| About the greenhouse gases, mostly it's steam from oceans, CO2 it's just a small percentage of the equation. No way humans are the major cause. |
| Anime caused Global Warming |
 |
Praland said: Anime caused Global Warming It's all the moe pollution. |
| "Let Justice Be Done!" My Theme Fight again, fight again for justice! |
| Cats caused Global Warming |
| I've been here way too long... |
| Anime fans burp mass could be causing global warming? |
| I kno ryt? Let's blame obama and the wurld lieders And dat Swede who promoted das theory |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
| ye look at this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1SgmFa0r04 |
| Nope, not caused by humans, just obama, but we all know he's not human. |
It's the major "human pollution", not the greenhouse gas with more concentration nor effect. "When it comes to global warming, methane is 20 times more harmful than carbon dioxide"¹ "Steam from water comprises up to 70 percent of the total greenhouse effect."² Oceans controls climate. |
| cow farts cause pollution as well. |
 |
GoldSlash said: Oceans controls climate. so blame the oceans? http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/oceans-hid-the-heat-and-slowed-pace-of-global-warming/ |
fst said: Nope, not caused by humans, just obama, but we all know he's not human. Damned reptilian! |
| "Let Justice Be Done!" My Theme Fight again, fight again for justice! |
| The sun controls the climate So let's blame the sun? |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
| Blame no one, it's a natural thing, like ice age was in the past. I mean, it's good that leaders are changing to a green power, just no need to rush. |
GoldSlash said: Look, no one knows yet. It is a fact that temperature in earth varies naturally, and that with or without humans the result would be the same, but one thing is for sure: We are accelerating the process.About the greenhouse gases, mostly it's steam from oceans, CO2 it's just a small percentage of the equation. No way humans are the major cause. |
 |
| Nice relevant anime discussion we have going on here. Was this by any chance inspired by Parashit's pseudo Green Peace message? |
 |
| We shood be concerned more about the fast depletion of resources not this silly theory of a Swede lol |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
| I'm still at episode 18 on Parashyt, dind't see the message though. |
 |
 |
ichii_1 said: are you trying to say its bad for us to think the dog is in pain because someone put a shirt on it? I'm confused because the caption seems to almost contradict the image because it is pretty obvious the dog is in pain? |
GoldSlash said: Blame no one, it's a natural thing, like ice age was in the past. I mean, it's good that leaders are changing to a green power, just no need to rush. but majority of scientists tells me that human pollution indeed influence it http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ who is the correct one you (and other global warming denialist) or this scientists? Now, scientists believe they’ve untangled the relationship. In a paper published Monday in Nature Climate Change, researchers from the University of Exeter claim to have found direct evidence that as global temperatures rise, so does the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, creating a positive feedback that in turn warms the Earth even more — basically, global warming creates more global warming. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/31/3640700/positive-feedback-except-its-terrifying/ |
sammario said: The dog is being portrayed as being in pain from a human perspective. Nevertheless, it would be foolish to assume a dog is happy or content with being dressed up if it doesn't show any objection.ichii_1 said: are you trying to say its bad for us to think the dog is in pain because someone put a shirt on it? I'm confused because the caption seems to almost contradict the image because it is pretty obvious the dog is in pain? |
|
sammario said: I'm not talking only about oil and other energy resourcesRemv_quevav said: We shood be concerned more about the fast depletion of resources not this silly theory of a Swede lol I'm sorry, but as someone who works in the Oil Industry, that is not true at all. Sure, current rigs will always run out, and we will need to move somewhere else, but you want to know something amazing? Oil can be found almost anywhere and everywhere. There is thousands of untapped oil reserves throughout our the world, especially in places like Antarctica and Alaska (even though people don't want drilling there, if we must there's tons of oil in those areas). Believe me when I tell you we are far from running out, and with the recent discovery of how to efficiently retrieve an extreme amount of oil from Barret's Shale, oil should last us a lot longer. I'm talking about all resources like food, water, land and etc. But its a nice insigjt that oil can be found anywhere (and I beliv tht) |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
| "the cientists" like if they are a mass and thinks all exactly the same. Also, it's authority fallacy. Just cause i've a computer science degree("a scientist" and says something about algorithms, or technology, it's automatically right? Of course not. Tbh i'm pretty donkey in most of computer topics. IPCC is dishonest in many ways... Their conclusions are biased. I don't denied the global warming, i deny "the cause" which is pretty different. |
GoldSlashMar 31, 2015 7:07 PM
