Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: The Coach on December 20, 2008, 07:48:47 AM
-
.......it's 40 degrees in Huntington Beach. I'll bet when this moron turns on the news and see's the blizzards going on throughout the mid-west and east and it being unusually COLD on the west coast........he just looks at his acadamy award and says to himself "yep, I suckard the libs.....again!"
-
.......it's 40 degrees in Huntington Beach. I'll bet when this moron turns on the news and see's the blizzards going on throughout the mid-west and east and it being unusually COLD on the west coast........he just looks at his acadamy award and says to himself "yep, I suckard the libs.....again!"
Did he also sucker every other scientist in the world that agrees with him?
-
Buddy, no one disagrees about whether or not the Earth is warming up. There's data to back it-both sides agree on that-I think we're up something like 1.7 degrees F or something like that since the temp started increasing more dramatically than usual. The argument is whether or not people are causing the warming.
-
.......it's 40 degrees in Huntington Beach. I'll bet when this moron turns on the news and see's the blizzards going on throughout the mid-west and east and it being unusually COLD on the west coast........he just looks at his acadamy award and says to himself "yep, I suckard the libs.....again!"
My god, you really are a dumbass arent you. Unbelievable
-
It is obvious that the Coach doesn't understand the word global in global warming. It is also evident that he has problems with normal distribution.
But its aaaaaaall okay.
::)
-
coach said he thinks palin would make a great president. strange fellow.
-
I'm actually surprised to see so many GBers on the global warming train. Now how many think that human beings are a big part of the cause? How many think that it's just a part of the Earth's natural temperature fluxations dependant on things bigger than us? I'm with the former, btw.
-
Shut up and pay your taxes like a good drone.
-
Did he also sucker every other scientist in the world that agrees with him?
The funny thing is there are more scientists that disagree with his handpicked scientists than anything. It's a joke. The raising of one degree in the earths temp over the last 100 years is nothing. It's political BS.
-
It is obvious that the Coach doesn't understand the word global in global warming. It is also evident that he has problems with normal distribution.
But its aaaaaaall okay.
::)
Ok, scientist. Explain it.
-
Ok, scientist. Explain it.
the melting of the ice caps would be a good place to start.
-
Global warming?
::)
Still waiting for my car and clothes to disolve the next time it acid rains.
Oh, and shouldn't the ozone layer be gone by now?
-
.......it's 40 degrees in Huntington Beach. I'll bet when this moron turns on the news and see's the blizzards going on throughout the mid-west and east and it being unusually COLD on the west coast........he just looks at his acadamy award and says to himself "yep, I suckard the libs.....again!"
You do realize Global Warming is based of decades and hundreds of years, long term trends. ::)
Wait, I am talking to someone who thinks the world is only 6000 years old and everythign was placed as is.
-
The funny thing is there are more scientists that disagree with his handpicked scientists than anything. It's a joke. The raising of one degree in the earths temp over the last 100 years is nothing. It's political BS.
1 degree has caused a dramatic decrease in polar ice-it means that there is a shorter cold period. 2-4 degrees will mean no poloar ice at all. We know this because we can see what has happened in the past when temp increases like this have happened-we see this in geological remains. Again, the argument-as you've just pointed out-is not whether or not global warming is happening, it's whether or not we are causing it and whether or not we can do anything about it.
Global climate change is a better name though, to be honest. Some places are getting colder, some warmer-all summed up, we're up 1.5 degrees or whatever it is.
-
You do realize Global Warming is based of decades and hundreds of years, long term trends. ::)
Wait, I am talking to someone who thinks the world is only 6000 years old and everythign was placed as is.
;D
-
.......it's 40 degrees in Huntington Beach. I'll bet when this moron turns on the news and see's the blizzards going on throughout the mid-west and east and it being unusually COLD on the west coast........he just looks at his acadamy award and says to himself "yep, I suckard the libs.....again!"
You really are a fucking moron. I was going to sign off from getbig for about 3 weeks and take a break but you suck me back in every time with your political bullshit. Your hero Bush even believes in global warming. I think i speak for everyone when i say we are tired of your political bullshit. You are up there in the ranks of johnny falcon and bluto as the most annoying posters. Take it to the political board. The ice caps are melting and we probably won't see them here in the next 20 years. Someone really needs to hit you in the face because i think the only way to get you to realize what's going on around you is to beat it into you.
-
The funny thing is there are more scientists that disagree with his handpicked scientists than anything. It's a joke. The raising of one degree in the earths temp over the last 100 years is nothing. It's political BS.
Handpicked? Try EVERY single non-partisan global Body of Scientists:
National Academy of Sciences (US) Royal Society (United Kingdom) Chinese Academy of Sciences Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Brazil) Royal Society of Canada Académie des Sciences (france) Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany) Indian National Science Academy Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy) Science Council of Japan Russian Academy of Sciences Australian Academy of Sciences Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts Caribbean Academy of Sciences Indonesian Academy of Sciences Royal Irish Academy Academy of Sciences Malaysia Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences http://www.royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id= ... (2001) http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/displaypagedoc.asp?id=20 ... (2005) For the comments of other scientific bodies http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Statements_on ...
The scientific consensus is with the IPCC. Just as the scientific evidence and consensus is for evolution.
The National Scientific Academies of the the following countries issued this statement
“The work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) represents the consensus of the international scientific community on climate change science. We recognise IPCC as the world’s most reliable source of information on climate change and its causes, and we endorse its method of achieving this consensus. Despite increasing consensus on the science underpinning predictions of global climate change, doubts have been expressed recently about the need to mitigate the risks posed by global climate change. We do not consider such doubts justified.”
No one on the IPCC doubts that there are cycles and natural factors. The question is whether the global warming observed since the mid 1970's has a significant human cause. The IPCC says yes with 90% certainty.
CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS PLEASE CHECK THESE BEFORE POSTING: UK Government's Meteorological Office debunking of climate-change-denial myths http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/pressoffice/ ...
New Scientist magazine addressing the main skeptic claims http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/ ...
Sir David Attenborough was once a climate skeptic, believing that it can all be explained by natural causes and cycles. He changed his mind, this is why
-
You really are a fucking moron. I was going to sign off from getbig for about 3 weeks and take a break but you suck me back in every time with your political bullshit. Your hero Bush even believes in global warming. I think i speak for everyone when i say we are tired of your political bullshit. You are up there in the ranks of johnny falcon and bluto as the most annoying posters. Take it to the political board. The ice caps are melting and we probably won't see them here in the next 20 years. Someone really needs to hit you in the face because i think the only way to get you to realize what's going on around you is to beat it into you.
Amen to that
-
.......it's 40 degrees in Huntington Beach. I'll bet when this moron turns on the news and see's the blizzards going on throughout the mid-west and east and it being unusually COLD on the west coast........he just looks at his acadamy award and says to himself "yep, I suckard the libs.....again!"
::)
Coach ,you are so lucky you were born in the US.
-
Time for the Deniers and everyone else to learn something from Sir David Attenbourough:
-
The funny thing is there are more scientists that disagree with his handpicked scientists than anything. It's a joke. The raising of one degree in the earths temp over the last 100 years is nothing. It's political BS.
Are those the same scientists that run studies sponsored by exxon and other gas corps?
-
You do realize Global Warming is based of decades and hundreds of years, long term trends. ::)
Wait, I am talking to someone who thinks the world is only 6000 years old and everythign was placed as is.
Is he really one of those creationist goof balls? Does Coach beleive that dinosaurs and humans co-existed? I thought only red neck hill billies still beleived that non sense.
