Irrefutable Scientific Proof of Global Warming

[Justice Hog]

[SkinsFanInHawai'i]

Thank God for global warming.
Keep on driving those SUVs.

[Irn-Bru]

And those were the men's swim-wear

[AZHog]

Thank God for global warming.
Keep on driving those SUVs.

I really hope you're joking! To be honest, all of the tree-hugging hippies out there that think by driving cars and using hairspray we're going to destroy the world are retarded. (Guess this is where a moderator moves it to the Smack Forum)

This planet is hundreds of millions, if not billions, of years old. It's gone through countless evolutionary changes and seen a variety of species come and go. Chew on this: At one point in time oxygen was a deadly poison. It was a toxic waste byproduct of plants, deadly to most forms of life. Death occurred rapidly and many species were lost. The world survived. The "atmosphere" as we now know it hasn't been around that long. In the not too distant past the earth protected by outgassing of gases trapped in the interior of the planet. Again, the world survived and adapted.

There is absolutely nothing we can currently do to destroy the earth. No matter what happens (ie. holes in the ozone, climate/current changes, nuculear holocost) the planet will most likely survive. Eventually some form of life left over will adapt and the planet will restore balance.

Global warming is not affected by driving fossil-fueled cars or using hairspray. Was the ice-age ushered in by some man-made phenomenon? Of course not, it's part of the climatological makeup of the planet, as is global warming. Our climates will change. Instead of trying to play the blame game and point fingers, lets try to better predict trends and adapt to the changing environment. Warmer or colder, weather changes no matter what we do.

[AZHog]

By the way, funny cartoon!

[redskins12287]

Thank God for global warming.
Keep on driving those SUVs.

I really hope you're joking! To be honest, all of the tree-hugging hippies out there that think by driving cars and using hairspray we're going to destroy the world are retarded. (Guess this is where a moderator moves it to the Smack Forum)

This planet is hundreds of millions, if not billions, of years old. It's gone through countless evolutionary changes and seen a variety of species come and go. Chew on this: At one point in time oxygen was a deadly poison. It was a toxic waste byproduct of plants, deadly to most forms of life. Death occurred rapidly and many species were lost. The world survived. The "atmosphere" as we now know it hasn't been around that long. In the not too distant past the earth protected by outgassing of gases trapped in the interior of the planet. Again, the world survived and adapted.

There is absolutely nothing we can currently do to destroy the earth. No matter what happens (ie. holes in the ozone, climate/current changes, nuculear holocost) the planet will most likely survive. Eventually some form of life left over will adapt and the planet will restore balance.

Global warming is not affected by driving fossil-fueled cars or using hairspray. Was the ice-age ushered in by some man-made phenomenon? Of course not, it's part of the climatological makeup of the planet, as is global warming. Our climates will change. Instead of trying to play the blame game and point fingers, lets try to better predict trends and adapt to the changing environment. Warmer or colder, weather changes no matter what we do.

this may sound like a personal, attack, but it must be said; that was by far the dumbest thing I have ever read. Yeah, lets just sit back, use up all out natural resources without a second thought, and assume the planet will take care of it's self. Why dont you go tell that to those people in south america who could not leave their homes during the day without umbrellas and such because of a hole in the ozone layer, or those people whose Island somewhere in the Pacific with be underwater in a few years because of the water rising due to the ICE CAPS MELTING BECAUSE OF THE HUGE HOLE IN THE OZONE LAYER!? Not just an island, a race of people who have called that island home for generations who now have to move and can never return. Or why dont you just go sit ona mountain overlooking L.A., look at the smog towering over the city.

For the sake of humanity I hope you were joking.

[Redskins Rule]

There is no hole in the ozone layer! That is something made up by all of those people that think we should go back to horseback riding for a means of transportation. Or that think we should put stuff in our hair to make ourselvse look better. Or that think we shouldn't be making stuff in factories. NEWSFLASH!!!! This is the modern era. We're not ever going to back to the stone age era. Get used to it!

[AZHog]

this may sound like a personal, attack, but it must be said; that was by far the dumbest thing I have ever read. Yeah, lets just sit back, use up all out natural resources without a second thought, and assume the planet will take care of it's self. Why dont you go tell that to those people in south america who could not leave their homes during the day without umbrellas and such because of a hole in the ozone layer, or those people whose Island somewhere in the Pacific with be underwater in a few years because of the water rising due to the ICE CAPS MELTING BECAUSE OF THE HUGE HOLE IN THE OZONE LAYER!? Not just an island, a race of people who have called that island home for generations who now have to move and can never return. Or why dont you just go sit ona mountain overlooking L.A., look at the smog towering over the city.

