PDA

View Full Version : Global Warming - another perspective.



brandywinelabs
12-24-2009, 10:18 AM
Very interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=FOLkze-9GcI&pop_ads=0#t=83

Steve
12-24-2009, 03:27 PM
That's great. But there is no funding without a crisis.:-x

david gibson
12-27-2009, 11:47 AM
that is a great dose of reality. thanks!!

i am convinced that the main reason there is so much debate about global warming is that the average - even above average - person has no concept of geologic time. we all know and see how south america and africa "fit" like puzzle pieces, and geology proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt. the same principles apply al...l over the globe, its all fact and fully proven.
as geologists we know that south america and africa are separating at the rate of about 2 inches per year. do the math, since the time of the birth of Christ the two continents have separated about the length of a football field. think about it! and go back the thousands of miles it takes to put them back together to the former super-continent called Pangea, and realize that it too was formed by other plates combining from the former original super continent Gondwanaland.

think about it.

the earth is in perpetual change. GLOBAL WARMING is a FACT to have been occurring repeatedly across geologic history. proving that man is causing it in the last 100 yrs and that we can reverse it in the next 100 yrs is not even worthy of the word "absurd
the vast majority of scientists that believe in man caused global warming are in academia. to jump on this bandwagon means grant money to further research and KEEP THEIR JOB. "publish or perish" is the realm of academia.

ok, i am done, just wanted to inject a dose of reality here.

Merry Christmas! Happy Hannukka!! good Kwanza!! or even Pleasant Festivus for the Rest of Us!

dnf777
12-27-2009, 01:56 PM
the earth is in perpetual change. GLOBAL WARMING is a FACT to have been occurring repeatedly across geologic history. proving that man is causing it in the last 100 yrs and that we can reverse it in the next 100 yrs is not even worthy of the word "absurd
!

I agree. In geologic times, trying to show man has affected the global climate over 100 years or so is just as ridiculous, if not MORE, than trying to prove in astronomical scale, something as equally absurd that the earth is round and revolved around the sun!! What'll they come up with next...little tiny organisms too small to see that make big strong man sick?? What a bunch of crazy goons! :rolleyes:

Helios regards
dave

Gerry Clinchy
12-27-2009, 02:38 PM
I agree. In geologic times, trying to show man has affected the global climate over 100 years or so is just as ridiculous, if not MORE, than trying to prove in astronomical scale, something as equally absurd that the earth is round and revolved around the sun!! What'll they come up with next...little tiny organisms too small to see that make big strong man sick?? What a bunch of crazy goons! :rolleyes:

Helios regards
dave

Not really fair comparisons, Dave.

dnf777
12-27-2009, 03:02 PM
Not really fair comparisons, Dave.

Sure, why not? The overwhelming majority of credible scientists of the time put forth a theory, which much like many large-scale theories of the natural world including global climate change, are not amenable to simple laboratory proofs, and the non-believers took advantage of this fact to discredit and persecute the scientists. Only a handful of astronauts and a few rich people who flew the concord actually SAW the curvature of the earth. The rest of us mere earthlings accept the scientific theories. Well, I'm not sure some do, but most of us, anyway. There are many more questions than answers. God has given us the ultimate textbook to study.....the natural world. The books man has written pale in comparison to God's world. While some study books, enlightened men and women study the world and skies for answers. Like I've said before, to accept global warming as put forth currently, is only slightly less foolish than to dismiss it!

Here's to 2010,
dave

subroc
12-27-2009, 04:41 PM
In Dave’s world you must see it to believe it, and must believe the world is flat if you don’t believe there is enough proof that man has caused global warming.

He dismissed some scientific proofs i.e. the world is round to try and prove his left wing radical idealistic theory

Pete
12-27-2009, 06:35 PM
Sure, why not? The overwhelming majority of credible scientists of the time put forth a theory, which much like many large-scale theories of the natural world including global climate change, are not amenable to simple laboratory proofs, and the non-believers took advantage of this fact to discredit and persecute the scientists. Only a handful of astronauts and a few rich people who flew the concord actually SAW the curvature of the earth. The rest of us mere earthlings accept the scientific theories. Well, I'm not sure some do, but most of us, anyway. There are many more questions than answers. God has given us the ultimate textbook to study.....the natural world. The books man has written pale in comparison to God's world. While some study books, enlightened men and women study the world and skies for answers. Like I've said before, to accept global warming as put forth currently, is only slightly less foolish than to dismiss it!



The men and woman of biblical times didnt need science to know the earth was round,, or that it hangeth on nothing and that continental drift was alive and real

They new the names of the stars and what was written therin,,,,they new nature much better than we do and probably had forgotten more about the natural world than we could ever know,,

astromers are still wondering why the sky is so mathmatically exact,,, well

Modern Science with all its fancy findings and fancy gadgets is as usual a step behind the times:D

Pete

david gibson
12-27-2009, 08:29 PM
well, i take all the biblical/religious aspects out of it. i am basically a conservative atheist - as a geologist i see the world from a staunch scientific viewpoint. i respect all religions and despise them all as mutually and self destructive at the same time.

science is science, period. you cannot inject any level of any religion into it to try to justify any said religion. science is science, religion is religion, ne'er the twain shall meet.

and i still say global warming as put forth by algore and his minions is ludicrous.

Pete
12-27-2009, 09:37 PM
science is science, period. you cannot inject any level of any religion into it to try to justify any said religion. science is science, religion is religion, ne'er the twain shall meet.



