Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Cavalier22 on March 20, 2007, 08:05:55 PM
-
No one seems to mention, as several heavyweight scientists have mentioned recently, the correlation of Mars becoming slightly warmer over the past several decades (accordoing to the Mars Rover) at a very similar rate to that of earth becoming slightly warmer during that same period.
This, they attribute to increased activity on the Sun's surface.
Why am I not surprised this is not on CNN or any other outlet.
-
Not ONLY Mars. but Jupiter and Venus as well. That is why I don't believe man made CO2 is the CAUSE of Global Warming. With or without it, I'm sure it would be happening right now.
-
Not ONLY Mars. but Jupiter and Venus as well. That is why I don't believe man made CO2 is the CAUSE of Global Warming. With or without it, I'm sure it would be happening right now.
Good point guys. Now watch how you get no responses from the left because when you combine facts and common sense they get stumped really quick!
-
So all those scientists that think Global Warming is real and that man had a hand in it are either wrong, lying or practicing partisan politics?
-
So all those scientists that think Global Warming is real and that man had a hand in it are either wrong, lying or practicing partisan politics?
No one denies the globe is warming. But smart scientists know it isn't man made. Or maybe their are SUVs on all the other planets experiencing the same warming trend? Hmmmmmm, You are just another sheep in the herd cardio. Why don't you try listening to the scientists on both sides and then mix in a tad of common sense and see where that gets you
-
No one denies the globe is warming. But smart scientists know it isn't man made. Or maybe their are SUVs on all the other planets experiencing the same warming trend? Hmmmmmm, You are just another sheep in the herd cardio. Why don't you try listening to the scientists on both sides and then mix in a tad of common sense and see where that gets you
Please provide proof of this statement.
-
Please provide proof of this statement.
Here comes the classic Dem line! "Please provide proof......" How do you think theis thread got started? I guess the first two posters just made up the fact that most of the planets are warming along with earth.
-
Here comes the classic Dem line! "Please provide proof......" How do you think theis thread got started? I guess the first two posters just made up the fact that most of the planets are warming along with earth.
I'm not a Democrat and you asserted that "smart scientists know it isn't man made". Are you saying that you can't actually prove that what you said is true?
-
My question is, how long have they been reading temperatures on mars?
And why is it that anytime someone brings up arguments against global warming it's always 1 or a small number of scientists when large groups of scientists seems to think global warming is in part at least caused by man?
-
I'm not a Democrat and you asserted that "smart scientists know it isn't man made". Are you saying that you can't actually prove that what you said is true?
Tell me this oh bright one, If Ifind quotes from scientists that use common sense to say that since all of the planets are warming the sun seems to be the common denominator, how will I prove they are smart? How can you prove they aren't smart, see jackass. Typical Dem (like you aren't)
-
My question is, how long have they been reading temperatures on mars?
And why is it that anytime someone brings up arguments against global warming it's always 1 or a small number of scientists when large groups of scientists seems to think global warming is in part at least caused by man?
But OzmO, if several planets have experienced a rise in temperature, wouldn't the sun be the one thing in common with all of those planets?
-
Tell me this oh bright one, If Ifind quotes from scientists that use common sense to say that since all of the planets are warming the sun seems to be the common denominator, how will I prove they are smart? How can you prove they aren't smart, see jackass. Typical Dem (like you aren't)
So you're not going to prove what you claimed then?
-
So you're not going to prove what you claimed then?
are you that much of an idiot? How do you prove someone's smarts?
-
are you that much of an idiot? How do you prove someone's smarts?
So now I'm an idiot because you can't provide proof of what you claimed?
-
But OzmO, if several planets have experienced a rise in temperature, wouldn't the sun be the one thing in common with all of those planets?
On the surface yes, as to those who know very little of science in those areas yes, but here are some questions regarding that:
How long have they been measuring temperatures on these planets?
How much is the measured rise in temps compared to the measure rise in earths temps?
What is the rate of temperature rising compared to both earth and those other planets?
Are all the planets experiencing this?
Are there other reasons they might experience this based on conditions in their atmospheres that we don;t about?
Shouldn't we just be able to measure the suns temperature and that be conclusive evidence one way or another?
-
So now I'm an idiot because you can't provide proof of what you claimed?