-
Time for SWEDISH VIKING and everyone else to learn something from Sir David Attenbourough:
Don't know why you singled me out-that movie says exactly what I said. Scroll up and re-read.
-
Is he really one of those creationist goof balls? Does Coach beleive that dinosaurs and humans co-existed? I thought only red neck hill billies still beleived that non sense.
He does and there is little to slight variation if any of him being a redneck hillbilly.
-
He does and there is little to slight variation if any of him being a redneck hillbilly.
TA-have you seen the "museum" that is dedicated to that crap? It's hysterical.
-
Don't know why you singled me out-that movie says exactly what I said. Scroll up and re-read.
Oh sorry, I thought you were of the opinion that Humans were not responsible for the cause. I will change the posts.
-
Oh sorry, I thought you were of the opinion that Humans were not delinquent in the cause. I will change the posts.
Thank you.
-
how global warming could send Europe into an ice age:
average global temperature rises just a degree or two, Greenland's ice cap completely melts in just a few years, dumping all that fresh cold water into the north Atlantic, causing the Gulf Stream Current (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream) and North Atlantic Current (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Current) to break down for a few years or decades. These currents now keep Europe temperatures moderate. Take them away and Europe plunges into an ice age.
-
how global warming could send Europe into an ice age:
average global temperature rises just a degree or two, Greenland's ice cap completely melts in just a few years, dumping all that fresh cold water into the north Atlantic, causing the Gulf Stream Current[url=http://and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Current]North Atlantic Current] and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Current]North Atlantic Current (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_Stream) to break down for a few years or decades. These currents now keep Europe temperatures moderate. Take them away and Europe plunges into an ice age.
I was going to mention that. Excellent point. As of yet, it's still dramatically warmer here in Stockholm-haven't had snow like when I was a kid in years.
-
.......it's 40 degrees in Huntington Beach. I'll bet when this moron turns on the news and see's the blizzards going on throughout the mid-west and east and it being unusually COLD on the west coast........he just looks at his acadamy award and says to himself "yep, I suckard the libs.....again!"
Anyone who believes in global warming needs their heads checked.
-
Anyone who believes in global warming needs their heads checked.
Why?
-
I'm actually surprised to see so many GBers on the global warming train. Now how many think that human beings are a big part of the cause? How many think that it's just a part of the Earth's natural temperature fluxations dependant on things bigger than us? I'm with the former, btw.
These suckers who buy into this garbage dont realize that previous ice ages ended due to what????? warming.
It has nothing to do with mankind, if it even exists.
Al Gore is god to these fools and they dont realize the massive taxation that is being planned to deal with the farce.
-
Why?
Well, man made warming. We have been on the planet for a blip on the radar screen as far as the earth goes. There have been periods of warming, cooling etc. The climate is always changing regardless of what we do.
Why do you think previous ice agens ended????
Why did the dinos die off?
Etc Etc.
The theories that americans driving their cars is creating global warming is so beyond absurd its not even worth discussion. Volcanic eruptions cause more pollution and emissions than mankind does.
How does Gore plan on dealing with that???
-
These suckers who buy into this garbage dont realize that previous ice ages ended due to what????? warming.
It has nothing to do with mankind, if it even exists.
Al Gore is god to these fools and they dont realize the massive taxation that is being planned to deal with the farce.
Al gore is no god because there is no god.and there's no point in debating anything with a bible beater on any topic.they are the people that believe a guy lived inside a fish belly,or a stick turned into a snake,or some dude built a boat so massive to hold 2 of every animal.yet oh no global warming!thats so far fetched.
-
I have not been to church in 15 years.
however, i also realize that imposing taxation and regulation on the us economy for this farce while china russia and india will not is just another nail in our coffin.
-
I have not been to church in 15 years.
however, i also realize that imposing taxation and regulation on the us economy for this farce while china russia and india will not is just another nail in our coffin.
I agree with that.
-
Well, man made warming. We have been on the planet for a blip on the radar screen as far as the earth goes. There have been periods of warming, cooling etc. The climate is always changing regardless of what we do.
yes, and sea levels have risen and fallen countless times. but now we have 6.8 billion people on the planet, and almost all of them live within a hundred miles of the ocean. whether man's activities have accelerated the current warming or not, the next 50 years will be very difficult to deal with. if we can change a few things to lessen the blow, why not?
The theories that americans driving their cars is creating global warming is so beyond absurd its not even worth discussion. Volcanic eruptions cause more pollution and emissions than mankind does.
but it is not an either/or situation: emissions from natural sources or emissions from man's activities. It is a combination of the two. if reducing our part would slow things down just a few decades, then we'd have a few more decades to figure out how to deal with the major problems.
what are the major problems? a billion people being displaced by rising water, &guy and more frequent storms, major drought in the midwest US where most of the world's corn is produced, Manhattan and Miami becoming like Venice.
-
If anyone seriously thinks that it's as bad as Gore is making it out to be is either a sucker, incredibly ignorant or just plain dumb.
-
If anyone seriously thinks that it's as bad as Gore is making it out to be is either a sucker, incredibly ignorant or just plain dumb.
My big issue with the whole "global warming" situation is that ALGORE and his flunkies always say it is "you" and "your way of life" that is causing the whole thing. If you would just give up more of your personal freedoms, resources, etc., then they could save you and the whole planet. Of course, if you disagree with them, you are "ignorant" and "part of the problem."
BTW...does ALGORE still use $2k + per month worth of utilities? Typical Limosine Liberal/Hollywood Hypocrite.
-
If anyone seriously thinks that it's as bad as Gore is making it out to be is either a sucker, incredibly ignorant or just plain dumb.
So exactly what is it Gore claims?
-
Global warming means that EVERY SINGLE day is warmer than it should be.
Even ONE DAY that is below average temperatures, anywhere in the world PROVES that global warming is a total lie.
I think it's obvious that this trend of a few days of cooler temperatures in a portion of one country proves that the average temperature of earth is NOT increasing.
-
Global warming means that EVERY SINGLE day is warmer than it should be.
Even ONE DAY that is below average temperatures, anywhere in the world PROVES that global warming is a total lie.
I think it's obvious that this trend of a few days of cooler temperatures in a portion of one country proves that the average temperature of earth is NOT increasing.
a science major you are not. the problem with the term global warming is that to the layman warming only means increase in temperature. but to scientists, warming also means an increase in the total amount of energy in a system. that energy can take many forms.
global warming is that the total amount of energy of the earth is increasing. This includes the temperature of the oceans, the air, the ice, the ground. it also includes the energy stored in wind and ocean currents.
The Gulf of Mexico is a big body of water who's temperature changes from year to year. when its temperature is higher, there is more energy stored in it. Hurricanes get their energy from the ocean water they travel over. when the Gulf of Mexico's water is warmer, it can create larger category hurricanes. but then creating larger hurricanes cools the water. Energy is transferred from the water to the storm. the total energy in the system didn't change. it just changed forms.
Now the earth does receive energy from an outside source, the sun. It also receives energy from the leftover heat from the core. this energy is stored in the oceans and the atmosphere. But energy is also radiated out into space, mostly in the form of infrared heat. as long as the amount coming in from the sun, plus the amount coming up from the core, is equal to the amount radiated into space, then the total amount of energy in the system remains the same and temps remain stable. the problem is when the amount coming into the system is not equal to the amount leaving the system.
too much water vapor in the air, and you get extra clouds reflecting the sunlight back into space, so less energy reaches the ground. too much greenhouse gasses, such as C02, sunlight is allowed in, but infrared light (heat) is not allowed out, and the amount of energy in the system increases.
too much energy in the system means more violent storms and rising sea levels.
then there is frozen methane in the permafrost and under shallow seas such as off the coast of Florida. right now all that methane is trapped. but warm the soil or the sea floor by just a degree or two, and it can all escape into the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas. then things can really get out of control.
