4 inches of snow (!!!!!) in Columbia

#176
#176
roddo518 said:
Global warming is a crock, that's why they call it climate change now. Look up the top ten biggest myths about global warming and don't stop there. Then research the myths they speak of. I have and everyone I checked out were factual. So you can believe the research, or you can believe all that msnbc crap, and oh by the way send your donations and greenhouse stamp money to the national democratic committee.
Click to expand...

Jeez, a lot of you all are willfully ignorant.

The change to climate change from global warming is the result NOT of a disagreement as to whether or not the globe is warming, or will continue warming. That is not at all controversial and the vast majority of all climate scientists agree. The change was, rather, because the term "global warming" ignores the side effects of warming, and atmospheric change. It ignores the fact that some of the worst effects will be experienced through storms, flooding via sea level rise, drought, etc. And, most of these effects will be felt by poorer regions.

The name was meant to address the fact that the common name was too narrow in scope and ignored a lot of the negative effects. That is why we use the larger and more general name climate change now. But, by all means, continue believing whatever conspiracy theorist nonsense you want. Continue disagreeing with what might be the biggest scientific consensus on any "live" or "debated" issue in recent memory on the basis of Rush Limbaugh's incisive analysis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#177
#177
CountVolcula said:
Did you know that the Sahara Desert used to be a fertile, lush area with rivers and lakes?

That was when an ice cap covered much of Europe and forced weather patterns to change, making that part of Africa much different than it is today

The caps melted for some unknown reason and changed that landscape to what we know today
Click to expand...



Its useless Count. One of the greatest ills of society will always be the unstoppable urge of a few to try to control the behavior and attitudes of the rest of just trying to live our lives.
 
#178
#178
Some of those scientists you speak of said that their observations were right on global warming but later have come out saying that you are lucky the oceans work the way they do. This meaning that they were wrong because they didn't factor in how the oceans stabilize the atmosphere and absorb the excess warmth. Funny use of words to use 'you are lucky' , he should have said we are lucky. That's how much he wanted their research to be right. Yall can believe what Ya want, I'm just not participating in a government global fundraiser.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#179
#179
FalcoVol said:
Carbon taxes for all who own livestock!!!
Click to expand...

I'm not even kidding. I just took this straight from an article.... It's rather sad. Lol

In a 2006 United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization report, it claims that the livestock sector, most of which are cows, “generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport.” According to a Danish study, the average cow produces enough methane per year to do the same greenhouse damage as four tons of carbon dioxide. So is this significantly contributing to global warming?
 
#180
#180
People, people; take it to the Politics forum or let it go. None of you are going to change the others' minds, and it's time to get in gameday mode!

PS: if it helps, the cheerleaders look cold.
Go Vols!!! :fireworks:
Oh, and Florida is down 7-0. :fireworks:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#181
#181
roddo518 said:
Some of those scientists you speak of said that their observations were right on global warming but later have come out saying that you are lucky the oceans work the way they do. This meaning that they were wrong because they didn't factor in how the oceans stabilize the atmosphere and absorb the excess warmth. Funny use of words to use 'you are lucky' , he should have said we are lucky. That's how much he wanted their research to be right. Yall can believe what Ya want, I'm just not participating in a government global fundraiser.
Click to expand...
Seeing how much of the earth is covered by water, that's a damn huge oversight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#182
#182
fade route said:
The IPCC is a political organization. Little of what they do is rooted in science. I for one would like the IPCC to answer a very simple question:

We only have a little over 100 years actual of climate data from which they base their assumptions, but the earth, as most would agree, has most likely been around for well over a million years. So, how do you even know what the average temp of the earth should be based on a sample size of 0.0001 percent of the entire time the earth has been in existence? And that's a conservative estimate. If you don't know what the average temp should be for the earth, then how can you possibly say that a 20-25 year warming trend is abnormal or due to human activity?
Click to expand...

Fade, Fade, Fade... the IPCC is a scientific organization rooted in science which must fight constantly fight political pressures.

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old, btw.

Let's forget climate for a minute - it's a simple energy balance. CO2 absorbs infrared radiation and then transmits that radiation in all directions. No one would ever try to deny this. CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere (no one denies this), ergo more infrared radiation (i.e. heat) is being reflected back to the ground.

It's a simple energy balance.
 
#183
#183
turambar85 said:
Jeez, a lot of you all are willfully ignorant.

The change to climate change from global warming is the result NOT of a disagreement as to whether or not the globe is warming, or will continue warming. That is not at all controversial and the vast majority of all climate scientists agree. The change was, rather, because the term "global warming" ignores the side effects of warming, and atmospheric change. It ignores the fact that some of the worst effects will be experienced through storms, flooding via sea level rise, drought, etc. And, most of these effects will be felt by poorer regions.

The name was meant to address the fact that the common name was too narrow in scope and ignored a lot of the negative effects. That is why we use the larger and more general name climate change now. But, by all means, continue believing whatever conspiracy theorist nonsense you want. Continue disagreeing with what might be the biggest scientific consensus on any "live" or "debated" issue in recent memory on the basis of Rush Limbaugh's incisive analysis.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight....you believe Al Gore and you are calling other people ignorant?
 
#184
#184
Eddie Vol Halen said:
Fade, Fade, Fade... the IPCC is a scientific organization rooted in science which must fight constantly fight political pressures.

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old, btw.

Let's forget climate for a minute - it's a simple energy balance. CO2 absorbs infrared radiation and then transmits that radiation in all directions. No one would ever try to deny this. CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere (no one denies this), ergo more infrared radiation (i.e. heat) is being reflected back to the ground.

It's a simple energy balance.
Click to expand...

Logical information
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#185
#185
BruiserVol said:
I'm not even kidding. I just took this straight from an article.... It's rather sad. Lol

In a 2006 United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization report, it claims that the livestock sector, most of which are cows, “generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport.” According to a Danish study, the average cow produces enough methane per year to do the same greenhouse damage as four tons of carbon dioxide. So is this significantly contributing to global warming?
Click to expand...
At what point does it get to population control? That's where it's going.
 
#186
#186
Fightmaker said:
Let me get this straight....you believe Al Gore and you are calling other people ignorant?
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight - you believe that every single one of the scientists - the experts - are basing their information and understanding on Al Gore?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#187
#187
turambar85 said:
Jeez, a lot of you all are willfully ignorant.

The change to climate change from global warming is the result NOT of a disagreement as to whether or not the globe is warming, or will continue warming. That is not at all controversial and the vast majority of all climate scientists agree. The change was, rather, because the term "global warming" ignores the side effects of warming, and atmospheric change. It ignores the fact that some of the worst effects will be experienced through storms, flooding via sea level rise, drought, etc. And, most of these effects will be felt by poorer regions.

The name was meant to address the fact that the common name was too narrow in scope and ignored a lot of the negative effects. That is why we use the larger and more general name climate change now. But, by all means, continue believing whatever conspiracy theorist nonsense you want. Continue disagreeing with what might be the biggest scientific consensus on any "live" or "debated" issue in recent memory on the basis of Rush Limbaugh's incisive analysis.
Click to expand...

Jibberish. I love the fact that those who promote climate change drive around in gas guzzlers and fly private jets.

Everything about the environment is cyclical. In the 1970's these idiots were predicting another ice age within 30 years. I will begin to worry when I see liberals walking 10 miles to work uphill in the snow barefooted.
 
#188
#188
BruiserVol said:
I'm not even kidding. I just took this straight from an article.... It's rather sad. Lol

In a 2006 United Nations’ Food and Agricultural Organization report, it claims that the livestock sector, most of which are cows, “generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport.” According to a Danish study, the average cow produces enough methane per year to do the same greenhouse damage as four tons of carbon dioxide. So is this significantly contributing to global warming?
Click to expand...

The US railroads staved off global warming by over 100 years by killing off the Bison. Amiright? Or amiright?
 
#189
#189
turambar85 said:
Let me get this straight - you believe that every single one of the scientists - the experts - are basing their information and understanding on Al Gore?
Click to expand...

There are plenty of credible, respected scientists who say that there is no global warming, or climate change, or whatever you guys will call it next when people stop believing it. And none of them are named Ben Affleck or Leonardo DiCaprio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#190
#190
turambar85 said:
Let me get this straight - you believe that every single one of the scientists - the experts - are basing their information and understanding on Al Gore?
Click to expand...

LMAO. Wake up people. Don't be sheep. Make a decision based on facts.

We need you. We need to change the world. It won't be easy. Like turning a cruise liner.

I am a conservative republican. But I get the facts. We can make a difference within reality...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#191
#191
Let me tell you what I know about most scientists... They are prostitutes for grant money. Who gives the most grant money? The gov't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#192
#192
Fightmaker said:
There are plenty of credible, respected scientists who say that there is no global warming, or climate change, or whatever you guys will call it next when people stop believing it. And none of them are named Ben Affleck or Leonardo DiCaprio.
Click to expand...

Let me guess, you don't believe in evolution either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#195
#195
Eddie Vol Halen said:
Fade, Fade, Fade... the IPCC is a scientific organization rooted in science which must fight constantly fight political pressures.

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old, btw.

Let's forget climate for a minute - it's a simple energy balance. CO2 absorbs infrared radiation and then transmits that radiation in all directions. No one would ever try to deny this. CO2 is increasing in the atmosphere (no one denies this), ergo more infrared radiation (i.e. heat) is being reflected back to the ground.

It's a simple energy balance.
Click to expand...

just stand in the shade then step out into the sun... is it warmer in the sun?.. ...
 
#198
#198
iVol4Life said:
Let me guess, you don't believe in evolution either.
Click to expand...

You would be correct. I believe in a creator. You can make fun of me all you want for that too, but you are still the one siding with Al Gore. Take my advice on this for real-me following the almighty God, and you following Al Gore does not make me look like the stupid one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top