So that's it for the election.

[Hasbinlulz]

737 degrees Kelvin y'all, NBD.

[Hasbinlulz]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well seeing as how we are already hitting all the controversial topics we might as well hit global warming.

Most people know the general theory of global warming: carbon dioxide (the result of burning gasoline) and methane (from cow poo) and such are 'green house gases'. They are transparent to visual light (emitted by the sun) but not infrared light (emitted by the earth). This is basically a good thing; without the atmosphere the earth would be -40 or something.

What most people do not know is that that carbon dioxide has a very small effect on temperature. Its like 1C tops or something; I don't know the numbers off of the top of my head. The theory is this: that 1C will warm the planet, causing more water to evaporate from the oceans. Water is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (I guess it isn't as politically convenient to demonize water though). And it is this 'forcing' that creates the 5-10C increases you read about. There are tons of computer models which generate very different answers depending on their initial parameters.

Now, what we know for a fact is that the planet has become somewhat warmer over the past 150 years. What we don't know is why. The earth and its weather are a very complicated system, not to mention changes in solar activity. Unfortunately we cannot use science here (= do controlled experiment, create 100 earths with 50 that have strict green house gas laws and 50 that do not and measure the differences). We only have one planet.

My personal belief is that most of the environmental moment is really about people who hate the fact that corporations can bribe our government to do anything and therefore want to try and fuck them in return, somehow, anyhow. This is moronic at best, but I understand the frustration (this is also why I always laugh at Democrats. The government is *always* on the side of the rich. The more you try and enlarge the government to redistribute wealth, the more the rich win.)

Anyway Hasbin, go look up the data of the earth's temperature for the past 10000 years from the Greenland ice cores. It has gone through huge variations with no influence from man at all. I'm not saying that global warming theory is wrong, only that there are a lot of people with a lot to gain if it is right and the evidence is not (and cannot) ever be there.

Warmer and warmer gets the water around the frog, and yet he doesn't notice until he's soup.

[Hasbinlulz]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well seeing as how we are already hitting all the controversial topics we might as well hit global warming.

Most people know the general theory of global warming: carbon dioxide (the result of burning gasoline) and methane (from cow poo) and such are 'green house gases'. They are transparent to visual light (emitted by the sun) but not infrared light (emitted by the earth). This is basically a good thing; without the atmosphere the earth would be -40 or something.

What most people do not know is that that carbon dioxide has a very small effect on temperature. Its like 1C tops or something; I don't know the numbers off of the top of my head. The theory is this: that 1C will warm the planet, causing more water to evaporate from the oceans. Water is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (I guess it isn't as politically convenient to demonize water though). And it is this 'forcing' that creates the 5-10C increases you read about. There are tons of computer models which generate very different answers depending on their initial parameters.

Now, what we know for a fact is that the planet has become somewhat warmer over the past 150 years. What we don't know is why. The earth and its weather are a very complicated system, not to mention changes in solar activity. Unfortunately we cannot use science here (= do controlled experiment, create 100 earths with 50 that have strict green house gas laws and 50 that do not and measure the differences). We only have one planet.

My personal belief is that most of the environmental moment is really about people who hate the fact that corporations can bribe our government to do anything and therefore want to try and fuck them in return, somehow, anyhow. This is moronic at best, but I understand the frustration (this is also why I always laugh at Democrats. The government is *always* on the side of the rich. The more you try and enlarge the government to redistribute wealth, the more the rich win.)

Anyway Hasbin, go look up the data of the earth's temperature for the past 10000 years from the Greenland ice cores. It has gone through huge variations with no influence from man at all. I'm not saying that global warming theory is wrong, only that there are a lot of people with a lot to gain if it is right and the evidence is not (and cannot) ever be there.

That wasn't a very good explanation from a doctor bro.

[Hasbinlulz]

How come every time I try and get someone who doesn't think mankinds shit stinks to explain why they tell me "it's complex bro, go look it up lol" ?

But then whenever I ask some environmentalist hippie to explain why shit is wrong, they are able to easily cite a laundry list of facts and studies that support what they are saying?

