posted
Since you lefties have all the answers on the climate, I have a question? Exactly what temperature is the world supposed to be? If (and that's a BIG if), the global temperature has increased .6 degrees in the past 100 years, does that mean that the earth's temperature is .6 degrees lower? How do we know that the "proper" earth temperature isn't 1.2 degrees higher? Or 1.8 degrees higher?
IP: Logged |
posted
Your ability with arithematic is apparantly faulty.
"global temperature has increased .6 degrees"
and
"the earth's temperature is .6 degrees lower?"
are contradictory.
It isn't "a BIG if" that the world's temperature has increased over the last century, it is fact.
I won't suggest you think, because you'd just go to some site that exist for the sole purpose of feeding you far right-winger's idiocies that you want to faithfully believe for the simple reason that it is for and from republicans, where you scarf up some more dimwitted crap and bring it here as if it were chocolate candy you were passing around.
The facts are that if we don't find ways to halt this movement, this world will soon become unfit and unfittable for human existence.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Propertymanager: Since you lefties have all the answers on the climate, I have a question? Exactly what temperature is the world supposed to be? If (and that's a BIG if), the global temperature has increased .6 degrees in the past 100 years, does that mean that the earth's temperature is .6 degrees lower? How do we know that the "proper" earth temperature isn't 1.2 degrees higher? Or 1.8 degrees higher?
i've explained this issue to you before, but apparently it didn't get caught in yer glue trap.
we can verify the problem scientifically by looking at the various levels of the atmosphere, like the troposphere and th stratosphere. When more energy is trapped by greenhouse gases? the stratosphere cools and the troposphere (lower) warms.
nobody anywhere argues whether CO2 is a greenhouse gas or not, nobody argues that we are producing more then ever.
futhermore? most religious organizations have come to recognise that God expect us to clean up our room.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, I left out a couple of words. Here's what I was trying to ask: If (and that's a BIG if), the global temperature has increased .6 degrees in the past 100 years, does that mean that the earth's temperature is supposed to be .6 degrees lower?
Which one of you lefties knows what the global temperature is supposed to be? Is that you bdgee? Why do you lefties assume that the temperature 100 years ago is the correct temperature and that any increase is abnormal? We know that the world's temperature has changed dramatically in the past, all without human intervention, but now suddenly you lefties assume that any change is caused by humans and that you lefties know the "correct" temperature. RIDICULOUS!
IP: Logged |
i blow glass. i am, in technical terms, a thermodynamic engineer. there is no "right" temperature for working the glass, and there is no right temperature for the earth.
the fact is? we are absorbing more solar radiation than we are releasing. once you accept that FACT? then you can begin (only begin) to work on the outcomes. accept the fact, the rest is just quibbling.
change is the only constant in the universe,
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
"Which one of you lefties knows what the global temperature is supposed to be?"
Your super viscous brain is still too cold to flow.
Asking that is about as adroit as asking,
Which one of you lefties knows what the weight of a man is supposed to be?
It is a nonsensical blather, not a responsible request for information.
Let's look at some more of that genre:
How black is night?
How high is a mountain?
How loud must it be to be noise?
How tall must a girl be to be a sexy movie star?
How slow is a dimwit?
Get the idea"
In order to make sense, you need to ask sensible responsible questions and if you refuse to ask responsible questions, you are just a waste everyone's time.
IP: Logged |
quote:"Which one of you lefties knows what the global temperature is supposed to be?"
Your super viscous brain is still too cold to flow.
Asking that is about as adroit as asking,
Which one of you lefties knows what the weight of a man is supposed to be?
You're getting closer bdgee. However, you came to the wrong conclusion. The real point is that you lefties don't claim to know what the weight of a man is supposed to be, but you do claim to know what the temperature of the earth is supposed to be. THAT'S RIDICULOUS!
IP: Logged |
posted
No, PM, no one with any responsibility ever suggested there is OR ISN'T a temperature the Earth is supposed to be and it take a fool or a liar to misconstrue the reality to make the childish accusation that anyone ever did.
IP: Logged |
It looks like the general reason for this report is to warn us that the earth is going to tip on it's axis and the oceans are going to change position. Is that what I'm reading?
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!!
IP: Logged |
quote:No, PM, no one with any responsibility ever suggested there is OR ISN'T a temperature the Earth is supposed to be and it take a fool or a liar to misconstrue the reality to make the childish accusation that anyone ever did.
Well, bdgee, if you don't know what the earth's temperature is supposed to be, could you please point me to the wacko environmentalist that does? Is that Al (I invented the internet) Gore? What if the correct temperature is 3 degrees higher than the present temperature? It might take hundreds of years to get to that point! Or, we may be in the next ice age before that!
At any rate, since you lefties are worried about Global Warming (or is it climate change), I'd like to know what temperature you're shooting for?
IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for chiming in Jordan! Do you have the temperature that you lefties are shooting for? Was it .6 degrees ago and if so, why? How was that temperature decided. Did a bunch of lefto scientists get together and vote?
IP: Logged |
posted
ok..do I have to do this for you?,,,I think a quick search would provide you with an answer for human existence...but for me, an ideal temp would be between 70 and 85 degrees with low humidity.. lol... now..the earth will survive with or without us,,and, again, if you really want to know these facts, why not spend your time looking for precise answers thru a search on this internet thingy. Dont waste your time here with us lefties...you dont want our answers anyway..
posted
That's a loaded question Props. I got one too, what is the current co2 level supposed to be? Since you and Rush know everything there is to know, that one should be an easy one for you. Here's a easy one... Are the co2 levels increasing?
I'll make it real easy for you, open book test... "Carbon dioxide levels are now 27 percent higher than at any point in the last 650,000 years, according to research into Antarctic ice cores published on Thursday in Science." And that was from 2005.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Highwaychild: That's a loaded question Props. I got one too, what is the current co2 level supposed to be? Since you and Rush know everything there is to know, that one should be an easy one for you. Here's a easy one... Are the co2 levels increasing?
I'll make it real easy for you, open book test... "Carbon dioxide levels are now 27 percent higher than at any point in the last 650,000 years, according to research into Antarctic ice cores published on Thursday in Science." And that was from 2005.
Is it a proven fact that carbon dioxide is the main reason for climate change? Is it a proven fact that human activity is the cause for this increase in carbon dioxide?
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!!
IP: Logged |
posted
Oh no, Lock... Carbon dioxide levels now 27 percent higher than at any point in the last 650,000 years must be just great for this big 'ol world... has to be the best thing that could have ever happened to us.
IP: Logged |
quote:No, PM, no one with any responsibility ever suggested there is OR ISN'T a temperature the Earth is supposed to be and it take a fool or a liar to misconstrue the reality to make the childish accusation that anyone ever did.
Well, bdgee, if you don't know what the earth's temperature is supposed to be, could you please point me to the wacko environmentalist that does? Is that Al (I invented the internet) Gore? What if the correct temperature is 3 degrees higher than the present temperature? It might take hundreds of years to get to that point! Or, we may be in the next ice age before that!
At any rate, since you lefties are worried about Global Warming (or is it climate change), I'd like to know what temperature you're shooting for?
OK, ignorant by choice Sir, first of all, Gore DID NOT say he invented the internet, but responded when "the information super highway" was the question that he had helped invent that term. You dishonest and ignorant republicans misquoted him intentionally as a part of your incessant hate campaign.
There is no "temperature that anyone is shooting for, Oh Ignorant ONE, (which you have to be to keep asking such ignorant uninformed questions that have no basis in anything but pleasing Fat Rush the Doper), simply a target of stopping human production of pollution that fuels the increase.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Highwaychild: I do, How about lower than 27 percent higher than at any point in the last 650,000 years.
But I asked you first...
I don't know what effect carbon dioxide has on the earth. Seems most experts usually use "could", "may have" "a possiblity" in their fact finding. It's usually facts based upon a computer model of future events.
Are you saying you know for a fact that a 27% increase in carbon dioxide over the last 650,000 years is caused by human activities? Could this just be a natural accurance in the cycle of the earth?
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!!
IP: Logged |
posted
"I don't know what effect carbon dioxide has on the earth."
Since you admit you don't know, why don't you stop claiming it has none?
"Seems most experts usually use "could", "may have" "a possiblity" in their fact finding."
Customarily, such phraseology is used to provide courtesy and respect in technical talk. It does no imply either inaccuracy or lack of certainty.
Grow up and get over abusing terminology that you are unfamiliar with to claim your admitted ignorance is paralleled by authorities.
Computer models are far far more accurate than anything predicted by political design. And, they usually are, when based on reliable data and prepared by qualified persons, far more accurate than any other method, certainly more accurate than anything the right-wing internet ****s you rely on are.
"Could this just be a natural accurance in the cycle of the earth?"
Absolutely not! To claim otherwise is for fools. liars, and those that are hopelessly ignorant.
Grow up and get over abusing terminology that you are unfamiliar with to claim your admitted ignorance is paralleled by scholars and experts.
IP: Logged |
posted
Seems most experts usually use "could", "may have" "a possiblity" in their fact finding. It's usually facts based upon a computer model of future events.
Are you saying you know for a fact that a 27% increase in carbon dioxide over the last 650,000 years is caused by human activities? Could this just be a natural accurance in the cycle of the earth?
we burn 80 million barrels of oil (alone) per day...
we KNOW that the increase is caused by us...
as to your question about the tilting axis? there is evidence that has happened before too..
it would be "interesting" to see....
there are also periodic reversals of the magnetic poles too...
the magnetic pole is not aligned to the true north pole and us "old timey" sailors had to cacklack the difference when we had Loranz or less...
it is theorised that as the magnetic poles get further and further away from the "true" poles, it becomes more and more likely that an axis flip will take place...