[/quote}
Yes you are an idiot..plain to see really. there is no way to prove someones smarts. So no matter how much info I show about the solar system warming, you can say "well how to you know those scientists are smart"
-
On the surface yes, as to those who know very little of science in those areas yes, but here are some questions regarding that:
How long have they been measuring temperatures on these planets?
How much is the measured rise in temps compared to the measure rise in earths temps?
What is the rate of temperature rising compared to both earth and those other planets?
Are all the planets experiencing this?
Are there other reasons they might experience this based on conditions in their atmospheres that we don;t about?
Shouldn't we just be able to measure the suns temperature and that be conclusive evidence one way or another?
Science has shown more hot spots on the sun
-
Here cardio.....
The sun is burning hotter than usual, offering a possible explanation for global warming that needs to be weighed when proceeding with expensive efforts to cut emissions of greenhouse gases, Swiss and German scientists say.
"The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures," said Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research.
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040718-115714-6334r.htm
Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/18/wsun18.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/18/ixnewstop.html
there science says sun buring hotter than ever in the last thousand years.....now what will you ask next?
-
lol, if you read through the article the scientist says he doesn't know why the sun is hotter. Cardio would say because of the American industrial complex and my 4 wheel drive truck!!! lol
-
So now I'm an idiot because you can't provide proof of what you claimed?
[/quote}
Yes you are an idiot..plain to see really. there is no way to prove someones smarts. So no matter how much info I show about the solar system warming, you can say "well how to you know those scientists are smart"
Just so we're straight, I'm an idiot because you claimed "smart scientists know global warming isn't man made" and when I asked you to provide proof of such a claim you refused?
Another thing I'm curious about, don't you claim that you're not a Conservative Republican?
-
here is more cardio....
Things are heating up on Mars...literally. The planet is experiencing its own version of global warming. The dry-ice polar caps are diminishing. Paul Hsieh speculates that this must be on account of our failure to sign Kyoto. Wow, when somebody close to me told me that I could vote for Bush if I wanted to, but I would have to accept the fact that everything that happens from now on is my fault...well, I just didn't grasp the cosmic implications.
On the other hand, I can't help but wonder — if two planets so close to each other are both experiencing a rise in surface temperature, isn't it just possible that it might have to do with that nearby star they both orbit? I'm just asking is all. I mean, what if...
-
Just so we're straight, I'm an idiot because you claimed "smart scientists know global warming isn't man made" and when I asked you to provide proof of such a claim you refused?
Another thing I'm curious about, don't you claim that you're not a Conservative Republican?
that is right, I am more conservative than liberal but I have never voted party lines. And yes you are an Idiot for asking me to prove someone is smart....
-
here is more cardio....
Things are heating up on Mars...literally. The planet is experiencing its own version of global warming. The dry-ice polar caps are diminishing. Paul Hsieh speculates that this must be on account of our failure to sign Kyoto. Wow, when somebody close to me told me that I could vote for Bush if I wanted to, but I would have to accept the fact that everything that happens from now on is my fault...well, I just didn't grasp the cosmic implications.
On the other hand, I can't help but wonder — if two planets so close to each other are both experiencing a rise in surface temperature, isn't it just possible that it might have to do with that nearby star they both orbit? I'm just asking is all. I mean, what if...
Yet again you're avoiding the issue. I could start posting links and information on the causes of Global Warming as well, but that's not the point.
You claimed the more intelligent scientists know that global warming isn't man made. Such a claim would be easy to prove, at least as far as their education is concerned. Where did they get their degrees? How many degrees do they hold? What were their GPA's? What special accolades did they receive?
Curiously you won't actually prove your point though.
Yeah, but I'm the idiot. Bwahhahhhaaaaaa
that is right, I am more conservative than liberal but I have never voted party lines. And yes you are an Idiot for asking me to prove someone is smart....
Again with the spin. LOL
I didn't ask you to prove someone is smart. I asked you to prove scientists were smarter than other scientists. You know, the thing you actually claimed? ::)
-
Yet again you're avoiding the issue. I could start posting links and information on the causes of Global Warming as well, but that's not the point.
You claimed the more intelligent scientists know that global warming isn't man made. Such a claim would be easy to prove, at least as far as their education is concerned. Where did they get their degrees? How many degrees do they hold? What were their GPA's? What special accolades did they receive?
