What's up with all these natural disasters?

Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
611
Likes
0
Points
0
#61
Puckstop31 said:
There is nothing wrong using news as reference material. Often, the news even gets it right. But, these days the media, IMHO, has too much of an agenda. (On BOTH sides)

What I got from your post that started all of this was that you would believe what the news says over other sources. (Including the Bible)

I am not saying you should believe that article. It is reference material. Also, if you could not see the sarcasm in that post, you need to lighten up.

Your last sentence hits it on the head. Seek TRUTH. This is hard to do, because we people tend to come up with our conclusions FIRST, then find tidbits that support that "truth".

Theories vs. facts.... The modern debate about Intelligent Design is a perfect example of this. Evolution is a THEORY. Yet, it is taught as FACT in the classroom. It has been pounded into your head since we started school. Any attept to dispute it is met with ridicule, yet I can go ON, and ON and ON with SCIENCE that shows Evolution impossible.

Seek TRUTH. Use your OWN brain and not what the mainstream tells you.
So you assumed I believe news over other references, didn't even take the chance to ask, just assumed. Maybe I just assumed you were trying to strike a nerve and got a little annoyed by it.

I've looked at plenty of references, 1/3 of them agree with one thing, 1/3 of them agree with another, and the other 1/3 is totally different. I decided to pick the one that seemed to make more sense to me. Something that could be proven such as holes in the ozone and the weather changing occuring at the near same time. Sorry if you can't handle seeing it from more than your point of view, thats not my problem. I can't prove that the two are directly related but it makes sense and seems the most logical, in my opinion. Maybe it is a phase just like the ice age. Maybe it is global warming. I think I'll decide on whatever I want and maybe that'll change if another fact comes up that changes everything/

Know what I agree with you, I SHOULD use my own brain over what the media tells me. I only agree with my own brain when I can prove something, if not I just take in a bunch of different ideas. None of them are fact. The only facts I can really agree with is in math. But is anything really the truth? 2+2 could just easily equal 5 but its become the truth that it equals 4 because thats how its been told to us.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
50
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#62
shredhead (DOG LOVER) said:
Hell seems like you've annoyed many of us.
Again, not my intent but if I did, I am not going to apologize. I know my thoughts and opinions clash with the touchy feely nature of this board. YOU have the power to make me go away. Take a poll if you like. If enough want me gone, I am gone. But, think about the precedent such a move would make. "Lets squash all people who are different than ME." I thought that was the job of we Right Wing Psycos?

:p :p

I just like to see if people can actually back up what they say. It doesn't seem to me you can.
Uh huh... Let me know when the real debate starts please. (Not like anything I say would ever sit with you... you already have your mind made up.)

I don't believe the news. I know who writes that stuff and it sure as hell isn't a good source of information. I don't really believe anything I can't prove throught experience. I just said that most news medias are blaming hurricanes on global warming, the other half are saying its just a phase. This is going the exact same way with scientists. Considering we haven't lived long enough to prove fact from theories in this case, you had no right to call me a sucker. No, scientists can not prove it but they can give theories. Here you are saying news is unreliable and you put in a link to the washington post in one of posts. Whats that about, why should I believe them?
Oh, I have EVERY right to call you a sucker. I have the right to call you whatever I want. The First Amendment says so. Just as that same Amendment gives you the right to not listen or to disagree.

The link I provided was merely supposed to be sarcasm, you know, the whole idea that MAN cannot control nature. I read that article thinking the guy might have been serious in his amazement. I provided plenty of emoticons to show said sarcasm.

You should certainly NOT believe the Washington Post.


I gotta go, but I look forward to this tomorrow.

Cheers!
 

Boxer*Mom

It wasn't me
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
1,740
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
41
Location
Georgia, U.S.
#63
Each new blow from greenhouse enhanced hurricanes may alert Americans about the necessity to get off the fossil fuels that feed these disasters--sooner, hopefully, than later or too late!
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
611
Likes
0
Points
0
#64
OOooooh this is going to be fun.
Puckstop31 said:
Uh huh... Let me know when the real debate starts please. (Not like anything I say would ever sit with you... you already have your mind made up.)

Hell if your arguement is good enough, I'll probably take your side.


Puckstop31 said:
Oh, I have EVERY right to call you a sucker. I have the right to call you whatever I want. The First Amendment says so. Just as that same Amendment gives you the right to not listen or to disagree.
Oh of course you have the "right " to. I'm not sure if you really had the reason to. Just because you assumed that I didn't look into a subject before talking about.