-
And tell me what tax that Al Gore wants on us is going to do darn thing about any of that????
-
a science major you are not. the problem with the term global warming is that to the layman warming only means increase in temperature. but to scientists, warming also means an increase in the total amount of energy in a system. that energy can take many forms.
global warming is that the total amount of energy of the earth is increasing. This includes the temperature of the oceans, the air, the ice, the ground. it also includes the energy stored in wind and ocean currents.
The Gulf of Mexico is a big body of water who's temperature changes from year to year. when its temperature is higher, there is more energy stored in it. Hurricanes get their energy from the ocean water they travel over. when the Gulf of Mexico's water is warmer, it can create larger category hurricanes. but then creating larger hurricanes cools the water. Energy is transferred from the water to the storm. the total energy in the system didn't change. it just changed forms.
Now the earth does receive energy from an outside source, the sun. It also receives energy from the leftover heat from the core. this energy is stored in the oceans and the atmosphere. But energy is also radiated out into space, mostly in the form of infrared heat. as long as the amount coming in from the sun, plus the amount coming up from the core, is equal to the amount radiated into space, then the total amount of energy in the system remains the same and temps remain stable. the problem is when the amount coming into the system is not equal to the amount leaving the system.
too much water vapor in the air, and you get extra clouds reflecting the sunlight back into space, so less energy reaches the ground. too much greenhouse gasses, such as C02, sunlight is allowed in, but infrared light (heat) is not allowed out, and the amount of energy in the system increases.
too much energy in the system means more violent storms and rising sea levels.
then there is frozen methane in the permafrost and under shallow seas such as off the coast of Florida. right now all that methane is trapped. but warm the soil or the sea floor by just a degree or two, and it can all escape into the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas. then things can really get out of control.
...great post Tim.
But as someone who has a background in physics I feel I must notify you of the fatal flaw in your reasoning:
You can't explain complex scientific concepts to religious people... if they understood science they wouldn't be religious in the first place... you are dealing with people who don't understand metaphor, what makes you think they'd fare any better with algebra?
The Luke
-
...great post Tim.
But as someone who has a background in physics I feel I must notify you of the fatal flaw in your reasoning:
You can't explain complex scientific concepts to religious people... if they understood science they wouldn't be religious in the first place... you are dealing with people who don't understand metaphor, what makes you think they'd fare any better with algebra?
The Luke
your ignorant
darwin was clergy
mendell was clergy
Religion and science do not oppose one another.
-
your ignorant
my ignorant what?
perhaps you mean you're ignorant, such as when you don't know the proper use of your and you're
-
my ignorant what?
perhaps you mean you're ignorant, such as when you don't know the proper use of your and you're
it wasnt directed at you but ya for somebody to make a sarcastic comment when they falsely believe a comment was directed them does make you ignorant, ass.
LOL weve had this conversation many times when ppl have nothing else to say about a topic they attack grammer. You obviously understood what i was saying and im not going out of my way if ppl can understand what im saying so why dont you stfu.
-
your ignorant
darwin was clergy
mendell was clergy
Religion and science do not oppose one another.
Didn't you mean:
You're ignorant. (As in "You are ignorant")
Darwin was a cleric (or "Darwin was a member of the clergy").
Mendel was a cleric (or "Mendel was a member of the clergy").
"Clergy" is a collective noun.
it wasnt directed at you but ya for somebody to make a sarcastic comment when they falsely believe a comment was directed (at) them does make you ignorant, ass.
LOL weve had this conversation many times when ppl have nothing else to say about a topic they attack grammer. You obviously understood what i was saying and im not going out of my way if ppl can understand what im saying so why dont you stfu.
...I won't even start with the poor punctuation, spelling, syntax and grammar here, lest you accuse me of also being "ignorant"... when you really mean to use the word "obnoxious", but you are so ignorant that you believe ignorant is some type of synonym for obnoxious.
Another "Palin/Jebus 2012" voter.
The Luke
-
Didn't you mean:
You're ignorant. (As in "You are ignorant")
Darwin was a cleric (or "Darwin was a member of the clergy").
Mendel was a cleric (or "Mendel was a member of the clergy").
"Clergy" is a collective noun.
LOL epic avoiding the point and highlighting your ignorance.
-
Again like i said its been done to death when someone is shown to be wrong they attack grammer LOL classic.
why dont you reply to the comment luke?
-
a science major you are not. the problem with the term global warming is that to the layman warming only means increase in temperature. but to scientists, warming also means an increase in the total amount of energy in a system. that energy can take many forms.
global warming is that the total amount of energy of the earth is increasing. This includes the temperature of the oceans, the air, the ice, the ground. it also includes the energy stored in wind and ocean currents.
The Gulf of Mexico is a big body of water who's temperature changes from year to year. when its temperature is higher, there is more energy stored in it. Hurricanes get their energy from the ocean water they travel over. when the Gulf of Mexico's water is warmer, it can create larger category hurricanes. but then creating larger hurricanes cools the water. Energy is transferred from the water to the storm. the total energy in the system didn't change. it just changed forms.
Now the earth does receive energy from an outside source, the sun. It also receives energy from the leftover heat from the core. this energy is stored in the oceans and the atmosphere. But energy is also radiated out into space, mostly in the form of infrared heat. as long as the amount coming in from the sun, plus the amount coming up from the core, is equal to the amount radiated into space, then the total amount of energy in the system remains the same and temps remain stable. the problem is when the amount coming into the system is not equal to the amount leaving the system.
too much water vapor in the air, and you get extra clouds reflecting the sunlight back into space, so less energy reaches the ground. too much greenhouse gasses, such as C02, sunlight is allowed in, but infrared light (heat) is not allowed out, and the amount of energy in the system increases.
too much energy in the system means more violent storms and rising sea levels.
then there is frozen methane in the permafrost and under shallow seas such as off the coast of Florida. right now all that methane is trapped. but warm the soil or the sea floor by just a degree or two, and it can all escape into the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas. then things can really get out of control.
Finally someone here that have a clue about physical systems.
I will ask you a very interesting question that I thought of, if tomorrow we stop using fossil fuels and all the energy will come from solar energy, what will happen? I predict the warming to continue but (to a lesser degree) due to the large change in radiation that goes in and what comes out, since a large portion of it will be absorbed by solar panels.
It will eventually reach equilibrium, something that a fossil based system cannot.
Also, massive usage of water/air based power generation facilities can disturb the natural currents of the earth since although the energy will be kept in the system it will be used in a different manner and will return mostly in the form of phonon's in a chaotic order that doesn't insure that it will recharge the specific system it depleted energy from.
BTW, I believe that global warm is happening but to a much lesser degree than the media wants us to believe, but I still support using more innovative power generation methods in order to preserve our life style and deplete political power of certain groups.
-
Again like i said its been done to death when someone is shown to be wrong they attack grammer LOL classic.
why dont you reply to the comment luke?
that Darwin and Mendel were members of the clergy? so what? they clearly weren't dogmatics
that religion and science do not oppose one another? Some religions have no problem with scientific inquiry and scientific explanations. Fundamentalism (of any of the Abrahamic religions) is certainly hostile to science.
-
Finally someone here that have a clue about physical systems.