Curiously you won't actually prove your point though.
Yeah, but I'm the idiot. Bwahhahhhaaaaaa
yeah you are an idiot...ok you post your info on why global warming is man made and then just insert these questions for my response...Where did they get their degrees? How many degrees do they hold? What were their GPA's? What special accolades did they receive? Hmmmm I am guessing your silence would be deafning
-
yeah you are an idiot...ok you post your info on why global warming is man made and then just insert these questions for my response...Where did they get their degrees? How many degrees do they hold? What were their GPA's? What special accolades did they receive? Hmmmm I am guessing your silence would be deafning
More spin. Bwahhahhhahaaaaaaaaaaaaa
And again, he won't prove his claims. You could easily quantify your claim yet you won't. I wonder why?
-
Yet again you're avoiding the issue. I could start posting links and information on the causes of Global Warming as well, but that's not the point.
You claimed the more intelligent scientists know that global warming isn't man made. Such a claim would be easy to prove, at least as far as their education is concerned. Where did they get their degrees? How many degrees do they hold? What were their GPA's? What special accolades did they receive?
Curiously you won't actually prove your point though.
Yeah, but I'm the idiot. Bwahhahhhaaaaaa
Again with the spin. LOL
I didn't ask you to prove someone is smart. I asked you to prove scientists were smarter than other scientists. You know, the thing you actually claimed? ::)
man you are special...you think college degrees, and GPA translate to smarts? I am sure you know plenty of book smart people that are truly dumb in life. Like you for instance.
-
Not that it proves his smarts but I don't want to dissapoint you cardio. Plus I like seeing you change the point with every fact i post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_Solanki
[edit] Academic Career
1987 Doctorate from the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich[7]
1987-1989 Post doc in St. Andrews, Scotland.
1992 Habilitation
1998 Professor of Astronomy at the University of Oulu in Finland
1999 Minnaert guest professor at the University of Utrecht
1999 Director of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research
[edit] Awards and Honours
2001 Honorary professor at the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule
2003 Honorary professor at the Technische Universität Braunschweig
2006 Associateship of the Royal Astronomical Society[8]
So? is he a smart scientist?
-
man you are special...you think college degrees, and GPA translate to smarts? I am sure you know plenty of book smart people that are truly dumb in life. Like you for instance.
No you're right, scientists don't learn their skills in the educational environment they learn them elsewhere, say in the streets. I like you don't care about a scientists educational background. I want our scientists to be more street smart than educationally smart. You're right, I'm converted.
-
No you're right, scientists don't learn their skills in the educational environment they learn them elsewhere, say in the streets. I like you don't care about a scientists educational background. I want our scientists to be more street smart than educationally smart. You're right, I'm converted.
I personally would like my scientists to be able to employ some common sense in making theorys. Kind of like this global warming thing, my guy used common sense, your guys don't
-
Not that it proves his smarts but I don't want to dissapoint you cardio. Plus I like seeing you change the point with every fact i post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_Solanki
[edit] Academic Career
1987 Doctorate from the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich[7]
1987-1989 Post doc in St. Andrews, Scotland.
1992 Habilitation
1998 Professor of Astronomy at the University of Oulu in Finland
1999 Minnaert guest professor at the University of Utrecht
1999 Director of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research
[edit] Awards and Honours
2001 Honorary professor at the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule
2003 Honorary professor at the Technische Universität Braunschweig
2006 Associateship of the Royal Astronomical Society[8]
So? is he a smart scientist?
So now you care about a scientists educational background? LOL
Yes, he is smart but you claimed scientists that didn't think global warming was man made were SMARTER. Get it, more intelligent? That means you have to compare the scientists on both sides, not just one particular scientist.
Watching you try and debate this is growing painful to witness.
-
So now you care about a scientists educational background? LOL
Yes, he is smart but you claimed scientists that didn't think global warming was man made were SMARTER. Get it, more intelligent? That means you have to compare the scientists on both sides, not just one particular scientist.
Watching you try and debate this is growing painful to witness.
actually I don't care about his smarts as evidenced in the first sentence of that post. I was just giving you a way to change the subject again. So what exactly have you brought to this debate?
