Is Gobal Cooling a Continuing Threat?

[JJScorpio]

I'm curious about something here.

Is there ever a winner and loser to this argument? And if you do win, what exactly is the prize? Is it self satisfaction, or something else? Some of you have spent at least a dozen hours arguing with other unknown entities so there has to be some type of reward for the winner isn't there?

 

[whodair]

I'm curious about something here.

Is there ever a winner and loser to this argument? And if you do win, what exactly is the prize? Is it self satisfaction, or something else? Some of you have spent at least a dozen hours arguing with other unknown entities so there has to be some type of reward for the winner isn't there?

some people probably just enjoy a lively discussion about a topic they feel passionate about...but a free pack of sour diesel would be nice for the "winner" of the debate !!!

 

[ibjamming]

We can reduce the human contribution to the bottom line.

Not a potential problem for the rock called earth, but is a potential problem for most of the life here.


It is not a made up problem, like the terrorist threat is.


Man is undeniable adding significantly to a known greenhouse gas.
Greenhouse gasses observably keep the planet warmer.
It is century old science which has been repeatedly confirmed over the course of that century.

But you don't KNOW that. There IS "something" that has happened EVERY time in the past when the temperature got to +8. That's my point! Something happens at that point and the warming turns into a cooling trend. There IS a pattern...and we ARE near the top of a natural warming cycle. There is NOTHING peculiar about our global temperatures. It's been MUCH hotter...MANY times in the past. We can't stop it!!! We need to work WITH it...for a change. Fucking people, ALWAYS fighting nature...and we wonder why we're all fucked up!

What YOU guys are doing is this... You're saying the earth has a "temperature", it's "sick" and it needs to be healed...why? Because the temperature is too high and GOING to get higher.

I'm saying the earth does NOT have a temperature...not yet...it WILL when (and IF) it gets to +8. We're only at +4. Like a kid...if you measure his temperature and it's 98.9, you don't start treating for a temperature...it USUALLY stabilizes itself. Do something when the temperature actually INDICATES a problem.

for all we know, at that magic +8 temperature...(a DEVASTATING temp increase for us humans by the way)...something "amazing" happens and the earth begins to cool rapidly. Maybe the oceans "turn over", maybe a thick cloud layer spontaneously appears everywhere like saturated air forced to condense. Something has happened throughout time that has and will continue to make the earths temp swing between -8 and +8...we're at +4!! Everything is still within normal ranges. Give it time...wait and see...don't jump the gun...wait for it...

We don't know IF we're actually doing something. Many say it's insignificant and will be recaptured. And until we actually get to +8...there probably isn't too much we can do...since SEVERAL times in the past...without people even here...we've gotten to +8. Come on...admit it...if the earth is NATURALLY raising it's temperature to +8...even IF we can diminish our contribution...humans can't prosper...maybe even survive...with a global +8 temperature. We're fucked whether we do anything or not when you get right down to it. A +8 global temp will be the end of civilization as we know it...IF it comes to quickly.

We need to work on what to do with increasing temps...not trying to stop a speeding train...with a WHOLE LOT of momentum behind it.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

I'm curious about something here.

Is there ever a winner and loser to this argument? And if you do win, what exactly is the prize? Is it self satisfaction, or something else? Some of you have spent at least a dozen hours arguing with other unknown entities so there has to be some type of reward for the winner isn't there?

I keep getting drawn in by other's feigned interest in the topic and questions directed at me... I should realize nobody really wants the answers they are asking for.... Part of me does really, but part of me hopes they're eventually dig deep enough into all of it to suss out the verifiable from the rhetorical.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

But you don't KNOW that.

No... I don't know that beyond all shadow of doubt, but I do know it beyond all reasonable doubt, and so can anyone else who is willing to look unbiased at all of the available information.

 

[ibjamming]

I'm curious about something here.

Is there ever a winner and loser to this argument? And if you do win, what exactly is the prize? Is it self satisfaction, or something else? Some of you have spent at least a dozen hours arguing with other unknown entities so there has to be some type of reward for the winner isn't there?

The satisfaction that I've turned someone else away from the dark side...into the light. I've broken their conditioning.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

What YOU guys are doing is this... You're saying the earth has a "temperature", it's "sick" and it needs to be healed...why? Because the temperature is too high and GOING to get higher.

No we're not.
I don't think you've ever actually listened to what we've said.
Every time you try to paraphrase, you are miles off.

We're saying that the earth is measurably warming.
We're saying that CO2 measurably retains heat.
We're saying that man is measurably adding to atmospheric CO2, bringing it to levels unprecedented in human history.

We're saying that to continue to add energy retention capability to a sensitive system that we've already added enough retention capability to to observe effects, is counter-productive to human survival.

We're saying rhetoric is irrelevant when it contradicts observations.

Sacrificing the future in order to be gluttonous in the present... is like pissing your pants to keep warm... It may feel good for a minute, but after that you're screwed.

 

[sac beh]

I don't view this discussion as a competition, so I don't really care who feels like they've won or not--its not about that. In the end the only winner or loser will be humanity itself, depending on how it decides to move forward on important challenges like climate change and cannabis prohibition.



But if there had to be a winner here, I vote that it be ibjamming based on the pure enthusiasm with which he advocates an untenable anti-science view. Prize: Head gear?

