To these people who dont believe Global Warming..

Daredevel7

Adrenaline Junky
Premium Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
4,335
Reaction score
5
Ya know whats so funny? Jiro and Endy can argue until they are blue in the face, but at the end of the day, they both turn off their energy efficient lights and recycle their cans!!!
 

Endy

New Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
239
Reaction score
0
Concede? In your wet dreams!

so..... you finally concede that I am right? is that what you're saying?

Ha, ha! I am not going to concede. That's not what I am saying. I said that everything is pointing in that direction. "That direction" I refer, Global warming.

Are you jumping to the conclusion with your words, "I am right." I am not playing your black-white game and I am not playing "win-lose" game. Because I know there are two opposite sides. You are over there and I am over there. I did agree on some points however, I did say that everything is pointing in that direction, obviously, direction to the climates change.
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,285
Reaction score
142
Ha, ha! I am not going to concede. That's not what I am saying. I said that everything is pointing in that direction. "That direction" I refer, Global warming.

Are you jumping to the conclusion with your words, "I am right." I am not playing your black-white game and I am not playing "win-lose" game. Because I know there are two opposite sides. You are over there and I am over there. I did agree on some points however, I did say that everything is pointing in that direction, obviously, direction to the climates change.

oh drat... well - Like I said , my side is backed with scientific findings and everything. Yours is not. Yours is backed with non-experts' opinions. All you have is that everything says that global warming IS real. You have NOT shown me any SINGLE SOURCE of consensus scientific agreement that Global Warming is caused by men. Not "contributed" but WHOLESOMELY caused by men.
 

Endy

New Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
239
Reaction score
0
I believe I mentioned the list of the human consumption through human activities. Either I thought I did put that on my posting or I think you may miss the part in my previous postings. It does not matter now and please allow me post with the links this time.

Human consumption through activites are primarily the burning fossil fuel emissions, such as car fuels, airplane fuels, coals for electricity, etc. Man-made industries burn hundred tons of oils and coals to produce materials. Humans use heaters, air conditioners, refrigators 24hr 365 days using the electricity. Electricity produced from coals. "In the United States, greenhouse gas emissions come primarily from the combustion of fossil fuels in energy use. Energy use is largely driven by economic growth with short-term fluctuations in its growth rate created by weather patterns affecting heating and cooling needs, as well as changes in the fuel used in electricity generation. Energy-related carbon dioxide emissions, resulting from the combustion of petroleum, coal, and natural gas, represented 82 percent of total U.S. anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions in 2006." (EIA - Greenhouse Gases, Climate Change, and Energy)

Logicalscience.com - The Consensus On Global Warming/Climate Change: From Science to Industry & Religion -- Appears that there is no consensus scientific agreement that you are inquiring for. This is the most controversial matter on consensus scientific agreement; however "The following is a list of quotes from scientific organizations, academies, scientists, industry spokesmen, etc supporting the existence of man made climate change and the need to take action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions." This appears like they are giving their press releases out on this global warming. This may be the one you wanted...

Quoted from the Peer Review Scientific Journals section, "Of the 928 papers surveyed not a single paper disagreed with the scientific consensus."

Scientists are pointing the Humans for the cause of climates change...
1 - Human Impacts on Climate
2 - AAAS ATLAS OF POPULATION AND ENVIRONMENT
3 - http://www.icsu.org/Gestion/img/ICSU_DOC_DOWNLOAD/60_DD_FILE_PAA_Env_Exec_Summ.pdf (PDF)
4 - http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/101_Science_Impacts.pdf (PDF)
5 - Climate Change and Global Warming — Global Issues
6 - New IPCC summary points to ongoing climate change » blog | Earth & Sky
7 - The Facts About Global Warming - Global Warming - California Dept. of Justice - Office of the Attorney General
8 - Scientific opinion on climate change and global warming (good one)
9 - NCPA | Study #285, Climate Science: Climate Change and Its Impacts
10 - Humans' beef with livestock: a warmer planet | csmonitor.com This cracks me up tonight.

I can go on!