For the sake of humanity I hope you were joking.

I don't take it as a personal attack -- just that you're missing the point. The world cycles, as does every planet. People are stupid if they believe exhaust from cars and fumes from hair-spray are the major cause. That's not only scientificly refutable, but just plain conceited. We're really nothing to the planet. We're just another species that will come and eventually go.

BTW, you're going to have to be a lot more specific regarding this island in South America. I've travelled all over this world, including Central and South America, and have yet to hear of that. The smog in LA is a direct byproduct of overpopulation and location. There are cities larger than LA without it's pollution (in supposedly one of the cleanest states I might add). If the ozone is so bad in South America, where are the giant gaping holes over LA? Folks should just burn up walking outside, right?

In response to your reference of Global Warming -- I never said it wasn't happening. It's a climatological phenomenan. Driving a "hybrid" (still fossil-fueled) vehicle, recycling (causes more pollution from the factory by-products), or much of anything else won't prevent it from happening. Let's get real folks: This planet has survived a loooong time, you're not going to kill it.

[admin]

It's not a personal attack to say that the post was dumb... it would be a personal attack if you said the person who posted it was dumb.

Carry on... but keep it civil and remember that while you're welcome to attack the post, please don't attack the poster.


He's right... the world likely will survive... it's just that people that won't be able to survive in it.

Why would humanity even think of doing something to protect humanity as well as mother earth? After all... mother earth will persevere with or without us.

Come to think of it... bring on global warming.... whipe out the planet as we know it... let it re-build itself... and we'll make sure azHog's post is chiseled into a cliff somewhere in Arizona to make sure that the next species of intelligence that comes along can see what kind of thinking sped up the destruction and forced evolution of the planet that they're now looking at.

[AZHog]

It's not a personal attack to say that the post was dumb... it would be a personal attack if you said the person who posted it was dumb.

Carry on... but keep it civil and remember that while you're welcome to attack the post, please don't attack the poster.


He's right... the world likely will survive... it's just that people that won't be able to survive in it.

Why would humanity even think of doing something to protect humanity as well as mother earth? After all... mother earth will persevere with or without us.

Come to think of it... bring on global warming.... whipe out the planet as we know it... let it re-build itself... and we'll make sure azHog's post is chiseled into a cliff somewhere in Arizona to make sure that the next species of intelligence that comes along can see what kind of thinking sped up the destruction and forced evolution of the planet that they're now looking at.

That'd be fine. My whole point is that we can't stop global warming. This would happen regardless of our intervention -- notice no Hollywood movies on trying to stop that one! I'm all for being environmentally friendly -- I recycle and all of that happy horse-hockey. I'm just a realist and am not conceited enough to think we'll last as a species forever.

[tazlah]

While I agree with a lot of what AZHog says, i.e., the Earth climate is indeed cyclic in nature with cooling and warming trends occurring regardless of human involvement. The Earth has experienced ice ages as well as global warming in past and will continue it's cycles long after we are no longer a part of this planet. I do not agree that use of fossil fuels has not expedited the warming trends.

And, the island in the Pacific that redskins12287 is referring to is called Tuvalu (actually a group of coral atolls). It appears that due to rising ocean levels (associated with the accumulation of greenhouse gases which expedite global warming), this unique and extremely remote country will in fact not exist in about 50 years. Looks like I need to pick me a new retirement location.

[redskins12287]

I don't take it as a personal attack -- just that you're missing the point. The world cycles, as does every planet. People are stupid if they believe exhaust from cars and fumes from hair-spray are the major cause. That's not only scientificly refutable, but just plain conceited. We're really nothing to the planet. We're just another species that will come and eventually go.

BTW, you're going to have to be a lot more specific regarding this island in South America. I've travelled all over this world, including Central and South America, and have yet to hear of that. The smog in LA is a direct byproduct of overpopulation and location. There are cities larger than LA without it's pollution (in supposedly one of the cleanest states I might add). If the ozone is so bad in South America, where are the giant gaping holes over LA? Folks should just burn up walking outside, right?

In response to your reference of Global Warming -- I never said it wasn't happening. It's a climatological phenomenan. Driving a "hybrid" (still fossil-fueled) vehicle, recycling (causes more pollution from the factory by-products), or much of anything else won't prevent it from happening. Let's get real folks: This planet has survived a loooong time, you're not going to kill it.

so its OK that we do all these things that lead to our own destruction as long as the earth will eventually recover? And as far as L.A., you think that smog would be there if cars did not exist? People breathing does not cause smog, polution does, and cars cause alot of polution. L.A. is an obvious example of how bad polution is for the enviroment, because due to the fact that the city is surrounded by mountains, the wind cant just push it out into the desert, so it buids up and gives us a clear picture that there is a problem.

