The Future of the Human Race.

[Beebs]

It's just a little hard to take seriously when the Earths temperature has swung wildly (relatively speaking) before humans were even a glint in the first mammals eyes. I don't pretend to know the exact correlation between human made pollution and Earth's temperature, but I do know that it is possible, and long term inevitable, that the Earth's temperature changes without us.

[Der Fuhrer]

Again, since humans are responsible for approximately 1-2% of total CO2 emissions in the world, I feel inclined to tell you to go fuck yourself Blondie.

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Der Fuhrer

Again, since humans are responsible for approximately 1-2% of total CO2 emissions in the world, I feel inclined to tell you to go fuck yourself Blondie.

It's not simply about how much percentage we contribute (more than 2%, by the way), but about how we offset the natural balance of C02 "give and take" between vegetation and animals. More on that here. and here.

[f3lix]

Nice finds, Blonde. But to use your own words... "on the vast scale of geological time, 40-50 years is NOTHING."

[Mr. Blonde]

Congratulations, F3lix, you've debunked my entire scientific argument with semantics. [10]

[Der Fuhrer]

Since our population is growing more rapidly than ever, food shortages may one day be a problem. I think it's obvious that God is making the Earth warmer so that there is more fertile agricultural land to cultivate. Thus allowing the human race to sustain its ever-growing population. Jesus loves us, and he is watching out for us.

Personally, I don't like cold weather, I'm glad the Earth is heating up.

[Ugly Bastard]

Something like global warming is probably always going to be perceived as being a bigger problem than it really is/affected by humanity more than it really is. People like things that allow them to think they matter and global warming is a perfect outlet for that. New York Magazine had a good article recently about the minds of the electorate. The gist is that things like Facebook have enabled people to feel like they're more important than they really are.

They unearthed a study of 11,000 teenagers that was done once in 1951 and once in 1989, in which only 12 percent agreed with the statement “I am an important person” the first time around, whereas 78 percent agreed the second.

I can only imagine that's more like 90%+ at this point.

[f3lix]

That would also be aided by all the bull shit educators have to do to make every child feel special. You'd be furious and shocked if you knew what we are taught in our education classes. Apparently, I'm in the severe minority that thinks teachers should focus on the greatest good and improve the masses while leaving the bottom 15% of students behind. I get all kinds of shit from classmates and professors who think the bottom 15% is the most important citing, "They deserve every opportunity that the others do." I'm arguing the majority gets held back for the sake of the minority.

[THEINCREDIBLEdork]

F3lix, do you think that you are an important person?

Everyone on this board is a product of the post 1951 education system in which everyone is led to believe they are special.

[f3lix]

Mackenzie told me I was special when I was inside her.

[THEINCREDIBLEdork]

We're ALL special in our very own way. Mackenzie told me you were 'specially small.

[Beebs]

Originally Posted by Mr. Mistoffelees

We're ALL special in our very own way. Mackenzie told me you were 'specially small.

Mitch and Mackenzie fanfic plz?

ty.

[Mr. Blonde]

How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming | A Grist Special Series | Grist

[Mr. Blonde]

Good Comic on it: Darryl Cunningham Investigates: Climate Change

[Saint DH]

I browsed the website. I looked at the various different sections for the reasons why I am skeptical. I saw very few. The first one that took my notice was about the hockey stick graph. Since I have read the article that discredits the entire study, I was curious as to what this website could possibly say to refute such unmistakable error and possible outright manipulation. The hockey stick graph, although claimed as unimportant by the web site's author, is very important. Nearly the entire global warming movement began as a direct result from this study. As I expected, the dumb ass author of this website had not even taken the time to read the article, and not only professed his ignorance and lack of understanding, but claimed reading such an article is only for those "without lives". I should have closed the web site at this point, but I continued looking.

The next "skeptic argument" link I clicked was the one about false predictions of global cooling in the 70s. Aside from the extreme assumption from the author that back then, "you could find a greater consensus on the coming alien invasion", I found the only rebuttal against this argument was that it wasn't nearly as successful as this current doomsday theory is. I wonder why that is? What is the biggest difference in life today and life in the 1970s? Oh? Computers and internet technology you say? The internet, which provides anyone with a semi-functioning brain to put out information, to write a blog, to make a message board post, to start a web site, to spread any type of information or misinformation they wish to spread? Is that the difference? Oh yeah, it probably is.

The final section I read about was against the argument that humans emit very little CO2 compared to natural emissions. What I expected were facts: humans emit this much CO2 and nature emits this much CO2. What I got instead was pure conjecture that the natural CO2 emissions are in perfect balance, and that humans have disrupted this balance. I don't buy that crap. If you pour 10,000 gallons of koolaid into a massive lake of fresh water, and take a drink of that water, it's probably goiing to still taste like nasty lake water. Perhaps that's a shitty analogy, but the point is that humans emit less than 1% of CO2 into the atmosphere. I just can't see how that little amount is the cause to the end of the world.

As far as that comic strip goes...you're never going to convince any global warming skeptics with left wing propaganda.

When global warming, and the subsequent apocalypse, never comes to fruition, one of two things will happen. The first is that the entire notion, and movement, of global warming advocacy will disappear completely. No one will ask questions, no one will speak of it again. Personally, I do not believe this is the likely outcome. As the author of the above website pointed out, global warming doomsday theories have been far too successful to simply disappear as previous doomsday theories have. That is why I believe the second outcome is much more likely. That is, in the coming future there will be some type of radical legislation proposed, supported, and passed by environmentalists and "scientists" with the sole intent of "stopping global warming". It will likely have serious implications for business and industry, and it will likely cause serious economic hardship, possibly even a recession (but that point is merely speculation on my behalf). The point is that once global warming never comes to be, proponents of the apocalypse will refer to such legislation as their "victory over global warming". And as such, it will be viewed as a triumph for the environment, environmentalist groups, and climate scientists, many of whom will receive highly prestigious awards for their efforts to save humanity. When in reality they probably hurt more people than they ever helped. This is how global warming will end, and it must end that way so the road can still be paved for the next doomsday theory to take hold of the population.