MS Geophysics USC 1985 (my thesis (http://fogarty.org/tim/thesis/thesis.html) is on my website)
if tomorrow we stop using fossil fuels and all the energy will come from solar energy, what will happen?
almost all of our current trouble is due to greenhouse gasses trapping heat in the lower atmosphere. don't trap the heat and the earth can stay in balance pretty easily.
Also, massive usage of water/air based power generation facilities can disturb the natural currents of the earth since although the energy will be kept in the system it will be used in a different manner and will return mostly in the form of phonon's in a chaotic order that doesn't insure that it will recharge the specific system it depleted energy from.
I don't know what phonons are but computer simulations have shown that windmills strategically placed in certain parts of the continent can cool the atmosphere just a bit.
-
Even ONE DAY that is below average temperatures, anywhere in the world PROVES that global warming is a total lie.
I think it's obvious that this trend of a few days of cooler temperatures in a portion of one country proves that the average temperature of earth is NOT increasing.
;D
-
Is he really one of those creationist goof balls? Does Coach beleive that dinosaurs and humans co-existed? I thought only red neck hill billies still beleived that non sense.
-
It is obvious that the Coach doesn't understand the word global in global warming. It is also evident that he has problems with normal distribution.
But its aaaaaaall okay.
::)
The Roach believes folklore is the truth ::)
-
that Darwin and Mendel were members of the clergy? so what? they clearly weren't dogmatics
that religion and science do not oppose one another? Some religions have no problem with scientific inquiry and scientific explanations. Fundamentalism (of any of the Abrahamic religions) is certainly hostile to science.
I agree that some PPL not religion take a stance in opposition to science but that doesnt mean the religion does. I cant say darwin and mendel where dogmatics or where not but will say that even some of those who where not dogmatic and shunned in their life time still have a religious impact today and as far as I know these two where never shunned or banned by the church. I think you have a poor understanding of religion and base what you believe off what others do. I agree the fundamental approach to religion can take opposition to science however fundamentalism is not the only way to view a certain religion, in other words its the ppl not the religion. I consider myself a christian and believe in evolution and in the scientific process. To paraphrase darwin, who better to investigate the wonders of Gods creations.
-
a science major you are not. the problem with the term global warming is that to the layman warming only means increase in temperature. but to scientists, warming also means an increase in the total amount of energy in a system. that energy can take many forms.
global warming is that the total amount of energy of the earth is increasing. This includes the temperature of the oceans, the air, the ice, the ground. it also includes the energy stored in wind and ocean currents.
The Gulf of Mexico is a big body of water who's temperature changes from year to year. when its temperature is higher, there is more energy stored in it. Hurricanes get their energy from the ocean water they travel over. when the Gulf of Mexico's water is warmer, it can create larger category hurricanes. but then creating larger hurricanes cools the water. Energy is transferred from the water to the storm. the total energy in the system didn't change. it just changed forms.
Now the earth does receive energy from an outside source, the sun. It also receives energy from the leftover heat from the core. this energy is stored in the oceans and the atmosphere. But energy is also radiated out into space, mostly in the form of infrared heat. as long as the amount coming in from the sun, plus the amount coming up from the core, is equal to the amount radiated into space, then the total amount of energy in the system remains the same and temps remain stable. the problem is when the amount coming into the system is not equal to the amount leaving the system.
too much water vapor in the air, and you get extra clouds reflecting the sunlight back into space, so less energy reaches the ground. too much greenhouse gasses, such as C02, sunlight is allowed in, but infrared light (heat) is not allowed out, and the amount of energy in the system increases.
too much energy in the system means more violent storms and rising sea levels.
then there is frozen methane in the permafrost and under shallow seas such as off the coast of Florida. right now all that methane is trapped. but warm the soil or the sea floor by just a degree or two, and it can all escape into the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas. then things can really get out of control.
An understander of sarcasm you are not.
I assumed that my extreme mockery of the mode of reasoning a religious zealot tends towards would be enough to prove my sarcasm. I guess I'll have to end each sarcastic statement with "The preceding post was sarcastic in nature. There is no need to type a long and involved post refuting my obviously incorrect statements."
-
MS Geophysics USC 1985 (my thesis (http://fogarty.org/tim/thesis/thesis.html) is on my website)
almost all of our current trouble is due to greenhouse gasses trapping heat in the lower atmosphere. don't trap the heat and the earth can stay in balance pretty easily.
I don't know what phonon's are but computer simulations have shown that windmills strategically placed in certain parts of the continent can cool the atmosphere just a bit.
Well phonon's are for example vibrations of a lattice. A very common occurrence is that a high energy photon is absorbed in the lattice and some of is transformed into phonon's.
This related to the subject because when you have solar panels you most definitely increase the absorbency of energy coming from the sun yet that energy is release back into the system in a form that cannot escape.
If a light ray hits the earth, some bounce back and some is absorbed but when a solar panel absorbs much more it transforms the energy into different types of energies mostly electrical/heat/friction and some of those can escape from earth thus creating an imbalanced system.
Off course that in due time the system will reach equilibrium...or we will melt off ;D
BTW regarding your thesis, I look at it briefly and it looks more like a computer science thesis than geophysics ???
Maybe I should have read more of it :P
-
MS Geophysics USC 1985 (my thesis (http://fogarty.org/tim/thesis/thesis.html) is on my website)
almost all of our current trouble is due to greenhouse gasses trapping heat in the lower atmosphere. don't trap the heat and the earth can stay in balance pretty easily.
I don't know what phonons are but computer simulations have shown that windmills strategically placed in certain parts of the continent can cool the atmosphere just a bit.
Look Tim, I know your a smart well educated person and I do believe that global warming does exist (to a certain extent), that being said Gore started this or at least made it more open for his own political purposes. We all want to our part, but he's making out to be like the end of the world is coming soon within our or our kids lifetime. To show how dumb smart people are, Ted Turner stated within 30 years we're all going to be cannibles. Again, it's not effecting my life, your life or anyone elses life unless you want it too. is Al Gore an idiot? Yes.
BTW, it's 41 degrees in HB as we speak.
-
that being said Gore started this or at least made it more open for his own political purposes.
yes, he did it just to get that Nobel prize.
We all want to our part, but he's making out to be like the end of the world is coming soon within our or our kids lifetime.
depends on what you mean by end of the world. Most of Florida completely under water? Certainly a possibility. Hurricane Katrina type storms every single year? Possible. World wide food production reduced by 10-30%? Possible. Forest die-backs. Extinction of all coral and all the life they support.
The doomsday scenario is the frozen methane I wrote about above. If that methane melts and enters the atmosphere, we'd have a run-away greenhouse effect that could keep the world above freezing year round for decades. So what you say? Well, freezing is an important part of many plant's life cycle. (keeps some bug populations under control too)
the real problem of global warming is the massive migration of humans it will cause. A billion people could be displaced. That will lead to famine, untold suffering, and certainly wars.
-
I love how some people refute global warming just by stating what the temperature is on a givin day in there area.really shows the mentality were dealing with.
-
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/
this is a good read. there are scientists more knowledgable than any of us on both sides of this issue. i think the message we can take from this is that we definitely do not have all the answers yet. i choose to listen to people like this about this issue rather than a politician.
-
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/
this is a good read. there are scientists more knowledgable than any of us on both sides of this issue. i think the message we can take from this is that we definitely do not have all the answers yet. i choose to listen to people like this about this issue rather than a politician.
That's what I am talking about. This is not a cut and dry issue that Shaman Gore would lead us to elive, especially considering that he wants businesses and people to be taxed additionally to deal with this.
