Jump to content


Photo

Global Warming ?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
148 replies to this topic

#21 m1hawkgsm

m1hawkgsm

    Forum Mathematiquè & Reduntarian

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,007 posts
  • LocationLand of Hobos and Ken

Posted 02 January 2013 - 08:30 PM

Global warming is the biggest hoax of the 21st century; a delusion created by first world countries and corporate giants to market the concept of sustainable innovation and take lunch money from the third world.
 
I can understand the weakness of the mathematical models, the opportunism of politicians everywhere, and the market potential it has.  But I honestly question your accusations of "conspiracy" and "hoax".  First, the science is there, there's no question about that. Second, it's true, as Milareppa said, that the climate science is unique in its dependence on data over long periods of time.

But, having said that, I don't see the big "take over" by green technology. If anything, fossil fuels still rule the markets, and I don't think any other nation sans the US has a big deal with alternative energy corporate policies. For example, the EU last year proposed implementing a version of the carbon tax on jetliners--both China and the US opposed it.

Politically? The Kyoto Protocol was amongst the big things that came out of the hoopla of Al Gore and the carbon movement, and it's virtually worthless as of now. Copanhagen was also pointless. Carbon taxes are generally ignored.

Green companies? They haven't taken over mainstream energy in the US, and one need only look at solar company bankruptcies to realize this (Solyndra). The same goes for governmental support. You need only keep up with the Wall Street Journal to feel the intense animosity that right wing and a majority of indepdendents have for Obama due to EPA policies and solar subsidies (not to mention the near biweekly exposition of scandalous details of EPA policies or details). Hell, there's generally a greater focus politically on shale oil and gas, if anything. That's the "next big thing", and both Obama and Romney put a huge amount of attention to it. Observe the Keystone XL issue.

It is very true that China heavily subsidizes its solar and green technological companies, but that also applies for practically all of its heavy industries. You might hear about Mitt Romney harking on about Chinese dumping of solar products onto the US and EU, but you might not also know that Chinese petro-explorers and drilling companies such as CNOOC and SinoPec have made frequent trips to diverse places outside the First world, such as Myanmar, Sudan, Brazil, among other places. Batiste (spelling), Brazil's shining billionaire, is putting his bets on oil production as his next big thing for Brazil. We're talking about one of the rising stars, the BRICS. That speaks volumes of where the "big guns" are moving.

Ethanol? It's only a big thing in select countries such as Brazil and Sweden, and this is because the economics just happen to make sense there--this has been documented by academics of both economics and policy.

I honestly don't see green technologies really "starving" third world countries. A number of African nations are making their cash off of petroleum exports (again, queue China), and even where green tech has some niche role, it's beneficial rather than forced (I personally know a number of people working for a solar tech company back in Colombia).

Point? You might complain about politicization of science, personal manipulations, and even falsification of data. You might complain about botched and malicious policies. BUT, you can't, without appealing to some "Illuminati" theory, posit that global warming is some great big plan to take over the world or screw over the Third World. The evidence isn't there.
  • Peleihno, Kazekage, Lucky Wolf and 1 other like this

D9wwdJt.jpg


#22 inzaratha

inzaratha

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 942 posts
  • LocationArizona

Posted 04 January 2013 - 12:50 PM

http://news.yahoo.co...-144852255.html

 

Type of thing I've been saying forever, it's about long term changes in things like the solar radiation and when solar radiation increases,  volcanoes seem to erupt more because the earth is a naturally self balancing organism so if the temperature increases then something else happens to make it decrease and this has been happening forever in a cycle.    I think looking at the very long term cycles is a lot more helpful to understanding it.      However the increase in population has caused the other factors too.   


  • Sev likes this

#23 Milareppa

Milareppa

    Live Long and Prosper

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,094 posts

User's Awards

2         

Posted 04 January 2013 - 03:54 PM

Interesting how that article claims it was a "new study" considering the theory isn't that new. It might be the newest study in a long line of them and perhaps the one that provides the best evidence of a link (I'd have to read the actual research paper and not a journalist's article on the subject to know for certain what's actually being reported, especially as the journalist's article does not cover the peer-review process that study should either have, or currently, be going through), but it won't be the first look into such a theory, despite the article claiming that "few people" thought about climate change fuelling volcanic activity prior to these researchers.

