Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » Man Made Global Warming what a joke!

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
Man Made Global Warming what a joke!
Fladimir da Gorf
Member #1,565
October 2001
avatar

Global Warming Petition Project said:

The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment

:D:D:D:D Yeah, right!

There's no telling if those people who have signed the petition have any knowledge of the area. Many of them don't even seem to have reported if they're scientists at all.

Still, the numbers are not comparable. You may think that only the 17,000 scientists agree on global warming. In reality there is probably a lot more.

Quote:

BTW Niel global warming stopped 10 years ago. Global cooling began 3 years ago.

OK now I have no idea where you got that information. It's not supported by any of the sites that were linked here.

Oh, and before continuing this rant, Frank, could you please at least read the Wikipedia article on this subject?

OpenLayer has reached a random SVN version number ;) | Online manual | Installation video!| MSVC projects now possible with cmake | Now alvailable as a Dev-C++ Devpack! (Thanks to Kotori)

Dustin Dettmer
Member #3,935
October 2003
avatar

Evert said:

Neat, I didn't know that one.

Shesh, don't take me so seriously.

Thomas Harte
Member #33
April 2000
avatar

Quote:

While I agree with this statement, it is a personal attack and doesn't improve his argument so it would have probably been best left unsaid.
...
But both of you are being hypocrites on this subject by denouncing personal attacks and then using them

These are valid criticisms.

Quote:

Neil you miss the beauty of my comments towards Thomas. The very first post he made was an attack and he has posted way more comments that could be considered attacks. Then he gets upset after interpreting something as a slight to him and he declares a problem with personal attacks.

I think you misinterpret. The first posts were emotional, the more recent are logical. In my opinion, as already stated, your views are overwhelmingly based on biases you formed a long time ago and not on objective thought. Regardless of whether I'm correct about that (I've already had your say, and for the record, you've already denied that such is the case), in my experience, people who have that condition are often not willing to enter into rational debate. It can therefore be futile to attempt it. In this thread I launched on completely the wrong foot.

However, I do think it's correct to say that I have become increasingly civil over the course of this thread, whereas you have done the opposite. If that's because you perceive me to still be writing every post as a direct attack on your character rather than your opinions then that's understandable. But I still maintain that it is true.

As I consider that your most recent post directed at me was based on that pattern, I'm going to take it in good character and offer you the opportunity to re-express it in a form removed of any character comments before I respond to it. Similarly I'm not going to respond to any of your new concerns for the time being.

I appreciate that it is not, and should not be, your responsibility to do that if your hostility is a result of my original hostility. However, I think it would be a justified courtesy to do so.

Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
avatar

EDIT:

For the record, this is the last time my posts will be this long in this thread.

END EDIT

I like what their petition says: "BS, MS, or PhD degrees in science, engineering, and related disciplines" No requirement for any knowledge in this field. Checking through the list of signers, I found some biologists, a few physicists, a chemist, and others, whose training had nothing to do with climatology or weather or anything related to global warming. So it's basically 19,000 random college educated people.

Quote:

Neil Black your quoting and commenting on every line of a post is a bit much.

Don't think putting it all in a huge block of text will stop me.

Quote:

The post was mainly directed for Thomas I do not want you to do his homework for him especially since you seem to be misinformed on most counts.

If it was directed for Thomas then use private messages, that's what they're there for.

Quote:

Neil you miss the beauty of my comments towards Thomas. The very first post he made was an attack and he has posted way more comments that could be considered attacks. Then he gets upset after interpreting something as a slight to him and he declares a problem with personal attacks. Doesnt this stike you as funny

So it's ok for you to do it because he did it first? I think you're both in the wrong in the area of personal attacks (actually, all of us are, because I've done it a few times myself).

Quote:

His mindless comment about me ignoring questions if foolish since look I am even responding to your posts about me that were not even directed at you

You saying it about him was mindless because he had already demonstrated his willingness to answer all parts of a post. At the time he said it you had demonstrated no such willingness. He has since been proven wrong, but you were proven wrong before oyu even said anything.

Quote:

I do not expect to convince people like you or thomas. I may sway a few people that are more open minded and less confrontational about their beliefs.