sammario said: ichii_1 said: are you trying to say its bad for us to think the dog is in pain because someone put a shirt on it? I'm confused because the caption seems to almost contradict the image because it is pretty obvious the dog is in pain? Stop, don't get sassy with me girl :( you know what that pic means :( Human arrogance is the source of global warming, we pollute the world all the while complaining about it, but we can't stop because the present is more important than the future. |
|
sammario said: Remv_quevav said: We shood be concerned more about the fast depletion of resources not this silly theory of a Swede lol I'm sorry, but as someone who works in the Oil Industry, that is not true at all. Sure, current rigs will always run out, and we will need to move somewhere else, but you want to know something amazing? Oil can be found almost anywhere and everywhere. There is thousands of untapped oil reserves throughout our the world, especially in places like Antarctica and Alaska (even though people don't want drilling there, if we must there's tons of oil in those areas). Believe me when I tell you we are far from running out, and with the recent discovery of how to efficiently retrieve an extreme amount of oil from Barret's Shale, oil should last us a lot longer. that maybe true on oil resources but fracking is being done now instead of drilling oil in the traidtional way, Michio Kaku says ye we will never run out of oil but it will become more expensive Mankind using Earth's resources at alarming rate Humanity would need five Earths to produce the resources needed if everyone lived as profligately as Americans, according to a report issued Tuesday. http://phys.org/news178269435.html |
GoldSlash said: "the cientists" like if they are a mass and thinks all exactly the same. Also, it's authority fallacy. Just cause i've a computer science degree("a scientist" and says something about algorithms, or technology, it's automatically right? Of course not. Tbh i'm pretty donkey in most of computer topics. IPCC is dishonest in many ways... Their conclusions are biased. I don't denied the global warming, i deny "the cause" which is pretty different. coming with fallacies again, that appeal to authority again, that fallacy is only applicable if the authority is proven to be wrong, and in this case can you prove those scientists wrong? and ok fair enough you believe in global warming too but a lot of news about it says that it is indeed influence greatly by human pollution/activity |
| How IPCC operates, is so great. American Geophysical Union said "observed over the past 50 years" American Meteorological Society said "of the past half century" IPCC conclusion = "over the past century". And sure, half century years of measure, would explain a historical effect which takes long term(centuries to thousand years and unknown variables(butterfly effect applies since we talking climate)). About, who have to prove, it's a reversal of the charge. First the positive statement has the charge to prove they are correct. The falseability is after. |
GoldSlashMar 31, 2015 7:23 PM
| Glory 2 Stalin & his gulag |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
GoldSlash said: About, who have to prove, it's a reversal of the charge. First the positive statement has the charge to prove they are correct. The falseability is after. the majority though the 97% of climate scientists agrees, and they agree with researches and studies to back it up that is the difference so you just simply cannot shift the burden of proof to this scientists since they already made their part to prove it and continue to refine and test it too now and in the future |
| What about the rest of statement? "Majority", do i need to remember Galileo? "the majority though the 97% of climate scientists agrees" said by IPCC, the ones that made "half century measures", becomes "over a entire century". Also, since we talking climate, what about butterfly effect?? Unknown variables and how they can affect the equation. Long term effect, thousand of years(see ice age), being "proven" with 100% accuracy, within short term data! Great! Not to mention the model they are using. |
GoldSlashMar 31, 2015 7:42 PM
| Galileos time is different than today though, today we got more better measuring tools and science is more accepted and openly scrutinize this days, peer reviews about the butterfly effect this recent news that i posted a while ago maybe related to it Now, scientists believe they’ve untangled the relationship. In a paper published Monday in Nature Climate Change, researchers from the University of Exeter claim to have found direct evidence that as global temperatures rise, so does the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, creating a positive feedback that in turn warms the Earth even more — basically, global warming creates more global warming. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/31/3640700/positive-feedback-except-its-terrifying/ |
j0x said: Now, scientists believe they’ve untangled the relationship. In a paper published Monday in Nature Climate Change, researchers from the University of Exeter claim to have found direct evidence that as global temperatures rise, so does the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases, creating a positive feedback that in turn warms the Earth even more — basically, global warming creates more global warming. http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/31/3640700/positive-feedback-except-its-terrifying/ Yeah and i agree with that. Sure temperature is rising, who said otherwise? Just it's not major human cause, since we not control oceans. If even we have influence, we aren't the "cause". "Scientists agree that an increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases causes the Earth’s temperature to rise" Blatantly news. Everyone that completed high school knows that... But they forgot to say, ""Steam from water comprises up to 70 percent of the total greenhouse effect.". So, Carbon Dioxide ins't >50 percent and isn't the main cause. |
