Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
I think he needs to prove it is man made global warming before he proposes any supposed cure.
90%+ of the earth's climate scientists have proven that. Again, the RWW's circular argument does NOT address the issues. Whether man made or not, we've got some serious issues with the environment. Do you deny that, too?
Hardly a productive discussion. Yet we manage to have at least one post about the great "hoax" on the front page at all times.
Your argument is going nowhere. You're simply marking time and making noise. It's about as about as intellectually responsible as the constant discussion about POTUS's citizenship or religion.
If you look at satellite images of sea ice and glaciers it will show the ice, then there will be a outer ring showing where it use too be. I don't know how you guys can look and deny.
A photograph of a single point in time is not proof of anything. Climate is dynamic and not static. Look at a photo of the Ozone Hole (remember that oldie but goodie)...one photo does not tell the story that the hole is constantly growing and shrinking. If you see that then you to ask, WHY? What causes the hole to enlarge? You look up what destroys ozone; very cold temperatures, sun activity, and airborne acids like hydrochloric acid top the list. Awfully cold in the Antarctic but that is always that way. Sun activity? You mean like sun spots and solar flares? In July of 1994 (the Bastille Day event) solar flares erupted causing a large amount (approximately 20%) of the ozone on the earth to be destroyed. Wow! That sounds like a good cause for the ozone hole to be there but flares don't happen all the time. What else that is long term, that waxes and wanes could also cause the ozone hole? Hydrochloric acid vapor is given off by an active volcano. Really? Is there an active volcano near the ozone hole? Actually, the Antarctic has a number of active volcanoes on it. Some of erupted as recently as this year. They are under the Ozone hole pumping acid vapor into the atmosphere which is destroying the ozone, causing the hole to appear, grow larger, and shrink.
To conclude, one picture of one instant of a climatic phenomenon does not tell the story when events in nature can take years to conclude.
You got to the huddle late go back to #21 check it out, then you will know why people are laughing at you dull knife, not me. It is still a shame a first nation is so ill informed about the state he lives in. The mountains lie buried under the flint hills, which use to be a inland sea in the thousands of years ago you were chirping about.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you saying that the ocean level used to be much higher (caused by nature) or that the low spot millions of years ago has become foothills today in central Kansas (also caused by nature).
No money grab? It's called Cap and Trade. It's not here yet, but.... Do you deny that's a goal of the environmental left? And clearly that money and power would go to the "Gubmint" and bureaucrats.
There's also a lot of grant money out there for climate scientists. Billions in fact. Of course, those monies would dry up pretty quickly if it's found that the recent warming was not related to human activity and we therefore don't any control over the climate or it's changes. Do you seriously want to deny that climatolgists would have no incentive to find in favor of catastrophoic anthropogenic warming? Seems naive.
Hmmm "cap and trade"? Isn't that the emissions limitation that controls the amount companies can pollute the atmosphere? I fail to see at what point the "money grab" kicks in. Don't just stop there. Map it out. Where is the money going? and to what end?
You can throw out some ideas but there are huge gaps in your line of questioning.
You're saying that someone somewhere is making money off of saying that climate change is happening, but you can't explain who exactly is making that money.
Scientists? You do know that grant money doesn't go to financing their personal lamborghinis right?
yes I do deny that is the goal of the "environmental left". The goal of the "environmental left" is to stop companies from destroying the earth that you and I and everyone else have to live on.
On the other hand there are multi billion dollar oil industries that have a vested interest in making sure that the public doesn't believe climate change. Really makes you wonder where the money trail leads.
Hmmm "cap and trade"? Isn't that the emissions limitation that controls the amount companies can pollute the atmosphere? I fail to see at what point the "money grab" kicks in. Don't just stop there. Map it out. Where is the money going? and to what end?
You can throw out some ideas but there are huge gaps in your line of questioning.
You're saying that someone somewhere is making money off of saying that climate change is happening, but you can't explain who exactly is making that money.
Scientists? You do know that grant money doesn't go to financing their personal lamborghinis right?
yes I do deny that is the goal of the "environmental left". The goal of the "environmental left" is to stop companies from destroying the earth that you and I and everyone else have to live on.
On the other hand there are multi billion dollar oil industries that have a vested interest in making sure that the public doesn't believe climate change. Really makes you wonder where the money trail leads.
The only ones who think there is a climate change occurring, are the ones effected by it.
Nope, not going to let you perpetrate the lie. This is not climate change, this is about that old fashioned Global Warming. To be more precise, Anthropomorphic Global Warming or man made global warming.
While we're at it I'd love to hear your theory about those man made settlements appearing under the retreating ice in Switzerland. How did they get there? Maybe you'll go the fundamentalist christian route and have us believe that those settlements were put there as a hoax a thousand years ago.
let's suppose that climate change isn't totally man made -- for the sake of discussion, that is -- do we have an obligation to try and fix what we can?
Or is the point arguing over the existence of climate change rather than its profound effect on the planet and its inhabitants?
Seems like some of you fellas would rather argue semantics than take responsibility.
It's obvious that the majority of you RWWs out there would rather spoil the earth for your children and grandchildren than admit we something needs to be addressed.
Drop the "definition" fight. Do you still believe that our generation is entitled to recklessly plunder the earth regardless the long or short term consequences?
Or do you think assigning blame for the mess is more important than cleaning it up?
So using your assessment you are in favor of man made climate change.