The last one that really shocked me. The link is from Christian Evangelists and I really liked this one... totally interesting for me, personally -- however back to the point, they did mentioned humans causing.... http://pub.christiansandclimate.org/pub/statement-booklet.pdf (pdf)

Does this help?
 

Liebling:-)))

Sussi *7.7.86 - 18.6.09*
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Messages
31,022
Reaction score
9
It´s interesting to read good argument on both sides between Jiro and Endy.

Jiro, I would like to ask you a question.

Do you support environment-friendly?
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,285
Reaction score
142
It´s interesting to read good argument on both sides between Jiro and Endy.

Jiro, I would like to ask you a question.

Do you support environment-friendly?

of course. it affects our micro-climate (our immediate surroundings) such as smog. But on global-scale? it's not going to make much dent. I only have problem with Endy's comment - "Humans cause global warming."
 

Maria

Active Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
10,309
Reaction score
0
I think his comment is true ( humans cause global warmin' ). I have a BIG problem that I can't say my pieces about why the nature phenomenon is necessary and why. Hate to see someone's holdin' a paddle behind me. :mad2:
 

Daredevel7

Adrenaline Junky
Premium Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Messages
4,335
Reaction score
5
of course. it affects our micro-climate (our immediate surroundings) such as smog. But on global-scale? it's not going to make much dent. I only have problem with Endy's comment - "Humans cause global warming."

See?? He's green too!! :D
 

Hermes

New Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2008
Messages
394
Reaction score
0
of course. it affects our micro-climate (our immediate surroundings) such as smog. But on global-scale? it's not going to make much dent. I only have problem with Endy's comment - "Humans cause global warming."

How about if we say "Humans contribute global warming" ? Would you find it more accurate?

-
 

Tousi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2003
Messages
18,470
Reaction score
181
How about if we say "Humans contribute global warming" ? Would you find it more accurate?

-

I would find it more accurate, yes, as long as the percentage of human contribution is kept at 2% or less. :D
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,285
Reaction score
142
How about if we say "Humans contribute global warming" ? Would you find it more accurate?

-

YES perfectly. It is ENTIRELY different from Endy's "accusation." Like what Tousi said - probably about 2% (I don't know approximate percentage because nobody knows). That is what everybody's capitalizing on - Al Gore, Greenpeace, etc. They're blowing this out of proportion. For that 2%... Earth's simply correcting itself to accommodate that 2% to balance everything. There's always first time for everything because we haven't been on Earth for long to witness all kind of phenomenon such as Ice Age, "Hot Age" (Prehistoric Time w/ dinosaurs... Earth was very volcanic), Pangaea, etc.

My stance is "human CONTRIBUTES to Global Warming." (as in insignificant factor)
Endy's stance is "humans CAUSES Global Warming" (as in the major factor)
 

Hermes

New Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2008
Messages
394
Reaction score
0
YES perfectly. It is ENTIRELY different from Endy's "accusation." Like what Tousi said - probably about 2% (I don't know approximate percentage because nobody knows). That is what everybody's capitalizing on - Al Gore, Greenpeace, etc. They're blowing this out of proportion. For that 2%... Earth's simply correcting itself to accommodate that 2% to balance everything. There's always first time for everything because we haven't been on Earth for long to witness all kind of phenomenon such as Ice Age, "Hot Age" (Prehistoric Time w/ dinosaurs... Earth was very volcanic), Pangaea, etc.

My stance is "human CONTRIBUTES to Global Warming." (as in insignificant factor)
Endy's stance is "humans CAUSES Global Warming" (as in the major factor)

I believe the truth will appear somewhere in between. Saying human responsible only 2 percent of natural changes, is actually saying that is a statistical error and human has no responsibility in it. On the other hand it is also true that with or without human , earth witnesses different climate periods.

The thing is , no matter what causes is, if it keeps going to a direction people suspect it will, the new conditions wont be so friendly to neither human nor his civilization. While this is the reality, people do nothing to ease its effects. Instead they are now amplifying the situation which might already be a big problem itself.

-
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,285
Reaction score
142
I believe the truth will appear somewhere in between. Saying human responsible only 2 percent of natural changes, is actually saying that is a statistical error and human has no responsibility in it. On the other hand it is also true that with or without human , earth witnesses different climate periods.

