Global Warming aka AGW, aka Climate Change, is bullshit.

[Nightstalker]

Well, after some perusing and debating the issue at length in other forums, i've come to satisfactory conclusion that it is indeed bullshit.

I just want to let you know that now in case any of you are contemplating a serious move on account of ecological justice

Some time in the future I will present a literary package worth your peepers.

[ZONK]

Yes it is hard to believe a species that as taken as much space as we have, has used and exploded as many chemical reactions as we have, could not possibly effect the earth.

Not saying global warming is fact, just saying there really is no harm in trying to limit our effects. Earth isn't magically evolving with our technology.

[Nightstalker]

actually it turns out there is harm in limiting "our" efforts.

or specifically Africa, and other developing countries which are told by inter-govemental crooks that they cannot develope...

1:15:00 here of the other perspective of AGW.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5576670191369613647&ei=_wGCS5aKG4TWqgK2ubnGCA&q=the+great+global+warming+swindle&hl=en&view=3&dur=3#
its a summary of some points I will present in detail later, though an informative look.

 

[Stugots]

I take the Top Gear attitude toward global warming.

[BCBrent]

Yup, agreed.  Global Warming is bullshit.

However, this whole climate change thing sounds like serious business.

[Unnormal]

“You’d be an idiot not to notice the temperature change,” "there’s a legit case that global warming has, at least in part, been caused by mankind". - Glenn Beck

[Nightstalker]

However, this whole climate change thing sounds like serious business

I love when people feature this as disassociated with Anthropodic Global Warming

Climate Change has been previously used to describe natural phoenomina or trends throughout history in a change of climate - weather etc. via major warming/cooling events such as the LIA, MWP, or Holocene etc..

Or by today's alleged standard, AGW. The warming of the planet via man made co2 emissions.

"In recent usage, especially in the context of environmental policy, climate change usually refers to changes in modern climate. It may be qualified as anthropogenic climate change, more generally known as "global warming" or "anthropogenic global warming" (AGW)."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change

http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_701705058/climate_change.html

If you are fortunate enough, you can find sites with the definition excluding the unproven science of climate change via anthropodic effects.

I'll update the title for anyone else that might make that mistake of trying to disassociate

Now that the "serious business" has been cleared up, the global temperature has been in a slight cooling trend for 8 year now.

More later..

Also hi Unno.

[Jim Tressel]

"I will present a literary package worth your peepers"

Doubt it.

[thrun]

I probably wouldn't present a documentary in which a couple of the interviewees filed formal complaints (and won) for being mislead and misrepresented with a British regulatory body.  I'd be interested to see if that link you posted was the original version or the one they had to re edit before it could be released on DVD.

I am not going to argue about climate/global warming since I don't know anything about it.  But I figure if you are going to educate us and what not you should put some due diligence in to it.

[BCBrent]

Heh, the main reason it is important to call it climate change is I am tired of hearing idiots spouting "Holy shit, it is the middle of winter and freezing cold!  I guess there's no such thing as global warming after all!"  Weather != climate.

That being said, whether or not the whole climate change debacle was indeed caused by our SUV's and spraying aersol cans into the sky, I have no earthly idea.  My theory is this: it sure as shit probably isn't helping anything.  Just sayin'

[Nightstalker]

That being said, whether or not the whole climate change debacle was indeed caused by our SUV's and spraying aersol cans into the sky, I have no earthly idea.  

Aerosols are CFC, and thats for the Ozone debate, not for AGW.

My theory is this: it sure as shit probably isn't helping anything.  Just sayin'

Certainly air polution at the very least.

Regarding the co2 emissions, living plants thrive on them and are absorbed in this manner, as well is co2 absorbed by the oceans. In addition, the machinations of anthropods are not the only emitters of co2. Dead plants and trees put out co2 as does other natural sources, but you don't see intergovermental panels trying to ban dead plants, or propose stopping volcanoes, which single volcanoes can put out more co2 than all of mankind for a whole year.

But I figure if you are going to educate us and what not you should put some due diligence in to it.

As I said thats forthcoming. It will take some hours to put together when I get a chance.

Doubt it.

Or should I have said literary package worth faxing?  

[Redbear8]

That being said, whether or not the whole climate change debacle was indeed caused by our SUV's and spraying aersol cans into the sky, I have no earthly idea.  

Aerosols are CFC, and thats for the Ozone debate, not for AGW.

Are you saying that the Ozone or it's depletion doesn't factor in Climate change?

My theory is this: it sure as shit probably isn't helping anything.  Just sayin'

Certainly air polution at the very least.

Regarding the co2 emissions, living plants thrive on them and are absorbed in this manner, as well is co2 absorbed by the oceans. In addition, the machinations of anthropods are not the only emitters of co2. Dead plants and trees put out co2 as does other natural sources, but you don't see intergovermental panels trying to ban dead plants, or propose stopping volcanoes, which single volcanoes can put out more co2 than all of mankind for a whole year.

The earth as evolved over a long period of time to handle co2 emissions from natural occurances. It has not been given the evolutionary time to deal with the giant influx of co2 man has pumped into the atmosphere. It has been able to absorb it somewhat up to this point, but a time will come when it can't any longer.

I'm not arguing one way or the other, but to say that man doesn't negatively impact the environment is just silly. It may not be as extreme as some may lead you to believe, but that doesn't mean it's doesn't exist. Too many people think things are either black or white. Almost always you will find a grey area and that's where the most reasonable of us reside.

[Nightstalker]

Are you saying that the Ozone or it's depletion doesn't factor in Climate change?

I haven't come across any data, or anyone trying to argue the point that it does. Are you saying that it does?

I'm not arguing one way or the other, but to say that man doesn't negatively impact the environment is just silly. It may not be as extreme as some may lead you to believe, but that doesn't mean it's doesn't exist. Too many people think things are either black or white. Almost always you will find a grey area and that's where the most reasonable of us reside

There isn't a gray area for AGW. Either we are contributing to the warming of the planet, or we are not. Lifestyles and the capacity of the 3rd world to develope are dependent on this, as is determined by an intergovernmental panel.

The earth as evolved over a long period of time to handle co2 emissions from natural occurances. It has not been given the evolutionary time to deal with the giant influx of co2 man has pumped into the atmosphere. It has been able to absorb it somewhat up to this point, but a time will come when it can't any longer.

if by giant influx you mean 0.001 of the atmosphere is manmade co2 then yes.

"Carbon dioxide is 0.000383 of our atmosphere by volume (0.038 percent)"

"Only 2.75 percent of atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic in origin. "

"We are responsible for just 0.001 percent of this atmosphere. If the atmosphere was a 100-story building, our anthropogenic CO2 contribution today would be equivalent to the linoleum on the first floor."

                               - Joseph D'Alea, the first director of meteorology at The Weather Channel and former chief of the American Meteorological Society's Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecast.

[Redbear8]

I agree with you completely. For instance I think Katrina had nothing to do with Climate change. It was just a case where God smote black people for being lazy. He also took care of the white folk stupid enough to live with them.

[thrun]

See that's funny because he is making fun of people that are a different color and the race traitors that associate with them.