earth and have the oil company execs put to death! Then we will all ride bikes everywhere, even across country! We will conquer you all! MWAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!
Hey, VNV, your bleeding heart is getting the carpet all bloody. Can you do something about that?
You are right. I should dump all that blood in the river instead. That way years later, instead of cleaning up the river or shutting me up, people can say that the Earth was naturally changing colors and it was part of the great business plan to colorfy things.
I suspect blood would be pretty safe, pollution-wise. Something’s just going to eat it.
Communists!
Of course the water has always been red. Why do you ask?
*Throws styrofoam cup full of cigarette butts out of Humvee window while driving 80 mph with ac on full blast*
But aren’t you cold?
Too jacked up on caffeine and nicotine to tell…
At least there’s no alcohol. Drinking and Driving will kill the Polar Bears.
We’ve got to do something about the Polar Bears and their alcohol problem. That’s not just Coca-cola they’re drinking, you know. It’s time for an intervention.
Fedding Polar Bears alcoholic Coca-Cola is part of the Belgian socialist, communist, marxist, fascist, mulinist world wide conspiriacy to wipe out Pandas.
It’s time to wake up and realize the Belgians philosphy of Bearism!!!
Beerism? I can get behind that cause.
That’s because you’re part of the human species group Partyous Animalous
The Belgians have joined with he Muslins and are now going after Koalas!! Bearism is real!
Would that be diet koalas or regular ones??!!!
Fat free Koalas. The fatty ones are sent to concentration camps.
Uhm…yeah, you’ll have to remove Koalas from that list. Well, the Belgians will have to remove them because Koalas are not bears.
But the Pandas are back in! Yay, genetic testing! Not just for catching criminals any more!
And we’re that much closer to catching the panda that raped my great-aunt!
“Next on the News, instead of actual news, we’re covering the recent Panda crime wave!”
“Koalas are not bears”
*facepalm*
I fail….
We forgive.
Hey, meant to ask, how are things going? Better than at Thanksgiving, I hope? I thought of you over the holidays (first is always hard).
Mabsba
Not too bad. My grandmother is doing fine now and I graduated college. Wooo! Now I’m just waiting for my acceptance letter into a university *fingers crossed*, so I can become an elitist, durty, hippie lib’rull
Yay! Come join the elitist crowd so you, too, can feel superior! *sorry, couldn’t stop laughing after that one*
Aaaah! Now I understand!
And it seems to be working. mwuhahahahahhaha!!2!
you, know, back in the 70′s, they were concerned about global cooling.
now they’ve reversed. besides, if there is global warming, we can easily adapt. for example, if the sea rises, we can put up a wall. the dutch did so hundreds of years ago, why can’t we with all this technology.
i say don’t worry about it. i personally think it is a cycle. and if it isn’t, then we’re just going to have to live with it.
Or…. we could be proactive. I mean, just ingnoring it is one route. Its the dumb route, but its one we could take.
You do know that whole 70′s thing was taken way out of context right?
Good lord, not the stupid global cooling argument again. Where did you read about this, on someone’s MySpace page? If you remember the ’70s, then you’re old enough to know this is a lie, that’s been repeated ad infinitum. The truth is that many of the scientists who are warning you about global warming now were warning you about global warming then. No reputable scientist was warning you of an imminent cooling crisis.
So, if you have some vague memory of global cooling scares in the ’70s, where did they come from? Newsweek. The same people who scare you about sharks. Sheesh.
I distinctly remember hearing stuff in the 70s about how we were overdue for another ice age; but as I was only in high school at the END of the 70s I can’t really say whether it was from a peer-reviewed source (unlikely) or Weekly Reader.
Oh, yes, it was out there, just not in any peer-reviewed journals. Time and Newsweek are the only two sources I’m aware of, but that’s not to say that the Weekly Reader didn’t also pick it up. As they are wont to do, they took a little bit of science totally out of context and then trumped it up.
Well, eventually we should have another ice age. We’re also way overdue for a polarity reversal; that’s going to be fun.
I’m generally in favor of minimizing our impact on the environment whether we (or the scientists) can agree on what the long-term effects are likely to be; I think we can all agree that pollution and waste in general aren’t likely to have a GOOD effect on the world we all have to live in. It doesn’t really MATTER whether excess amounts of Chemical X are going to make us warmer, cooler, or just unable to breathe. We need to stop arguing over that and concentrate on the fact that maybe, just maybe, we don’t need Avatar Happy Meal toys and that a tiny pair of headphones doesn’t need to be in three layers of packaging that’s large enough for a coffeemaker.
I was with you until you dragged Avatar Happy Meal toys into it. I might have to rethink my position…
Drop the toy, Nebton. You don’t need the toy!
But…but…the ass of the weird horse thing lights up!
(My son got tons of entertainment out of that.)
Aren’t we already IN a polar shift? I remember hearing about it in high school in ’99 as the magnetic polar north was shifting. It used to be around Northern Canada, and in ’03 I know it was closer to siberia. o.O And that was part of the whole climate change package.
And yes, regardless of climate change or not, I do agree that we should minimize environmental impact where we can. It would be nice to have cleaner air to breathe, cleaner water, food not full of chemicals, trees and other plants to help filter out carbon dioxide and to continue producing the oxygene that we need to breathe.
nope everything is staying the same, nothing ever changes. EVER and man kind has no responablity other then making money and giving that money to jesus, close your eyes, pretend there is nothing wrong BECAUSE IT ALL A LIE, the ice age never happened. dinosause never happened. NOPE and the earth is only 5000 years old
I’m glad you have finally seen the truth, BT.
