|
Replies: 15
| visibility 1
|
All-In [40925]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42941
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Guru [1723]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 1842
Joined: 12/22/11
|
Facts Smacts...humans are bad
Mar 13, 2014, 12:43 PM
|
|
and scientists need grants...quit with this propoganda you SUV driving,capitalist pig who hates trees and Baby Polar bears. Have you no heart! Didn't you see that video with the big piece of ice falling into the Artic? What MORE proof do you need.
Baby seals!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9093]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11332
Joined: 10/15/99
|
egore forgot to mention the Great Lakes***
Mar 13, 2014, 1:26 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34104]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33608
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Shocking facts about global warming
Mar 18, 2014, 10:41 AM
|
|
I'm no Gore defender, and normally I wouldn't bother fact-checking someone's attack on him, because he's probably full of #### and he's definitely not a scientist. So I wouldn't get my global warming information from him.
BUT: A couple observations about your post:
#1) The "shocking fact" you cited was "There is a 75% chance that the polar ice cap will be completely ice free by 2013."
But that's not what Gore said.
He said there's a 75% chance that the polar ice cap will be ice free during some of the summer months starting in 5 to 7 years. The speech was in December 2009, according to the video you posted. That means that he was referring to December 2014 through 2016, and then only during some of the summer months.
So, even though he may still have been wrong, we can't prove him wrong with photos from 2013.
2) Although the photo you posted is meant to show how silly Gore's prediction is, it's worth noting that you aren't questioning any of the other facts in his speech, such as the facts about how much the polar ice caps have already receded.
In other words, there are already shocking facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
If you are not 110% correct, you are wrong.
Mar 18, 2014, 10:44 AM
|
|
#goprefudiation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111495]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73734
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Shocking facts about global warming
Mar 18, 2014, 10:53 AM
|
|
here is my whole thing with he anti climate peeps.
I am left to assume that you guys all work in the fossil fuel industry, because you argue it like your life depends on our current energy policy staying in tact, when that are at least a 1/2 dozen other good reasons why we should transfer to renewables anyway, climate change being only one of them. It is going to happen eventually, this push back from the oil lobby is just delaying the inevitable.
But what if you are wrong,? even if there is a one percent change of that in your minds? The consequences of being wrong and not acting are inexcusable, where being wrong on the environmentalist side of the argument has little to no consequence outside of looking stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15746]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17370
Joined: 2/1/99
|
Right, here's the problem:
Mar 19, 2014, 1:26 PM
|
|
Invariably this Global Warming issue is used to start imposing significant taxes on individuals or industrial sectors of the economy, or to subjugate the United States under some world treaty that will undermine us relative to our main rivals of the world.
That's, I think, the issue.
So I would push it back on Climate Change "believers". If you know that half of the country thinks this is garbage, why do you wage battle over it? You want a cleaner environment? So do people who refute man-made Climate Change. So shut up about Climate Change. But no...like religious zealots, it's not enough that people are fine with YOU believing in Climate Change...they MUST accept it as well. Now you can't see the forest for the trees.
The goal here isn't to hedge on who will look less-stupid a hundred years from now. The goal is sound environmental policy.
Here's an article currently running on CNN.com's Money Section:
http://features.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2014/03/18/chinas-rich-make-plans-to-avoid-smog/?iid=HP_River
The wealth of China wants to leave China because it's a junk heap.
A clean environment in America should be considered a key part of our overall country's vision for its future. It makes sense economically, in terms of security, and for the overall happiness of the population. It should be approached in a disciplined manner that continues to allow the U.S. to complete.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111495]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73734
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Right, here's the problem:
Mar 19, 2014, 2:11 PM
|
|
I do not disagree with much of that, but what half of the country thinks is irrelevant, only facts are relevant. One side of the argument is presenting facts, the other is using propaganda. Half our country has its head ups its #### on a lot of issues. Creation "Science" is the other one that really chaps myass.
And it is not about a clean environment, it is about limiting co2 and Methane from getting into the upper atmosphere. the longer we wait, the more it will cost us. And I can assure you, it wont be 100 years from now we will be looking abck on this, more like 10-20.
Lastly, I am not going to rely on CNN and The heritage foundation to tell me what to believe. We live in the information age, if you are too lazy to use a search engine and get your info from Cable news instead, then you really should not be a part of the conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15746]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17370
Joined: 2/1/99
|
Re: Right, here's the problem:
Mar 19, 2014, 3:23 PM
|
|
" but what half of the country thinks is irrelevant,"
Supremely niave. We're talking politics. If what half the country thinks is irrelevant, why are Climate Change believers frothing at the mouth about it? It matters because it impacts policy.
"One side of the argument is presenting facts, the other is using propaganda."
I'll say this in your defense: I believe that you believe this.
"Creation 'Science' is the other one that really chaps myass."
Fascinating, but this thread isn't about Creation Science or "thinks that chap Tigerbalm1's backside".
"And it is not about a clean environment, it is about limiting co2 and Methane from getting into the upper atmosphere."
Incorporate this into the overall strategy for a cleaner environment. Just because it doesn't change the color of a stream doesn't mean it isn't part of the environment.
"Lastly, I am not going to rely on CNN and The heritage foundation to tell me what to believe. We live in the information age, if you are too lazy to use a search engine and get your info from Cable news instead, then you really should not be a part of the conversation."
Typical irrelevant Tigerbalm attack. I don't even know what prompted this comment, but please stop kidding yourself. No one here thinks that you are the least bit open minded and no one here thinks that you have respect or interest in facts over your agenda. But good to know that you don't think the uneducated should have a place at the table. I'll look for you to be advocating that as a component of the Democratic ticket come 2016...maybe a science or history test prior to being allowed to vote? That would no-doubt work out well for the Democrats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111495]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73734
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Right, here's the problem:
Mar 19, 2014, 5:03 PM
|
|
I am not going to waste my time with you any more. You are going to believe what you want to believe regardless, and are just intent on arguing and chopping me down personally.
Good bye forever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [15746]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17370
Joined: 2/1/99
|
That's fine but you are the one that called me lazy and
Mar 20, 2014, 9:16 AM
|
|
suggested that I shouldn't be in this conversation, and you're typically the quickest with the insulting jabs, so I think it's a bit disingenuous to complain about being chopped down personally. And of course I'm intent on arguing...we disagree. You argue all day long on here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [761]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1061
Joined: 10/19/04
|
It's about money plan and simple.
Mar 19, 2014, 2:51 PM
[ in reply to Right, here's the problem: ] |
|
There is money to be made with carbon taxes. That's why this is being pushed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12269]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14009
Joined: 2/19/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24742]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42458
Joined: 7/31/10
|
More moisture and more southern Arctic jet streams. The
Mar 19, 2014, 4:33 PM
|
|
overall effect is a counter-balancing but the immediate effect is considerably more snowfall in the winter and hotter in the summer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111495]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73734
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: More moisture and more southern Arctic jet streams. The
Mar 19, 2014, 5:06 PM
|
|
for the most part yes. Those who believe that it also intensifies the strength of storms have a good argument, clean-up being more costly and expensive as well as more frequent. I guess the next El nino season will tell us a lot.
Then of course, the constant swings in weather are hell on the road surfaces. The ocsts start to pile up after a while.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [40925]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42941
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 15
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