Please don't call me close-minded simply because I don't agree with you. That's another personal attack, which if you'll notice I'm trying to stop doing. I won't argue about the confrontational bit, though. ;D

Quote:

I also figured someone like you would latch upon the quotes and have to comment on them and look you are the lucky winner to get there first congrats.

I win? YAY! I want my prize.

Quote:

The play by play on almost every single sentence is truly "getting kind of tiresome" as you would put it.

My logic for the line-by-line is this: maybe you'll either understand what I'm tying to tell you and realize how wrong you are (and you are wrong), or you'll go away. Either way, the community wins.

Quote:

BTW Niel global warming stopped 10 years ago. Global cooling began 3 years ago.

Really? And your proof is?

Quote:

Time to jump on board the new band wagon before the grant money runs out.

Sorry, I don't jump on board bandwagons. Too many diseases. I prefer to study the facts and go with the side I agree with, no matter which side is more popular.

Quote:

I may have typed it wrong but there are 1,600 who signed the IPCC document not 16,000. There are far more scientists that disagree with global warming than agree with it.

Just because there's more of them doesn't make them right. Who's jumping on the bandwagon now?

Quote:

his is the off topic area if I remember correctly. You are correct that this is a scientific issue BUT the main push behind action on this are political people like Al Gore who is no more qualified than all of us to make this decision so I see nothing wrong with us talking about it.

EDIT2:

edited because I was being hypocritical.

You're annoying the crap out of everyone, for one thing. I have no problem with you believing global warming is a hoax. You can believe the U.S. government controls world temperatures with giant underground radiators for all I care. I hope you don't have a problem with the fact that I think you're wrong, and that if you're going to come onto a public site and declare as fact something that I think is wrong, them I'm going to tell you that it's wrong. If you're lucky, I might even take the time to tell you why.

END EDIT2

Quote:

There will never be a aha moment about this because the issue is just going to slowly disapear without any fan fare just like 99% of all the mass media scares do.

Believe me, I sincerely hope that's true. However, given that it is more likely that something bad will happen due to this climate change, it's in our best interests to try to do something about it.

imaxcs
Member #4,036
November 2003

I am being on your side on the main issue, but...

Quote:

My logic for the line-by-line is this: maybe you'll either understand what I'm tying to tell you and realize how wrong you are (and you are wrong), or you'll go away.

Quote:

You can believe the U.S. government controls world temperatures with giant underground radiators for all I care. But don't tell me I'm wrong because I disagree with you.

First you tell Frank that he is wrong and then you tell him he shouldn't tell you because you disagree with him... :P

Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
avatar

... oops. Let me re-think that hypocritical statement.

EDIT:

Ok, I fixed it. I feel dumb for doing that in the first place.

Frank Griffin
Member #7474
July 2006

Yep that was kinda funky reading. You have told me I am wrong several times meaning that you are right. You have just complained to me for such statements. You and Thomas both have trouble abiding by your own rules. I of course have set no rules for my self (like a democrat) so I am just fine hehe. Your wanting me to go away reminds me of children holding their hands over their eyes and ears not wanting to listen to something they dont want to hear. Dont take this as an attack but really how old are you two? Dont worry because like a good teacher I am here to help you so I am not going away but you two keep coming back to learn more and this way the community wins.

BTW Thomas still has not answered my questions thus proving he cannot live up to his own rules. Of course that does not stop him from creating more rules or hoops for people to jump thru.

The US Government does not control world temperatures with giant underground radiators just to help yea out there.

You are right about the 19,000 being a collection of individuals that are probably not all climatologists but the IPCC signatories are not all weather related individuals also. Also not all signatories want their good name on the IPCC document anymore.

I will find the link about the last 10 years of global temperatures for yea.

Here is a another good article from the drudge report. It is about how the founder of the weather channel, he is preparing to sue Al Gore to expose the global warming fraud along with the carbon credit schemes.

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080303175301.aspx

"gut feeling the people in England are poor" -Samuli
"taken out of context it's an awesome quote" - Jonatan Hedborg

Fladimir da Gorf
Member #1,565
October 2001
avatar

Frank, I hope you understand that the weather channel guys are just after money? And that site you linked is owned by industry lobbyists?

But anyways, it's been fun to read your posts. They just get better every day.