Puckstop31 said:
Again, not my intent but if I did, I am not going to apologize. I know my thoughts and opinions clash with the touchy feely nature of this board. YOU have the power to make me go away. Take a poll if you like. If enough want me gone, I am gone. But, think about the precedent such a move would make. "Lets squash all people who are different than ME." I thought that was the job of we Right Wing Psycos?
Oh no I don't want you gone. I love arguments and I love different opinions. I'm pretty sure if we met in real life we'd get along great always arguing about stuff. What annoys me is that it seems like your going out of your way to try to annoy us. If thats just your personality, than I guess I'm wrong and hell I'm sorry.
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
10,119
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
wasilla alaska
#65
In order for me to believe huricanes are bigger and more freaquent because of global warming show me factual evidence of global warming first.
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
611
Likes
0
Points
0
#66
blue said:
In order for me to believe huricanes are bigger and more freaquent because of global warming show me factual evidence of global warming first.
Well here are some facts, whether they're considered global warming or not is your choice.

Heres some things that might support global warming.
• There is little doubt that the planet is warming. Over the last century the average temperature has climbed about 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.6 of a degree Celsius) around the world.
• The multinational Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA) report recently concluded that in Alaska, western Canada, and eastern Russia, average temperatures have increased as much as 4 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit
• Vast quantities of fresh water are tied up in the world's many melting glaciers. When Montana's Glacier National Park was created in 1910 it held some 150 glaciers. Now fewer than 30, greatly shrunken glaciers, remain. Tropical glaciers are in even more trouble. The legendary snows of Tanzania's Mount Kilimanjaro 19,340-foot (5,895-meter) peak have melted by some 80 percent since 1912 and could be gone by 2020
• Since the 1860s, increased industrialization and shrinking forests have helped raise the atmosphere's CO2 level by almost 100 parts per million—and Northern Hemisphere temperatures have followed suit. Increases in temperatures and greenhouse gasses have been even sharper since the 1950s.
• Studies show that many European plants now flower a week earlier than they did in the 1950s and also lose their leaves 5 days later.

I think the real question here is, is global warming caused by stupidity of mankind, OR is it just a phase that the world is going through. According to scientists, the earth goes goes throught warmer and colder climate changes every 100,000 years. Global warming may just be a phase of the earth. Greenland has ice cores that indicate one spike in which the area's surface temperature increased by 15 degrees Fahrenheit in just 10 years. Maybe thats what's happening here.

I think theres no quesiton that the climate is getting warmer. To me its more a question of why is it getting warmer. Global warming is still a recent theory but theres been many projections but they're just projections, they could be and likely are wrong.
 

Zoom

Twin 2.0
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
40,739
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
41
Location
Denver, CO
#67
Global warming could very well be a natural trend leading up to the next Ice Age, but I tend to believe that we have exacerbated the situation by adding millions of tons of pollutants into the equation.
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2004
Messages
611
Likes
0
Points
0
#68
Lol yea...we've probably dug ourselves into a hole that we could've gotten out of before but now we poured water along the sides and now were stuck.
For some reason I just got a flash of "Silence of the Lambs":

"It puts the lotion on it's skin or else it gets the hose again..."
 

Zoom

Twin 2.0
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
40,739
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
41
Location
Denver, CO
#69
EDIT: Oh crap, I didn't meant to do that! and I don't know how to fix it! That was supposed to be me and not shredhead saying that...
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
10,119
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
wasilla alaska
#73
If it is Global Warming the Earth will adapt the way it has many times before. If it is a Climate Cycle the Earth is adapting as it has many times before the Evils of Mankind wrought its wrath upon her.
 
W

Whitedobelover

Guest
#74
blue global warming is controlled by the government... the government has controlled the environment and weather since WWII
 
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
10,119
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
wasilla alaska
#75
Whitedobelover said:
blue global warming is controlled by the government... the government has controlled the environment and weather since WWII

Got proof?

Nikoli Tesla said he could split the earth in half with its electro magnetic currents. The HAARP is said to be a global weather controll. Its been said the Russians have simmilar setups to our HAARP, have they expounded on Tesla's ideas as well?

A good book for all to read if you can find it, its out of print, The Last Gasp.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
50
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#76
Boxer*Mom said:
Each new blow from greenhouse enhanced hurricanes may alert Americans about the necessity to get off the fossil fuels that feed these disasters--sooner, hopefully, than later or too late!

This ones easy on a very straightforward and easily researched item.

On Nevadas mountain islands, there exists the Bristlecone pine. The oldest living plant on Earth.