 

Inzaratha, did you notice that this article reveals that the study being written about was looking only at natural changes in the climate and that the scientists behind the research are not claiming there's no such thing as man-made climate change or that their research disproves such a thing? Man-made impact appears to have been beyond the scope of this specific research study judging by the scientists' quotes used in the article (although again, directly reading the research paper concerned is the best way of assessing exactly what's in it and what the limitations and scope of the study actually were). I have, however, noticed that you appear to believe that climatologists aren't aware of (and don't factor in) research into solar variation, that they don't look at very long term cycles, and that they (or other scientists, for that matter) don't look into the issue of human population size/increase.


Edited by Milareppa, 04 January 2013 - 04:12 PM.


#24 disastrousmaster

disastrousmaster

    Pirate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,624 posts
  • Locationtrying to find where I am

Posted 13 January 2013 - 03:16 AM

i dont really get why we are complaining about climate change here. it seems to me that the climate change has not really vastly affected human population at large. some people whine about how costal lines are disappearing and weather is changing and saying we are polluting our air too much and that it is causing the problems well my answer is climates have changed for thousands of years and if we can survive an ice age we can survive a little heat. its not like the average temperature in places is 200 degrees. the thing is people dont like seeing other humans die, but that is nature and will happen. but on the other side the global warming issue does bring in many good things like more efficient use of our nonrenewable resources. I think its gonna be funny when they all run out and we start using horses n shiz again. i did like the overpopulation thing. that is a pretty big thing. eventually its gonna bite humanity in the butt, but that is what happens to all overpopulated animals. the famine and disease realated deaths when this comes to a head is going to be horrible. but we will survive i think just not quite so many of us.


                                                    <p align=center><a target=_blank href=http://www.nodiatis....personality.htm><img border=0 src=http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/19.jpg></a></p>

“The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die.”― Eddard Stark, A game of thrones

Spoiler funny quotes

#25 Lucky Wolf

Lucky Wolf

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 696 posts

Posted 21 January 2013 - 12:58 PM

i dont really get why we are complaining about climate change here. it seems to me that the climate change has not really vastly affected human population at large. some people whine about how costal lines are disappearing and weather is changing and saying we are polluting our air too much and that it is causing the problems well my answer is climates have changed for thousands of years and if we can survive an ice age we can survive a little heat. its not like the average temperature in places is 200 degrees. the thing is people dont like seeing other humans die, but that is nature and will happen. but on the other side the global warming issue does bring in many good things like more efficient use of our nonrenewable resources. I think its gonna be funny when they all run out and we start using horses n shiz again. i did like the overpopulation thing. that is a pretty big thing. eventually its gonna bite humanity in the butt, but that is what happens to all overpopulated animals. the famine and disease realated deaths when this comes to a head is going to be horrible. but we will survive i think just not quite so many of us.

we have seen climate change before but not at this rate and when storms like sandy become even bigger then its not something that we can so easily survive.... 



#26 disastrousmaster

disastrousmaster

    Pirate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,624 posts
  • Locationtrying to find where I am

Posted 21 January 2013 - 09:56 PM

we have seen climate change before but not at this rate and when storms like sandy become even bigger then its not something that we can so easily survive.... 

so you are saying that heading towards more global warming may end up making a storm too large for us to encompass as a whole? does that mean you believe we are going to make a storm large enough to encompass our entire globe because if you do i would say that would be nearly impossible. the clouds that make up the size of the storm eventually get too farspread blocking out the sun causing the water underneath it to cool which in turn would cause the storm to break itself apart into several smaller storms. also the death toll from sandy wasnt actually all that high from what i read. less than 200 really. 


                                                    <p align=center><a target=_blank href=http://www.nodiatis....personality.htm><img border=0 src=http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/19.jpg></a></p>

“The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die.”― Eddard Stark, A game of thrones

Spoiler funny quotes

#27 Milareppa

Milareppa

    Live Long and Prosper

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,094 posts

User's Awards

2         

Posted 22 January 2013 - 07:01 PM

so you are saying that heading towards more global warming may end up making a storm too large for us to encompass as a whole? does that mean you believe we are going to make a storm large enough to encompass our entire globe because if you do i would say that would be nearly impossible. the clouds that make up the size of the storm eventually get too farspread blocking out the sun causing the water underneath it to cool which in turn would cause the storm to break itself apart into several smaller storms. also the death toll from sandy wasnt actually all that high from what i read. less than 200 really. 