-
Not that it proves his smarts but I don't want to dissapoint you cardio. Plus I like seeing you change the point with every fact i post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sami_Solanki
[edit] Academic Career
1987 Doctorate from the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich[7]
1987-1989 Post doc in St. Andrews, Scotland.
1992 Habilitation
1998 Professor of Astronomy at the University of Oulu in Finland
1999 Minnaert guest professor at the University of Utrecht
1999 Director of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research
[edit] Awards and Honours
2001 Honorary professor at the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule
2003 Honorary professor at the Technische Universität Braunschweig
2006 Associateship of the Royal Astronomical Society[8]
So? is he a smart scientist?
Here, here is your expert's education
In 1965, he enrolled at Harvard College, the only school to which he applied. His roommate (in Dunster House) was actor Tommy Lee Jones. After finding himself bored with his classes in his declared English major, Gore switched majors and worked hard in his government courses and graduated cum laude from Harvard in June 1969 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in government. After returning from the military he took religious studies courses at Vanderbilt University and then entered its Law School. He left Vanderbilt after completing the required one-year Rockefeller Foundation scholarship for students returning to secular work to run for Congress in 1976.[7]
hmmmmm bachelor's degree? doesn't seem that great. I don't know whay I am debating your side for you. The lib side always comes up so short! LOL
-
actually I don't care about his smarts as evidenced in the first sentence of that post. I was just giving you a way to change the subject again. So what exactly have you brought to this debate?
These are the facts. You claimed scientists that think global warming is man made are less intelligent than scientists that think global warming is not man made.
I asked you to prove such an incredible claim. You refused and hemmed and hawed until we come to the point where now you're asking what I've brought to the debate. ::)
Congratulations.
BTW, snow isn't actually frozen water, it's really white cotton candy. And no, I won't provide any actual proof of this claim.
-
Here, here is your expert's education
In 1965, he enrolled at Harvard College, the only school to which he applied. His roommate (in Dunster House) was actor Tommy Lee Jones. After finding himself bored with his classes in his declared English major, Gore switched majors and worked hard in his government courses and graduated cum laude from Harvard in June 1969 with a Bachelor of Arts degree in government. After returning from the military he took religious studies courses at Vanderbilt University and then entered its Law School. He left Vanderbilt after completing the required one-year Rockefeller Foundation scholarship for students returning to secular work to run for Congress in 1976.[7]
hmmmmm bachelor's degree? doesn't seem that great. I don't know whay I am debating your side for you. The lib side always comes up so short! LOL
Bwahhahhhaaaaaa
Now your using Al Gore as a scientist?
Please stop, you're only embarrassing yourself.
-
These are the facts. You claimed scientists that think global warming is man made are less intelligent than scientists that think global warming is not man made.
I asked you to prove such an incredible claim. You refused and hemmed and hawed until we come to the point where now you're asking what I've brought to the debate. ::)
Congratulations.
BTW, snow isn't actually frozen water, it's really white cotton candy. And no, I won't provide any actual proof of this claim.
exactly my point....you bring nothing. I showed evidence of the sun warming the earth, I compared two experts, you...another graduate of OzmO debating school. Take one word in a sentence, debate just that one word but not support your side of the story. Oh wait you don't have a side worth supporting!!! LMAO
-
Bwahhahhhaaaaaa
Now your using Al Gore as a scientist?
Please stop, you're only embarrassing yourself.
Me?!! lol Gore is your god not mine!!!! Don't see you pulling out intelligent scientists on your side!! You have avoided this all morning. Puss
-
Science has shown more hot spots on the sun
then i would ask the question(s):
Are we experiencing Global Warming now?
Are we experiencing the unwanted effects scientists are warning about now?
Is the SUn's temperature rise connected to possible problems in the future regarding Global Warming?
Can the Suns rise in temperature speed up global warming?
Because if i understand it right, we are being warned by scientists that if we don't do things to prevent global warming now, in the near future we will experience problems on a global scale.
So the Sun rise in temperature now, doesn't seem to say much other than 1000's of scientists who have concluded global warming is a threat don't seem to think the Sun rise in temperature is a major factor in their warnings.
-
Me?!! lol Gore is your god not mine!!!! Don't see you pulling out intelligent scientists on your side!! You have avoided this all morning. Puss
Perhaps you've missed all those posts of mine calling Gore a lying, hypocritical blowhard and saying he's the wrong guy to be championing global warming.