February 15, 2001 -- You can't tell by looking, but scientists say the Sun has just undergone an important change. Our star's magnetic field has flipped.
The Sun's magnetic north pole, which was in the northern hemisphere just a few months ago, now points south. It's a topsy-turvy situation, but not an unexpected one.
"This always happens around the time of solar maximum," says David Hathaway, a solar physicist at the Marshall Space Flight Center. "The magnetic poles exchange places at the peak of the sunspot cycle. In fact, it's a good indication that Solar Max is really here."
The Sun's magnetic poles will remain as they are now, with the north magnetic pole pointing through the Sun's southern hemisphere, until the year 2012 when they will reverse again. This transition happens, as far as we know, at the peak of every 11-year sunspot cycle -- like clockwork.
there's aloto' stuff going on out there, just because some individual person who happens to be a jerk points out an inconvenient fact doesn't make it non-factual.
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: "I don't know what effect carbon dioxide has on the earth."
Since you admit you don't know, why don't you stop claiming it has none?
"Seems most experts usually use "could", "may have" "a possiblity" in their fact finding."
Customarily, such phraseology is used to provide courtesy and respect in technical talk. It does no imply either inaccuracy or lack of certainty.
Grow up and get over abusing terminology that you are unfamiliar with to claim your admitted ignorance is paralleled by authorities.
Computer models are far far more accurate than anything predicted by political design. And, they usually are, when based on reliable data and prepared by qualified persons, far more accurate than any other method, certainly more accurate than anything the right-wing internet ****s you rely on are.
"Could this just be a natural accurance in the cycle of the earth?"
Absolutely not! To claim otherwise is for fools. liars, and those that are hopelessly ignorant.
Grow up and get over abusing terminology that you are unfamiliar with to claim your admitted ignorance is paralleled by scholars and experts.
I've never claimed anything about carbon dioxide one way or the other.
However I don't think scientist have proved that human activity is the main reason for it's rise. I'm allowed an opionion aren't I?
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!!
IP: Logged |
posted
"I've never claimed anything about carbon dioxide one way or the other."
Oh, yes you have!
"I'm allowed an opionion aren't I?"
Why should anyone that has an expressed intention of preventing and shaming others who don't agree with his opinion (that is only an opinion, not the result of careful and appropriate study)have any right to one?
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lockman: Are you saying you know for a fact that a 27% increase in carbon dioxide over the last 650,000 years is caused by human activities? Could this just be a natural accurance in the cycle of the earth?
Loc, I'm not Wikipedia... look it up for yourself. I will tell ya co2 is a greenhouse gas though. Also, as far as I know Yellowstone hasn't erupted 27% of it's top. But the worlds population has increased about 25% in the last 80 years. So I'll bet you, The rate of burning coal, well, burning everything has went up by at least that much. But again, I'm not Wikipedia.lol
IP: Logged |
quote:burning forests and burning oil and coal have most definitley increased CO2 levels. there is no doubt even amongst the educated naysayers.
I thought the United Nations said that cow farts were the main cause!!!
quote:Why should anyone that has an expressed intention of preventing and shaming others who don't agree with his opinion (that is only an opinion, not the result of careful and appropriate study)have any right to one?
There's your answer Lock. NO! You don't get an opinion. Only people who agree 100% with the wacko environmentalists are entitled to an opinion (even though their opinion is WRONG)! LOL!
IP: Logged |
quote:burning forests and burning oil and coal have most definitley increased CO2 levels. there is no doubt even amongst the educated naysayers.
I thought the United Nations said that cow farts were the main cause!!!
quote:Why should anyone that has an expressed intention of preventing and shaming others who don't agree with his opinion (that is only an opinion, not the result of careful and appropriate study)have any right to one?
There's your answer Lock. NO! You don't get an opinion. Only people who agree 100% with the wacko environmentalists are entitled to an opinion (even though their opinion is WRONG)! LOL!
"I thought the United Nations said that cow farts were the main cause!!!"
No, the UN never ever said such a thing. Claiming so is a quote from Fat Rush the Doper when he told that lie back in the 80s.
Certainly he has a right to an opinion, PM, but he states his opinions as a matter of claiming others have no right to one, than goes further and claims those others opinions are lies.
It gets old whether it is you or him doing it.
IP: Logged |
quote:Certainly he has a right to an opinion, PM, but he states his opinions as a matter of claiming others have no right to one, than goes further and claims those others opinions are lies.
Show me a post where Lockman said that others have no right to an opinion. Or did you just make that up?
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