 

 

Are you trying to talk about global warming or climate change? They're not the same thing.



#28 disastrousmaster

disastrousmaster

    Pirate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,624 posts
  • Locationtrying to find where I am

Posted 22 January 2013 - 08:29 PM


Are you trying to talk about global warming or climate change? They're not the same thing.

please explain what you mean >_> i was replying to the fact that the aforementioned person claimed that global warming was the cause of this storm, and would cause more that were even larger that humanity would have a hard time surviving if you are asking about the post before it please quote that one as well and go a little more into detail : )


                                                    <p align=center><a target=_blank href=http://www.nodiatis....personality.htm><img border=0 src=http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/19.jpg></a></p>

“The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die.”― Eddard Stark, A game of thrones

Spoiler funny quotes

#29 Milareppa

Milareppa

    Live Long and Prosper

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,094 posts

User's Awards

2         

Posted 25 January 2013 - 07:20 AM

please explain what you mean >_> i was replying to the fact that the aforementioned person claimed that global warming was the cause of this storm, and would cause more that were even larger that humanity would have a hard time surviving if you are asking about the post before it please quote that one as well and go a little more into detail : )

Well, you made a post that appeared to be muddying the waters between climate change and global warming. Lucky Wolf responded to that post with a comment on climate change specifically (his belief of it at any rate) and you responded to that as if he was talking about global warming. As a result, I decided to double-check whether you're confusing what climate change and global warming actually are since they're not the same thing. Lucky Wolf didn't say enough for me to determine whether or not he's confused which is why I quoted your post.
Global warming is a sustained increase in global average surface temperature across a defined period of time.

Climate change itself studies a huge variety of changes across a defined period of time (usually decades) across a defined locality (be it a small local area, a much wider geographic area, or a global scale). Changes include humidity, precipiation, sunshine, cloud cover, rainfall, snowfall, temperature levels at a variety of atmospheric heights, extreme weather conditions (floods, hailstorms, droughts, etc.). Global warming is only one aspect of climate change.

Global warming, being one aspect of climate change, may have an impact on climate change but it is not, by itself, climate change, given how broad in scope climate change actually is.

The two concepts seem to be getting muddied on a regular basis in this thread.

#30 disastrousmaster

disastrousmaster

    Pirate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,624 posts
  • Locationtrying to find where I am

Posted 25 January 2013 - 09:23 AM

Well, you made a post that appeared to be muddying the waters between climate change and global warming. Lucky Wolf responded to that post with a comment on climate change specifically (his belief of it at any rate) and you responded to that as if he was talking about global warming. As a result, I decided to double-check whether you're confusing what climate change and global warming actually are since they're not the same thing. Lucky Wolf didn't say enough for me to determine whether or not he's confused which is why I quoted your post.

Global warming, being one aspect of climate change, may have an impact on climate change but it is not, by itself, climate change, given how broad in scope climate change actually is.

The two concepts seem to be getting muddied on a regular basis in this thread.

well does not global warming/cooling have a direct effect on climate change? as the surface temperature of the earth rises the temperature of the water being over 70% of the surface rises as well causing more evaporation as well as melting of the ice on the northern and southern continents. the difference in precipitation would be more advantageous to the lifeforms in that area no? the only people negatively affected would be coastal city dwellers as well as animals that live on the glacial continents really. >_> but i wont get further into this as you seem to believe the two dont seem to have an affect on each other. 


                                                    <p align=center><a target=_blank href=http://www.nodiatis....personality.htm><img border=0 src=http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/19.jpg></a></p>

“The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die.”― Eddard Stark, A game of thrones

Spoiler funny quotes

#31 Lucky Wolf

Lucky Wolf

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 696 posts

Posted 29 January 2013 - 08:34 PM

well does not global warming/cooling have a direct effect on climate change? as the surface temperature of the earth rises the temperature of the water being over 70% of the surface rises as well causing more evaporation as well as melting of the ice on the northern and southern continents. the difference in precipitation would be more advantageous to the lifeforms in that area no? the only people negatively affected would be coastal city dwellers as well as animals that live on the glacial continents really. >_> but i wont get further into this as you seem to believe the two dont seem to have an affect on each other. 

this idea of weather changing means more animals go extinct and it means more severe storms such as Sandy was, since like you said there would be more water in the air. Overall this idea of global warming being good for us has some very negative sides to it. Also it is undeniable that we will run out of fossil fuels, we won't run out of wind and light for 3 billion years and that means we have other problems we will run out of fossil fuels in a couple hundred, this means we need the technology to be ready for all of this when this occurs instead of being against the green party. 



