Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-28-2008, 02:37 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
129 posts, read 400,173 times
Reputation: 43

Advertisements

emi - there is no way to "know"!

evilnewbie - So I looked up some graphs and it is inconclusive which one started rising first CO2 or Temp.

Anyhow, who really cares why it's happening, natural or not - it's only going to result in chaos and tragedy for ****loads of people. It's inevitable, so why put it off. Plus, God is all about letting people suffer so that others can be comfortable - right?

I can hear it now - "bleeding heart liberal". Well, that thought is just a bunch of propoganda put in your "christian" heads by the devil.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2008, 02:38 PM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,965,265 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker View Post
Might be because its FACT, undisputed FACT. The only thing up in the air is how much we are influencing it, but its a fact that one day glaciers will again scrub most of the northern & southern latitudes clean.
Funny you mention that. 2008's ice melt is behind (actually, it has already lost being able to beat it) 2007 and it is up in the air if it will even beat 2005 and 2002. There is also the belief that we may see some extensive growth of ice this season. Time will tell, but then we won't see that in the news I am sure. I can imagine all the alarmist are already standing in front of the mirrors practicing their come back's on this "inconvenient truth". *chuckle*

I am actually finding the coming future in climate to be very interesting as none of the predictions made by these noisy models are verifying with the observational data. It is wishful thinking, but I would so love to see us go into a wild cold trend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2008, 02:41 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
129 posts, read 400,173 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tin Knocker View Post
Might be because its FACT, undisputed FACT. The only thing up in the air is how much we are influencing it, but its a fact that one day glaciers will again scrub most of the northern & southern latitudes clean.
A FACT is something that can be proven. This cannot. So if Dr. Evil blew up the Earth today - you would be a liar - there would be no glaciers!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2008, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
129 posts, read 400,173 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by emi__ View Post
Because there are glaciers but the temperatures are still moderate around the globe? Look up the definition of an interglacial.
Fair enough, I didn't know what an interglacial was.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2008, 02:44 PM
 
Location: Retirementland
1,233 posts, read 2,828,186 times
Reputation: 829
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciJay View Post
emi - there is no way to "know"!

evilnewbie - So I looked up some graphs and it is inconclusive which one started rising first CO2 or Temp.

Anyhow, who really cares why it's happening, natural or not - it's only going to result in chaos and tragedy for ****loads of people. It's inevitable, so why put it off. Plus, God is all about letting people suffer so that others can be comfortable - right?

I can hear it now - "bleeding heart liberal". Well, that thought is just a bunch of propoganda put in your "christian" heads by the devil.
So there is no way for me to know that we're in an interglacial even though the very definition of an interglacial describes the world of today? Anthropocene or Helocene, I'm not worried about what the names of it are, the fact remains that we're in an interglacial world.

BTW, please don't lump me in with Christians and right-wingers. I'm an atheist and a liberal myself. You're just being rather ignorant about this whole "there is no way to know" stuff.

Quote:
Fair enough, I didn't know what an interglacial was.
You should try looking it up next time before you start on about there being no way to know, 'kay? Nothing personal, but that wasn't the brightest idea there.

Last edited by emi__; 07-28-2008 at 02:47 PM.. Reason: Blah, blah...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2008, 02:51 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
129 posts, read 400,173 times
Reputation: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by emi__ View Post
So there is no way for me to know that we're in an interglacial even though the very definition of an interglacial describes the world of today? Anthropocene or Helocene, I'm not worried about what the names of it are, the fact remains that we're in an interglacial world.

BTW, please don't lump me in with Christians and right-wingers. I'm an atheist and a liberal myself. You're just being rather ignorant about this whole "there is no way to know" stuff.
Emi - I didn't mean to lump you in with the christians & right wingers.

I originally thought you were referring to the current global warming trend being natural. Sorry, I'm just getting sick of the media & politician stating things as fact, when they are not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2008, 03:02 PM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,881,898 times
Reputation: 9284
It is not inconclusive, it is well KNOWN fact that temperature increases BEFORE CO2 increases... ask your friend Al Gore who hid the fact during his presentation... even though it was THERE in front of everyone, I guess they were to mesmerized by Al Gore to pay attention to his ramblings. If you want some real science here you go....

http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newslet...7/monckton.cfm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2008, 03:29 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
129 posts, read 400,173 times
Reputation: 43
Emi - Where am I off here: Interglacial means we are between glacial periods. If the next one hasn't happened yet, how do we know for sure that were in an interglacial?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2008, 03:33 PM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,881,898 times
Reputation: 9284
Because you are not frozen in a glacier...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2008, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Retirementland
1,233 posts, read 2,828,186 times
Reputation: 829
Quote:
Originally Posted by ciJay View Post
Emi - Where am I off here: Interglacial means we are between glacial periods. If the next one hasn't happened yet, how do we know for sure that were in an interglacial?
An interglacial is a warmer period when ice ages are still possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top