The poles are always moving. Here is a pretty picture for you:
{http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/lookingatearth/29dec_magneticfield.html}
It’s a rather complicated subject, so anything you get from regular media is probably so watered down that it’s not very informative (as is most science once it passes into mainstream news sources).
how DARE you try to bring me science and FACTS when i clearly simply refuse to see them. i dont WANT to see them, i will fight you when you try to bring me logic and reason. im just a selfish douchebag who just cares for himself. and you have NO right to try to stop me from being so
Yeah b/c these facts have been proven time and time again, and have never been disputed EVER. How dare I NOT blindly follow the herd like sheep. My GOD (or fSM, or mythical creature in the sky), how dare we question facts that have not fully been vested and are based on mathematical models. B/C you know in physics class your experiment ALWAYS matched the calculations you made. How dare I try and not be controlled by what I believe to be a mass hysteria until the questions are answered. Global Warming (Climate Change) believers are so SET in their mind what will happen that it changes weekly. First we’ll have an Ice Age due to Global Warming, now it’ll be violent storms (b/c last year’s Hurricane season was SOOO terrible as predicted.) So Bitter take your control and levy it on someone else. **carries Don’t Tread on Me Flag**
and next time you see thunderstorms, please ignore them and run around with large metal poles, because warnings are clearly nothing to care about
and next time you’re in the midst of a terror attack don’t forget the conservatives saying that we need to be tougher on terrorism…….
or next time unemployment reaches 13- 14% BUT you have free Health Care don’t heed the warnings……
everytime unemployment gets really high, isnt it normally at the end of a replubicans presidents term?
Not really. Look at Carter.
Yeah now the Polls are in favor of Republicans.
Hey, thanks for the link. :3 It’s making for an interesting read.
Well, I had remarkably good luck finding it. Sometimes I get such garbage when I’m searching for actual science. Speaking of which, if you do a general search, you will find a LOT of stuff on the 2012 nonsense, which I didn’t know included cataclysmic pole shifting until YOU made me look. (Hah. All your fault.
)
You’re surprised? The tin foil hat crowd will include anything and everything into their conspiracy theories. Some especially love to take science out of context to make things seem more realistic and plausible.
And even more sad is all those who buy into it all.
No, not surprised. But since I’m a mathematician, married to a scientist, I find it exactly as you said — sad. A bit like much of this discussion — “But, look, it’s snowing so there can’t be global warming.” *sigh*
Seriously. The idea that tin foil hats will protect you from Them reading your brain is a crock of sh*t. Clearly if you want to protect yourself you need a lead hat.
And here I thought it was supposed to be copper hats, what with all the copper in telephone pole thefts as of late. ;3
I’m sorry, I can’t hear you. I’m wearing cobalt ear muffs.
hey, just saying. i’m not saying the globe is cooling, and no, i did not get it off of a myspace page. i remember hearing it somewhere, not sure where, though.
and about the proactive part, we don’t know exactly what will happen for sure if global warming IS happening. but being prepared for the worst can’t hurt at all.
not that the government should shove crappy enviromental standards up our butts. that’s why i don’t like the enviromental agenda. it advocates government interference in our lives in preparation for something that may not exist
Yes, I’ve never been murdered, either. Until I get murdered, I don’t want the government interfering in my ability to shoot people with guns, stab them with knives, etc.
You know what we DO need government interference on? Bathing. Totally. There are some stinky motherfukcers out there who need a damn bath.
What was a valid scientific concern in the 70s was the growing Antarctic ozone hole. And for those who start screaming, but what happened, huh, what was the big fuss about because it seems to have stopped growing, what happened was that we banned the chemicals (remember freon?) that were the primary cause. So we can fix problems.
Of course, there was similar screaming and yelling about the banning of freon, but we have all magically survived the disasters predicted.
well, there was definitely a hole there. and it was caused by freon. but if i remember my science text book correctly, it could only happen in antarctica because freon is heavier than air. there is certain phenomena there called the polar vortex. it has the strength to lift the freon off the ground and do it’s stuff. but it’s only found in antarctica and a weaker version at the north pole.
Yes, there was and is a hole there. It was rapidly expanding in the 70s and no longer is since we do not produce freon any more. At certain times of the year it still almost reaches South America.
I do not believe you are correct about the weight of freon. If you puncture an old fridge, you will literally SEE the freon rise. (I can attest to this.) I just was checking these facts online and see that the ozone hole is again expanding the last couple of years because something else we’re releasing into the atmosphere is doing the same thing the freon was.
BTW, freon is actually a brand name, often used (as we have) to refer to a class of chemicals.
80′s, actually. Although there was increasing concern (and reaction by banning CFC’s) regarding the ozone layer in the 70s, the research that showed the Antarctic ozone hole was published in 1985. (The decades do all run together after a while as we get older, don’t they?)
Yes, I misspoke. The ozone depletion was a concern in the 70s. Actual measurement of the Antarctic hole was published later.
And we adapted nicely; we figured out how to make aerosol cans without CFC’s, found alternative coolants….in other words, the adaptations we made in response to learning that CFCs had risks to the environment didn’t destroy Life As We Know It or the economy.
Actually the CFC producers wen out of business.
Somebody’s producing whateverthehell we use instead, now, so it’s not a net loss economically but a shift in the market.
I’m guessing they didn’t so much go out of business as changed their business. If they did go out of business, so did horse and buggy makers.
Nah they still need to make those for Central Park, and weddings, and when we have to turn in all our cars.
Don’t forget the Amish! (Although I suppose they make their own, along with those confusing Amish electric fireplaces….)
Many of my cousins work for Coachman up in Indiana. It’s amazing how many Amish also work for Coachman. Evidently, it’s OK to make vehicles for other people.
There is no significant change that can be made, no matter how good it seems, that will not adversely affect someone. Of course, as Diss points out, it usually positively affects someone else. And those two groups can be the same if the first group is willing to adapt to the change.
Aw, poor babies. I guess we should let them destroy the ozone so they can keep making money. That’s the right thing to do.
You’re so mean! *cries over the horse buggy empire she failed to inherit*
You think you got it bad? My grandpa invented a car that gets 1 mpg. And now there will never be a market for it. DAMN YOU, ENVIRONMENTALISTS DESTROYING THE ENTREPRENEURIAL SPIRIT!!!!
Rando: Your Grandpa was too late. Hummer got the lead on that.
Pfft. You’d expect that from those monsters. My grandpa managed to combine compact cars and poor fuel efficiency into a Civic that only holds enough gas to go to the next gas station. It costs $40 to drive to work. True innovation!
My grandad held the patent on the fan belts your grandad used in his cars! It wore out weekly. You could buy them by the case, and they only cost 112.00 each!
Ok so you invented the K-Mart Car.
No, that would be Rando’s grandpa.