#32 Gazhead

Gazhead

    Samurai

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,483 posts
  • LocationLao G

Posted 30 January 2013 - 05:01 AM

Global warming is the biggest hoax of the 21st century; a delusion created by first world countries and corporate giants to market the concept of sustainable innovation and take lunch money from the third world.  

not true, small island nations are some of the foremost proponents of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. why is this? well its because they have the data to prove that rising sea levels which threaten to send some of these countries under water are in fact the result of highly inflated greenhouse gas emissions melting the polar ice caps and raising sea levels. you are right in sime sense though, developed nations are largely responsible for this problem and it is the developing nations who pay the price. so yes rich people managed to make a problem and twist it and make the poor people pay them for it i.e. carbon emission trade schemes.



#33 Milareppa

Milareppa

    Live Long and Prosper

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,094 posts

User's Awards

2         

Posted 14 February 2013 - 03:30 AM

well does not global warming/cooling have a direct effect on climate change? as the surface temperature of the earth rises the temperature of the water being over 70% of the surface rises as well causing more evaporation as well as melting of the ice on the northern and southern continents. the difference in precipitation would be more advantageous to the lifeforms in that area no? the only people negatively affected would be coastal city dwellers as well as animals that live on the glacial continents really. >_> but i wont get further into this as you seem to believe the two dont seem to have an affect on each other.

 

You appear to have either misread or misunderstood my posts. You certainly seem to misunderstand both climate change and ecology.



#34 disastrousmaster

disastrousmaster

    Pirate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,624 posts
  • Locationtrying to find where I am

Posted 14 February 2013 - 02:24 PM

this idea of weather changing means more animals go extinct and it means more severe storms such as Sandy was, since like you said there would be more water in the air. Overall this idea of global warming being good for us has some very negative sides to it. Also it is undeniable that we will run out of fossil fuels, we won't run out of wind and light for 3 billion years and that means we have other problems we will run out of fossil fuels in a couple hundred, this means we need the technology to be ready for all of this when this occurs instead of being against the green party. 

weather changes all the time in this world, just as animals will go extinct all the time. there are some things in this world that cannot be helped. yes global warming has some negative affects i will not lie, but it will also have positive ones as well. it all depends on where you happen to be living. the earth will eventually balance itself back out. and all you are speaking about us loosing is mearly technology for the mainstream populace when we lose fossil fuels. with how quickly we got to the point we are with fossil fuels i am sure we will be just fine with a few hundred years to capture the true nature of how to use sunlight to our advantage in a cost-effective way. the way people think that the end will come with the end of electronics is simply hilarious to me(dont know if your one of those people but i doubt it). if you think on it we wont be able to do too much more to our enviornment with that which we have regarding fossil fuels. We may just have a few decades of extreme weather but hey humanity was able to survive an ice age it should be able to survive some hectic weather for a while.

 

You appear to have either misread or misunderstood my posts. You certainly seem to misunderstand both climate change and ecology.

climate change is most certainly primarily affected by the temperatures that surround it so no i dont believe i do misunderstand myself. what i am saying is that as the temperature changes over that period of time it can change the overall enviornment due to survival of the fittest and whatnot. plants will evolve to suit the changes to the climate, animals too. (if i am wrong please do correct me on how you can keep an enviornment completely the same with changes in temperature.)


                                                    <p align=center><a target=_blank href=http://www.nodiatis....personality.htm><img border=0 src=http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/19.jpg></a></p>

“The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die.”― Eddard Stark, A game of thrones

Spoiler funny quotes

#35 Milareppa

Milareppa

    Live Long and Prosper

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,094 posts

User's Awards

2         

Posted 19 February 2013 - 01:02 PM

climate change is most certainly primarily affected by the temperatures that surround it so no i dont believe i do misunderstand myself. what i am saying is that as the temperature changes over that period of time it can change the overall enviornment due to survival of the fittest and whatnot. plants will evolve to suit the changes to the climate, animals too. (if i am wrong please do correct me on how you can keep an enviornment completely the same with changes in temperature.)