[Hasbinlulz]

INTERESTING, ISN'T IT BROS?

[Splorf22]

You must also believe that hurricanes come from God when people sin. Is it really so hard to believe that we just don't understand the weather well enough to justify fucking with the lives of billions of people?

I was about to congratulate you on successfully trolling me out of 10 minutes of my time, but then I realized you had just trolled yourself 4 times in a row.

[Hasbinlulz]

I'm just asking for some backup on your statement dude. I asked you once and you diverted with a very opinionated and unsubstantiated editorial on your feelings.

I ask you again doc, please explain this position of "mankind doesn't affect the environment" a bit better. Maybe a couple links to useful analysis published in a peer reviewed journal?

Oh wait..

They don't exist??

ERMEHGERD

[Splorf22]

I am not saying that mankind doesn't impact the environment. In fact I think that global warming detracts from real environmental issues like preserving the rainforest and endangered species and such.

You think that my previous post represents my feelings because you are just as religious about global warming as Daldoma is about jesus, and you are demanding the same appeal to authority he is.

The reality is: the earth's atmosphere is a very complicated and chaotic system which is extremely difficult to model with mathematics and computers. We know it changes substantially on its own anyway, so the burden of proof is on the nuts (you) who want to fuck with the lives of millions of people. Anyway, since it appears you like links, how about:

http://www.nature.com/climate/2007/0...e.2007.22.html Go to figure 2 and note the width of the pink bar - its almost 50% of the size of the change! OK, you say, the pink bar is still going up. The reality is that the models are predicting the data on which they were trained (a huge no-no in classification) and they still have this kind of error. In other words: we don't know. Since its in Nature I'm sure you'll accept everything they say without questioning.

http://www-eaps.mit.edu/faculty/lind...0_TakingGr.pdf And here we have a discussion about troposphere warming and how the IPCC is lying through its teeth.

[Alarti0001]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well seeing as how we are already hitting all the controversial topics we might as well hit global warming.

Most people know the general theory of global warming: carbon dioxide (the result of burning gasoline) and methane (from cow poo) and such are 'green house gases'. They are transparent to visual light (emitted by the sun) but not infrared light (emitted by the earth). This is basically a good thing; without the atmosphere the earth would be -40 or something.

What most people do not know is that that carbon dioxide has a very small effect on temperature. Its like 1C tops or something; I don't know the numbers off of the top of my head. The theory is this: that 1C will warm the planet, causing more water to evaporate from the oceans. Water is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide (I guess it isn't as politically convenient to demonize water though). And it is this 'forcing' that creates the 5-10C increases you read about. There are tons of computer models which generate very different answers depending on their initial parameters.

Now, what we know for a fact is that the planet has become somewhat warmer over the past 150 years. What we don't know is why. The earth and its weather are a very complicated system, not to mention changes in solar activity. Unfortunately we cannot use science here (= do controlled experiment, create 100 earths with 50 that have strict green house gas laws and 50 that do not and measure the differences). We only have one planet.

My personal belief is that most of the environmental moment is really about people who hate the fact that corporations can bribe our government to do anything and therefore want to try and fuck them in return, somehow, anyhow. This is moronic at best, but I understand the frustration (this is also why I always laugh at Democrats. The government is *always* on the side of the rich. The more you try and enlarge the government to redistribute wealth, the more the rich win.)

Anyway Hasbin, go look up the data of the earth's temperature for the past 10000 years from the Greenland ice cores. It has gone through huge variations with no influence from man at all. I'm not saying that global warming theory is wrong, only that there are a lot of people with a lot to gain if it is right and the evidence is not (and cannot) ever be there.

CO2 is one of many greenhouse gasses. Not to mention minimal changes cause more ice to melt, and less snow to fall in the polar regions the effect adds up exponentially over the years. Do some research unless you only want to look at the very very short term effects of an exponential curve.

[Alawen]

I have way too much to do to get into this one. Plus, I can't even say things like North Atlantic Oscillation without a PhD in meteorology.