Also, Shaman Gore stands to make $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ off this scam with his carbon credit business scheme he is running.
-
I love how some people refute global warming just by stating what the temperature is on a givin day in there area.really shows the mentality were dealing with.
Great point. Coach is nothing but a personal trainer. Dime a dozen mentality.
-
Cigarette Smoking Does Not Cause Cancer.
We were told that for years by Big Tobacco. The Tobacco executives, with their leather skin and sunken eyes, testified before Congress that Cigarette Smoking Does Not Cause Cancer.
And they were right. The cause of cancer is due to the paranormal wave that attracts our body.
http://www.pyroenergen.com/articles/smoking.htm
There are only positions and slants and spin. And science, well, science is just a tool.
Cancer or global warming, it doesn't matter. Somebody has an axe to grind or a fortune to make.
Or is there such a thing as science or even, a scientific method?
Somebody should look into this.
-
Scientists are still arguing on causes of global warming and the earth's cyclic temperature changes. Someone like Gore, who is so sure and has intertwined the issue with politics, has ignored the fact that there are credible experts on both sides.
I'm all for non-carbon based fuels but we just don't have good enough technology yet and placing excessive taxation and regulation on the US, without complete global agreement, is economic suicide.
-
Global warming has moved from a scientific debate to a religion.
The scientific method ensures that nothing is every 100% proven.
That is whole point of theories.
For example if everyone believed that newton was right about gravity, we would not have computers, or nuclear technology.
This happen with Aristotle and stunted science for 2000 years.
Science requires vigorous testing of all theories.
Air pollution is a real problem, but oceans rising by 7 meters or some other garbage like that won't happen.
There are many things that would mitigate global warming including the increase in plankton and water vapour in the atmosphere.
Even the IPCC doesn't support most of the outlandish claims made on this site.
Dangerous air from smog and poisoned water from manufacturing and power production should be our first concern and that is where most of money should go first.
For all you skeptics or people interested in some of the quirks in climate modeling you should check out Climate Audit by Steve McIntyre. http://www.climateaudit.org/
He was the guy that discovered the error in the US modeling that had 1998 as the warmest year on record, when in fact it was 1934.
Another interesting fact of the debate is that Canada and many other nations don't have national climate records before the mid 50's. So claims that world climate is the hottest on record should be tempered by the fact that we have no empirical data for the rest of the world for temperatures in the 30's.
-
Just add more taxes, that will do it. Lets make manufacturing autos, steel, power plants, etc even more difficult??? Right???
-
I love how some people refute global warming just by stating what the temperature is on a givin day in there area.really shows the mentality were dealing with.
however, the flip side is that you alarmists will take a day in the middle of august when it is 90 degrees and say that is global warming.
It works both ways.
-
Cigarette Smoking Does Not Cause Cancer.
We were told that for years by Big Tobacco. The Tobacco executives, with their leather skin and sunken eyes, testified before Congress that Cigarette Smoking Does Not Cause Cancer.
And they were right. The cause of cancer is due to the paranormal wave that attracts our body.
http://www.pyroenergen.com/articles/smoking.htm
There are only positions and slants and spin. And science, well, science is just a tool.
Cancer or global warming, it doesn't matter. Somebody has an axe to grind or a fortune to make.
Or is there such a thing as science or even, a scientific method?
Somebody should look into this.
Al Gore "has a fortune to make" as you say off of this. He started a "carbon credit" business or whatever the hell that is.
-
however, the flip side is that you alarmists will take a day in the middle of august when it is 90 degrees and say that is global warming.
It works both ways.
not sure who "you alarmists" are.is that like "you people"? or "that one"?
-
Listen up, Getbig. The Coach has done extensive research on Global Warming and his case his airtight. So unless you hold a post graduate degree in a related field, I don't want to see you in here arguing with him.
Just logout of your account, kick back and learn from The Coach. He's done the research, fellas.
-
not sure who "you alarmists" are.is that like "you people"? or "that one"?
"Alarmists" are the ones screaming that we all need to buy PFD's and run to the hills and that we are facing an apocolypse because the earth may be warming a degree or two.
The world is billions of years old and has gone through many many changes well before we even were even a spec on the planet. It cooled and there were ice ages, it heated up, etc etc.
For anyone to believe that any alleged current "climate change" is solely a result of man driving cars and heating their homes is just delusional and ignoring the fact that the earth is billions of years old and has NEVER stayed in a constant state as far as the environment is concerned.
-
Listen up, Getbig. The Coach has done extensive research on Global Warming and his case his airtight. So unless you hold a post graduate degree in a related field, I don't want to see you in here arguing with him.
Just logout of your account, kick back and learn from The Coach. He's done the research, fellas.
agreed...he is the authority on almost any subject.not from extensive research though.it's from listening to Rush.
-
The world is billions of years old and has gone through many many changes well before we even were even a spec on the planet. It cooled and there were ice ages, it heated up, etc etc.
yes, and some of those cycles were caused by things like volcanic eruptions the size of Wyoming, or collisions with comets or meteors. And, they caused massive extinctions.
if such an event were to happen today, it would again cause mass extinctions, including perhaps 4-5 billion people. and you won't get to choose which 4-5 billion.
For anyone to believe that any alleged current "climate change" is solely a result of man driving cars and heating their homes is just delusional and ignoring the fact that the earth is billions of years old and has NEVER stayed in a constant state as far as the environment is concerned.
it doesn't matter if some of the current climate change would have happened anyway. the amount of CO2 we're adding to the atmosphere is accelerating it. if we can do things to slow it down even a decade or two, that would give us more time to deal with it.
all this comes down to risk probability and impact assessment. what is the risk and cost of doing something vs the risk and cost of not doing something? if we set up new rules and regulations to reduce the amount of carbon we pump into the air, and global warming turns out to be false, some people may pay more taxes and some others may make less profit. if we ignore the problem and global warming turns out to be true, we could have Katrina type storms every year, massive coastal flooding that displaces a billion people, a significant reduction in food production, famine, and war.
-
"Alarmists" are the ones screaming that we all need to buy PFD's and run to the hills and that we are facing an apocolypse because the earth may be warming a degree or two.
The world is billions of years old and has gone through many many changes well before we even were even a spec on the planet. It cooled and there were ice ages, it heated up, etc etc.
For anyone to believe that any alleged current "climate change" is solely a result of man driving cars and heating their homes is just delusional and ignoring the fact that the earth is billions of years old and has NEVER stayed in a constant state as far as the environment is concerned.
And YOU supported Palin. ::)
-
A quick note.
Hurricanes are not increasing because of global warming.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/askjack/wfaqhurw.htm
Mitigating the affects of climate change would be a lot cheaper then carbon reduction.
The cost of carbon reduction is 5% of the global GDP. Global GDP at present value is 64,903,314,000,000
Which means carbon reduction would cost = $64,903,314,000,000 X .05 = $3,245,165,700,000 This is the equivalent of the worlds 4th biggest economy stopping.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-spm.pdf
Also many examples of climate change are actually problems with land use like, Lake Aural, Lake Chad, Bangladesh and many of the pacific islands.
http://www.unccd.int/cop/cric7/menu.php
-
A quick note.
Hurricanes are not increasing because of global warming.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/askjack/wfaqhurw.htm
Mitigating the affects of climate change would be a lot cheaper then carbon reduction.
The cost of carbon reduction is 5% of the global GDP. Global GDP at present value is 64,903,314,000,000
Which means carbon reduction would cost = $64,903,314,000,000 X .05 = $3,245,165,700,000 This is the equivalent of the worlds 4th biggest economy stopping.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-spm.pdf
Also many examples of climate change are actually problems with land use like, Lake Aural, Lake Chad, Bangladesh and many of the pacific islands.
http://www.unccd.int/cop/cric7/menu.php
Its all just another ruse to add taxes, regulations, control, and $$$$ to Shaman Gore in his carbon credit scam.
-
...great post Tim.
But as someone who has a background in physics I feel I must notify you of the fatal flaw in your reasoning:
You can't explain complex scientific concepts to religious people... if they understood science they wouldn't be religious in the first place... you are dealing with people who don't understand metaphor, what makes you think they'd fare any better with algebra?
The Luke
The Luke,
tell that to these guys, all great scientists and devout Christians as well:
Nicholas Copernicus, Blaise Pascal, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Sir Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregor Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin, Max Planck, Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Arthur Peacocke, Russell Stannard, John Polkinghorne and Francis Collins.
-
The Luke,
tell that to these guys, all great scientists and devout Christians as well:
Nicholas Copernicus, Blaise Pascal, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Sir Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregor Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin, Max Planck, Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Arthur Peacocke, Russell Stannard, John Polkinghorne and Francis Collins.
man if only these men could have been enlightened by "The Luke". ::)
-
The Luke,
tell that to these guys, all great scientists and devout Christians as well:
Nicholas Copernicus, Blaise Pascal, Sir Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Rene Descartes, Sir Isaac Newton, Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Gregor Mendel, William Thomson Kelvin, Max Planck, Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Arthur Peacocke, Russell Stannard, John Polkinghorne and Francis Collins.
I'm not familiar with every name on that list... but I'm familiar enough with some of them to do a little correction:
Nicholas Copernicus... atheist.
Blaise Pascal... atheist.
Sir Francis Bacon... playwright, not a scientist.
Johannes Kepler... atheist.
Galileo Galilei... atheist.
Rene Descartes... atheist.
Sir Isaac Newton... some form of mathematical esotericist, not really properly religious. He spent most of his life working on heretical Kabbalist codes.
Robert Boyle... atheist.
Michael Faraday... atheist.
Gregor Mendel... he wasn't definitely a Christian, he was a monk, might have signed up just for an education... most of his work was considered either heretical or blasphemous.
William Thomson Kelvin... atheist.
Max Planck... absolutely an atheist.
Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher
Theodosius Dobzhansky
Arthur Peacocke
Russell Stannard
John Polkinghorne
Francis Collins
...not really familiar with the guys lower down this list, I assume most are part of the 0.1% of scientists that are religious (3+% of scientists are manic depressives for example).
With regard to the top of that list, I think you are confusing being born into a religiously oppressive time and actually being religious.
The Luke
-
I'm not familiar with every name on that list... but I'm familiar enough with some of them to do a little correction:
Blaise Pascal... atheist.
I am not going to go through your whole list as you are the one trying to say that all of those scientists were atheists.
Obviously you didn't do any research though
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaise_Pascal#Last_works_and_death
Miracle
When Pascal was back in Paris just after overseeing the publication of the last Letter, his religion was reinforced by the close association to an apparent miracle in the chapel of the Port-Royal nunnery. His 10-year-old niece, Marguerite Périer, was suffering from a painful fistula lacrymalis that exuded noisome pus through her eyes and nose—an affliction the doctors pronounced hopeless. Then, on March 24, 1657, a believer presented to Port-Royal what he and others claimed to be a thorn from the crown that had tortured Christ. The nuns, in solemn ceremony and singing psalms, placed the thorn on their altar. Each in turn kissed the relic, and one of them, seeing Marguerite among the worshipers, took the thorn and with it touched the girl's sore. That evening, we are told, Marguerite expressed surprise that her eye no longer pained her; her mother was astonished to find no sign of the fistula; a physician, summoned, reported that the discharge and swelling had disappeared. He, not the nuns, spread word of what he termed a miraculous cure. Seven other physicians who had had previous knowledge of Marguerite's fistula signed a statement that in their judgment a miracle had taken place. The diocesan officials investigated, came to the same conclusion, and authorized a Te Deum Mass in Port-Royal. Crowds of believers came to see and kiss the thorn; all of Catholic Paris acclaimed a miracle. Later, both Jansenists and Catholics used this well-documented miracle to their defense. In 1728, Pope Benedict XIII referred to the case as proving that the age of miracles had not passed.
Pascal made himself an armorial emblem of an eye surrounded by a crown of thorns, with the inscription Scio cui credidi—"I know whom I have believed."[20] His beliefs renewed, he set his mind to write his final, unfinished testament, the Pensées.
Many scientists are Christians or of faith.
http://www.adherents.com/people/100_scientists.html
-
I'm not familiar with every name on that list... but I'm familiar enough with some of them to do a little correction:
Nicholas Copernicus... atheist.
Blaise Pascal... atheist.
Sir Francis Bacon... playwright, not a scientist.
Johannes Kepler... atheist.
Galileo Galilei... atheist.
Rene Descartes... atheist.
Sir Isaac Newton... some form of mathematical esotericist, not really properly religious. He spent most of his life working on heretical Kabbalist codes.
Robert Boyle... atheist.
Michael Faraday... atheist.
Gregor Mendel... he wasn't definitely a Christian, he was a monk, might have signed up just for an education... most of his work was considered either heretical or blasphemous.
William Thomson Kelvin... atheist.
Max Planck... absolutely an atheist.
Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher
Theodosius Dobzhansky
Arthur Peacocke
Russell Stannard
John Polkinghorne
Francis Collins
...not really familiar with the guys lower down this list, I assume most are part of the 0.1% of scientists that are religious (3+% of scientists are manic depressives for example).
With regard to the top of that list, I think you are confusing being born into a religiously oppressive time and actually being religious.
The Luke
These guys, Blaise Pascal, atheists? Nonsense. As usual you pull "facts" out of your butt and make claims you can't substantiate. Everyone on that list is/was a great scientist and devout Christian.
And me, confusing being born into a "religiously oppressive time" and actually being religious? Are you saying these guys were all closet atheists? By your logic, I could just as easily say that most main stream scientists today are closet Christians who pretend to be atheists out of fear of losing respect, research grants and even their jobs.
As for the scientists at the bottom of the list, they are the most modern, not born into a "religiously oppressive time" as you call it.
You don't know who is Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher or who is Francis Collins? I'm shocked, this coming from you, a self proclaimed intellectual who brags about his education and loves to talk down to people of faith. I suggest your read up on these modern scientists. Even Richard Dawkins shows respect for them.
-
These guys, Blaise Pascal, atheists? Nonsense. As usual you pull "facts" out of your butt and make claims you can't substantiate. Everyone on that list is/was a great scientist and devout Christian.
...wasn't Francis Bacon a poet/playwright, not a scientist.
Shouldn't the Masons be taken off that list? Isn't Masonic membership irreconcilable with Christian faith?
These guys might well have been spiritual or religious, but they couldn't have been proper "Christians"... not when their research was heretical/blasphemous.
The Luke
-
...great post Tim.
But as someone who has a background in physics I feel I must notify you of the fatal flaw in your reasoning:
You can't explain complex scientific concepts to religious people... if they understood science they wouldn't be religious in the first place... you are dealing with people who don't understand metaphor, what makes you think they'd fare any better with algebra?
The Luke
The Luke,
Your above statement is clearly false and ignorant. End of story.
-
The Luke,
Your above statement is clearly false and ignorant. End of story.