Umm, tell that to the people living on islands in the midst of the Pacific or Atlantic… Islands that are only a few feet above water level. When the water level rises as rapidly as it has done in the last decades, they literally will have wet feet and “building walls” is an incredibly unrealistic childish idea.
it would work elsewhere. but yeah, probably not the small islands. we should probably move them elsewhere
Or we could just attach pontoons to them.
heehee, yes. floating islands. or giant balloons
The entire country of Bangladesh? I listened to their prime minister (? I don’t remember his title) speaking last month — a huge percentage of their country is extremely low. And, of course, much of Louisiana, if we want to look closer to home.
New Orleans… *sigh* It makes my head hurt that they are rebuilding those areas that flooded for Katrina. Why, oh why would someone live in a house that the river is level to the second story? I know how much those people have to pay for homeowners and flood insurance. It makes me want to cry every time I see those numbers.
*headdesk*
Are they at least elevating them like they sometimes do beach houses?
You’re joking right?
Just …pathetically hoping, I guess.
That’s just….*sigh*
I will say this much, for the most part it’s different people coming in and buying the property, and then rebuilding. From what I understand, the people who lived there/owned the property before have mostly learned their lesson.
I saw the saddest thing Saturday and the NO Airport. They now sell tours to the lower 9th ward so that you can “see the devestation that stills plauges Louisiana” and “see the rebuilding efforts” and a list of other things. I had heard it was possibly going to happen, but didn’t realize it had already started.
They haven’t put in Animatronic displays of refugees and teams of volunteer rebuilders yet, have they?
What’s the Carbon Footprint there? To Mina, the people LOVE misery.
The people are idiots.
I agree, but why do you think you stop on the highway for an accident in the opposite direction lanes. People love to see others misery.
No need to. Tent City is still there (though growing smaller… it’s more like Tent Village right now) and there are still volunteer rebuilders all over the place.
Definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Hey the gubberment will fix those levies and if not come save dem again.
Then they’re not insane are they? Clearly they (those different people coming in and buying the property) are expecting the same result, i.e., for the government to come in save them again. I suspect we’ve found another small area where we can agree…
B/C the government (state and federal) DID such a BANG UP job the first time.
Well, Brownie did a heckuva job, that’s for sure!
I’d say it was both Federal and State…. the Gubonor of LA turned back some help from out of state National Guard Units. It was a CF on many levels.
I’d say it was Federal, State, and Local. IIRC, there were a lot of unused buses left behind to get water damaged. WTF‽‽‽
Wait what? The Sea LEvels Rose? Really? Damn it Iknew I shoulda bought that property in AZ. DAMN IT ALL!!!
You’d have to buy in Havasu or Yuma dude.
How in the world did this one even get through?
I know I failed it in the voting. It was in the negative when I did that too.
I’m thinking this one is gonna go at least 700 comments. Anyone else?
1000 is my bet. A Good PK Flame War. BTW your point is wrong Global Warming is a farce
I’m sorry, I can’t hear you over the sound of the planet crying. *starts hugging trees* Damn, my bleeding heart is making a mess again.
Excuse me Sir, but that Oak over there has filed Sexual Harrassment against you. S/he/it has said you touched it’s branches in an inappropriate manner and licked its bark.
It was totally asking for it. Don’t you see how it’s dressed? Slutty tree.
Sir, it doesn’t count if you put the clothes on the tree after using Chlophyll to knock it out. At least you left the sapling alone.
Of course I did! What kind of sick weirdo do you think I am? Say, is that a maple over there?
That makes me a sad panda!
Well tell Shaq to stop holding you then.
When should we sell, Rando?
Note the use of comma, otherwise I would have been asking when we should sell Rando.
Ooooooo…I don’t think Rando’s wife would like us selling Rando. Maybe if we got a really good price and gave her a cut?
Wait! A comma! Punctuation saves Rando! *throws confetti*
I’d sell Rando for some Jack in the Box though. Shhhh, don’t tell Rando.
Ugh. Not me. Now some ribs from the lovely bbq place down the street… *dials phone*
I could have sworn that the talking heads now call it Climate Change…
Which doesn’t really make sense either; as it’s not normal for the Earth’s climate to BE stable long-term. I think the term they’re really needing is “Anthropogenic Climate Change” as presumably they’re not terribly concerned with the part that happens naturally.
If it were all natural, then you’d see the battle lines drawn differently, but there’d still be a battle. You’d see hard-core environmentalists saying let the world do what it’s always done, and you’d see others saying damn what’s natural, we need to figure out a way to keep the Earth from killing us.
I wonder how things would be different if there was an asteroid we knew was coming for us? That’d be natural, after all…
Good lord, you want to feel insecure, watch something about the ideas and plans for stopping an asteroid impact. (“We’ll…paint one side white and one side black!” I swear, this is a Real Plan…) I felt safer when I thought we were just going to send Bruce Willis to blow it up if that happened.
Anyway, my point was that when we just talk about “climate change” without specifying the “anthropogenic” part, you’re going to get sidetracked by a lot of people (*raises hand*) pointing out that change is normal…..
What worries me more is that we might try to “fix” climate change (not by decreasing pollution, which couldn’t hurt, but by tweaking things somehow) and screw it up worse. (See, e.g. our efforts to “fix” floodplains.)
I get your point, and it’s valid. I just enjoy speculating about the what-ifs. Btw, speaking of asteroids, are you aware that the Russians are seriously planning on diverting an asteroid? Not a hypothetical asteroid, an actual one. Apophis, IIRC.
I heard about that.
“Can we divert it into America?”
“Sorry, Mr. Putin, we don’t have that technology yet.”
I didn’t know that! Interesting.
I just plan to rely on Bx2 to solve any problems that come along. Willis and Campbell, nothing those two can’t handle. When they die, we’ll be screwed anyway.
I fear control. And to me alot of “Climate Changers” are trying to control me.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.” Yoda, Ph.D.
And whom has said the Dark Side is evil. I think they’re just misunderstood. The Jedi were all about control as well, look where that got them.
As long as you don’t start arguing that Jar Jar Binks was “just misunderstood”…
Jar Jar Binks is pure evil. Pure evil. Worse than those Woodland Critters. *shudders*
What? Just because they worship Satan and are trying to bring about the apocalypse you deem them evil? Also, it really isn’t very nice to compare them to that…that Thing. I think you owe them an apology. And a human sacrifice.
DU, did you ever see their return appearance in the “Imaginationland” episodes? Lol….