But why let facts ruin your argument.
I don't have to pull out the educational background of scientists on the global warming side. You made the assertion. You prove the assertion. Or did that little fact slip your mind?
-
then i would ask the question(s):
Are we experiencing Global Warming now?
Are we experiencing the unwanted effects scientists are warning about now?
Is the SUn's temperature rise connected to possible problems in the future regarding Global Warming?
Can the Suns rise in temperature speed up global warming?
Because if i understand it right, we are being warned by scientists that if we don't do things to prevent global warming now, in the near future we will experience problems on a global scale.
So the Sun rise in temperature now, doesn't seem to say much other than 1000's of scientists who have concluded global warming is a threat don't seem to think the Sun rise in temperature is a major factor in their warnings.
So who is wrong? your guys or my guys?
-
Here comes the classic Dem line! "Please provide proof......" How do you think theis thread got started? I guess the first two posters just made up the fact that most of the planets are warming along with earth.
This isn't about "Dem".
This is about that a majority of scientists have found evidence that there is global warming and it is caused by humans.
Answer this: Why on earth would any of the current politicians try to fcuk with the research in order to make things look worse?
"Dems" have a lot of responsibilities towards workers in the car industry and other heavy industries, guys that may lose their job if some of the necessary changes are done.
So why would this be some kind of "Dem" agenda?
Cut the fcuking crap for once.
Realize that environmental policies isn't about left or right, "Dem" or "Rep".
Even though more than 2000 scientists backed up a report for UN that stated that there is global warming, there are still self-proclaimed experts who sits by their computers and thinks up theories that goes something like this:
"these scientists are all wrong, and I, who have no expertise and haven't even studied this, I happen to know better"
Incredible.
-Hedge
-
Perhaps you've missed all those posts of mine calling Gore a lying, hypocritical blowhard and saying he's the wrong guy to be championing global warming.
But why let facts ruin your argument.
I don't have to pull out the educational background of scientists on the global warming side. You made the assertion. You prove the assertion. Or did that little fact slip your mind?
funny, of all the articles I pulled up supporting global warming and all the scientists they mentioned, I couldn't find any background on any of them. Maybe they aren't good enough scientists to warrant listening to
-
This isn't about "Dem".
This is about that a majority of scientists have found evidence that there is global warming and it is caused by humans.
Answer this: Why on earth would any of the current politicians try to fcuk with the research in order to make things look worse?
"Dems" have a lot of responsibilities towards workers in the car industry and other heavy industries, guys that may lose their job if some of the necessary changes are done.
So why would this be some kind of "Dem" agenda?
Cut the fcuking crap for once.
Realize that environmental policies isn't about left or right, "Dem" or "Rep".
Even though more than 2000 scientists backed up a report for UN that stated that there is global warming, there are still self-proclaimed experts who sits by their computers and thinks up theories that goes something like this:
"these scientists are all wrong, and I, who have no expertise and haven't even studied this, I happen to know better"
Incredible.
-Hedge
Hey fool......I didn't say global warming was a Dem thing, I said cardio was using a classic dem approach. Way to read the first two words of the post!! LOL wow so many fools in this joint
-
So who is wrong? your guys or my guys?
It seems that there are far more guys who think GW is man made than the few who think it isn't.
I realize that doesn;t mean it's true either way, but it's just an observation.
-
funny, of all the articles I pulled up supporting global warming and all the scientists they mentioned, I couldn't find any background on any of them. Maybe they aren't good enough scientists to warrant listening to
Well, none of this matters to me anymore because you've converted me. I don't want a scientists to have a strong educational background. In fact you're right, what does a scientist learn in an educational environment that he wouldn't learn with common sense?
MIT, Cal. Tech, Stanford, Harvard. Screw em all, they mean nothing. Budding scientists would do better to employ common sense than to actually learn science in a world class educational environment.
-
Well, none of this matters to me anymore because you've converted me. I don't want a scientists to have a strong educational background. In fact you're right, what does a scientist learn in an educational environment that he wouldn't learn with common sense?
MIT, Cal. Tech, Stanford, Harvard. Screw em all, they mean nothing. Budding scientists would do better to employ common sense than to actually learn science in a world class educational environment.