There you go,,spoken like a true atheist

p

david gibson
12-27-2009, 10:39 PM
There you go,,spoken like a true atheist

p

Thanks! you actually get it! ;-)

but actually, i am not a "true" athiest, so be careful not to label me. i just have my own independent free thinking being a geologist and one who has put his hands on the history of the earth, and i just dont see that meshing with the old testament books. however, i have no issues with the ten commandments posted in a courthouse, i fully back the public display of mangers and christmas trees and all things so related - and i want prayer in public school and keep "In God We Trust" on our currency. i support all religions and their right to apostatize peacefully, but this country was founded on christian principles and i prefer it to remain so. i just ascribe to no one religion personally - yet i have spent several hundred thousands of dollars putting my kids through catholic school and defend their right to their own personal choice.

so put away the broad brush and dont judge - wwjd - right? its all in how we steer our own lives and treat our fellow man, thats all Jesus would care about at the end of the day. its all so very simple.

Gerry Clinchy
12-28-2009, 07:31 AM
Like I've said before, to accept global warming as put forth currently, is only slightly less foolish than to dismiss it!


I can accept the data that there is a warming trend ... but have more difficulty accepting that the trend is a long-term indication, or just part of a cycle.

Also have difficulty accepting that we know the "why" for the present warming trend & that we can make significant impact by the remedies proposed. As you and I both mentioned, unless we include population considerations in the computations as well, we are dealing with incomplete data.

Pete
12-28-2009, 08:23 AM
Thanks! you actually get it! :wink:

but actually, i am not a "true" athiest, so be careful not to label me. i just have my own independent free thinking being a geologist and one who has put his hands on the history of the earth, and i just dont see that meshing with the old testament books. however, i have no issues with the ten commandments posted in a courthouse, i fully back the public display of mangers and christmas trees and all things so related - and i want prayer in public school and keep "In God We Trust" on our currency. i support all religions and their right to apostatize peacefully, but this country was founded on christian principles and i prefer it to remain so. i just ascribe to no one religion personally - yet i have spent several hundred thousands of dollars putting my kids through catholic school and defend their right to their own personal choice.



Good dont label me either,,,I am a scientific biblical research student and I too have seen the corruption in science as well as religious leaders,,,and sorry but I had a label for you a long time ago ,,,and dont see a need to throw them out. Just like a scientist I need my little catagories too. Oh and yes I understand where your comming from I grew up catholic and did the whole bit also and so did my wife,,,
I'll tell you what I'll throw my label cabinate away for your records if throw mine away

i am basically a conservative atheist thats where I got my paint brush from
Happy New year

Pete

JDogger
12-28-2009, 10:17 PM
Good dont label me either,,,I am a scientific biblical research student and I too have seen the corruption in science as well as religious leaders,,,and sorry but I had a label for you a long time ago ,,,and dont see a need to throw them out. Just like a scientist I need my little catagories too. Oh and yes I understand where your comming from I grew up catholic and did the whole bit also and so did my wife,,,
I'll tell you what I'll throw my label cabinate away for your records if throw mine away
thats where I got my paint brush from
Happy New year

Pete

You lost me Pete... wanna try again? What's a cabinate?

JD

Pete
12-29-2009, 08:25 AM
You lost me Pete... wanna try again? What's a cabinate Dont you know anythang,,,:p

p

JDogger
12-29-2009, 08:36 AM
Dont you know anythang,,,:p

p

Guess not. Is there a secret handshake too?

JD

K G
12-29-2009, 08:57 AM
Don't let JDog get you down, Pete....he needs Merriam-Webster too...:D

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=48985&page=2

Glass houses regards, ;-)

kg

Terry Britton
12-29-2009, 10:09 AM
Looking at data over just a 10 year period is statistically insignificant in the big picture. Also, ignoring data such as activity from under water volcanos or solar activity, or affect from water and water vapor makes any conclusions from just CO2 trash.

K G
12-29-2009, 10:39 AM
Looking at data over just a 10 year period is statistically insignificant in the big picture. Also, ignoring data such as activity from under water volcanos or solar activity, or affect from water and water vapor makes any conclusions from just CO2 trash.

You're forgetting one VERY important force of nature here, Terry...the liberal left.....:rolleyes:

What they SAY global warming is, and what global warming IS, is two VERY different things regards,

kg

junbe
01-01-2010, 09:42 AM
New research finds that the airborne fraction of carbon dioxide has not increased either during the past 150 years or during the most recent five decades, contrary to some recent studies.

This finding was just published yesterday in a scientific journal.
ScienceDaily (Dec. 31, 2009)
Jack

dnf777
01-01-2010, 11:49 AM
The men and woman of biblical times didnt need science to know the earth was round,, or that it hangeth on nothing and that continental drift was alive and real

They new the names of the stars and what was written therin,,,,they new nature much better than we do and probably had forgotten more about the natural world than we could ever know,,

astromers are still wondering why the sky is so mathmatically exact,,, well

Modern Science with all its fancy findings and fancy gadgets is as usual a step behind the times:D

Pete

Are you referring to ancient men of science such as Copernicus, Galileo, Descartes....all of whom where ridiculed and persecuted by the Church??
Thank you for adding to my point.

And how can you believe in continental drift?? At the rate they're moving, the world would have to be older than 6000 years??? Preposterous!