Yes, yes I did. “We need some with AIDS to piss in their eye sockets” “None of us have AIDS” “Well, we need one of you to get AIDS so you can piss in their eyesockets and give them AIDS!”
And when they send Kurt Russell through the portal and he runs into them…..”Oh the… cute little bear’s eyes are starting to glow red now… Uh, hello there, little animals, do you happen to know how to — OW! AAAAAAAAAAA!”
They’re just so darn cheerfully evil!
nah he was a racist stereotype put in to make people laugh and added absolutely nothing to the film, and should be banned from any re-digitializations.
I don’t believe that Lucas was deliberately employing a stereotype there, but I still can’t understand why no one in his film crew didn’t say, “you know, George…” I mean the marching band at the end really just put the cherry on top of that pie, didn’t it? (I grew up in the South, and at least at the time, there was a pretty big difference in the marching bands from schools that were predominantly white and those that were predominantly black.)
RACIST
Sometimes I think in natural disasters is part of the earth’s/mother nature’s/whatever’s plan… to cull the herd. The herd being humans, of course.
how DARE you bring your anti-jesus lingo here! PAGAN !! BURN THE PAGAN!!! BURN IT!!!!!!!!!
More Agnostic than anything else. ;3 But clearly I’m indeed a horrible person for not being a bible-thumper.
Yeah how’s that liberal acceptance working for all you liberals out there attacking Christians. NICE!
Hmm yeah no I have this thing. There are Christians, which I don’t have a problem with… and then there are bible-thumpers, who annoy the crap out of me when I refuse to convert to whichever denomination they’re all for. Like my ex sister-in-law. Girl would read the bible to people everywhere she went. Even in line at movie theaters. o.O
But my comment above was more due to Bitter troll’s comment where I figured he was being sarcastic/joking around… and I figured why not go along with it. Hence the ;3 in the post.
I think guns/cars are much better at that than natural disasters.
I’m pretty sure Nuclear Holocaust could make it’s way into carving a nitch into the Human population, however I think it’ll devistate the environment.
Haha yeah Nuclear holocaust, guns, cars, etc do work better. But they’re man-made, and not so much earth’s natural built in events o’doom.
Maybe it would help if more than 3 people on the planet understood that “global warming” is verbal shorthand for “more extreme weather, both hot and cold, and major changes in climate everywhere, including blizzards in Europe and heat waves at the North Pole.” But I doubt it. The average person is a moron, and that means half of them are even stupider.
Way to incorrectly use a word (stupider) to describe how unintelligent everyone else is.
hey at least he didn’t say more stupider.. I’ve seen that a few times.
Ha! Global warming became Climate change because record highs haven’t been set since somewhere around 2001. Then again, Al Gore misquotes people all the time… A scientist might say *it is possible that the temperature will trend upwards in the next 10 years*. And good ol’ Al says *the temp Will rise drastically causing this and that to happen and oh, don’t forget the polar bears! (crocodile tears)*.
No, global warming became climate change because (a) it’s so much more than just warming, and (b) so many people fail to grasp the “global” part of global warming. I hate to break it to you, but the trend line for average global temperatures is still increasing.
No, global warming became climate change in order to better explain a) why it is hot in the summer, and b) why it is cold in the winter.
Didn’t they teach you that somewhere along the line? It’s hot in the summer and cold in the winter because of axial tilt.
Umm, yes they did. I was being facetious. Sarcastic, maybe, as well.
Which is why one needs to add the “/sarcasm” at the end of the comment so readers can tell if the poster is joking or actually is that stupid. (I’m sure you thought it was too stupid to be taken seriously, but that boat sailed so long ago it’s on its way back from China.
)
…and I should have included a “;-)” as well…
It’s a variant of Poe’s law, I suppose.
I thought it was because the.. trees.. lost their leaves.. because they were cold so there was no more insulation making it colder. Yeah.
Maybe if they were more responsible they wouldn’t keep losing their leaves. Stupid trees.
I guess it isn’t possible that as we learn more about the phenomenon that a name change might be necessary. You think we knew everything about global warming in the 80s? We’re still learning the effects of this problem. Just because somethings about the theories change doesn’t mean that the whole thing is a sham.
Damnit, Rando. Don’t you realize that by admitting that we’ve learned anything new in the last 30 years you’re essentially admitting that it’s possible we don’t know everything now? And if that’s the case, then really isn’t it possible we don’t know anything?
Isn’t that kind of the whole point. Should we try and fix $hit, if we don’t necesarily know everything that’s wrong. If there was a “conservative” idea that “didn’t” know everything would liberals buy into it? No probably not. Please STOP with the Man-MAde Global Warming is a fact bought in by 100% of scientists and humans. If so many people believed in it, don’t you think it wouldn’t be as controversal as it is?
No, it’s not. By your same argument, doctors shouldn’t try to help cure anybody until we know everything there is to know about the human body in general, and about their patients’ bodies in particular. I assume you don’t believe that, do you?
As for anthropogenic global warming (I’ll abbreviate as AGW in the future) being a “fact”, it’s just as much a fact as evolution (just to open that can of worms down here, too). Sure, you can find “scientists” who don’t believe in evolution and you can find one or two climatologists who aren’t convinced of AGW (although they waiver quite a bit themselves), and you can find a lot of non-scientist people who don’t believe it, but the basic science is quite settled. In both cases, of course, there are disagreements on the details. That doesn’t invalidate the big picture, though.
Sure it does! Once you invalidate a little part of it it makes the whole thing wrong! Right?
Well, they can try a cure, as long as the cure isn’t more deadly than the disease. Which it is in many cases, btw. But that’s another story…
Like the allergy mist that causes glaucoma? That one is my FAVOURITE.
So they’re going forward with using Nuclear Winter to combat Global Warming?
Meh, what’s the worst that could happen?
The Iranians and Russians, and Californians might survive? :-O
AGW is generally used as shorthand for “anti-global warming.” Can we use something else? Perhaps “AnthGW?”
Actually, in places I hang out, it’s already generally used as short hand for an anthropogenic global warming. Perhaps the antis could come up with a different shorthand?
*copyrights AGW© as Aquatic Gryphon Weavings©* There! Now both of you have to pick new letters!
Damn you, DU! How about AGGW? The first G is for “genic”. I’ll let you figure out the rest for yourself.
As for anti-global warming, is there anyone (other than perhaps the bigwigs flying their private jets) who is pro-global warming?