As far as my details, sorry if im not an expert on this topic, but I saw on TV a few years ago this thing about this small island somewhere in the pacific that was soon to be swalloed up by the ocean. Same thing with the south america deal, saw a thing on it on TV a few years ago. And while speaking of deatails, Im yet to see and scientific support for anything you have said so far. While I doubt that any scientits would disagree that the earth moves in cycles, I think most would agree that we have a say in our planets future and much of the problems with it are a direct result of polution and such.

[ii7-V7]

Hey AZ Hog!

I don't disagree with the premise of your post...that being that pretty much no matter what we do the earth itself will survive. I do however object to your use of the word "retarded." Say that around Taylor Jacob's and he'll punch you in the face!

I think its quite interesting that in the last twenty years the instances of Autism have risen by over 2000% and yet people think that our destructive habits have no bearing on our lifes!

Chad

[UK Skins Fan]

Thank God for global warming.
Keep on driving those SUVs.

I really hope you're joking! To be honest, all of the tree-hugging hippies out there that think by driving cars and using hairspray we're going to destroy the world are retarded. (Guess this is where a moderator moves it to the Smack Forum)

This planet is hundreds of millions, if not billions, of years old. It's gone through countless evolutionary changes and seen a variety of species come and go. Chew on this: At one point in time oxygen was a deadly poison. It was a toxic waste byproduct of plants, deadly to most forms of life. Death occurred rapidly and many species were lost. The world survived. The "atmosphere" as we now know it hasn't been around that long. In the not too distant past the earth protected by outgassing of gases trapped in the interior of the planet. Again, the world survived and adapted.

There is absolutely nothing we can currently do to destroy the earth. No matter what happens (ie. holes in the ozone, climate/current changes, nuculear holocost) the planet will most likely survive. Eventually some form of life left over will adapt and the planet will restore balance.

Global warming is not affected by driving fossil-fueled cars or using hairspray. Was the ice-age ushered in by some man-made phenomenon? Of course not, it's part of the climatological makeup of the planet, as is global warming. Our climates will change. Instead of trying to play the blame game and point fingers, lets try to better predict trends and adapt to the changing environment. Warmer or colder, weather changes no matter what we do.

Hell's bells - this might be one of the most depressing things that I've ever read. I was actually thinking today of posting a thread here, just to ask why it is that only Americans seem to believe that man-made global warming does not exist, and that most of the rest of the world has got it wrong. I'm no scientist, so I rely on scientists to try to interpret the observable facts for me. With few vocal exceptions, the most eminent scientists over this side of the pond agree that 1) global warming is happening right now, and 2) the activities of mankind are contributing greatly to an acceleration in the process.

I haven't lived for 200 million years, so I can't tell you from experience that the world's climate is changing in ways that wouldn't be possible without human intervention. But when the only scientific voices that I have heard denying global warming are those voices funded by oil companies, then I choose to believe scientists whose only vested interest is in the pursuit of science. Sure, some of them want to make a name for themselves with ever more wild theories, but there are too many of them out there to be dismissed with a simple "well, the Earth has survived this long, so there's nothing we can do to hurt it"

True, the world will survive whatever, and humankind will indeed die out at some time, but shouldn't we feel some responsibility to the planet, ourselves, and its other inhabitants, to pass it on to future generations in an inhabitable state? Just because we're not knee deep in crap yet, doesn't mean that we should keep on shovelling.

By the way, the accepted rule around here is that we don't attack the poster. Bear in mind though, that if you go around insulting others by calling them retarded even before they've posted, you may find yourself making enemies quickly. Not all of us that believe human accelerated global warming exists are tree huggers either, any more than all Americans are overweight, ignorant loudmouths. Stereotypes are easy, lazy, and generally the last refuge of the mentally bewildered. Apart from stereotypes about the French - they're nearly all correct.

[JansenFan]

It's all a moot point.

In about 500 trillion years, the Andromeda galaxy will collide with the milky way creating a new solar system. If another planet doesn't collide with the earth destroying it, the battle between the two suns gravitational pull will cause a super black hole that will vaporize our planet anyway.

[Texas Hog]

It's all a moot point.

In about 500 trillion years, the Andromeda galaxy will collide with the milky way creating a new solar system. If another planet doesn't collide with the earth destroying it, the battle between the two suns gravitational pull will cause a super black hole that will vaporize our planet anyway.

