Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Floppin

Man made global warming DEBUNKED by CERN.

58 posts in this topic

Stop the presses...I think Venom just posted something not too goofy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lord knows, Al Gore isn't making a dime off of any of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can set each end of a rope afire with a blowtorch and then light the middle with a match... Ultimately, the flame consumes the rope completely... It doesn't really matter the contributing factors when all you have are ashes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont get why its so hard to fathom that pollutants and greenhouse gases could possibly alter the quality of air and a hole in the atmosphere. I guess everything I learned from 2nd grade thru high school and into college is just a huge conspiracy theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont get why its so hard to fathom that pollutants and greenhouse gases could possibly alter the quality of air and a hole in the atmosphere.

Can people affect the environment negatively? Sure. Go Google "Cuyahoga River". Google "EPA Superfund". Hell, just Google "Deepwater Horizon". People can be destructive.

But the question, is; Can people affect the Global environment?

This is really, really hard to answer, because we don't know exactly what level of pollution is us, or nature.

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/hazards/gas/index.php

Volcanoes release more than 130 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year

Think about the trillions of tonnes of CO2 gas released in just the past 15,000 years. And actually, the farther back you go into the past, the more geologically active the Earth was. So this number is probably lowering.

And yet, there have been ice ages, even in the past 100,000 years.

I guess everything I learned from 2nd grade thru high school and into college is just a huge conspiracy theory.

Is it so hard to believe? Schools once taught that the world was flat. Just because a teacher, or a group of people promotes a particular scientific aspect as true, doesn't take away from the fact until conclusively proven, it is just theory.

This is the problem with our current academic attitudes. Concepts are taught as fact. Facts are ignored if it doesn't "Fit" with the concensus view. And the average person is left in the dark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would assume by now that everyone's come to the realization that global warming due to man-made co2 is a fabricated scheme designed to generate profits and bring about control. It is a farce, it is a lie. Period. Now don't get me wrong, taking care of the planet is essential, however this planet is slowly turning into a wasteland by many corporations and industries. The establishment motto is "do as i say, not as i do."

Your theory breaks down when you consider that usually it's governments trying to force scientists to deny global warming, and pulling their funding when they don't. Governments have a way bigger stake in oil than they do in 'green' whatever.

You insist that 'everyone' realizes it's fabricated, meanwhile within a few percentage points of 100% of scientists support the model. Call me crazy, but I believe an absolute majority of scientists over the Rick Perrys of the world. Politicians lie to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it so hard to believe? Schools once taught that the world was flat. Just because a teacher, or a group of people promotes a particular scientific aspect as true, doesn't take away from the fact until conclusively proven, it is just theory.

In science, something has to be tested and proven to be considered a theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Environmentalism can be taken to the extreme point where preventing/limiting advancement of civilization can occur.

See Malaria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In science, something has to be tested and proven to be considered a theory.

:lol:

No it doesn't.

Example: String Theory. Completely unprovable. The math doesn't even conclusively support it. There is no observable data to support it.

Yet, it's passed by some astrophysicists as fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

No it doesn't.

Example: String Theory. Completely unprovable. The math doesn't even conclusively support it. There is no observable data to support it.

Yet, it's passed by some astrophysicists as fact.

The point is that you used the generic sense of the word instead of the correct one. "That's why it's just a theory" is a weak argument if taken at face value, which is what I did. I didn't even contest anything you said outside of that sentence.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your theory breaks down when you consider that usually it's governments trying to force scientists to deny global warming, and pulling their funding when they don't. Governments have a way bigger stake in oil than they do in 'green' whatever.

You insist that 'everyone' realizes it's fabricated, meanwhile within a few percentage points of 100% of scientists support the model. Call me crazy, but I believe an absolute majority of scientists over the Rick Perrys of the world. Politicians lie to you.

Im curious as to what Rick Perry has to do with anything? And since when has the establishment denied the theory of man-made global warming? They are the biggest enablers of this concept of all. Big Oil are some of the biggest pushers of going "green" with various advertisement campaigns more than suggesting this, which we all know is total hypocricy. BP is a perfect example.

Fact of the matter is big oil and the gov't are in bed with eachother, thus all the theatre and propaganda we see regarding this hypocritical arena. Scientists support this fabricated idea because they are all bought and paid for establishment shills.

CO2 has absolutely nothing to do with global warming, especially when you take into account the point BCG made about volcanos. The obvious answer for the climate change on our planet, as well as the other planets in our solar system, is because of the Sun. But of course NASA and the so-called scientific community are keeping this information from us so that they can continue this revenue generating scheme, which in effect would do nothing to help the cause even if man-made global warming was a fact. Its all about money and power. We should know this by now Rodeo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is that you used the generic sense of the word vs. the correct one.

A "generic sense of the word"? :rofl:

Actually, you've touched on something.

I used a literal definition of the word, which is probably how the scientific community is allowed to make unprovable claims. Your definition is literally correct, but the community is juxtaposing the application of the word in the two defintions and misusing it.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theory

1. a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. Synonyms: principle, law, doctrine.

2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Synonyms: idea, notion hypothesis, postulate. Antonyms: practice, verification, corroboration, substantiation.

In fact, if you look at the two definitions of the same word... they actually form an oxymoron. Two almost completely different ideas represented by the same word.

Anyhow... we're arguing semantics. The fact remains, Man-Made Global Warming falls into the #2 definition of the word "Theory".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites