Junk Science

5.56X45mm

Milforum Mac Daddy
Humans have very little to no impact on global climate change. Our earth is 4.6 billion years old. It started out as one big fire ball with a tremendous amount of volcanic activity. Since its creation, the earth's core has been cooling and will continue to cool until its demise.

The earth has gone through some extreme changes. Just like the universe, the earth is a dynamic system. Not static. It is constantly changing. Our earth has gone from global tropical temperatures, like that of the Jurassic period, to the frigid ice age temperatures of the Pleistocene period.

During parts of the Cryogenian period (790 to 630 million years ago), the Earth experienced what is known as "Snowball Earth." Within a 160 million year period the Earth was entirely covered by ice and melted all by its lonesome self.

The last major Ice Age was about 15,000 years ago. The polar ice caps covered a large part of the earth leaving a narrow band around the equator. Around 10,000 years ago, both ice caps receded back to what they are today.

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant, it is a nutrient. CO2 is one of the many elements that our earth's ecosystem needs to sustain life. CO2 is what animals and humans exhale and what plants need for photosynthesis. Five hundred million years ago CO2 was 20 times more prevalent than today, decreasing to 4-5 times during the Jurassic period and then maintained a slow decline. Compared to previous geological time periods the earth today is actually CO2 impoverished. 6 Billion ton of CO2 are man made each year. 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in the world's oceans. 90 billion tons come from volcanoes and decomposing terrestrial based life. Man made CO2 only contributes about 3.2% of the total CO2 discharge.

To believe that humans have enough impact on the environment to cause the climate to change is both very irresponsible and dangerous. What do I mean by this? I mean we must not relinquish our freedoms and liberties to some government entity wanting to raise taxes, raise fees, regulate and control every aspect of our lives in the name of saving humanity. The environmentalist and far left are using Global Warming as a means to push there socialist agenda upon the populace.

They also forget to mention another of those deadly greenhouse gasses that are so heinous, water vapor! In the 80's, Mt Pinatubo in the Philippines erupted and in a few days, it dumped more CO2 into our atmosphere than in the entire human industrial age to to date. Somehow, the environment managed to survive this "catastrophe".

There is absolutely no basis in scientific fact for the assertions of the watermelons that global warming (if any) has been induced by human activities. One would think that if the scientific facts were so overwhelmingly on their side, they wouldn't have any problem with honest scrutiny of their data, assumptions made based on that data, or honest open examination of evidence that is contrary to their conclusions. In reality, they invariably attack the bearer of this information rather than the evidence itself. People have lost their jobs and had their careers ruined for doing nothing more than applying legitimate scientific logic and scrutiny to the assertions of fanatics. They love to make the assertion that "The consensus of scientists agree that there is in fact global warming and it is undeniably man-made." The reality is that most of the scientists that they refer to are not people trained and educated in any science even vaguely related to climatology. Many are even social scientists! While their is some evidence of warming trends in the last 20-30 years, making the leap that it is human induced is nothing less than fantastically delusional, or more likely, intentional misinformation.

As I stated, the environmental movement is nothing more than a vehicle to impose more and more governmental control. It is nothing more than yet another page out of the liberal playbook. Time and time again they have lost at the ballot box because normal (clear thinking) people naturally reject their brand of stupidity. They have to hide their agenda and true feelings in order to get elected to public office in much of this country. They try to get their legislation through congress but when that doesn't work, they have no problem bypassing the democratic system to impose their lunacy on us by getting liberal judges to create law by fiat. The real problems of this country are almost wholly created and magnified by liberalism. It is nothing less than a cancer and it must be attacked without mercy wherever it is found.
 
"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-twentieth century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic (man-made) greenhouse gas concentrations via an enhanced greenhouse effect. Natural phenomena such as solar variation combined with volcanoes probably had a small warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950 and a small cooling effect from 1950 onward.[2][3] These basic conclusions have been endorsed by at least thirty scientific societies and academies of science,[4] including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries.[5][6][7] While individual scientists have voiced disagreement with some findings of the IPCC,[8] the overwhelming majority of scientists working on climate change agree with the IPCC's main conclusions."

"Human activity since the industrial revolution has increased the concentration of various greenhouse gases, leading to increased radiative forcing from CO2, methane, tropospheric ozone, CFCs and nitrous oxide. Molecule for molecule, methane is a more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, but its concentration is much smaller so that its total radiative forcing is only about a fourth of that from carbon dioxide. Some other naturally occurring gases contribute small fractions of the greenhouse effect; one of these, nitrous oxide (N2O), is increasing in concentration owing to human activity such as agriculture. The atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and CH4 have increased by 31% and 149% respectively since the beginning of the industrial revolution in the mid-1700s. These levels are considerably higher than at any time during the last 650,000 years, the period for which reliable data has been extracted from ice cores.[29] From less direct geological evidence it is believed that CO2 values this high were last attained 20 million years ago.[30] Fossil fuel burning has produced approximately three-quarters of the increase in CO2 from human activity over the past 20 years. Most of the rest is due to land-use change, in particular deforestation.[31]"

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming


Conclusion - Your above post has a lot of wrong information. You can read the whole wiki if you like, there are lots of good pieces of evidence, as well as the sources for them. I just picked out 2 good paragraphs. as I said in the other thread:

As for your conclusions on "Globull Warmening", until you have a degree from some credible institution in something at all scientific, you can expect me to take your opinion with a MASSIVE grain of salt. I'm talking the largest grain of salt you can ever imagine.
 
