Archived

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

Panthers_Lover

Global warming out of this world?

108 posts in this topic

Eugenicists, phrenologists, and Freudian psychologists were scientists too

So what part of the science are you disputing? Do you think CO2 levels are not actually rising/ have nothing to do with human activity? Do you not believe atmospheric CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas in the atmosphere?

There have been plenty of flawed scientific theories throughout history which have been proven wrong, but they weren't proved wrong by somebody saying, "well I dont care what evidence you have, other scientists were wrong before you so I dont believe anything you have to say"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CO2 being a greenhouse gas is no more in dispute than CFCs cause a breakdown of O3.

The catch for the latter is justifying how a heavier-than-air molecule gets miles above the surface to perform this breakdown. Yet is was accepted as a slam dunk for anyone in the know about science just two decades ago.

Now the crux of arguments that have yet to be made is just how significant is anthropomorphic contributions to global temperature with respect to all other variance that we know of. If what scientific inquiry has found is true, then the earth has gone through several cycles of warming and cooling LONG before people inhabited it. There are DEMONSTRATED accounts of variance of solar activity, volcanic activity, and oceanic activity that FAR OUTWEIGH anthropomorphic CO2 emissions.

Any climatologist that claims otherwise is a fraud. Hell, the trajectories that were projected just a decade ago are NOTHING CLOSE to what they claimed. Tom Brokaw ran with that widely accepted view and proclaimed that NYC would be underwater by this time due to rising sea levels due to global warming.

I would suggest reading State of Fear by Michael Creighton. His 20 page bibliography from a decade ago does FAR MORE actual research than that picture book by Al Gore that is still touted as indisputable science.

So the question remains, with everything that we were SO SURE about in the past and turned out to be SO WRONG about, are we certain that we should support policies that clearly have ulterior motives that have nothing to do with environmental concerns? Europe has already seen hundreds of billions of dollars exchange hands due to the carbon credit scam. Who made out the best? Surprise! Politicians!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom Brokaw? Michael Creighton? Al Gore? Now we're talking about SCIENCE!

I just called up my climatologist buddy and told him about those cycles of heating and cooling the earth went through in the past. He had never thought of that either. What an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom Brokaw? Michael Creighton? Al Gore? Now we're talking about SCIENCE!

I just called up my climatologist buddy and told him about those cycles of heating and cooling the earth went through in the past. He had never thought of that either. What an idiot.

Take a quick gander at the bibliography and references cited for State of Fear and then get back to me on that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take a quick gander at the bibliography and references cited for State of Fear and then get back to me on that

Have you read said sources? Not the bibliography, but the actual sources?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you read said sources? Not the bibliography, but the actual sources?

A couple, yes. And I bet that's two more than you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple, yes. And I bet that's two more than you

Hah, you would be surprised. Good job being defensive for no reason though, jerk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hah, you would be surprised. Good job being defensive for no reason though, jerk.

I would be surprised given the utter lack of any effort for anyone to approach the substance of what I've put forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be surprised given the utter lack of any effort for anyone to approach the substance of what I've put forth.

I haven't been a part of this discussion before now - in this thread anyhow. Regardless, I'll leave you to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eugenicists, phrenologists, and Freudian psychologists were scientists too

elucidate

elucidate

elucidate

elucidate

elucidate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites