Global Warming...

Submitted by Lou on 7/1/06 at 1:28 AM. ( )

So I was at work reading the news on the internet and I see the title on a page "Global Warming: It's the hottest it's been in 2000 years and we're to blame!". On my 45min commute\think time home tonight I was thinking about that statement and broke it down in my head or tried too at least.

One is only to assume the statement "The hottest it's been in 2000 years" means that at some point in world history it was this hot or close to being this hot 2000 years ago.
Well, who was to blame 2000 years ago? If our population counts are correct and the population has grown from 2.5 billon in 1950 to 6.5 billion in '06 (, then it's probably safe to assume that the population was no where near that figure 2000 years ago.
So what caused the temperature increase? Was it the methane from the horse dung building up in the streets?
Seriously though, I'd be interested to see a true study of what the temperature were like 100, 1000, 2000, 4000, 8000, and 10000 years ago. I'd be willing to bet there's pattern!

Return to Current Events Category Menu

"True study?"

This response submitted by Jim on 7/1/06 at 7:43 AM. ( )

Lou, your loaded questions reveal a prejudice typical of those whose political agenda precludes any open-minded evaulation of graphs or other scientific data. The internet has plenty of graphs showing global temperature data. Of course data prior to gathering data was indirectly derived by means other than measuring the temperature. The RATE at which global temperatures are rising appears to be unprecedented. If you feel (like bush) that dealing with global warming will hurt the economy, or you(like the conservatives on this forum) hate Al Gore, then none of the graphs or data from any of the "true studies" on global warming is going to make any difference to you.

Jim, YOUR comments reveal the dangers of YOUR thinking

This response submitted by George on 7/1/06 at 8:42 AM. ( )

Already agencies are being threatened with removal of funding if they DON'T support your junk science. Why is it that the liberal, politically correct mindset is devoid of common sense. The head of the National Meterological Society and the U.S. Weather services have all voiced opposition to the notion of "global warming" in the context of the Al Gore debacle. The earh is encountering a "warming" stage just as evidence has provided for millinnea. There is NO DEFINITIVE PROOF that any of it is caused by fossil fuels. Even your brain dead experts begrudgingly admit that as little as 500 years ago, the earth experienced a "mini- Ice Age". HELLO? Anyone home there? Don't place your quotes around "true studies" unless you're smart enough to read ALL of them. Don't pick and choose for convenience. Even your lauded "scientific" friends have been ignoring that the "Greenhouse effect" is flawed. Carbon dioxide released by COWS and fossil fuels is sustenance for plants. Plants turn CO into oxygen and the more plants, the more OXYGEN in the atmosphere. OXYGEN is not one of your vaunted "greenhouse gasses". I for one like the idea of the polar ice melting. Your experts claim that we would lose miles of coastline in that event. That should drown about 90% of the damned liberals on the East Coast and along California.

Like that polar melting idea

This response submitted by * on 7/1/06 at 8:51 AM. ( )

George I love your last three sentences...Am going to build a bonfire today and help.

Excuse me George...

This response submitted by Gina on 7/1/06 at 10:08 AM. ( )

drown them liberals by all means, but what about me? I live on the west coast and would lose a HELL OF A LOT of clientel...being the loss of elk and deer habitats due to flooding, thus decreasing the number of hunters in the area, as well as losing my own house...I dont think I like the idea of that happening...of course, i probably wont be around for that even, since they predict it will happen in about 50 years...LOL

George,your comment reveal you are an idiot

This response submitted by Jim on 7/1/06 at 10:25 AM. ( )

For you so - called conservatives to be so spiritualy and morally motivated, you all really like the idea of people dying, as long as it is not you.I was just curious if any of you go to church and laugh about people dying. Those damn liberals don't want anybody to die, do they? They think we should leave Iraq just because over 2500 of our young men and women, with families, have died and countless more have been severely injured for a war based on lies. They think the economy is bad. They think gas is too high. Those liberals should all drown, shouldn't the George.By the way is your last name Bush?

Jim, Gina, you got it all wrong

This response submitted by George on 7/1/06 at 10:36 AM. ( )

Anyone with a brain will have moved. That'll leave guys like Jim standing on the beach waving banners saying "I told you so".

People like Jim here thrive on a platform. They think it's perfectly all right to kill thousands of unborn babies yet lament over 2500 patriots who actually thought freedom was worth dying for so snivelers like him could shed fake tears over their losses. They want DARE programs and like throwing money at "education" without ever seeing any return. They snort their coke quietly and talk "War on Drugs" when they should be making them legal and drive the illicit drug trade out of America once and for all. It's OK for thousands to be gunned down or run down by the drug cartele, but they want to pick and choose where people die. My last name isn't Bush, but having balls like he has isn't the worst thing I could imagine. I could be called "Jim".