The thing is , no matter what causes is, if it keeps going to a direction people suspect it will, the new conditions wont be so friendly to neither human nor his civilization. While this is the reality, people do nothing to ease its effects. Instead they are now amplifying the situation which might already be a big problem itself.

-

By saying that - that would means humans are the main cause of Global Warming. Mind you... 2% is pretty significant on Global Scale. I wouldn't worry about new conditions being unfriendly to human civilizations. It only simply means some population will die out. Well hey - it's Mother of Nature. She gets to decide, not us... and the law stands true - "Only the strong survives..."
 

Reba

Retired Terp
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
54,906
Reaction score
1,517
... Well hey - it's Mother of Nature. She gets to decide, not us... and the law stands true - "Only the strong survives..."
Not every one believes in Mother Nature; some of us believe in the One who created the universe and will also determine when it will end. :)
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2007
Messages
69,285
Reaction score
142
Not every one believes in Mother Nature; some of us believe in the One who created the universe and will also determine when it will end. :)

oh yes yes... you are right. :cool2:
 

Endy

New Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
239
Reaction score
0
Wording Cop!

I see... So, you are dismissing the whole agruement upon my wording, "cause". You too focused on ONE word, "cause" out of this entire thread. No wonder, you have been hammering me for my wording.

Wow, I don't know that you are the wording police!! Everybody, watch out, Jiro is the Wording COP!

I am getting the idea that you are overthrowing my argument based my wording.

OMG! This is not a thesis for our college assignment.
 

Byrdie714

New Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2005
Messages
8,889
Reaction score
0
I believe the truth will appear somewhere in between. Saying human responsible only 2 percent of natural changes, is actually saying that is a statistical error and human has no responsibility in it. On the other hand it is also true that with or without human , earth witnesses different climate periods.

The thing is , no matter what causes is, if it keeps going to a direction people suspect it will, the new conditions wont be so friendly to neither human nor his civilization. While this is the reality, people do nothing to ease its effects. Instead they are now amplifying the situation which might already be a big problem itself.

-

Good post.

However I do want to add my comments in regards to the highlighted section....some of us have experienced unusual weather/climate change and it wasn't pretty.
 

Hermes

New Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2008
Messages
394
Reaction score
0
By saying that - that would means humans are the main cause of Global Warming. Mind you... 2% is pretty significant on Global Scale. I wouldn't worry about new conditions being unfriendly to human civilizations. It only simply means some population will die out. Well hey - it's Mother of Nature. She gets to decide, not us... and the law stands true - "Only the strong survives..."

Its like saying, I can do all kind of harmful things to my body, its the body gets to decide when to die, not us. Sure if thats what you command for yourself, what you sought will be what you will get.

Besides that accepting the climate cycles of earth doesn't dismiss the whole subject. I believe human contribution is being downplayed. How human pollutes his environment and resources (not the earth, nothing is happening the earth. Human destroy his own life and resources) is obvious.

Whats the point of saying , "yes we pollute , but there is also climate cycles and we are going to die anyway" ? If we pollute, thats the part in our responsibility and we can recognize it. Since we are not mindless creatures, lets take our own responsibility, and leave nature her own part.


-
 

Macian

New Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2004
Messages
569
Reaction score
0
very interesting thread...
I also don't believe we are causing it, well adding to it a little, but hell volcanoes pump more out in a day than we do collectively in a year.
I think of it like the seasons, only on a much longer scale, the planet heats up a bit, icebergs melt, stop the atlantic conveyor, leaving us brits to freeze out nuts off. over time it will come good again. it's happened numerous times in the past as the ice cores, earth excatvations etc have proven, even before man was here, wonder how they blame that on us.
I think the money being wasted trying to stop it would be put to better use trying to work how we can survive it.
don't get me wrong, i know we have to cut gasses, recycle etc, I'm all for that, but no matter what we do, we won't stop global warming, same as we can't stop a hurricane, with nature we need to find ways of surviving what it throws at us, whish is why I believe thats where the money should be going towards.
 
Top