OpenLayer has reached a random SVN version number ;) | Online manual | Installation video!| MSVC projects now possible with cmake | Now alvailable as a Dev-C++ Devpack! (Thanks to Kotori)

Thomas Harte
Member #33
April 2000
avatar

Quote:

You and Thomas both have trouble abiding by your own rules.

I'll reiterate the thoughts I semi-iterated earlier. If you have trouble with some of the "rules" that are being set out in this argument then please explain what they are. If you agree with the "rules" then why do you keep giving them ownership?

Quote:

Your wanting me to go away reminds me of children holding their hands over their eyes and ears not wanting to listen to something they dont want to hear.

It reminds me of the last time I had a cold. My body didn't enjoy it, so it wanted it to go away. Childish body.

Quote:

Dont take this as an attack but really how old are you two? Dont worry because like a good teacher I am here to help you so I am not going away but you two keep coming back to learn more and this way the community wins.

The question isn't a personal attack. The part afterwards clearly is. As a result, and because I don't think it's relevant, I am not inclined to answer this question.

Quote:

BTW Thomas still has not answered my questions thus proving he cannot live up to his own rules.

This would be true had I at any point set the rule that "all people must answer all questions addressed to them under all circumstances". You seem to believe I did, and I would be interested to find out how you imputed that. Regardless of whether I did or not:

Quote:

Of course that does not stop him from creating more rules or hoops for people to jump thru.

Please either provide justification for this comment or withdraw it.

Re: your questions rather than the method you use to re-affirm them. The questions as restated by you:

1. Do you see a pattern of warming and cooling going back the last 100,000 years?
2. Does the warming during peak tetemperatureseach levels equivalent to todays warming?
3. Since I personally see nothing special about our current warming tend from looking at past temperatures what makes this warming period so special? The spikes and troughs look the same during each heating and cooling cycle.

1. I am unable to find detailed sources of information that go back 100,000 years. The data you linked to was clearly a simplification, though that isn't surprising given the period it covers. But the way the temperature just jumps from one side to the other makes me think that the author simplified it to communicate the point he wanted more clearly (a good presentation technique and not necessarily to be criticised).

2. I am unable to answer this question due to my answer to part 1. I would assume that it does. I don't think that humans have, or indeed could, find a way to make this planet warmer than it has ever been.

3. What bodies such as the IPCC allege is that this warming period is special because (a) we actually know that it's happening; and (b) human activity is contributing to it in a more than negligible way. If you accept both of those as facts (and for the record, I know that you don't) and believe that increasing temperatures could lead to death then the argument runs that we should curb our activities that contribute to the climate change so as not to exaggerate it further than we already have.

Incidentally, I believe you are new to these boards, and it doesn't affect the quality of your arguments in the slightest, but you can use the '{quote}' and '{/quote}' (but with square brackets instead of curly) tags to produce boxes like this:

Quote:

... you are right about the 19,000 being a collection of individuals that are probably not all climatologists but the IPCC signatories are not all weather related individuals also. Also not all signatories want their good name on the IPCC document anymore.

It's actually 20,000 per the form you get if you want to sign up. I think the front page may be out of date.

Quote:

Here is a another good article from the drudge report. It is about how the founder of the weather channel, he is preparing to sue Al Gore to expose the global warming fraud along with the carbon credit schemes.

http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080303175301.aspx

Sadly it says that he is advocating that someone sue Al Gore, not that he is preparing to do so. I think the problem is that he doesn't really suggest a plausible legal cause of action.

Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
avatar

Quote:

Your wanting me to go away reminds me of children holding their hands over their eyes and ears not wanting to listen to something they dont want to hear. Dont take this as an attack but really how old are you two? Dont worry because like a good teacher I am here to help you so I am not going away but you two keep coming back to learn more

I want you to go away because I am convinced you are wrong in every thread you've made so far. Note my word choice, I don't believe you are wrong, I'm convinced you are wrong. I've put thought into the matter and looked at the evidence and decided that I cannot agree with your viewpoint. Which means I'm tired of hearing it. I won't try to force you to go away, because not only is it a futile effort (you have no reason to listen to me), it goes against my belief in freedom of speech. That won't stop me from wanting you to go away, though.

For you fund of general knowledge, I am 20 years old.