LMAO!! I'll take that as the white flag!!!! I said I like a combination of common sense backed up with education!!! Way to fight your point......LOL oh god it hurts!!! lmao
-
LMAO!! I'll take that as the white flag!!!! I said I like a combination of common sense backed up with education!!! Way to fight your point......LOL oh god it hurts!!! lmao
This is what you said when responding to my post about comparing intelligence levels of scientists.
man you are special...you think college degrees, and GPA translate to smarts? I am sure you know plenty of book smart people that are truly dumb in life. Like you for instance.
Apparantly college degrees aren't particularly important to you in regards to scientists. Your argument was so persuasive that I no longer believe college degrees are important either. Congratulations, I'm converted.
Since education isn't important to you perhaps a quick dictionary search for the word sarcasm would help you better understand my post.
-
This is what you said when responding to my post about comparing intelligence levels of scientists.
Apparantly college degrees aren't particularly important to you in regards to scientists. Your argument was so persuasive that I no longer believe college degrees are important either. Congratulations, I'm converted.
Since education isn't important to you perhaps a quick dictionary search for the word sarcasm would help you better understand my post.
and here was my response
"I personally would like my scientists to be able to employ some common sense in making theorys. Kind of like this global warming thing, my guy used common sense, your guys don't"
so show me where I said education wasn't important??????? thought so And like I said your scientists must not be that educated if I can't turn up any info on the 10 I tried......I'll just wait now for you to try and bring anything to this argument.
-
and here was my response
"I personally would like my scientists to be able to employ some common sense in making theorys. Kind of like this global warming thing, my guy used common sense, your guys don't"
so show me where I said education wasn't important??????? thought so And like I said your scientists must not be that educated if I can't turn up any info on the 10 I tried......I'll just wait now for you to try and bring anything to this argument.
So you're saying that this post doesn't say you don't think education is important when referring to the intelligence of scientists?
man you are special...you think college degrees, and GPA translate to smarts? I am sure you know plenty of book smart people that are truly dumb in life. Like you for instance.
My quip about snow being cotton candy brought as much credibility to this debate as your quip that said scientists that don't believe global warming is man made are smarter than scientists that do believe global warming is man made.
But please keep spinning your posts away from the fact that you can't prove your claim. This is highly amusing.
-
scientists are mixed on this. another article on global warming and gore
Skeptics Call Gore's Movie Science Fiction
By Monisha Bansal
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
March 19, 2007
(CNSNews.com) - In response to former Vice President Al Gore's Academy Award-winning documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth," climate change skeptics called the film a "sci-fi disaster" movie.
"Al Gore put global warming on the map," said Marlo Lewis, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, at a Capitol Hill press conference on Friday. He called "An Inconvenient Truth" the "most politically influencing documentary."
But Lewis added: "Nearly every significant statement that Vice President Gore makes regarding climate science and climate policy is either one-sided, misleading, exaggerated, speculative or wrong."
Lewis outlines these arguments in a 140-page congressional working paper released Friday, ahead of Gore's trip to Washington, D.C., to provide congressional testimony on global warming.
He said the movie "purport to be a non-partisan, non-ideological exposition of climate science. In reality, the film is a computer-enhanced lawyer's brief for global warming alarmism and energy rationing."
"The only facts and studies Gore considers are those convenient to his scare-them-green agenda," he said.
Lewis said Gore "vastly overstates carbon dioxide's importance" in climate change, noting that the 1930s were warmer than current temperatures.
"Our parents or grandparents somehow survived that crisis, and I think we will, too," he said sarcastically.
Lewis also took issue with Gore's characterization of climate change as a "moral issue."
"Gore calls global warming a 'moral issue,' but for him, it is a moralizing issue -- a license to castigate political adversaries and blame America first for everything from hurricanes to floods to wildfires to tick-borne disease," Lewis said.
"Somehow, he sees nothing immoral in the attempt to make fossil energy scarcer and more costly in a world where 1.6 billion people have never flipped a light switch and billions more are too poor to own an automobile," he said.
"There is no way you can stabilize CO2 in the atmosphere unless you extend Kyoto-like initiatives to developing countries like China and India," Lewis added.
