Climate change

[Evil Hamster]

Lol. Since your point was most people don't believe the global warming myth- you're right!

I did NOT say global warming has local effects- because global warming is a lie. I said we (humans) can have local effects. Dump a bunch of toxins in a lake and you'll kill off all the fish in that lake.

As for CO2- it is NOT a pollutant. It is plant food.

Here's a good link with some actual numbers.

Perhaps the fact global warming is a myth is why they changed its name and are now calling it "climate change"? And guess what? The earths climate is ALWAYS changing 

As for your hysterical claims about the ozone layer- "The conceptual "ozone layer" is not some delicate, static and fragile wrapping about the outer atmosphere but rather a dynamic and highly volatile component, both created and destroyed by solar radiation. Ozone creation is a continuous process, so we can not "run out" of stratospheric ozone. The more ozone (O3) is destroyed, the more free oxygen radicals (O1) are available to bind with free oxygen (O2) to create ozone (O3), the same applies with free oxygen (O2)." (the science behind that quote: http://junkscience.com/Ozone/ozone_seasonal.html )

Why is it that the vast majority of scientists say man-made climate change is a lie? The vast majority of scientists who believe in it are political scientists.

[Evil Hamster]

most people don't believe the global warming myth [...] the vast majority of scientists say man-made climate change is a lie [...] The vast majority of scientists who believe in it are political scientists.

Do you have any proof of this conjecture?

I could post links but I was just told that posting links doesn't prove anything 

[Evil Hamster]

Posting links doesn't prove anything when those links don't actually have any evidence. Hard statistics, preferably well sourced, would be nice.

Well again, posting links doesn't prove anything
I've gained my sources from science articles that are very well cited and researched on.
The fact that uzra keeps denying change shows how alot of people think.
Even if it's just local changes...
Local changes occuring across the globe is a problem...

Both the links I posted are to actual science with real data.

But when those little annoying things called facts get in the way of religious beliefs like "global warming" people tend to pretend they don't exist.

[Evil Hamster]

Talking about hamster, "hysterical claims" ... I'm just looking at people's opinions o.o

You're right. I apologize for my poor word choice.

There's just too many claims like "the world is going to end seas will rise and drown us all the end is near" out there when people try and convince me that global warming or climate change or whatever they are calling it today is real.

Here's some more real science for those of you who are interested:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/co2_report_july_09.pdf

[NukleusX]

Errrr, my bad.

I simply meant I am in agreeance with you about it being pathetic.

That better? Was not trying to insult you.

[NukleusX]

I love my Cummins Turbo Diesel under the hood of my truck. Enviro-Nazis hate it.

I love my carbon footprint too, aka smoking out a 4 lane road with my exhaust.

I hate Al Gore and his enviro-nazi stance, and his whole liberal agenda.

[NukleusX]

Though, many Wikipedia pages are cited, too, and if you go to those cited pages, you'll find that they are often cited by other websites/texts/research. Wikipedia is actually a pretty good source, assuming that the pages are well cited with credible information.

Thanks for that heads up.

[NukleusX]

Well again, posting links doesn't prove anything
I've gained my sources from science articles that are very well cited and researched on.
The fact that uzra keeps denying change shows how alot of people think.
Even if it's just local changes...
Local changes occuring across the globe is a problem...

At least you don't gain most of your sources like the most folk on here; from wikipedia.     


(And just so I have a flame suit on, I will admit to using wikipedia when I want info. Using it as a CREDIBLE source, is a whole 'nother topic. Thanks.)

[Uncle Jellyfish]

Problem with posting links and videos trying to prove that your opinion/fact/belief/etc. is correct is that there will ALWAYS be an equally convincing counter-argument. Sure, it may not be convincing to you, but likewise, the stuff you post isn't as convincing to those that adamantly follow the alternative.

[Uncle Jellyfish]

(And just so I have a flame suit on, I will admit to using wikipedia when I want info. Using it as a CREDIBLE source, is a whole 'nother topic. Thanks.)

EDITED:

Though, many Wikipedia pages are cited, too, and if you go to those cited pages, you'll find that they are often cited by other websites/texts/research. Wikipedia is actually a pretty good source, assuming that the pages are well cited with credible information, which some of them aren't.

[Uncle Jellyfish]

Do not trust wikipedia on sensitive topics though (like climate change). People have been caught changing information critical of their viewpoint.

This is very true, though it often times gets changed back rather quickly, since things that are unsighted or misposted are often removed or changed by someone who has the knowledge and skills to provide accurate information.

[Uzra]

Ok, It's time for your rehabilitation....