As far as putting genic in there, I don’t see what pants have to do with global warming.
People living in vary cold places are probably pro-global warming.
umm, no record highs since 01? REALLY??
“Instead, for the period from January 1, 2000, to September 30, 2009, the continental United States set 291,237 record highs and 142,420 record lows, as the country experienced unusually mild winter weather and intense summer heat waves. ” (source: http://www.ucar.edu/news/releases/2009/maxmin.jsp)
Forgot to add: I’m going to guess that those 291K records didn’t all occur in 24 months.
In case that’s not enough–from Florida: “The Treasure Coast matched or broke 23 daily heat records throughout the year, including even a high of 85 degrees on Jan. 29, based on records for Indian River County.” Published 12/30/09, for the year of 2009 (source: http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2009/dec/30/treasure-coast-temperatures-set-record-highs-in/)
Actually, we’re talking about global highs, not local (or even national) ones. That said, the global trend is still consistently upward. Having a single extremely hot year does not make the other record breakers (in terms of the ten hottest years on record happening in the last 20 years, and the eight hottest years on record happening in the last 10 years, etc.) less hot.
ah, in that case, my bad. but yes, I’m one who is aware of the global trend and actually believes the climate change is a cause for concern.
How dare you be rational! HOW DARE YOU? This is NO place to be thoughtful. *floats away again because gravity is just a theory*
Try velcro, dude.
Quick! Get Ivan some of those magnetic boots the astronauts use!
Just like “The Man” to try to bring me down. Only in this case it’s “The Woman”. Or Women. Hey! That’s NOT a handle!
*lets go of “not handle”*
Sorry.. It was so convenient.
Must be something larger we could use as a handle.
O_O
Day = Made.
Misread that as magnetic boobs…I’m sure it would make him happier, but how would it keep him from floating away?
Maybe if he took a lot of iron…or had an iron hat instead of a tin foil one.
Wait, what? Since when do I belong to the tinfoil hat conspiracy crowd?
That was really a reference to another ‘chat’ DU and I were having in which she said the problem with the tin foil hat people was that tin wasn’t sufficient shielding and they needed iron hats. Not so much about you.
No, no, no! You’ve been brainwashed by their conspiracy and they’ve changed your memory! I said lead is the hat you need! Iron actually makes it easier for them to manipulate your thoughts!
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/FAQ/wg1_faq-1.2.html
“Another common confusion of these issues is thinking that a cold winter or a cooling spot on the globe is evidence against global warming. There are always extremes of hot and cold, although their frequency and intensity change as climate changes. But when weather is averaged over space and time, the fact that the globe is warming emerges clearly from the data.”
i love how they all got in their private jets, rode their private limos and ate cavier while they talked about 3rd world nations and how THEY need to conserve and pitch in via carbon credits ect. and not 1 of the people there were ACTUAL SCIENTISTS WHICH ACTUAL FACTS!!! as an american, we should not even be involoved in theis bs, never mind the fact that obie flew air force 1, his private 747, all the way there to give a 13 minute speech and flew back in his private 747. man, our leaders are…too many mean words to choose one…
MICHEAL SAVAGE FOR PRESIDENT, GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX, ASK THE SCIENTISTS!!!
Well, you see, global warming doesn’t apply to them, it applies to us, the little people. We are the ones screwing up the environment and we have to pay, pay them that is… So they can afford the jets, cause they ain’t cheap.
Michael Savage for president? You’re serious?
As for asking a scientist, that’s a good idea. Hey, Nebton, is global warming a hoax?
Thanks for asking, Rando. No, it’s not.
(Which just goes to prove that I’m in on the conspiracy! BWAHAHAH!)
3/10
And that, my dear kids, is why entire earth thinks that Americans are stupid …
Well then, speaking as an American to the entire Earth, PPPPPPPPPPPBBBBBBBBBBBBBBTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH:-p
Really? Do you have proof of this? The ENTIRE EARTH??
Yes HelOnWheels. The ENTIRE earth thinks every SINGLE American is stupid. Now that is the tardchat we’ve come to know and love on the internets.
Out of curiosity, where is PeterL from? I’d bet he’s from Texas and just doesn’t realize that the Confederates lost the war…..
Igloo: So we talk of tardchat and then throw out the last line “I’d be he’s from Texas and just doesn’t realize that the Confederates lost the war…” You do realize the fallacy of your comment, Texans know the Confederates lost the war, that’s why they want to cecede themselves again, it’s the deep Southern Georgians, Alabamians, Carolinians (both North and South), and some Virginians who don’t realize it. You should substitute Deep Southerner for Texas. Then it won’t be “tardchat”
Having lived in Texas for four years, I disagree. Molly Ivins put a common view there very well when she spoke of her shock at going ‘up north’ for school and discovering, “Not only was it not called the War of Northern Aggression, but that we had lost.”
It may be more common in other states, but that view is certainly well represented in Texas.
Having lived in Texas my whole life, I can honestly say the opinions of all you Yankees don’t matter a hill o’ beans to me. And by the way, the last battle of the War of Yankee Agression was fought at Palmito Ranch in South Texas near Brownsville and the South won. So I reiterate, PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBTTTTTTTTTTTTHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH:-p
How do you get those hoods and sheets soooo white??
There is a hell of a lot more to that story than just some “idiots over in Jasper”…
Which story?
Exactly.
(meaning, the story the media ran about the poor defenseless man dragged to death by some white racists isn’t the entire story. The facts change the perceeption of the case, so they were left out)
But I honestly don’t know what you’re talking about. Damnit do I have to Google “KKK + Jasper TX” or something?
You might need to
Long and short of it is that a black man was dragged behind a truck by three white rednecks. He was killed, of course, and the three men went to jail. I can’t remember if one or two got the death penalty, but at the very least they’re in jail for the rest of their lives. And you know how we feel about the death penalty in Texas. We’re trying to put in an express lane.
The story was told as thought it was a poor defenseless black man ambushed and killed by some racist idiots. That’s not what happened at all. There are racists on both sides of the issue in East Texas, and they’re extremely hard core. My understanding of the situation is that all of these guys had served time together. Apparently, the black guy was involved in the rape of one (or all) of the white guys while in prison. When they all got out, there was still fighting amongst them all that culminated with the black guy either beating up one of the white guys’ brother. There was fighting back and forth, and the end result was that the three white guys grabbed the black one and dragged him to death. It was horrible, and it never should have happened. But it still remains that the entire story wasn’t told.