Lewis said that many developing nations are "energy starved" and would be harmed by policies that would force them to curb the use of fossil fuels, an energy source he said is the "most affordable for the foreseeable future."
The Union of Concerned Scientists, League of Conservation Voters, Natural Resources Defense Council, World Resources Institute and Environmental Defense declined to comment for this article, but according to the movie's website, "The evidence [for global warming] is overwhelming and undeniable."
"The vast majority of scientists agree that global warming is real, it's already happening and that it is the result of our activities and not a natural occurrence," it states. "We're already seeing changes.
"Glaciers are melting, plants and animals are being forced from their habitat, and the number of severe storms and droughts is increasing," it says. "If the warming continues, we can expect catastrophic consequences."
-
So you're saying that this post doesn't say you don't think education is important when referring to the intelligence of scientists?
My quip about snow being cotton candy brought as much credibility to this debate as your quip that said scientists that don't believe global warming is man made are smarter than scientists that do believe global warming is man made.
But please keep spinning your posts away from the fact that you can't prove your claim. This is highly amusing.
Me spinning? lol...I showed the intelligence of my scientist. But your scientists are so uncredible their education record can't be found on the web.......guess that proves the ones that blame the sun are smarter then the ones that say man made. Unless you can prove me wrong.
And I still can't see where I said education is unimportant.........that is all I have for now. If you come back with facts that support any part of your argument on this matter whether it be the intelligence of scientists, or that global warming is man made then I will keep debating. I have supported my arguments with facts so maybe you will try the same. Until then I will assume you can't discredit my info.....
-
Me spinning? lol...I showed the intelligence of my scientist. But your scientists are so uncredible their education record can't be found on the web.......guess that proves the ones that blame the sun are smarter then the ones that say man made. Unless you can prove me wrong.
And I still can't see where I said education is unimportant.........that is all I have for now. If you come back with facts that support any part of your argument on this matter whether it be the intelligence of scientists, or that global warming is man made then I will keep debating. I have supported my arguments with facts so maybe you will try the same. Until then I will assume you can't discredit my info.....
So you're saying you're not going to prove your claim that scientists that don't believe global warming is man made are smarter than scientists that do believe global warming is man made?
-
So you're saying you're not going to prove your claim that scientists that don't believe global warming is man made are smarter than scientists that do believe global warming is man made?
I did prove it, my scientist is smart enough to have info about him on the web. Yours aren't that smart. Now it's your turn to prove me wrong....
-
I did prove it, my scientist is smart enough to have info about him on the web. Yours aren't that smart. Now it's your turn to prove me wrong....
If by "I did prove it" you actually mean "I didn't even remotely prove my absurd claim" then I agree completely, you did prove it.
-
If by "I did prove it" you actually mean "I didn't even remotely prove my absurd claim" then I agree completely, you did prove it.
good thing I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to prove me wrong......Where is all the education background of the "man made" scientists??????? Must not be that smart....
-
good thing I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to prove me wrong......Where is all the education background of the "man made" scientists??????? Must not be that smart....
Good thing I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to actually prove your original claim.
-
Good thing I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to actually prove your original claim.
How did I not? I showed my scientist's education, but was unable to unearth any of yours.....so tell me how I didn't prove it. Your guy's education must not exist. If your's are uneducated, and mine is educated...that means that my guys are smarter. So how did I not prove it?
-
How did I not? I showed my scientist's education, but was unable to unearth any of yours.....so tell me how I didn't prove it. Your guy's education must not exist. If your's are uneducated, and mine is educated...that means that my guys are smarter. So how did I not prove it?
Is this sarcasm? It's got to be, there's no way your post could actually be serious.
-
Is this sarcasm? It's got to be, there's no way your post could actually be serious.
serious, how did I not show that my guy is more educated, unless you can provide proof otherwise that your scientist is smarter........Which you can't or you would have by now
-
There is still a lot of the Earth's natural cycle that we don't know. If scientist's knew for sure. they would be able to predict PRECISELY when earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, droughts,etc. would occur. Most scientists will admit there is more CO2 in the atmosphere, but none will TRULY admit it is the CAUSE of Global Warming.