[Mr. Blonde]

DH, I suggest you re-read this entire thread. You seem to forget pretty much everything. This is from just the previous page:

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Predictive apocalypse timelines are mostly useless, but the principles behind them (environmental ones, anyways) are still valid. There is absolutely no doubt that eventually we are going to run out of resources. The Earth is finite.



Okay. Because on the vast scale of geological time, 40-50 years is NOTHING. We know a lot of stuff now we didn't know in the 70's, especially when it comes to environmental science. Secondly, most of what you just said is complete bullshit.

Some highlights:

"The video truly becomes meteorological malpractice when Bastardi compares today to the 1970s, utterly misleading viewers into thinking that a few days of cold weather over parts of the word somehow undoes the “unequivocal” warming of the Earth’s climate system that has been demonstrated through direct scientific observation in recent decades. In fact, “The last 10 years are the warmest 10-year period of the modern record,” said NOAA climate monitoring chief Deke Arndt. “Even if you analyze the trend during that 10 years, the trend is actually positive, which means warming” "

"There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age. Indeed, the possibility of anthropogenic warming dominated the peer-reviewed literature even then."

"The BAMS piece examines the scientific origins of the myth, the popular media of the 1970s who got the story slightly wrong, the deniers/delayers who perpetuate the myth today, and, most importantly, what real scientists actually said in real peer-reviewed journals at the time. Their literature survey, the most comprehensive ever done on the subject, found:

The survey identified only 7 articles indicating cooling compared to 44 indicating warming. Those seven cooling articles garnered just 12% of the citations."

"In this case, the panel concluded that the potential damage from greenhouse gases was real and should not be ignored. The potential for cooling, the threat of aerosols, or the possibility of an ice age shows up nowhere in the report. Warming from doubled CO2 of 1.5°–4.5°C was possible, the panel reported. While there were huge uncertainties, Verner Suomi, chairman of the National Research Council’s Climate Research Board, wrote in the report’s foreword that he believed there was enough evidence to support action: “A wait-and-see policy may mean waiting until it is too late” (Charney et al. 1979). Clearly, if a national report in the 1970s advocates urgent action to address global warming, then the scientific consensus of the 1970s was not global cooling."

"On August 14, 1975, the New York Times ran, “Warming Trend Seen in Climate.” In this article, the New York Times discusses two scientific articles that focus on the overall climate patterns. It covers the debate over global cooling due to aerosols and global warming due to CO2 increases:

Dr. [Wally] Broecker’s argument is that the present cooling trend in the north will be reversed as more and more carbon dioxide is introduced into the atmosphere by the burning of fuels.

In the decades since, of course, scientists have come to the consensus that our continued burning of fossil fuels are tied to the warming of the planet."


In sum, you and DF need to shut the fuck up and read more about science instead of holing yourselves up in some financial ivory tower and assuming you know what the hell you're talking about. I cannot for the life of me understand why you're both so willing to disbelieve that the massive amount of pollution and environmental destruction we humans have caused might be destroying the environment.

[Saint DH]

Nothing serious guys, but in the past week I've put a significant demon-sized hole in the plaster walls of my house. The causing issues aside, I need to fix them. I was conjuring the demon king of hell, Beleth, and apparently I did not offer him the correct sacrifice. An epic battle between myself and the demon lord followed. I was able to (because I'm a badass) successfully banish him back to the netherworld but not without significant damage to my plaster walls. I have 7 months to fix it, so I have time, I just want to get it fixed asap. I know how screens work, somehow, but I have no clue about the science of plastering. Thanks.

~STDH

[Mr. Blonde]

[Mr. Blonde]

YouTube - Bertrand Russell - to our descendants

YouTube - Bertrand Russell - to our descendants

[DDTempest]

Originally Posted by Dirty Harry

Nothing serious guys, but in the past week I've put a significant demon-sized hole in the plaster walls of my house. The causing issues aside, I need to fix them. I was conjuring the demon king of hell, Beleth, and apparently I did not offer him the correct sacrifice. An epic battle between myself and the demon lord followed. I was able to (because I'm a badass) successfully banish him back to the netherworld but not without significant damage to my plaster walls. I have 7 months to fix it, so I have time, I just want to get it fixed asap. I know how screens work, somehow, but I have no clue about the science of plastering. Thanks.

~STDH

You can fake it with drywall compound and a good coat of paint.

[Mr. Blonde]

Why don't people understand the urgency of colonizing other planets?

Fantastic explanation of the kind of behavior the DH/DF exhibits, as he seems to believe that humans are nearly gods and humanity can survive in Earth's environment even under our extremely heavy-resource-raping for all eternity forever and ever Amen.

[Saint DH]

I never once claimed anything of the sort. I just refuse to buy into your holothetic logic. When it comes to the conflict of man vs. nature, I believe the outcome is conditional and circumstantial. In the case of global warming, I just think humans are not as powerful as portrayed, and that nature is not as susceptible as it is portrayed.

Colonizing planets is absolutely essential for the assurance of a continuing human species. Without such developments, we are surely doomed to die out eventually.

[Mr. Blonde]

SUCK
MY
DICK
DIRTY
HARRY

[f3lix]

"97% of scientists" is a proof surrogate. What the fuck is a "scientist"? In what field are they scientists? This could be a bunch of medical researchers being polled.

[Saint DH]

Or it could be a group of climate scientists, all of which have their entire careers staked on global warming.