The great BLOW HOLE has opened!(LOL)

This response submitted by Jim on 7/1/06 at 1:52 PM. ( )

Like a typical environmentally brain dead conservative you completely divert the subject(global warming if you need a reminder) to drugs, abortion, or anything else you can whine about. It's pretty ovious that your massive ego is taking a beating as a result of more than a few contributors calling your contemptible bluff on a variety of topics recently. Your characteristic ridicule is nothing but a smoke screen to cover up that fact that you just can stand being exposed for being wrong. Having self-serving opinions is your right, but distorting the evidence to make YOU sound like the final authority on global warming is arrogance at its worst. You blow off all of your opinionated BS that you want but it won't change the existence of global warming. Sorry to inform you, but your opinion on the facts of this issue is totally insignificant. The international community is already moving to deal with global warming, and apparently none too soon.


This response submitted by Lou on 7/1/06 at 3:37 PM. ( )

I'm neither a republican nor a democrat I'm registered as "Non-affiliated".

I didn't think my questions were loaded at all? Actually they weren't really questions at all just my thoughts from a drive home.
It's obvious you have lots of passion on the subject so you must understand it enough to explain to me how we know the temperatures are getting hotter than 2000 years ago, rather than giving me a canned answered of "The RATE at which global temperatures are rising appears to be unprecedented". We're both intelligent so let's talk science.
Does our current scientific evidence (not proxy or estimations) show that it's not a pattern the world will follow in which it heats up on its own? If there's no pattern then why fossil fuels? What's so bad about them? Try to leave your political references about Bush, Al Gore, or any other politician in you answer out and answer it strictly from your understanding of the situation.

BTW, I'm all for open minded discussions ask anyone who knows me, but not when we're talking about subjects which need to be based on fact and at this point there are no facts just theories. Folks are pushing those theories and trying to turn them into fact without hard evidence.


This response submitted by Drew M. on 7/1/06 at 5:46 PM. ( )

Global warming may be occuring, but if it is, it certainly is not caused by man. The earth cools and warms naturally, it is cyclical and documented.

For all the democrats that seem to have not paid attention in science class...the earth was much warmer than it is now. There were these funny things walking around called dinosaurs and much of the earth was like a rainforest. For example...Colorado used to be under the ocean. The plates shifting is natural, the earth cooling and warming is also natural. I am not sure how taxing gas or banning SUV's is going to stop it.

Jim, it's YOU who didn't answer the question

This response submitted by George on 7/1/06 at 6:03 PM. ( )

Careful there Drew, Jim's allergic to logic.

Lou asked you by inference if the world is hotter now than it was 4000 years ago, what made it hotter 4001 years ago when fossil fuels hadn't been discovered yet and cars hadn't been invented. WWI and WWII along with the Civil War and a sundry of other little conflicts like Noah's Ark all took place to keep human numbers in check. Just so you hot air remains breathable, ANSWER THE QUESTION. You defend the idiocy, you must have some harebrained reason that you could share. If you don't, it's only proof of where the "stupidity" actually lies.

Your homework.

This response submitted by Jim on 7/1/06 at 6:30 PM. ( )

Lou; It's an easy few clicks to get to the volumes of meterological data that have lead to the identification of global warming. I invite you to do your homework. I would have left politics out of the discussion, but the motivation behind some of these replies that scoff at data and conclusions from the most reputable and respected scientific organizations in the world are just that...political. To refer to the findings of NASA, NOAA, NAC, and the EPA as "junk science" is a reflection of the myopia of the republican mindset against most, if not all, serious environmental issues. The republicans have nothing but contempt for Al Gore and because HE is leading an effort to deal with global warming, THEY insist it does not take place. They support Bush on everything and because he refuses to acknowledge the occurrence of global warming ON ECONOMIC GROUNDS, they stand in line with him. Look at the motives. Science has no political agenda. Science makes obersvations, asks questions, and runs tests and experiments WITHOUT A PRE-DETERMINED OPINION of what they "should" or "want to" find. No one WANTS global warming, but the evidence at this point is undeniable. Unless, of course, you love Bush and hate Gore. Do your homework and you'll see why there is an ongoing worldwide effort to deal with global warming. The USA should join too, but that will probably have to wait until 2008 when HOPEFULLY we will get a president who is willing to be more open-minded on environmental issues.


This response submitted by Lou on 7/1/06 at 8:33 PM. ( )

You're the one who originally brought the freaking politics into the discussion in the first reply to my post DUH!