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

for all we know, at that magic +8 temperature...(a DEVASTATING temp increase for us humans by the way)...something "amazing" happens and the earth begins to cool rapidly. Maybe the oceans "turn over",

That is pretty close to exactly what happens.

Study oceanwide anoxic events. (here's a starting point http://www.njgonline.nl/publish/articles/000311/article.pdf)

When those occur, Large percentages of life (carbon) die off, and sink to the ocean floor where they do not decompose (from the absence of O2), but instead capture all that carbon in huge deposits which become oil.

It is like the earth has a built in carbon capture and storage system... unfortunately it involves mass extinctions and I like humanity not being extinct.


What we're doing is un-storing all that carbon, so that the earth has to do all that work over again.

 

[strawbrrygirl]

[/quote]Sacrificing the future in order to be gluttonous in the present... is like pissing your pants to keep warm... It may feel good for a minute, but after that you're screwed.[/quote]
Hey H3ad that is one of the best quotes I have read in a long time!!!!!!"Picture a bright blue ball spinnin free!! Dizzien in possibilities!!!!!!!"

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Sacrificing the future in order to be gluttonous in the present... is like pissing your pants to keep warm... It may feel good for a minute, but after that you're screwed.

Hey H3ad that is one of the best quotes I have read in a long time!!!!!!"Picture a bright blue ball spinnin free!! Dizzien in possibilities!!!!!!!"

Yeah... I think "it's like pissing your pants to keep warm" is an old saying in Norse country... first time I heard it it stuck out as a perfect description for a plethora of situations, so I added it to my repertoire.

 

[Ben Tokin]

The irony of AGW groupies is that they have lost the argument a long time ago. The first indication of defeat is personal attacks on those who know the difference between fact and fiction.

The term "denier" is a blatant and pompous term used to classify and demean those who know better than to believe the obvious attempts to perpetrate an undignified fraud on an uneducated vulnerable world population.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

The irony of AGW deniers is that they have lost the argument a long time ago. The first indication of defeat is personal attacks on those who know the difference between fact and fiction.

The term "groupie" is a blatant and pompous term used to classify and demean those who know better than to believe the obvious attempts to perpetrate an undignified fraud on an uneducated vulnerable world population.


(see how easy rhetoric is? I'm so glad the vast preponderance of evidence supports my position... rhetoric is such bullshit)



btw, how many times are you going to rephrase and repost that same fail?

 

[GrinStick]

and the winners are...applause...

Grateful and Sac Beh, truly passionate category...1st and 2nd place respectively...
DiscoBisquit...honorable mention.

IBJammin...HOLD the FORT! Grand Prize for persistence.

it matters little what our "science" tells us, the peoples who are perpetuating the current atttitude towards agw are unlikely to refrain.

The planet will recover and life will go on.

If mankind is stupid enough to poison the environment to the exclusion of the humanoid specie the we deserve what we get.
Granted this is not the best scenario, nor the worst.

If nothing else the entertainment value must be noted!...more Applause...Great thread...too bad I didn't get through the whole thing before the "Tinfoil Hats" comment was thrown out...

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

btw, denier is a perfectly apt description as is it's opposite acknowledger.

deny |diˈnī|
verb ( -nies, -nied) [ trans. ]
refuse to accept or agree to.

acknowledge |akˈnälij|
verb
accept or admit the existence or truth of.

I guess philosophical skeptic would also apply to some deniers, but denier is more broadly accurate.

skeptic |ˈskeptik| ( Brit. sceptic)
noun
1 a person inclined to question or doubt all accepted opinions.
2 Philosophy an ancient or modern philosopher who denies the possibility of knowledge, or even rational belief, in some sphere.


I have no need for propaganda words, only for accurate descriptors.

 

[Ben Tokin]

It becomes more clear, as evidence mounts, that AGW will soon be another "pet rock" as it fades into history along with the many other attempts to defraud the public.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

Great thread...too bad I didn't get through the whole thing before the "Tinfoil Hats" comment was thrown out...

Yeah, sorry about that... it's hard not to when the conversation gets sidetracked off into using conspiracy theorists as authoritative sources.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

It becomes more clear, as evidence mounts, that AGW will soon be another "pet rock" as it fades into history along with the many other attempts to defraud the public.

only if you're ignoring the evidence and being duped by the anti-science propaganda... in the real world the mounting evidence is clarifying the details about the increasingly undeniable truth of AGW.

I still wonder how many times you're going to repackage that same lie, though... You have yet to produce one piece of evidence, much less mount any.

What has become clear, is that you're more interested in comforting yourself than seeking truth.
What has become clear is that you started this thread with an already established opinion, and are simply pushing an agenda, not genuinely curious like you tried to con us into thinking.

I also find it hilarious that you think 'pet rocks' were some sort of fraud.

 

[Grat3fulh3ad]

anyhow... your continued posting of rhetorical propaganda statements, which are completely without basis in fact, is the reason I'm again tired of playing your 'agenda pushing disguised fake discussion' game.

My position has been well stated, and is completely supported by verifiable evidence, which I've documented. People can read through the thread and do their homework if they choose to. You and I have nothing further to discuss, I've met your every challenge even though you ignore it.

Enjoy your empty propaganda pushing.

 

[GrinStick]

slight grimace...now what? turn the conversation toward 'fossil fuels'? the real reason for pollution is it is a natural byproduct of humankind...no other species creates self destructive constructs.