In one cut specimen you have records of weather phenomena that go back to 4000 years plus.

http://www.sonic.net/bristlecone/growth.html


There are periods of much more extreme climatological change than anything we've observed in the modern age that is readily indicated. From frosted plains of New Orleans with glacial moraines left all throughout the midwest and northeast to GLOBAL evidence of a TROPICAL rainforest on the North Pole and Siberia, everywhere with massive and rapid burial and deposition to give us nice coal, gas and oil formations that will last eons. Of course I think this may have been as rapid as a few days, others that like fables think it takes millions of years and animals just walk into little sink holes one at a time.

Either way, its quite obvious to all the climate is oscillatory and undergoes MASSIVE temperature swings.

Further...

According to the evidence left behind by the Fremont Indians in that same area, circa about 2,000 years ago, the high plains of Nevada was a lush, rain filled agricultural area. The Fremonts were semi agrarian with some trading and nomadic activity. Today, this area is ARID, cold and hot.

I suppose that as thier climate dried up, and thier rangeland withered away, water evaporated from numerous freshwater lakes and ambient temperatures simultaneously skyrocketed and plunged, depending on the summer or winter, one perhaps two of them stood around talking outside thier Fremont Indian Starbucks and had this conversation;

Howichi: WTF Stargazer? Why this area turn to crap and dry up?
Stargazer: WTF Howichi? Me guess great god sun/moon/earth mad at us.
Howichi: F that. We should build more fire and make blanket for mother earth, she is cold and hot each season.
Stargazer: WTF, how? It is global cooling, how you think we get from Eurasia to land of pre-Nevada?
Howichi: Did you google that? I don't believe this lie.
Eurasia: STFUP Howichi, you spend too much time inside, I hear Mazatlan is a nice area this time of year.
Howichi: Yeah, let's travel.

Summary??? Climate change is a constant. Manmade influnce has little, if anything, to do with it.
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
50
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#77
shredhead (DOG LOVER) said:
OOooooh this is going to be fun.
Lets hope so! :D

Hell if your arguement is good enough, I'll probably take your side.
It is not about winning or losing, it is about truth.

Oh of course you have the "right " to. I'm not sure if you really had the reason to. Just because you assumed that I didn't look into a subject before talking about.
Do I need a reason to exercise my rights? I assumed nothing, I simply commented on what you said. Granted, I might have taken it out of context, but context is sometimes difficult to dechipher on the web. :)


Oh no I don't want you gone. I love arguments and I love different opinions. I'm pretty sure if we met in real life we'd get along great always arguing about stuff. What annoys me is that it seems like your going out of your way to try to annoy us. If thats just your personality, than I guess I'm wrong and hell I'm sorry.

I prefer "debate" to "arguement". :) It is never my primary intent to annoy, push buttons or say things JUST for the responce they get. I have way better things to do with my time.

I mean that, it is important to me. I am NOT a troll, just looking for a fight.

Now, to the good stuff...
 

Puckstop31

Super-Genius
Joined
Jul 8, 2005
Messages
5,847
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
50
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
#79
Boxer*Mom said:
So you think that mans pollution or depletion of natural resources has nothing to do with climate changes?
I am sure it has something to do with it, but human influence is NOWHERE near as influential as the eco-terrorists want us to think...

The Earth was a MASSIVELY rich and luxuriant jungle that was distributed globally. The atmosphere was clearly different than anything we could imagine today. (Ice core samples from Antartica being the reference material here.)

This mat of life was clearly destroyed in a singularly quick, and global manner (Note, NOT over years and WAY before man's technology could influence it.) and that the atmosphere has been oscillating WILDLY since that period, a period of unparalleled biological diversity has given way to increasing extinctions and less biological diversity, just as one would predict of an un-tended garden.

What we do today, has no bearing on the Earth, trust me, compared to what has happened in the distant past.

Again, the fight of uniformitarianism and creationism.
 

Boxer*Mom

It wasn't me
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
1,740
Likes
0
Points
0
Age
41
Location
Georgia, U.S.
#80
This is not eco terroism

The international response to climate change was launched in 1992, at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, with the signing of the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. The Convention established a long-term objective of stabilizing greenhouse concentrations in the atmosphere “at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system.” It also set a voluntary goal of reducing emissions from developed counties to 1990 levels by 2000 – a goal that most did not meet. Recognizing that stronger action was needed, countries negotiated the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which sets binding targets to reduce emissions 5.2 percent below 1990 levels by 2012.

With entry into force, Kyoto’s emission targets become binding legal commitments for those industrialized countries that have ratified it (the United States and Australia have not). Also, the market-based mechanisms established under Kyoto, including international emissions trading and the Clean Development Mechanism, will become fully operational.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top