Last edited:
So in less words, your point is the Earth has heated and cooled a bunch of different times before us humans can along and will continue to heat and cool regardless of our actions?

I had to break it down for those members who don't like to read long posts:cool:
 
So in less words, your point is the Earth has heated and cooled a bunch of different times before us humans can along and will continue to heat and cool regardless of our actions?

I had to break it down for those members who don't like to read long posts:cool:

Thats not what I got out of it. He was claiming that there is no scientific evidence that humans caused any heating or cooling of our planet. Obviously our planet is going to cool and heat regardless of what we do. The issue lies in the degree to which it heats and cools, and our impact on this degree. :)
 
i personally think that we can't make any major difference. not even a minor difference. i think that it's just part of a cycle of events that constantly goes round and round.
 
i personally think that we can't make any major difference. not even a minor difference. i think that it's just part of a cycle of events that constantly goes round and round.

Exactly... what we has a group do it so small it's trivial. It's like me pouring a glass of water into the Ocean. I'm all for the environment. If the woods and animals go away then I have to place to hunt/fish/camp.

The Earth has cooled and heated long before we came and it will do it long after we go. The Sun goes through cycles also and heats and cools. Hell, the Polar Ice Caps on Mars are melting..... Do we have any effect on that?
 
If Al Gore can use excessive energy for his home, just how serious does he (or expect us to) really take the nonsense he tries to sling at us?
 
Last edited:
To quote MontyB...

MontyB said:
Well if environmental concern is such a joke I heard there is some cheap land around Chernobyl available for immediate settlement, interested?

The bottom line is that we ARE a part of this planet, and we can have devastating effects on it. For example, if we cut down every tree on earth we could drastically increase the amounths of carbon dioxide while lowering the amounts of oxygen. If we killed every bird there would be an enormous upswing in insect population.

We're not just in the theater, we're in the movie.
 
Fortunately, I haven't seen any orders for mass tree cutting. Although, I have seen some requests in the past submitted for tree hugger cutting. They were denied.
 
Last edited:
(note to self: remain calm, saying your mind will get you banned...)

Gimme a scientist behind this. Some sort of source. And I don't mean letsgobuyhummers.com
 
For many years the egg heads were pointing to the hole in the ozone layer as an example of what man made pollutants were doing to the atmosphere. It was stated that if man stopped using CFCs immediately (in about 2003/4) it would take 50 years before we would see any measurable effect on the hole in the ozone layer.

In 2006, the hole was the smallest it had been since accurate recording began in the 1970s.

Our scientific community although well intentioned are still "whistling in the dark" when it comes to many of these problems. I feel that many of them are allowing their science to be affected by the opinions of a very vocal minority.

There may well be something in what they say, but I feel that they don't know the half of it yet. There is no doubt that we seem to be suffering an increase in extreme weather events, but I feel that because these things are cyclic (well they appear to have been for several 100s of thousands of years) it is far too soon to be making judgements as to their cause. Guesses?... by all means, accurate judgements?... no way.
 
Last edited:
So in less words, your point is the Earth has heated and cooled a bunch of different times before us humans can along and will continue to heat and cool regardless of our actions?

I had to break it down for those members who don't like to read long posts:cool:

Thank you.

I am annoyed with the green movement.


P.S. I love the color green.
 
For many years the egg heads were pointing to the hole in the ozone layer as an example of what man made pollutants were doing to the atmosphere. It was stated that if man stopped using CFCs immediately (in about 2003/4) it would take 50 years before we would see any measurable effect on the hole in the ozone layer.

In 2006, the hole was the smallest it had been since accurate recording began in the 1970s.

Oddly enough NASA has a different story:

“From September 21 to 30, [2006], the average area of the ozone hole was the largest ever observed, at 10.6 million square miles,” said Paul Newman, atmospheric scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. Newman was joined by other scientists from NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in reporting that the ozone hole over the polar region of the Southern Hemisphere broke records for both area and depth in 2006. A little over a week after the ozone hole sustained its new record high for average area, satellites and balloon-based instruments recorded the lowest concentrations of ozone ever observed over Antarctica, making the ozone hole the deepest it had ever been.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Newsroom/NewImages/images.php3?img_id=17436
 
Another concern of mine with this is that many countries pay the environment no mind, if we're excessively concerned about it as a nation, not just the current freaks, than the other nations will pass us and fast in military capability. Kind of hard for us to remain a super power if we're a bunch of tree huggers while everyone else is building their military for the hated Americans.
 
Well Monty, it just goes to prove that the answers depend on what experts you listen to, because it made the news here, and since that time it has completely dropped off the radar. When was the last time you heard someone quoting the hole in the ozone layer as a measurement of the damage CFCs were doing to the atmosphere.

I just went googling and it appears that my time scale was out, it was 2002, meaning that the quotation about 50 years befor it stopped growing must have been before that as this was the one thing I remembered about the whole issue.
 
Last edited:
"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-twentieth century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic (man-made) greenhouse gas concentrations via an enhanced greenhouse effect. Natural phenomena such as solar variation combined with volcanoes probably had a small warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950 and a small cooling effect from 1950 onward.[2][3] These basic conclusions have been endorsed by at least thirty scientific societies and academies of science,[4] including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries.

Im not sure how much more can be said. The scientific community (in a vast majority) agree that not only global warming exists, but that humans are exacerbating it.
 
Back
Top