"Lou, your loaded questions reveal a prejudice typical of those whose political agenda precludes any open-minded evaluation of graphs or other scientific data. The internet has plenty of graphs showing global temperature data. Of course data prior to gathering data was indirectly derived by means other than measuring the temperature. The RATE at which global temperatures are rising appears to be unprecedented. If you feel (like bush) that dealing with global warming will hurt the economy, or you(like the conservatives on this forum) hate Al Gore, then none of the graphs or data from any of the "true studies" on global warming is going to make any difference to you. "

And again you didn't answer my questions and only filled the reply with this politician and that politician, so I'm to assume you have little or no useful data on the subject and are only following your herd and should be taking your own advice on doing homework.

Do you drive a car Jim? If so why and doesn't that mean you're contributing to the problem if we believe the "It's our fault" theory? What technologies have you implemented to improve or decrease your fossil fuel energy consumption?

Still now answers

This response submitted by George on 7/1/06 at 8:37 PM. ( )

Even if the "most reputable" scientists and organizations in the world state a lie, it doesn't make it true. The EPA proclaimed that Alar was poison on apples and that cyclamates in Gatoraide cause cancer. Just as many REPUTABLE scientists and organizations say it's politically motivated to allow multinational corporations to squeeze the life blood out of American society and redirect it to third world countries with less EPA INTRUSION and where sweat shops undercut American labor.

I asked you one simple question Jim. Certainly from your "volumes of meterological data", you could provide me with just that ONE answer. (And don't play that crap about who brought politics into this. It was YOU who was spring loaded left wing to George Bush and Iraq. Is the war exacerbating your phony theory or defeating it? Thou protests too loudly.)

Rev. Jim

This response submitted by one of us on 7/1/06 at 8:42 PM. ( )

Many complete cities have been discovered underwater in the Mediterranean Sea. The water rose quite a bit and covered them up completely due to global warming hundreds of year before Christ. Also the great spinxs was built when that area of Egypt has been proven to be tropical at the time. Just two of many examples. I guess right winged alien saucers emitting fumes caused the changes back then. OR just maybe the earth is changing position and its magnetic field thereby causing climate changes as it naturally spins on its axis, like it has for (b)millions of years. Liberals like you Jim want to cry the sky is falling, esp. when the opposition is in power, so you can point fingers of blame and you will always find ways to believe and even prove it, it makes you feel superior to us mere common sence mortals. Its your religion! Praise the almighty one Al Gore, and his liberal holy man Jim, we are not worthy of his great wisdom and insight.

Speaking of "Volumes"

This response submitted by George on 7/1/06 at 8:46 PM. ( )

Go to your favorite search engine and, using quotation marks, type in "Global Warming Lies". Google reports that it has 11,200,000 entries entitled that. And Jim, be careful using the NOAA. It seems that the pinhead who released the statement that "a concensus" of their experts was that global warming was relevant, my have been in error. The NOAA now states that such a "consensus" does not, in fact, exist. DO YOUR HOMEWORK.

Jim, just try this

This response submitted by Ron on 7/1/06 at 10:41 PM. ( )

Find some old magazines, say, 20 or thirty years old and see what "EXPERTS" used too say. It's a blast. Got and old national Geographic here some where from I believe about 1975. The "Expert Sientist" all said we would be OUT of fossil fuels by 2000. And you should see all the "Crap" info they give to prove it. Well, where are your experts now.
Fact is, goods news makes NO MONEY. No scientist who wants a job will give you GOOD news. Every scientific study out there is followed by these words...Coffee is bad..BUT MORE STUDIES ARE NEEDED.
Coffee is good..BUT MORE STUDIES ARE NEEDED. Next time you hear a scientific report on the news, just will here them. All about money.

Where's your sign?

This response submitted by Jim on 7/2/06 at 9:22 AM. ( )

Now I see why Capt. BLOW HOLE ignores the obvious. "Go to your favorite search engine and, using quotation marks, type in "Global Warming Lies"." He forms an opinion and then searches the internet BY TITLE to find something that bolsters it.(LOL) That's exactly what I described above. Capt. BLOW HOLE's opinion and mindset preceeds and PRECLUDES any information that refutes it. Flame on Capt'n...flame on.
Ron. Your scoffing at "science" is obvious. If one were to share your low opinion of scientists, then NOTHING they do is of value because they just want a job. Bullcrap! You sure can find "junk science" out there and it reflects poorly on the legitimate work that has been done. Same applies to taxidermy. The cut-rate "hacksidermists" out there reflect poorly on the profession. That said, the loudest mouth wanting MORE STUDIES on global warming in none other than...DUBYA! HMMMmm?