As a side note, I think the three white guys ALL should fry for it, not just the one who is going to.
Thanks for the back story, Froo. Sounds like there are some prison guards and prison policy-maker types who should be charged in that case, also. As in, being sentenced to prison should not equal being sentenced to rape.
I did Google it and I did find the “defenseless black dude” story. I didn’t see anything about the other stuff you mentioned though. Do you have any references for that? I’m only asking because I’m curious, not because I don’t believe you.
And yeah, VG, you’re right. Sounds like there’s more culpability there. Prison should be a punishment but in no instance should being sentenced to prison = being sentenced to rape.
Unless you’re in prison for rape
Unfortunately, I dont’ have any references handy. I’ll try to find some, but my knowledge of the story is from people who live in the area and were associated with or close friends with all of the parties involved.
Jasper. Why am I not surprised.
What? I have family near there.
Sorry, I forgot the
at the end of my comment.
Thanks PB, I forgot about Texas trying to secede. I have a limited quota for news about stupid people, and the constant reporting on the Jersey shore has maxed it out.
It is very easy for us northern folk to just label the “south” and be done with it, but it clearly isn’t that easy. Sure, there’s the deep south that we all know and…love. Uh, yeah. But Texas is its own category. And so is Louisiana. And does anyone really think Miami meets the definition of “deep south?” AZ & NM are technically south, but we call them the southwest. But the same goes for the north. MN & WI are a totally different animal than NY, and ID isn’t going to be anything like OH.
Ya know, no need to get snippy, Igloo, because you can’t see me making a point with my comment about the stupidity of PeterL’s comment.
Because of an unfunny lol? I honestly don’t understand your point.
To be fair, people were more upset at China for their asshattery.
…Oh, oh! You meant the LOL caption itself! Well, that is pretty lame I guess. Made for a flamboyant flame war, though.
(Which is obviously why it’s here, donchakno?)
yeah its difficult to understand the the gulf storm brings warm weather to europe and gets weaking be the higher temparture.
This we had here both a heat and cold record, F*ck my car.
Stream. Gulf Stream.
The rest of it.. I can’t translate.
QueUE. Queue for the prize for inarticulateness.
Why are we lining up? I don’t see any need for a que. *runs*
YOU GUYS SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *cries*
Well, yes, but that’s never been a problem before.
*sobs hysterically*
*sucks Charro’s boobies and makes everything better.*
Yes.. That does make everything better. Nibble a little, would you?
I’m sorry, I just don’t find your car sexually attractive.
I’m sure something could work out with the gear shift.
bret hart hit the ground!
ewwwwwwwwww.
Too soon.
But it was actually one of the ring posts, and then the ground.
That was Owen Hart that hit the ring post, adm.
Why are you shouting?
I’m not. I’m the opposite of k.d. lang, so I figured I’d better Capitalize
I don’t buy it. You’re up to something. *eyes froo suspiciously*
*sigh* ooops..
Well, let me ask you this……
IF I TYPE LIKE THIS, DOES THE VOICE IN YOUR HEAD SHOUT?
Yes. All twelve of them. Thanks.
And they’re all screaming “turn the fvcking caps lock off!!!”
I believe that was Owen Hart, Bret Hart will be on Raw tonight.
Loved the standing ovation for Hugo Chavez. Left wingers are pathological liars, and should be treated accordingly. AGW is nothing but fabricated bullsh*t designed to impose socialism on all of us. Go ahead, leftists, and keep pressing your case. Go too far, and find yourselves up against the wall, with or without a blindfold and cigarette.
No one cares what you think.
No one cares what you think.
OK, can some of the long-timers tell me whether or not cgray’s a parody? If it’s something I’ll just have to figure out for myself, so be it.
As far as I’ve ever been able to tell, cgray takes itself quite seriously.
You guys! The only accepted response is: No one cares what you think. We agreed lols ago!
chavez saves children of evil computer games such ninja gaiden 2 >)
Well, thanks for clearing that up. Much obliged.
No one cares what you think.
No one cares what you think.
Everybody knows that if it snows during the winter, that proves that Global Warming Is Not Real. Duh.
Wow, the Trolls are thick today !
Blah blah blah – back and forth about who’s right and who’s wrong. While I’m certainly in favor of cleaning up the environment, I firmly believe the jury is still out and what the cause and effect are. All I know is (from a local perspective) that the PM here in Australia tried in vain to get an emissions trading scheme put in the place that was rejected not once, but twice. It would seem that he didn’t want to go to Copenhagen with nothing in hand to say Australia is doing it’s part. The problem is, his scheme would mean an increase in taxes and the people just weren’t going to abide by that, not with the economy the way it is at the moment. And all this while he was jetsetting across the globe and leaving a massive carbon footprint.
Yes, I want to do my part, but I want conclusive evidence as well. At the moment there’s two sides battling it out and I don’t see any way of them agreeing to anything.
And let’s not forget “Propane Jane”.
I believe they agree to disagree!!
Hey, if there’s anything we can agree on, it’s that! Or, do you disagree?
I don’t think we yet have sufficient data to determine whether or not disagreement can be agreed on.
whats the government’s take on agreeing disagreement?
I believe they’ve formed a committee…oh, and your taxes will be increasing no matter what they determine, so get ready!
A Bipartisan Commitee to study the impact of global warming/climate change/sun-burnt polar bears and the frozen tundra of Houston Texas on your wallet!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, oooh stop, I crack myself up.
We’re going to need ….um….more data, some binder clips, the DVD box set with all four Die Hard movies, and some bagels. We’ll have an unintelligible report of our “findings” out within the, um…decade. Ok?
I thought by Christmas 2009?
We’ve had to revise that deadline due to the bagel shortage.
I thought it b/c the Republicans who couldn’t stop any bill with weak numbers were holding up the vote?
Well, it turns out that we first have to determine what the actual question is. It might be whether, in this particular situation, both sides have agreed to disagree; on the other hand, it might be whether they actually DO disagree; then again, there’s a vocal subgroup that just objects to everything anyone else says, no matter whether they agree with it or not, and we’re pretty sure they’ve misunderstood what “agree to disagree” means, but they disagree.