...I apologise. my statement was both sweeping and obnoxious.
What I should have done was referenced the fact that 99+% of the world's top scientists are either atheist or agnostic. It was wrong of me to generalize 99+% to be all inclusive.
That would be like claiming all Evangelical Christians are deluded, when the facts clearly show that only 99+% of Evangelical Christians are delusional.
I apologize again.
The Luke
-
...wasn't Francis Bacon a poet/playwright, not a scientist.
Shouldn't the Masons be taken off that list? Isn't Masonic membership irreconcilable with Christian faith?
These guys might well have been spiritual or religious, but they couldn't have been proper "Christians"... not when their research was heretical/blasphemous.
The Luke
Having faith is a non-negotiable faith requirement of being a Mason.
http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/textfiles/religion.html
Freemasonry stands for the values that are supreme in the life of the church and expects each member to follow his own faith and to place his duty to God above all other duties. We are sure that a member who is true to the principles he learns in Freemasonry will be a better church member because of it.
Also the Anglican church is headed by the British family and Prince Edward is the head of the Masons in England
http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page5619.asp
Christians are freely allowed to believe in God in any way they choose. That is why there is so many denominations.
-
What about albert einstein?
-
...I apologise. my statement was both sweeping and obnoxious.
What I should have done was referenced the fact that 99+% of the world's top scientists are either atheist or agnostic. It was wrong of me to generalize 99+% to be all inclusive.
That would be like claiming all Evangelical Christians are deluded, when the facts clearly show that only 99+% of Evangelical Christians are delusional.
I apologize again.
The Luke
99+%, right? Because you are such an accurate person, who doesn't even know that Francis Bacon was also a scientist, that Blaise Pascal was a Christian. You don't even know who Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Arthur Peacocke, Russell Stannard, John Polkinghorne and Francis Collins are. ::)
-
...I apologise. my statement was both sweeping and obnoxious.
What I should have done was referenced the fact that 99+% of the world's top scientists are either atheist or agnostic. It was wrong of me to generalize 99+% to be all inclusive.
That would be like claiming all Evangelical Christians are deluded, when the facts clearly show that only 99+% of Evangelical Christians are delusional.
I apologize again.
The Luke
Nice making up facts.
The numbers of scientists that believe in religion is much higher.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.commentary/index.html
Actually, I find no conflict here, and neither apparently do the 40 percent of working scientists who claim to be believers. Yes, evolution by descent from a common ancestor is clearly true. If there was any lingering doubt about the evidence from the fossil record, the study of DNA provides the strongest possible proof of our relatedness to all other living things.
-
Having faith is a non-negotiable faith requirement of being a Mason.
http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/textfiles/religion.html
Freemasonry stands for the values that are supreme in the life of the church and expects each member to follow his own faith and to place his duty to God above all other duties. We are sure that a member who is true to the principles he learns in Freemasonry will be a better church member because of it.
Also the Anglican church is headed by the British family and Prince Edward is the head of the Masons in England
http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page5619.asp
Christians are freely allowed to believe in God in any way they choose. That is why there is so many denominations.
...before the Reformation, the one and only Mother Church often issued edicts on the incompatibility of Masonic thought and Christianity.
How could a Mason deeply involved in Kabbalist mysticism also be a Christian? (Newton)
What about albert einstein?
...do more research, he wasn't a deist.
Nice making up facts.
The numbers of scientists that believe in religion is much higher.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/03/collins.commentary/index.html
...that's an American poll (America is highly religious). Also, the wording of the question is important.
Ask scientists if there is any organized religion to which they subscribe with whose compendium of tenets they agree wholeheartedly... then 99+% say no.
What does any of this have to do with Global Warming?
The Luke
-
...before the Reformation, the one and only Mother Church often issued edicts on the incompatibility of Masonic thought and Christianity.
How could a Mason deeply involved in Kabbalist mysticism also be a Christian? (Newton)
...do more research, he wasn't a deist.
...that's an American poll (America is highly religious). Also, the wording of the question is important.
Ask scientists if there is any organized religion to which they subscribe with whose compendium of tenets they agree wholeheartedly... then 99+% say no.
What does any of this have to do with Global Warming?
The Luke
I could ask you the same:
...great post Tim.
But as someone who has a background in physics I feel I must notify you of the fatal flaw in your reasoning:
You can't explain complex scientific concepts to religious people... if they understood science they wouldn't be religious in the first place... you are dealing with people who don't understand metaphor, what makes you think they'd fare any better with algebra?
The Luke
-
I could ask you the same:
...perhaps you could explain why so many Global Warming deniers just so happen to also be Evangelical millenarianist End-Times/Rapture-mongers?
The Luke
-
...perhaps you could explain why so many Global Warming deniers just so happen to also be Evangelical millenarianist End-Times/Rapture-mongers?
The Luke
More unsubstantiated claims? And this makes your above statements any less ignorant how?
-
More unsubstantiated claims? And this makes your above statements any less ignorant how?
Exhibit A: Sarah Palin and her Witchdoctor lead church.
The Luke
-
What about albert einstein?
-
Einsteins us of the word "god" couples with his anthropomorphic metaphors lead many to believe he was a deist... he was not.
When Einstein says "god"; he is referring to the interconnected mathematical paradigm underlying out physical reality.
He explained this many times himself, in his writings... in interviews... and in person.
The Luke
-
...before the Reformation, the one and only Mother Church often issued edicts on the incompatibility of Masonic thought and Christianity.
How could a Mason deeply involved in Kabbalist mysticism also be a Christian? (Newton)
...do more research, he wasn't a deist.
...that's an American poll (America is highly religious). Also, the wording of the question is important.
Ask scientists if there is any organized religion to which they subscribe with whose compendium of tenets they agree wholeheartedly... then 99+% say no.
What does any of this have to do with Global Warming?
The Luke
A Most scientists live in America and I believe in statistics like polls not made up conjecture that has nothing to do with science. So even if 40% of American scientists that is way over your conjecture of 99%. The numbers also don't take into consideration of places like Islamic countries were the numbers of religious adherents is much higher.
B The Masonic movement as we know it didn't start until after the reformation. As a matter of fact the date was 1717.
Which is more made up facts by you. There was an edict put out by the Catholic church against Masonic beliefs, but most masons are protestants
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Freemasonry
# Stage 2. Freemasonry of the late 16th Century and into the 17th Century. Surviving Scottish Lodge records, as early as the 1630s, show a gentrification process - a transition from Operative to Speculative Freemasonry - evidenced by increasing non-operative notable gentleman within the membership. [15] Virtually no records of English lodges survive prior to the, speculative, Grand Lodge period of 1717 onwards. The purely speculative ritual and lectures of William Preston (1742-1818) demonstrate an increasing use of a ritual infusion of Enlightenment philosophy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholicism_and_Freemasonry
The Roman Catholic Church has long been an outspoken critic of Freemasonry, and has continually prohibited members from being Freemasons since In Eminenti Specula in 1739.
what this has to do with global warming is little other than the fact that you brought it up to prove that you knew science and scientific thought and wanted to bash anyone who believed in God in this thread. And to you wanted to use the belief in God as a tool to prove skeptics were religious for some reason.
What has been proven is that you make up statistics and don't do research. The two founding principles of science.
Which means that like many in the Global Warming world your views on the science of global warming has been replaced with belief.
-
A Most scientists live in America and I believe in statistics like polls not made up conjecture that has nothing to do with science. So even if 40% of American scientists that is way over your conjecture of 99%. The numbers also don't take into consideration of places like Islamic countries were the numbers of religious adherents is much higher.