This response submitted by Lou on 7/2/06 at 1:01 PM. ( )

I'm only to assume you don't know as much about Global Warming as you led us to believe since you've only answered my questions with "this politician says this or that politician says that".

I find it sad that folks don't take the time to question what you're told by others. Scientist or not you should always question what's said. And that's exactly what my original intent was, questioning the statement "It's the hottest it's been in 2000 years and we're to blame!".

Your choice...and mine

This response submitted by Jim on 7/2/06 at 6:20 PM. ( )

I'm no expert on global warming and rely on the findings of the reputable organizations I alluded to for their assessment of the situation. I also place a high value on doctors for medical evaluation, teachers for educational expertise, lawyers for legal advice, investment counselors for financial recommendations, etc...
If NOAA, NAC, NASA, the EPA, and independent meterological and geological professionals have the data to support that global warming is being exascerbated by human activity, then I don't think I'll question that. If you don't WANT TO acknowledge all of the evidence because you DON'T LIKE the consequences, that is your opinion. I don't think there is a scientific debate any longer on whether global warming is taking place...just whether hummans are contributing to it. The data certainly supports the position that we are. Believe what you want, but be responsible enough to do your homework on the data that is out there for all to read.


This response submitted by Ron on 7/2/06 at 9:27 PM. ( )

GIve us at least one honest answer. Why do you "WANT" global warming to be true?


This response submitted by Lou on 7/3/06 at 12:50 AM. ( )

Riggggghhhhhtttttt be responable and read data and do my homework, just like you? :-)

OOPS! Thought this was about g.w.

This response submitted by Jim on 7/3/06 at 8:53 AM. ( )

But I see now it's really the same old conservative/liberal thing. Ron, I presume that "us" means the conservatives who REFUSE to acknowledge that global warming is taking place? That would explain why you missed the answer to the stupid question you just asked. I'll save you the time of going back up and finding this. "No one WANTS global warming,..."
Keep digressing from the issue to mocking liberals, but that won't change the observation that global warming is with us and the evidence to suppport that human activity is a contributing factor. At this point the refusal of a few to "get it" is meaningless . "The international community is already moving to deal with global warming, and apparently none too soon."
Let me ask you right wing dittoheads a question. Let's assume that bush is told by his ECONOMIC advisors that the USA dealing with the problem of global warming would STIMULATE OUR ECONOMY and CREATE NEW JOBS. Let's further assume that as a result of this new information from his ECONOMIC advisors, bush "flip flops" and agrees to join the international community to deal with the problem. What would you dittoheads think of global warming then? DUH!(LOL)

The international comunity

This response submitted by Nat on 7/3/06 at 10:01 PM. ( )

Ain't going to do squat .When they catch up to what we've already done, let us know.

re the international community or comunity whatever

This response submitted by Nat on 7/3/06 at 10:39 PM. ( )

Why the hell do you think Jim ,that all the industry moved out of this country? It wasn't so they could be regulated more or spend more money cleaning up the envoirnment.I have been very tolerant of your ignorance but this global warming crap is intollarable .The whole scheme is just a ploy to get the American people to buy into more control and regulation and socalization by the leftist marxist movement.You Jim are always whining about people such as poor Brad or as you call him PMVHOLE being hateful or getting personal when it is your yourself who I have noticed is spewing one hateful remark after another I belive you have almost stigmatized poor Brad to the point that he isn't even posting as often.As you said you don't know much about global warming and will leave it to your socalled expert authoritys on the matter : Well so will we. Come back when the international community is as clean as we are .


This response submitted by Ron on 7/3/06 at 11:19 PM. ( )

I think people like you want global warming to be true just like preachers want this to be the end time. No money or power in good news. Thats the way the humane mind works. There will always be doomsdayers. But the one thing they all have in common is they have been wrong one hundred percent of the time. Hell even Ted Danson, the bastion of wisdom, was wrong. Remember when he said the oceans would be dead by the year 2000. Remember the "studies" he quoted to support his "wisdom". I don't know about you but I just did two 100 pound sailfish that my friends caught. Guess where they caught them. THE F-ING DEAD OCEAN.

By the way I believe the earth is warming. I also believe, as history has shown it comes in cycles. What I am not arrogant enough to believe is that man can control the weather.

You jimbob

This response submitted by DaveT on 7/5/06 at 8:06 PM. ( )

So is an egg good for you or bad? Science can't even determine that and yet you think they know what causes earth cycles? You are a riot of misinformation.


Return to Current Events Category Menu