 

I know what you're saying. What I'm trying to convey to you is that global warming and climate change have specific definitions (reread my previous posts for them) and that global warming is only one single aspect of climate change. This is because climate change is a massive field of study due to there being so many important factors involved in what contributes to what the experts define as 'climate change'.

You also seem to be missing what the research into climate change is actually covering. Equating climate change to temperature change, or even claiming it's primarily about temperature change is, to put it as simply as I can, inaccurate. On the other hand, global warming is primarily about temperature change - but only in terms of global average surface temperature. That excludes temperature changes at different atmospheric heights (for example) because global warming deals only with surface temperatures. Further more, climate change is the study of both natural and man-made climate change. As I've said in my previous posts, this might come as a surprise to some, but the experts in the field are well aware of the fact that climate change predates the evolution of modern humans and that, even with modern humans living on the planet, natural climate change continues to happen.



#36 disastrousmaster

disastrousmaster

    Pirate

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,624 posts
  • Locationtrying to find where I am

Posted 19 February 2013 - 02:07 PM

I know what you're saying. What I'm trying to convey to you is that global warming and climate change have specific definitions (reread my previous posts for them) and that global warming is only one single aspect of climate change. This is because climate change is a massive field of study due to there being so many important factors involved in what contributes to what the experts define as 'climate change'.

You also seem to be missing what the research into climate change is actually covering. Equating climate change to temperature change, or even claiming it's primarily about temperature change is, to put it as simply as I can, inaccurate. On the other hand, global warming is primarily about temperature change - but only in terms of global average surface temperature. That excludes temperature changes at different atmospheric heights (for example) because global warming deals only with surface temperatures. Further more, climate change is the study of both natural and man-made climate change. As I've said in my previous posts, this might come as a surprise to some, but the experts in the field are well aware of the fact that climate change predates the evolution of modern humans and that, even with modern humans living on the planet, natural climate change continues to happen.

climate change is spoken over the scale of a certain area no? while global warming affects the entire planet. while i am aware that climate change/global temperature changes have happened for pretty much the entire life of this planet(i dont get what your trying to say with that...did you think i didnt know that the earth can have changes?) but what i am saying that you clearly arent getting is that temperature changes can cause changes within the environment that lead to climate changes as the temperature rises in a given area it changes the way things will have to adapt to survive what with less harsh winters and more brutal summers and all that whatnot. it takes quite a while for the temperature changes to affect the climate but it does happen indeed.(i honestly dont get where we are going with this as we each keep repeating ourselves..and we seem to support each others arguments is it the fact that im speaking on global scale and your speaking on certain areas?)


                                                    <p align=center><a target=_blank href=http://www.nodiatis....personality.htm><img border=0 src=http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/19.jpg></a></p>

“The man who passes the sentence should swing the sword. If you would take a man's life, you owe it to him to look into his eyes and hear his final words. And if you cannot bear to do that, then perhaps the man does not deserve to die.”― Eddard Stark, A game of thrones

Spoiler funny quotes

#37 Milareppa

Milareppa

    Live Long and Prosper

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,094 posts

User's Awards

2         

Posted 01 March 2013 - 05:06 PM

climate change is spoken over the scale of a certain area no? while global warming affects the entire planet. while i am aware that climate change/global temperature changes have happened for pretty much the entire life of this planet(i dont get what your trying to say with that...did you think i didnt know that the earth can have changes?) but what i am saying that you clearly arent getting is that temperature changes can cause changes within the environment that lead to climate changes as the temperature rises in a given area it changes the way things will have to adapt to survive what with less harsh winters and more brutal summers and all that whatnot. it takes quite a while for the temperature changes to affect the climate but it does happen indeed.(i honestly dont get where we are going with this as we each keep repeating ourselves..and we seem to support each others arguments is it the fact that im speaking on global scale and your speaking on certain areas?)