B The Masonic movement as we know it didn't start until after the reformation. As a matter of fact the date was 1717.
Which is more made up facts by you. There was an edict put out by the Catholic church against Masonic beliefs, but most masons are protestants
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Freemasonry
# Stage 2. Freemasonry of the late 16th Century and into the 17th Century. Surviving Scottish Lodge records, as early as the 1630s, show a gentrification process - a transition from Operative to Speculative Freemasonry - evidenced by increasing non-operative notable gentleman within the membership. [15] Virtually no records of English lodges survive prior to the, speculative, Grand Lodge period of 1717 onwards. The purely speculative ritual and lectures of William Preston (1742-1818) demonstrate an increasing use of a ritual infusion of Enlightenment philosophy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholicism_and_Freemasonry
The Roman Catholic Church has long been an outspoken critic of Freemasonry, and has continually prohibited members from being Freemasons since In Eminenti Specula in 1739.
what this has to do with global warming is little other than the fact that you brought it up to prove that you knew science and scientific thought and wanted to bash anyone who believed in God in this thread. And to you wanted to use the belief in God as a tool to prove skeptics were religious for some reason.
What has been proven is that you make up statistics and don't do research. The two founding principles of science.
Which means that like many in the Global Warming world your views on the science of global warming has been replaced with belief.
let's do a mini poll to see if there is any correlation between religious beliefs and globalwarming..I will start............... is global warming real?yes..is god real?no...
-
let's do a mini poll to see if there is any correlation between religious beliefs and globalwarming..I will start............... is global warming real?yes..is god real?no...
Another guy that doesn't believe in science.
Why don't you hire a polling agency and try to come up with some valid statistics.
Or at least do some research on the net.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/070115_science_religion.html
BOSTON (AP)—Some leading scientists and evangelical Christian leaders have agreed to put aside their fierce differences over the origin of life and work together to fight global warming.
Representatives met recently in Georgia and agreed on the need for urgent action. Details on the talks will be disclosed in Washington on Wednesday.
I am not going through all of the scientists, but at least the first one isn't religious.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11383
"I am a skeptic ... . Global warming has become a new religion." -- Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.
http://vega.org.uk/video/programme/30
Giaever is not religious and thinks religion is to blame for a lot of the ills of the world. His wife and he ski regularly.
-
...before the Reformation, the one and only Mother Church often issued edicts on the incompatibility of Masonic thought and Christianity.
...I said "Masonic thought" not Freemasonry as exemplified by the Scottish Rites. Masonic "thought" predates the Reformation. Masonry is just another manifestation of the Gnostic school of thought which arguably has paralleled human development since Biblical times... read Graham Hancock's excellent compendium study on this subject "Talisman" for a layman's introduction to this subject.
How could a Mason deeply involved in Kabbalist mysticism also be a Christian? (Newton)
...Kabbalah and Christianity ARE incompatible, and Newton was AFTER the Reformation wasn't he?
You are just misreading what I posted then reacting to what you THINK I have posted. I can't correct for your level of reading comprehension, that is your responsibility.
A Most scientists live in America...
...classic GetBig. There goes your credibility.
What has been proven is that you make up statistics and don't do research. The two founding principles of science.
Which means that like many in the Global Warming world your views on the science of global warming has been replaced with belief.
...I don't believe in CO2 as a mechanism of anthropogenic Global Warming.
But dismissing the Global Warming phenomenon itself is something only those who believe in a talking snake can do.
I still stand by this statement:
Ask scientists if there is any organized religion to which they subscribe with whose compendium of tenets they agree wholeheartedly... then 99+% say no.
...it remains true even if "most scientists live in America"... ha-ha.
The Luke
-
...I said "Masonic thought" not Freemasonry as exemplified by the Scottish Rites. Masonic "thought" predates the Reformation. Masonry is just another manifestation of the Gnostic school of thought which arguably has paralleled human development since Biblical times... read Graham Hancock's excellent compendium study on this subject "Talisman" for a layman's introduction to this subject.
...Kabbalah and Christianity ARE incompatible, and Newton was AFTER the Reformation wasn't he?
You are just misreading what I posted then reacting to what you THINK I have posted. I can't correct for your level of reading comprehension, that is your responsibility.
...classic GetBig. There goes your credibility.
...I don't believe in CO2 as a mechanism of anthropogenic Global Warming.
But dismissing the Global Warming phenomenon itself is something only those who believe in a talking snake can do.
I still stand by this statement:
...it remains true even if "most scientists live in America"... ha-ha.
The Luke
Gave you the dates you ignored them.
Freemasons will accept anyone will who believes in God. If someone has opposing views then they shouldn't be a Mason.
The Church of England is closely linked to Masons. The Queens second son is the leader of Freemasons in England and the Queen is the Head of the Church of England.
You explicitly said when the church banned association with the freemasons was before the reformation. This wasn't until 1739.
You still don't use science and that is fine with me.
http://www.aneki.com/nobel.html
Countries with the Most Nobel Prize Winners
1 United States 270
2 United Kingdom 101
3 Germany 76
4 France 49
5 Sweden 30
6 Switzerland 22
7 Netherlands 15
8 USSR 14
8 Italy 14
10 Denmark 13
11 Japan 12
12 Austria 11
13 Canada 10
14 Spain 6
14 Australia 6
16 Ireland 5
16 Israel 5
16 Poland 5
16 South Africa 5
16 Argentina 5
21 India 4
I believe in Climate Change and I know for a fact that it is man made.
Most Climate Change starts as a micro change and becomes a Macro Change.
The biggest contributors to the problems associated with climate change is desertification.
-
http://www.the-scientist.com/images/yr2003/pdfs/country_030825.pdf
Concentration: Highly Cited
No. of Percent No. of Scientists/ per Million
Rank Country Highly Cited Highly Cited Places Places Population
1 US 815 66.7 90 9.06 3.16
2 UK 100 8.2 24 4.17 1.72
3 Germany 62 5.1 21 2.95 0.78
4 Canada 42 3.4 15 2.80 1.53
5 Japan 34 2.7 14 2.43 0.27
6 France 29 2.3 11 2.64 0.50
7 Switzerland 26 2.1 5 5.20 3.78
8 Sweden 17 1.4 2 8.50 1.96
9 Italy 17 1.4 10 1.70 0.29
10 Australia 17 1.4 9 1.88 0.96
-
...Kabbalah and Christianity ARE incompatible, and Newton was AFTER the Reformation wasn't he?
Masons aren't Christian. They believe in a higher power but aren't Christian.
http://www.freemasonry.bcy.ca/textfiles/religion.html
Freemasonry is a completely tolerant organization. When Freemasonry accepts a Christian, or a Jew, or a Buddhist, or a Mohammedan, it does not accept him as such, but accepts him as a man, worthy to be received into the masonic fraternity.
-
You do realize Global Warming is based of decades and hundreds of years, long term trends. ::)
Wait, I am talking to someone who thinks the world is only 6000 years old and everythign was placed as is.
Thats funny,in the 70s they said it was global freezing and a new ice age that was coming upon us.That was also based on thousands of years of research.
-
I saw on the news the other day that current pictures of a previously broken ice caps are now frozen with even more than 30% more ice than last pics. Astonished scientists said the difference is taking a pic in summer vs winter..........i hate oil companies anyway!
-
Al Gore "has a fortune to make" as you say off of this. He started a "carbon credit" business or whatever the hell that is.
What a scammer. First he invents the internet. Then invents global warming. Then he invents carbon credits.
When will this mad man be stopped?