Poor Eagle fans....that was the year they had a shot at winning a SuperBowl

[NC43Hog]

Hell's bells - this might be one of the most depressing things that I've ever read. I was actually thinking today of posting a thread here, just to ask why it is that only Americans seem to believe that man-made global warming does not exist, and that most of the rest of the world has got it wrong. I'm no scientist, so I rely on scientists to try to interpret the observable facts for me. With few vocal exceptions, the most eminent scientists over this side of the pond agree that 1) global warming is happening right now, and 2) the activities of mankind are contributing greatly to an acceleration in the process.

I haven't lived for 200 million years, so I can't tell you from experience that the world's climate is changing in ways that wouldn't be possible without human intervention. But when the only scientific voices that I have heard denying global warming are those voices funded by oil companies, then I choose to believe scientists whose only vested interest is in the pursuit of science. Sure, some of them want to make a name for themselves with ever more wild theories, but there are too many of them out there to be dismissed with a simple "well, the Earth has survived this long, so there's nothing we can do to hurt it"

True, the world will survive whatever, and humankind will indeed die out at some time, but shouldn't we feel some responsibility to the planet, ourselves, and its other inhabitants, to pass it on to future generations in an inhabitable state? Just because we're not knee deep in crap yet, doesn't mean that we should keep on shovelling.

By the way, the accepted rule around here is that we don't attack the poster. Bear in mind though, that if you go around insulting others by calling them retarded even before they've posted, you may find yourself making enemies quickly. Not all of us that believe human accelerated global warming exists are tree huggers either, any more than all Americans are overweight, ignorant loudmouths. Stereotypes are easy, lazy, and generally the last refuge of the mentally bewildered. Apart from stereotypes about the French - they're nearly all correct.

Nice post.

[Justice Hog]

Wow. I am simply amazed at the deep conversation a picture of a thong generates. I am truly impressed.

[SkinsFanInHawai'i]

I was thinking the same thing.

[Chris Luva Luva]

AZ ruined this thread with his stupid intelligence!

[skins81]

All this damn learning...

[NC43Hog]

AZ ruined this thread with his stupid intelligence!

Nice Oxymoron!

[skins81]

Thank God for global warming.
Keep on driving those SUVs.

I really hope you're joking! To be honest, all of the tree-hugging hippies out there that think by driving cars and using hairspray we're going to destroy the world are retarded. (Guess this is where a moderator moves it to the Smack Forum)

This planet is hundreds of millions, if not billions, of years old. It's gone through countless evolutionary changes and seen a variety of species come and go. Chew on this: At one point in time oxygen was a deadly poison. It was a toxic waste byproduct of plants, deadly to most forms of life. Death occurred rapidly and many species were lost. The world survived. The "atmosphere" as we now know it hasn't been around that long. In the not too distant past the earth protected by outgassing of gases trapped in the interior of the planet. Again, the world survived and adapted.

There is absolutely nothing we can currently do to destroy the earth. No matter what happens (ie. holes in the ozone, climate/current changes, nuculear holocost) the planet will most likely survive. Eventually some form of life left over will adapt and the planet will restore balance.

Global warming is not affected by driving fossil-fueled cars or using hairspray. Was the ice-age ushered in by some man-made phenomenon? Of course not, it's part of the climatological makeup of the planet, as is global warming. Our climates will change. Instead of trying to play the blame game and point fingers, lets try to better predict trends and adapt to the changing environment. Warmer or colder, weather changes no matter what we do.

I wasn't going to post, but this is really uninformed.
It's a good example of how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Yes, weather on Earth is cyclical. There have been a number of mini ice ages along with the big one everyone knows about. The Earth weather patterns do change, independent of man.

Greenhouse gasses are a good thing, they keep the surface of the earth warm and they keep me and you alive. They keep the surface of the planet from freezing.

The major players among the greenhouse gasses are carbon dioxide and water vapor. They in effect absorb radiation and send it on back to the surface, further heating the planet.

This isn't some speculation. This is fact. Proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Even the groups that argue against global warming do not dispute that. Here's a link to the anti global warming group the COOLER HEADS COILITION. Even the cases they cite only dispute the liability of who is responsible for the increased CO2 in the air, not that it actually does contribute to global warming. They know they would lose that battle.
http://www.globalwarming.org/
Here's the science of greenhouse gasses
http://www.science.gmu.edu/~zli/ghe.html

So who's wrong? Maybe neither group. Perhaps the increase in CO2 production is not really that big a deal, and it's really the change in the use of the land globally that leads to the problem. Less trees due to deforestation means less processing of CO2 and more buildup of greenhouse effect and increase global temperature.