 

Climate change is measured across a designed area. That can be a very local region or it can be the entire planet, but the study concerned will explain in the research paper what the scope of the study will be. Global warming is the average surface temperature across the entire planet.

 

I did not think you didn't know the earth can have changes. I said your posts (and others in this thread) have sometimes sounded as though you don't realise the experts themselves know this.

 

Referring specifically to part of your post:

 

"...but what i am saying that you clearly arent getting is that temperature changes can cause changes within the environment that lead to climate changes..."

 

What you don't appear to be understanding is the significance you're applying to 'cause'. Causality is very important in science, especially in the sense of how badly it's abused outside science (when discussing scientific subjects). Loose wording can cause problems (I know this because I'm a master at loose wording).

 

Temperature changes do not 'cause' climate change, although under certain conditions, certain temperature measurements can be a driving factor. A cause and a driving factor are not the same thing, and driving factors can change depending on the conditions of study. Temperature changes are part of a wide variety of factors that contribute to climate change. You don't seem to appreciate just how complex climatology really is. That, or your wording is so loose it's obscuring what you know. The idea that temperature change causes climate change excludes any other possible factor as being equally (or even, depending on what is being studied, more) important. It can be extremely difficult to pull out one single cause for climate change. Even when one factor becomes a driver at a certain point in time or under certain conditions, that doesn't make it a cause, it makes it a driver - for the specific conditions being discussed or studied.

 

Further more, the idea of 'temperature changes' obscures the different kinds of temperature considerations that exist for climatology in general and climate change specifically. For example, global warming only measures surface temperature. There are a wide range of different temperature considerations across a range of different atmospheric heights. Global warming only uses a single type of temperature measurement (surface temperature, even more specifically, global average surface temperature). Climate change encompasses more temperature measurements than just that.


Edited by Milareppa, 01 March 2013 - 05:10 PM.


#38 Lotus-Eater

Lotus-Eater

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 35 posts

Posted 08 March 2013 - 05:34 PM

weather changes all the time in this world, just as animals will go extinct all the time. there are some things in this world that cannot be helped. 

 

We may just have a few decades of extreme weather but hey humanity was able to survive an ice age it should be able to survive some hectic weather for a while.

 

what i am saying is that as the temperature changes over that period of time it can change the overall enviornment due to survival of the fittest and whatnot. plants will evolve to suit the changes to the climate, animals too.

Why do you bother having a roof over your head? Putting food in your mouth? Your going to be dead in about 90 years. There's just some things you cant help, just lie down, give up and die.
Sometimes I wonder why I cant just eat my finger food after going to the bathroom without washing my hands, it just turns into poop anyway :D amiright?

I survived getting hit in the balls before, sure I can do it couple more times :D

I for one am looking forward to a future where instead of lots of other animals and plants to eat, there will be fewer. Lets do nothing to stop that from happening. It'll be like setting a game to the hardest difficulty for fun :3


Edited by Lotus-Eater, 08 March 2013 - 05:48 PM.

  • waleuska and NGEFan like this

#39 Graeystone

Graeystone

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 926 posts

Posted 18 March 2013 - 05:20 AM

Why is a little bit of warming a bad thing especially in normally cold regions? Crops don't exactly thrive in Winter tempratures. One of the things that irks me about the global warming/climate change/whatever crowd is that they expect the planet to be 'static' in terms of tempreture and seaons. . .it doesn't work that way, the planet doesn't work that way, the UNIVERSE doesn't work that way. These apparent 'extreme' warm/cold patterns the planet experiences every few decades/centuries. . .well, 'this to shall pass.'


  • disastrousmaster likes this

Posted Image


#40 Milareppa

Milareppa

    Live Long and Prosper

  • Blessed by Uglypuff
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,094 posts

User's Awards

2         

Posted 18 March 2013 - 01:48 PM

One of the things that irks me about the global warming/climate change/whatever crowd is that they expect the planet to be 'static' in terms of tempreture and seaons

 

 

Climatologists and global warming experts are well aware of what climate change is and are far better informed than most that the planet is not 'static'. They are not interested in a 'static' planet, nor do they think the planet should be 'static'. Separating out for a moment those that study climate change simply because they're interested in understanding climatology from those that study climate change from an applied or environmental sciences perspective, the latter tend to be mostly interested in environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability has nothing to do with a 'static' planet.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users