GoldSlashMar 31, 2015 8:03 PM
Remv_quevav said: The sun controls the climate So let's blame the sun? We should blow it up. |
| There are studies that say that the sun's changing temperature is causing weather alterations of the planet. The rise of CO2 does not coincide 2 the rise of temperature. It also say that CO2 levels were higher in Ice Age than 2day. I can't show the study coz I'm in phone. |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
| @Remv_quevav Exactly...It's also said that CO2 is the "life gas", the ones that made life have more variability... Without that gas, even the life on Earth couldn't be possible. |
GoldSlash said: About the greenhouse gases, mostly it's steam from oceans, CO2 it's just a small percentage of the equation. No way humans are the major cause. "steam from oceans" that is water vapour you idiot. that evaporates and is part of the water cycle which does not affect global warming at all. co2 from fossil fuels and methane ARE the main causes go back to fox news |
 |
GoldSlash said: About the greenhouse gases, mostly it's steam from oceans, CO2 it's just a small percentage of the equation. No way humans are the major cause. Wrong forum. But, a drastic change happens every couple hundred years, its completely a natural normal pattern for the earth. We SHOULD worry about the environment and air quality, but not so much about 'global warming' |
 |
placid said: that is water vapour you idiot. that evaporates and is part of the water cycle which does not affect global warming at all. co2 from fossil fuels and methane ARE the main causes "Steam from water comprises up to 70 percent of the total greenhouse effect."² Steam, vapor, vapour, it's the same thing. It's a greenhouse gas too. http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html About CO2 is not only from fossil fuels, it's for any burn, like when our forest get in fire(happens a lot in S.America), also when vulcans expels mostly co2, So2 and water vapour, both of these things are uncontrollable. @dakotasapphire Yeah much better. |
GoldSlashApr 2, 2015 7:27 AM
sammario said: placid said: "steam from oceans" that is water vapour you idiot. that evaporates and is part of the water cycle which does not affect global warming at all. co2 from fossil fuels and methane ARE the main causes go back to fox news says the guy who thinks the worlds going to explode because gas is in the air. Believe me when I say climate change scientist "assume" so much about their research. There's many random variables that would need to occur for their studies to be true, and not only that, we do not know everything single thing about how our atmosphere works. It's quite possible that we could be wrong, and the reason we go with these studies is only because it makes sense with the information we have right now. There are just too many gaps and general randomness in a climate change scientists "theories" to be considered credible. Go back to MSNBC, you prick. P.S I really don't care who you listen to, but considering you seem to dislike a certain news channel simply because they share different opinions than you is absurd. Every news channel has some sort of bias, and a lot of times they twist facts in the favor of that bias, which could end up making the facts incorrect. Don't be a fucking hypocrite. you're a fucking dumbass. fox news denies the existence of global warming altogether. regarding your first sentence, i have no clue what you're talking about; you've clearly mistaken me for some other idiot who shares the same pea-sized cranium with you. go back to the autistic care centre where you belong GoldSlash said: placid said: that is water vapour you idiot. that evaporates and is part of the water cycle which does not affect global warming at all. co2 from fossil fuels and methane ARE the main causes "Steam from water comprises up to 70 percent of the total greenhouse effect."² Steam, vapor, vapour, it's the same thing. It's a greenhouse gas too. http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html About CO2 is not only from fossil fuels, it's for any burn, like when our forest get in fire(happens a lot in S.America), also when vulcans expels mostly co2, So2 and water vapour, both of these things are uncontrollable. @dakotasapphire Yeah much better. im talking about global warming. you're talking about the greenhouse effect. get your eyes checked the natural greenhouse effect does not affect global warming. it involves a balanced exchange of heat between the atmosphere of earth and the space beyond. global warming is the unbalanced absorption of the heat and damaging of the ozone which results in an increasing global temperature just because you googled some unrelated information on nasa that looks relevant doesnt make your room temperature iq seem more grand run along retards |
|
| It is mostly caused by the farts of cows and the electrical consumption from Al Gore's house. We can't turn Al Gore into a hamburger but. |
More topics from this board
Poll: » do you hide or deny your dark side to others or society?deg - 6 hours ago |
21 |
by deg
»»
4 minutes ago |
|
» Are you going to apologize?LenRea - Mar 25 |
21 |
by cosmosreceiver
»»
6 minutes ago |
|
» whats your shoe size ?sussybakagirl420 - Mar 22 |
22 |
by tsukareru
»»
14 minutes ago |
|
» Plushies_Nette_ - Yesterday |
16 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
43 minutes ago |
|
» Do you enjoy nature?Kamikaze_404 - Apr 23 |
34 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
44 minutes ago |