That is why there are many scientists who are telling us that increased CO2 production and decreased capacity of the earth to process CO2 is contributing to the rise in global temperature.

By the way, global temeerature is going up. That's another thing that is not disputed. And the Majuro atoll in the Marshall Islands will decrease in size by 80% in the next century.

Why is it that people have an inability to take responsibility for their own actions? If we are responsible for global warming, so what? Let's take action now to dercease consumption and decrease the rate of deforestation.
It seems smarter than hiding your head in the sand.

[thaiphoon]

But when the only scientific voices that I have heard denying global warming are those voices funded by oil companies, then I choose to believe scientists whose only vested interest is in the pursuit of science

There is no scientific consensus that global warming is a problem or that humans are its cause. Even if current predictions of warming are correct, delaying drastic government actions by up to 25 years will make little difference in global temperature 100 years from now. Proposed treaty restrictions would do little environmental good and great economic harm. By contrast, putting off action until we have more evidence of human-caused global warming and better technology to mitigate it is both environmentally and economically sound. While ground-level temperature measurements suggest the earth has warmed between 0.3 and 0.6 degrees Celsius since 1850, global satellite data, the most reliable of climate measurements, show no evidence of warming. Even if the earth's temperature has increased slightly, the increase is well within the natural range of known temperature variation over the last 15,000 years. The earth experienced greater warming between the 10th and 15th centuries - a time when vineyards thrived in England and Vikings colonized Greenland and built settlements in Canada.

Scientists do not agree that humans discernibly influence global climate because the evidence supporting that theory is weak. The scientific experts most directly concerned with climate conditions reject the theory by a wide margin. A Gallup poll found that a small minority of the members of the Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Society think that the warming of the 20th century has been a result of greenhouse gas emissions - principally CO2 from burning fossil fuels. More than 100 noted scientists, including the former president of the National Academy of Sciences, signed a letter declaring that costly actions to reduce greenhouse gases are not justified by the best available evidence.

While atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 28 percent over the past 150 years, human-generated carbon dioxide could have played only a small part in any warming, since most of the warming occurred prior to 1940 !!!! Agreed .... sea levels are rising around the globe, though not uniformly. In fact, sea levels have risen more than 300 feet over the last 18,000 years - far predating [u]any possible human impact. Rising sea levels are natural in between ice ages. Contrary to the predictions of global warming theorists, the current rate of increase is slower than the average rate over the 18,000-year period

Sorry my friend ... if you think that the scientists who are saying that Humans are inducing global warming are only interested in science you're sadly mistaken. They gain by making this a "calamity" that governments must fund in order to help prevent. The funding goes in the form of grants to the very organizations that these scientists run or work for. If you want to play this game of what is behind the research go right ahead, for each one you point out the other side can also point out one.

Instead you should focus on the research and the results.

If anyone cared to look at the IPCC report (which was the reason why the Kyoto Treaty was started) they would notice that the Summary of the report was acutally written by politicans and not the scientists whose work contributed to the report. They would also notice that many of the results that are in the report are either skewed or presented in the reverse in the IPCC policy makers summary which Kyoto was really based upon.

For those who want to say "well lets not take any chances" I ask you. If you lived in Kansas would you take out Earthquake insurance on your house?? I could undersatand Tornado insurance but would you hamper yourself economically in order to prevent loss against an earthquake in Kansas?? The proposed measures would hamper economies and lead to many deaths. This all based upon theories that are not based upon good science. Not exactly making me warm and fuzzy here.

Check out http://www.globalwarming.org/ and go beyond the cases on the first page and look at the data archives. Do some more research and then ask yourself that if the sea levels have been rising for 18,000 years and man has been pumping out CO2 for only the last 100-200 years...how can we be at fault for the continuing rise? Then ask yourself that if we've been pumping out CO2 all this time why has most of the warming occured over 60 years before now. Finally ask yourself that if the actions of the Earth's oceans cause over 95% of all CO2 to be released into the atmosphere and humans cause less than 3% then how are curbing our CO2 emissions going to solve the problem?

I'll give you one caveat in that we shoul have as much vegetation as possible. But remember as CO2 levels rise, vegation grows larger and denser leading to more CO2 being sucked down into a 'CO2 sink". We should be good stewards of our rainforests,etc... and nto continue to clear-cut them I agree. But the Kyoto protocol is bunk and no nation should be stupid enough to sign onto it.

[SkinsFanInHawai'i]

Now that I think about it, I wouldn't put it past people to make something up like global warming inorder to make some money.