See why we need the bagels and the Die Hard dvds?
You forgot about back door deals to get your own party to own up to the response, or is that what the Bagels and Die Hard vids are for?
The bagels are so I don’t starve. The Die Hard dvds are so I have something to do while I stall and hope that eventually the purpose of the committee will be forgotten and we can just issue a report full of statistics and random banalities and nobody will even read it.
“eventually the purpose of the committee will be forgotten”
Are you sure you’ll need a decade for that? American voters’ attention spans are rather short.
A whole decade?!?! Better bring the Lord of The Rings trilogy too.
Extended Director’s cut please.
yeah it’s hard to push the fallacy of global warming in the cold of winter. They should be on Failblog.
*headdesk*
why is there no antidote for climate change (with worse reaction than it actually by them self)^^
IN THE NAME OF CAIN!! IN THE NAME OF CAIN!! IN THE NAME OF CAIN!!!
I’m sorry, I’m not Abel.
But you’ll be better, you’ll be better doc as soon as you are Abel.
I don’t know if I Cain be Abel. Joe not making sense pitty. Let’s leave the Lot of it behind, the more the Mary-er.
Oi don’t give Adam what they say. Let’s give ‘em the old ‘Eve ho, right luv?
Paul-right then. Judas be moving right along!
I believe Rocky found that line in Gideon’s bible.
What’s this about vampires, now?
Global warming is BS. The world’s average temperature has been constantly fluctuating for eons. Go look it up.
Hmmm.. Yes.. Fluctuating for eons isn’t the same thing as what people are talking about when they refer to “Global Warming” or “Climate Change”. Go look it up.
shhh love, he chooses not not believe in the truth, same as bitter troll chooses not to believe in the magic man in the sky who grants wishes if you pray hard enough.
But that’s not really the same thing now is it.
pfft since when did that stop a conservative, why are we allowing it to stop us?
bitter, are you ok?
He’s just a little… bitter.
I think Charro is seeing that Bitter is in rare angry form lately.
the one who submitted this is an even greater fool, for arguing against global warming without even knowing what the theory claims.
Clearly, it was a Belgian theory argued by a Belgian with a pancake. And Shaq is holding a panda.
Why don’t you enlighten us Kelly. The fools are those who arrogant enough to think man is capable of changing the climate of the earth. I would be willing to bet there is just as much ignorance on the side of those who promote global warming. It’s really hip to be green these days. Recylcling tends to ease the guilt of being an otherwise self absorbed individual.
When you realize that Al Gore stands to profit millions if Cap and Trade passes (primary investor in a company that will monitor carbon credits), you have to question his intentions. He’s already made tons of money on global warming (conveniently being changed to climate change since it’s obvious the earth’s temp isn’t warming fast enough). What’s crazy is that (and you wont hear this on CNN) a majority of scientist refute any measurable contribution to climate change by man. Hopefully people will wake up before we sell our souls to a blatantly BS theory.
I see. And where did you get this load of dog crap?
steve, what do you have against making money? do you hate capitolism steve? america is capitolism steve..why do you hate america steve…why do you support the terrorists, because if your not with us, your with them steve.
the term “global warming” is not correct and has been falsely advertised to the general public. the more correct terminology would be CLIMATE CHANGE. there is a difference. i suggest that before anyone tries to defend this ignorant caption, that they do some scholarly research and educate themselves. the IPCC graphs and reports do not count, and neither does al gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”
Yeah because 100-200 years ago people were so concerned about Climate Change they took dead on balls accurate temperature readings.
They had no concerns about getting water,food or shelter.
Heh. I’ve just skimmed the first few replies and seen a lot of the denialists’ pulled-out-of-their-ass theories, based on absolutely nothing (i.e. bizarre random changes in Earth’s orbit).
The wrong-wing knobheads used to claim climate change wasn’t even real; now the song has changed to “okay, it’s real, but it’s not man-made!” Too bad they can’t settle on a cause: cow farts, axis wobble, the aforementioned weird orbit deviations, sunspot activity…the list goes on.
Hey, what the heck, they’ve been right about everything else (ozone depletion causing skin cancer; Iraq’s connection to 9-11; WMDs; the Laffer Curve). Let’s trust them on this! It’s easier! And you don’t have to think, which just makes your head hot! Megadittos, Rush! Baaa! Baaa!
Cranial warming is very dangerous!!1!
I thought the colder weather in certain parts has been explained and known. Because the seas and oceans are warming, this disrupts oceanic currents, such as the Gulf Stream, and North Atlantic Drift, which causes certain areas, like Western and Northern Europe, as well as Eastern USA, to be colder than usual, as these currents normally have a warming effect.
Of course, maybe the denialists are just ignorant of this little fact.
The denialists are ignorant of a lot of stuff. For instance they refuse to recognize that even if GW were not a problem that we still have to do all the stuff that GW requires us to do. We are still running out of cheap oil so we have to move away from fossil fuels. Coal mining is incredibly destructive and toxic so we still have to move away from fossil fuels. The oceans are acidifying which requires us to move away from any non-carbon-neutral energy source. Potash is a finite resource so we still have to move away from excessive use of fertilizers. Overpopulation of a fixed land area still requires that we reduce population. Land erosion problems still require that we preserve and restore forests and wetlands. Overflowing landfills still require that we reduce, reuse and recycle. Growing problems with asthma still require that we move away from personal internal combustion engines. The obesity epidemic still means that we have to return to active lifestyles based on using our feet and some elbow grease in daily activities. Species loss due to habitat loss still means that we must stop urban sprawl, stop mining expansion, stop deforestation. Creating more employment still demands we have more small businesses and fewer global corporations. Etc, etc, etc.
At least BHO knows the difference between THE DATA and A DATUM.
(It’s a lot like the difference between the scientific method and your attempts to reason with the oatmeal that substitutes for a brainbone in your cranial vault)
Looking like damn fools,…
doing it pretty well akshully.
The CLIMATE for the world is heating up. CLIMATE DOES NOT EQUAL WEATHER.
Yes. And good for you for pointing that out! Because no one else did.
Well, this is just ignorant o.o damn american’s learning nothing in schools.
Damn Lena-ans not learning proper capitalisation techniques and the correct use of the apostrophe.
What? There was a BLIZZARD? In WINTER?