BTW, the ice is melting in the seas. But there is also more UNDERWATER VOLCANIC activity.
http://www.iceagenow.com/Underwater_Lava_Plateau.htm
http://www.iceagenow.com/New_Island_Near_Tonga.htm
http://www.iceagenow.com/Underwater_Volcanoes_Heating_Pacific_Ocean.htm
http://www.iceagenow.com/Volcanoes_in_Arctic_Ocean.htm
Why didn't Gore include this in his documentary? ::)
-
There is still a lot of the Earth's natural cycle that we don't know. If scientist's knew for sure. they would be able to predict PRECISELY when earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, droughts,etc. would occur. Most scientists will admit there is more CO2 in the atmosphere, but none will TRULY admit it is the CAUSE of Global Warming.
BTW, the ice is melting in the seas. But there is also more UNDERWATER VOLCANIC activity.
http://www.iceagenow.com/Underwater_Lava_Plateau.htm
http://www.iceagenow.com/New_Island_Near_Tonga.htm
http://www.iceagenow.com/Underwater_Volcanoes_Heating_Pacific_Ocean.htm
http://www.iceagenow.com/Volcanoes_in_Arctic_Ocean.htm
Why didn't Gore include this in his documentary? ::)
Oldskool, don't come in here with facts! You will get a bad rep
-
More scientists discounting global warming
An expert in thermodynamics says the assumption that the earth is getting warmer through the use of what is called a "global temperature" is scientifically unsound.
Professor Bjarne Andresen of the University of Copenhagen's Niels Bohr Institute says it is meaningless to talk about an average global temperature. He says compiling temperatures from various places and averaging them would be like calculating the average phone number in the phone book.
And he points out there are several different methods by which scientists calculate average temperatures — and they can come up with many different answers from the same set of numbers.
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Science/danish_scientist_global_warming_is_a_myth/20070315-012154-7403r/
"It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something as complicated as the climate of Earth," said Andresen, an expert on thermodynamics. "A temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system. Furthermore, the climate is not governed by a single temperature. Rather, differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, thunder, etc. which make up the climate".
Cardio here is his phone number, his education background was written in a foreign language but you can call him if you want and see if he is smart enough for you
Bjarne Andresen, professor of physics Phone: +45 3532-0470
-
Me spinning? lol...I showed the intelligence of my scientist. But your scientists are so uncredible their education record can't be found on the web.......guess that proves the ones that blame the sun are smarter then the ones that say man made. Unless you can prove me wrong.
Steven Hawking thinks global warming is real and that man has something to do with causing it. Can you find me a scientist smarter than Hawking? ;D Here's a quote from Hawking:
In an ABC News interview in August 2006, Hawking explained, "The danger is that global warming may become self-sustaining, if it has not done so already. The melting of the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps reduces the fraction of solar energy reflected back into space, and so increases the temperature further. Climate change may kill off the Amazon and other rain forests, and so eliminate one of the main ways in which carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere. The rise in sea temperature may trigger the release of large quantities of methane, trapped as hydrates on the ocean floor. Both these phenomena would increase the greenhouse effect, and so further global warming. We have to reverse global warming urgently, if we still can."
-
Steven Hawking thinks global warming is real and that man has something to do with causing it. Can you find me a scientist smarter than Hawking? ;D Here's a quote from Hawking:
You mean the same Stphen Hawking who made this statement?
http://www.space.com/news/hawking_rebuttal_011016.html
or this?
http://www.skepticism.net/articles/2000/000007.html
-
stephen hawking is widely regarded by the public but in his actual field he is not near the top, not even close.
i read the other day that the sun is at its hottest its been to 28000
-
stephen hawking is widely regarded by the public but in his actual field he is not near the top, not even close.
i read the other day that the sun is at its hottest its been to 28000
the way ya talk mate..
does christianity = pro bush?? :-\
-
stephen hawking is widely regarded by the public but in his actual field he is not near the top, not even close.
i read the other day that the sun is at its hottest its been to 28000
Stephen Hawkings is a very smart man, but a bit too eccentric IMO. The media have him really high because he's beaten the odds of his disability with his knowledge.
-
i have watched a few videos on blackholes, quantum physics whatever and from what i havfe seen other scientists say he got real famous 20 years go on a new far out theory that has since been disproven and has contributed no more than other scientists in his same field
and no, i think bush has doen a shitty job