Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#977
#977
Obsessed said:
No. I'm denying you assertion that it is man made. Elementary chemistry does not prove your assertion.
Click to expand...

And Algorian Chemistry has proven to be a moneymaker for certain people, but it's not overburdened with provable hypotheses.
 
#978
#978
hog88 said:
You and your ilk have yet to produce anything disputing the aurguments against man made climate change.
Click to expand...

I don't have an ilk.

The earth's atmosphere and oceans are warming.

Where would one get the idea that humans can alter the composition of the atmosphere without there being any consequences?
 
Last edited:
#979
#979
Velo Vol said:
I don't have an ilk.

The earth's atmosphere and oceans are warming.

Where would one get the idea that human's can alter the composition of the atmosphere without there being any consequences?
Click to expand...

The IPCC has yet to prove that is happening.
 
#984
#984
Obsessed said:
No. I'm denying you assertion that it is man made. Elementary chemistry does not prove your assertion.
Click to expand...

As far as I know we are responsible for increasing rate of CO2 emission and deforestation. Which do contribute to a greenhouse affect.
 
#986
#986
hog88 said:
He is correct to a point. It is still not understood why some smokers develop cancer and others do not. In my non medical opinion genetics play the biggest role.
Click to expand...

Depends on the cancer. Smoking is the biggest role on lung cancer obviously.
 
#988
#988
hog88 said:
He is correct to a point. It is still not understood why some smokers develop cancer and others do not. In my non medical opinion genetics play the biggest role.
Click to expand...

There are a myriad number of things that have the ability to cause cancer and mitigate either cancer or cancer causing factors. Add into the fact that any given person can be either knowingly or unknowingly exposed to or predisposed to (by genetics as you alluded to) such factors make knowing what specifically caused the cancer (or not caused) in a particular person very difficult. However, that is not the same as not knowing what causes cancer. Conversely, knowing the cellular process of cancer, carcinogenic compounds, carcinogenic energy, or carcinogenic genes does not mean we have the full picture of cancer.
 
#992
#992
Persian Vol said:
How?
Click to expand...

Our bodies create billions of cancer cells daily. In return our body destroys and disposes them.

Unfortunately some cancer cells survive ( due to genetics) and the body doesn't see them. It treats them as they are normal cells. These cells grow and become cancer. ( any and all forms- depending on genetics)

There is no cause to cancer. Unless you want to blame your body. When in fact, it created them.
 
#993
#993
Obsessed said:
Our bodies create billions of cancer cells daily. In return our body destroys and disposes them.

Unfortunately some cancer cells survive ( due to genetics) and the body doesn't see them. It treats them as they are normal cells. These cells grow and become cancer. ( any and all forms- depending on genetics)

There is no cause to cancer. Unless you want to blame your body. When in fact, it created them.
Click to expand...

Regardless of biological explanation of what cancer cells are, smoking increases chances of obtaining lung cancer by a substantial margin.
 
#994
#994
Persian Vol said:
Regardless of biological explanation of what cancer cells are, smoking increases chances of obtaining lung cancer by a substantial margin.
Click to expand...

Prove it.


Wait. You can't. Matter of fact the oldest people alive today are "gasp" smokers.

Do foundling breast cause breast cancer? What about prostate cancer?

Persian. I'm right. This is something this silly ass ole country boy did a lot of studying on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#996
#996
Hmm.

Cigarette smoking is the number one risk factor for lung cancer. In the United States, cigarette smoking causes about 90% of lung cancers. Using other tobacco products such as cigars or pipes also increases the risk for lung cancer. Tobacco smoke is a toxic mix of more than 7,000 chemicals. Many are poisons. At least 70 are known to cause cancer in people or animals.

People who smoke are 15 to 30 times more likely to get lung cancer or die from lung cancer than people who do not smoke. Even smoking a few cigarettes a day or smoking occasionally increases the risk of lung cancer. The more years a person smokes and the more cigarettes smoked each day, the more risk goes up.
Click to expand...
 
#997
#997
The fact that people who deny smoking causes cancer also deny pollution causes global warming is fitting, I suppose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#998
#998
Velo Vol said:
There's no evidence that smokers have a greater chance of getting lung cancer than non-smokers?
Click to expand...

No. Cancer and it's various forms are genetic.


I would assume as a person gets older, the body gets weaker and may not recognize the cancer cell(s) and the body becomes cancerous. ie: smokers lungs are weaker.
 
#999
#999
Velo Vol said:
The fact that people who deny smoking causes cancer also deny pollution causes global warming is fitting, I suppose.
Click to expand...

Hopefully TRUT will show up. He doesn't believe it either. He has presented the science in the past.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top