OMG U GUIZ GLOBAL WARMIN IZ TOTALY A HOXE
Have none of you read anything about Climategate? That hacker that got all those emails? All the evidence from the last 30 years has been compromised? Please tell me that at least one of you has at least considered that before saying that the coldest winter in 25 years is a sign of global Warming or is irelevant.
I have read enough about the so-called ClimateGate to understand that it does not affect the scientific evidence on the climate chaos one bit. You could throw out 100% of the East Anglia data and you would have a damn solid case that global warming is real, manmade and a threat.
Anybody who claims a colder winter in certain parts of the world is proof that “global warming is a hoax!!!11!!11!” is showing off their ignorance and/or malicious misanthropy. You obviously should be stuffing your money in a mattress because the market (climate) couldn’t possibly go up if a few stocks (weather) go down. You should not treat your child’s high fever (climate) because they have Reynaud’s syndrome in one cold finger (weather). You would tell a teacher with thousands of successful students (climate) that they are a failure because ~1/2 of their students scored below average (weather).
…IF you throw out all of the compromised evidence, you would have none. All the predictions for this year have been shown to be false. Australia had some major legislation that was going to tax carbon that was pushed by the Prime Minister. It was voted down because of Climegate, since they could not vote on something backed by false evidence.
I am not saying that global warming is not happening. Just that it has been happening for the last 4 million years since the last really big Ice age, and it has much more to do with natrual phases of he Earth (which have been shown to happen throughout Earths history) then anything humanity has done.
Maybe you’d better explain what this ‘compromised evidence’ actually is, because all I’ve seen is someone hacking in, getting private e-mails, and denialists taking parts of them out of context and proclaiming that this is ‘proof’ that AGW is a fake, then utterly ignoring the people who actually wrote those e-mails giving the context of the quotes, which utterly nullifies that ‘proof’. For example, the one that is commonly hailed by deniers as the ‘smoking gun’, an e-mail talking about a ‘trick’ to ‘hide the decline’ was, in fact, taking about a clever method, or ‘trick’, to put data from recent tree-ring proxies, which actually seem to indicate a decrease in temperature, into graphs and what-not without having those compromise the actual measured temperatures from the same time period, which is far more reliable data, and which show temperatures continuing to rise. IIRC, in the end, they didn’t really ‘hide’ it at all – they simply put both sets of data in the graphs, and marked which is which.
See, your mistake is in assuming that Not Givingname has any interest in anything beyond reinforcing his/her preconceptions. Anything that might challenge his/her worldview is ignored, thus there is no evidence that challenges his/her worldview. Got it?
global warming is political nt ethical
It is called CLIMATE CHANGE not global warming people. If you have even the basic understandings of global climates and currents you would know the entire world will not heat. There will be massive changes to our climate and weather. Overall temperatures on average will rise, while some regions will see cooling. I reccomend everyone watches the new documentary ‘Home’.
It’s still called both, Tooshie. Climate change is broader in scope than just global warming, but it’s still perfectly valid to discuss global warming. The problem is that many laypeople don’t grasp that global warming refers to a phenomenon that is both global and statistical (i.e., a single year doesn’t invalidate it).
Well whoever made this is a tad slow.
To use the weather of a single day to try to refute global warming is like using the baseball scores of a single day to predict who will win the World Series. And actually, continued melting of the arctic ice caps decreasing the salinity of the North Atlantic, thus interrupting the Gulf Stream Current will cause more blizzards in Denmark…and Germany…and France…and Britain…and Spain…
just kill he bastard and get it over with him and the sheeple
You know, just saying, but theoretically global warming would likely increase blizzards. Higher temperature = more glaciers melting = more humidity = higher dew point (point at which the temperature must be for humidity to condensate into water) = more snow when it actually is cold.
Anyone who buys the whole “The winter is cold, global warming is a lie” argument should go find a dictionary and look up the difference between climate and weather, then you can either shut the hell up, kill yourself or both.
@Chase
Climate has changed throughout history. The arrogance of man is that he believes he is the most significant being on the planet and therefore has the most impact on climate. Do your homework sonny. Since the earths orbit is unstable, using the logic of the “sky is falling” Global Warming bots, we will start to investigate what it is that man has done to cause this. I can see the headlines now:
“Scientists still investigating how man has caused the erratic wobble of the earths orbit!”
I highly doubt that the very slight orbital instability has such a great impact on the climate as “evaporating our coal mines into the air.” Or perhaps it is just a convenient fluke that the recent rise in global temperatures coincides directly with human industrial activity producing massive amounts of carbon dioxide. I wish I had come up with that phrase, but I must give credit to Svante Arrhenius, 1903 recipient of the Nobel Prize for Chemistry.
1. Cap & Trade
2. Chicago Carbon Exchange
3. Who is getting rich from this
That is what motivates the Global Warming puppet masters and the bots are falling for it without question. Feeble minds are easily led.
All about greed – ask Al Gore
A total farse.
What’s been going on I have not frequented your blog recently and I just remembered remembered how much I enjoy reading your posts. I will favorite your site on this visit to ensure I don’t forget it.
People saying ‘climate change is real because of extreme weather conditions’ is just as bad as ‘global warming isn’t real because it’s cold.’
Last i checked, the Earth has been through at least one MAJOR ice age which human’s were not around to create.
The fact that we are depleting our resources is a problem and should be addressed, the idea that we are ruining the planet by causing major swings in climate trends is utter nonsense.
We probably are affecting it, but not in any way that is going to break the world. Just for arguments sake, say we as humans change the climate by a factor of 3. This is significant, but the earth itself will at the same time change it’s own climate by a factor of say 15.
If the extreme conditions continue, everything will adapt and it will be a non issue, if it doesn’t then nothing will really change.
Really, i could care less if it gets hotter or colder, if a species dies out then another species will evolve to take its place.
End rant, and if you read it’s merely an opinionated rant and not some scientific bull that people will argue endlessly about, because according to the scientists everyone is wrong.
Ok, worded poorly, but the gist is this.
I see a lot of how climate change is happening, i see a lot of causes (NOT all of them human by the way) but i see nothing of how climate change is a bad thing.
Things change, things adapt, life goes on.
One thing I have noticed in all your posts and I thought I’d compliment you on is how solid your writing and grammar are. Where did you figure out how to write so good? It looks like you have a certification in writing from a University.