I have learned a lot from this thread, so I guess i will keep coming back to learn more. However, let it be known that what I've learned goes against what you are saying, and you yourself have taught me nothing.

Erikster
Member #9,510
February 2008
avatar

I've decided to lighten up the tension in the thread by adding my own sarcastic joke, like Vanneto. (I'm not ripping him off, I'm contributing to his joke.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Actually, the Weather is heavily influenced by small molecules. They're called dihydrogen monoxide molecules. They cause precipitation, clouds, and humidity. If you take a pot of water, and boil it, you can see them float up into the air like smoke.

However, a network of those molecules, put in a temprature of 273.15 K, will turn into a solid object.

Amazingly, this element is essential to human life, and the solid version of it is highly sought after by children during school in the Winter.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Get it?

Cat! I'm a kitty cat. And I dance dance dance, and I dance dance dance.

alethiophile
Member #9,349
December 2007
avatar

Most amusing. Has anyone seen the sites on "dihydrogen monoxide" and its dangers? Some city actually banned styrofoam cups because they contain it. ::)

--
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
C++: An octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog.
I am the Lightning-Struck Penguin of Doom.

BAF
Member #2,981
December 2002
avatar

Styrofoam cups contain dihydrogen monoxide? Without being filled with it?

Frank Griffin
Member #7474
July 2006

It looks like Thomas and Neil have calmed down and have agreed to disagree on this topic. Time will determine who is right and who is wrong not the statement I am right and you are wrong. You should avoid the use of always, never, everything and nothing because you end up not being 100% right which would make you wrong in the end.

The biggest point about all of this Global warming stuff is the hyseria and jump to action mentality without thinking about the consequences. Here is a link to just such a story that popped up today.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/news/2008/03/05/nplane105.xml

The airline had a perfectly resonable answer and just like ethanol these people need to look at the whole system. Ethanol is a net loser by the time you look at the total input to create a single gallon of ethanol. The Greenies should have looked at the average of passengers over many flights because I know they would not shuttle five passenger over and over. They also ignore the consequences of canceling this one flight. Holding a single flight back can cause a large chain reaction of problems and people depend on a timely and reliable transportation systems. Could you imagine wanting to take a bus and it arrive 2 hours late because the bus driver refused to leave a stop until he had enough people to make it co2 acceptable. Can you imagine the chaos if every form of transportation acted like this. If a route is unpopular the market will take care of it and it will be phased out or modified all on its own without some do gooder making noise.

This type of behavior is what I expect from many Global warming believers, over reaction without understanding the whole picture. Let the science work itself out and then let the politicians figure out how they can make a buck off of it.

"gut feeling the people in England are poor" -Samuli
"taken out of context it's an awesome quote" - Jonatan Hedborg

Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
avatar

Give it a rest Frank ::)

--
Thomas Fjellstrom - [website] - [email] - [Allegro Wiki] - [Allegro TODO]
"If you can't think of a better solution, don't try to make a better solution." -- weapon_S
"The less evidence we have for what we believe is certain, the more violently we defend beliefs against those who don't agree" -- https://twitter.com/neiltyson/status/592870205409353730

LennyLen
Member #5,313
December 2004
avatar

Quote:

You should avoid the use of always, never, everything and nothing because you end up not being 100% right which would make you wrong in the end.

And you should avoid bringing up peoples age multiple times in a thread. It makes you look like a snotty little 13 yr old who's just started high school and starts talking down to all their 12 friends, telling them they're too young too understand anything.

Vanneto
Member #8,643
May 2007

Frank, you should know...

// != as in "not always"
Age != (Wisdom | Knowledge)

More likely:

Age == Alzheimer && Alzheimer == Bad & Stupidness

Sure, it could be:

Youth == Freshness && Freshness == Ignorance

But nobody's that young. :P

And no offense to anyone who has Alzheimer ( my grandpa has it... its horrible ). Just read another thread and you will forget it in a minute!

In capitalist America bank robs you.

Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
avatar

Quote:

Time will determine who is right and who is wrong not the statement I am right and you are wrong.

Well if you're right then everything is fine and dandy, but if everyone else on this site is right then we're all screwed if we don't take action now. Time will tell, but it will tell us too late.



Go to: