|
Random Politics & Religion #00
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2014-11-19 23:07:59
Do mainstream conservatives still think the scientific community is split on man-made global warming or have they moved on to accusing the scientific community of fabricating it just so they can get grant money? Why not both? Also, polar bears.
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13643
By Bahamut.Ravael 2014-11-19 23:08:11
If a group of pilots were discussing the best way to land a broken plane, do you know what I'd do? I sit down and shut up and let the people that know what they're doing actually fix the problem.
1970s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1980s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1990s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2000s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2010s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
Looks like they're doing a great job of fixing the problem.
Sadly, scientists aren't able to make the changes that would need to be made and research is expensive. Are you saying that green technologies have not made any significant progress in the last 50 years?
Relative to the money that's been shoveled towards them? No. Then again, I think the money has gone to the wrong places. Instead of giving it to a bunch of researchers who study it but can't do anything about it, it should've gone to engineers and inventors who might have been able to.
[+]
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2014-11-19 23:17:48
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program.
By Altimaomega 2014-11-19 23:22:55
Take all the money away from the scientists researching global warming and put it towards something that could benefit the world.
Screw that lets just fear monger and executive order money into more research, regulations and taxes! Yeah! Screw solving problem logically!!
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-11-19 23:30:06
You know what could benefit the whole world? Clean cheap energy...
[+]
By Jetackuu 2014-11-19 23:34:10
Lets see you use some of that awesome scientific literacy in place of what I said.
inb4 "no u" again... We have, numerous times and yet you still don't comprehend it.
No really actually put some substance into what you preach. What should I have said while saying the exact same thing using your awesome scientific literacy.
I'm gonna bet you'll start pulling my hair before you back up your statement. That's the thing, you wouldn't have said what you said if you understood, unless you were trolling.
By Jetackuu 2014-11-19 23:43:51
PS. Those electric lift trucks are not as "green" as people claim.
I'm well aware of the drawbacks of electric lifts vs CNG. We replaced a fleet of 5K counterbalance lift trucks with 4K electric reach lifts that weighed about half as much. Pound for pound they aren't much greener than traditional lift trucks in the same way that a Hummer is greener than a Prius.
If a group of pilots were discussing the best way to land a broken plane, do you know what I'd do? I sit down and shut up and let the people that know what they're doing actually fix the problem.
1970s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1980s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1990s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2000s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2010s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
Looks like they're doing a great job of fixing the problem.
Sadly, scientists aren't able to make the changes that would need to be made and research is expensive. Are you saying that green technologies have not made any significant progress in the last 50 years?
So now green tech is only around because of the evil global warming monster? /faccepalm
Are you HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE or something?
I'm wondering the same thing about you.. You make a horrible analogy about a group of pilots, Rav owns you on it. Then you jump to boohoo scientists can on do so much because research is expensive and blah blah green tech. Meanwhile that plane you let fly into the ground because of your blinding trust has rusted away into nothingness.
I'd sooner take my chances with the pilots who are aware and admit there is a problem and are trying to solve it, than the moron on the plane who doesn't think there's a problem, and is too busy bitching to everyone else that they're just making it up to actually listen to the people who know what they're talking about.
By Altimaomega 2014-11-19 23:46:57
You know what could benefit the whole world? Clean cheap energy...
That will happen right after world peace.
By Jetackuu 2014-11-19 23:48:36
You know what could benefit the whole world? Clean cheap energy...
That will happen right after world peace.
Wow your ignorance of technology is astounding. Pardon me, I'm going to go lick cold fusion, just out of spite.
By Altimaomega 2014-11-19 23:51:56
Lets see you use some of that awesome scientific literacy in place of what I said.
inb4 "no u" again... We have, numerous times and yet you still don't comprehend it.
No really actually put some substance into what you preach. What should I have said while saying the exact same thing using your awesome scientific literacy.
I'm gonna bet you'll start pulling my hair before you back up your statement. That's the thing, you wouldn't have said what you said if you understood, unless you were trolling.
No I mean exactly what I say, just not in the context you would like it to be in.
PS. Those electric lift trucks are not as "green" as people claim.
I'm well aware of the drawbacks of electric lifts vs CNG. We replaced a fleet of 5K counterbalance lift trucks with 4K electric reach lifts that weighed about half as much. Pound for pound they aren't much greener than traditional lift trucks in the same way that a Hummer is greener than a Prius.
If a group of pilots were discussing the best way to land a broken plane, do you know what I'd do? I sit down and shut up and let the people that know what they're doing actually fix the problem.
1970s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1980s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1990s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2000s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2010s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
Looks like they're doing a great job of fixing the problem.
Sadly, scientists aren't able to make the changes that would need to be made and research is expensive. Are you saying that green technologies have not made any significant progress in the last 50 years?
So now green tech is only around because of the evil global warming monster? /faccepalm
Are you HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE or something?
I'm wondering the same thing about you.. You make a horrible analogy about a group of pilots, Rav owns you on it. Then you jump to boohoo scientists can on do so much because research is expensive and blah blah green tech. Meanwhile that plane you let fly into the ground because of your blinding trust has rusted away into nothingness.
I'd sooner take my chances with the pilots who are aware and admit there is a problem and are trying to solve it, than the moron on the plane who doesn't think there's a problem, and is too busy bitching to everyone else that they're just making it up to actually listen to the people who know what they're talking about.
That's the problem with you idiots and this whole global warming debacle. You think only two options exist. I'd sooner grab a parachute and take my chance's.
By Jetackuu 2014-11-19 23:53:13
Like I said: if you understood science, you wouldn't say what you say.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
By Altimaomega 2014-11-19 23:53:48
You know what could benefit the whole world? Clean cheap energy...
That will happen right after world peace.
Wow your ignorance of technology is astounding. Pardon me, I'm going to go lick cold fusion, just out of spite.
Excuse me while I hope in my cold fusion powered car and drive home to check on my cold fusion powered furnace because its cold outside.
/sigh
By Jetackuu 2014-11-19 23:55:53
Like I said: no scientific literacy.
Bahamut.Kara
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2014-11-19 23:57:01
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program. For some reason people don't think engineers do any research or apply for research grants. Honestly, I'm really not sure if people (in general) understand what engineers do.
It's seriously confusing to me.
I guess people forget or don't know that MIT, CalTech, and GeorgiaTech (top three in US) are engineering schools that do vast amounts of research?
By Jetackuu 2014-11-20 00:00:19
Then there's Virginia Tech, where people get shot.
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13643
By Bahamut.Ravael 2014-11-20 00:04:45
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program.
Well then I don't know what to say. Clearly I don't understand the complexities of the process, but you'll forgive me for thinking that something is off. In my work, I have seen research groups pull off some incredible things with very limited budgets. And here I look at all the cash that has been thrown at climate science in along with the decades of research, and what? I see pretty graphs, dead-end projects, and some whizz-bang innovations that apparently haven't done much to stem our carbon footprint. Should I be impressed? If so, by what?
By Altimaomega 2014-11-20 00:05:50
Like I said: if you understood science, you wouldn't say what you say.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
Whats with your obsession with my avatar? Its like the 3rd time you've made fun of it and I really don't understand why...
Also, If you understood life you'd know that
How's business lately, AO?
Not to bad considering the Historic low temperatures and early snow.
has absolutely nothing to do with scientific literacy. Since you obviously have the aptitude of a stone I will spell it out for you.
It's kinda hard to chisel plow when the ground is frozen and covered in snow. Considering that I am ALWAYS chisel plowing this time of year I could really use some global warming about now.
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13643
By Bahamut.Ravael 2014-11-20 00:07:31
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program. For some reason people don't think engineers do any research or apply for research grants. Honestly, I'm really not sure if people (in general) understand what engineers do.
It's seriously confusing to me.
I guess people forget or don't know that MIT, CalTech, and GeorgiaTech (top three in US) are engineering schools that do vast amounts of research?
Yes, but there are researchers who research for the sake of research. I have a little more faith in engineering schools to actually get something done with the research they do.
By Altimaomega 2014-11-20 00:08:59
Not sure where you get the idea that engineering doesn't receive funding the same way researchers do. It's incorporated into the traditional STEM categorization that science agencies like the NSF and NASA deal with. Anecdotal but I was vastly outnumbered by engineers and engineering students in my climate change related program.
Well then I don't know what to say. Clearly I don't understand the complexities of the process, but you'll forgive me for thinking that something is off. In my work, I have seen research groups pull off some incredible things with very limited budgets. And here I look at all the cash that has been thrown at climate science in along with the decades of research, and what? I see pretty graphs, dead-end projects, and some whizz-bang innovations that apparently haven't done much to stem our carbon footprint. Should I be impressed? If so, by what?
The government agency's have to approve the grants and only so much money is available for research grants every year. You are totally correct when you think something is off.
By Jetackuu 2014-11-20 00:17:29
Like I said: if you understood science, you wouldn't say what you say.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
Whats with your obsession with my avatar? Its like the 3rd time you've made fun of it and I really don't understand why...
Also, If you understood life you'd know that
How's business lately, AO?
Not to bad considering the Historic low temperatures and early snow.
has absolutely nothing to do with scientific literacy. Since you obviously have the aptitude of a stone I will spell it out for you.
It's kinda hard to chisel plow when the ground is frozen and covered in snow. Considering that I am ALWAYS chisel plowing this time of year I could really use some global warming about now.
It does since snow at this time of the year isn't "early" and these aren't even record low temps...
Bahamut.Milamber
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2014-11-20 00:28:20
Not by anyone who's opinion you should care about, but... Global climate is something that affects just about everything. Climate changes on any scale can upset entire ecosystems and disrupt industry. It's not hard for semi-educated people to make causal connections between anything and climate change even if it is at best a corollary or coincidental connection.
This constant emphasis on everything different being the polar opposite and must be wrong drives me nuts. People who question conclusions aren't the same as radical deniers any more than people who accept scientific consensus are tree-huggers.
I agree with the second paragraph, but the bolded part is what drives me nuts. Educated people and proper scientists should make it a point to not declare causality when there is at best a corollary or coincidental connection. Since you're someone who claims to always state opinions as opinions and facts as facts, I'd assume that you'd recognize that causality shouldn't be something that's declared all willy nilly just because it fits a narrative.
I agree, but I also am acutely aware of how much I don't know about many things, and I defer to experts. I wouldn't state their findings as fact, but things like oceanic temperature readings are easy for a layman to understand if they cared to.
Yeah, but making the leap from "ocean temperatures are rising" to "it's all our fault" and actually being able to declare causality with the backing of advanced statistics is a lot more involved than most people (even scientists) are willing to admit. Then again, I'm a tad jaded due to my line of work.
Well, here's my shorthand version. Temperatures are rising more quickly than at any time we know about that didn't correspond with some kind of major geologic event. We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses and we know that we're pumping a lot of it out. I'm not saying that it's the base cause, but it is definitely contributory and anything we can do to lessen our impact on our surroundings should at least be explored.
The problem is that deniers are claiming the same certainty as tree-huggers with even less evidence and that debate keeps us from having the debate we should be having; how do we deal with climate change and our finite energy sources.
Wanna back that statement up a bit?
Pipe down, kiddo, the adults are talking.
More like tossing poo.
Since the USA is one of the main CO2 producers, why are the temps not rising here? "You're not saying its the base cause but definitely contributing." Contributing to what? The extremely mild temperatures the USA has had and is continuing to have for the past 2 years. You cannot have it both ways. Uh, because a gas is not a solid? Localized production doesn't necessarily mean anything other than temporarily greater local concentrations? I'm sure this felt like a legitimate question, but it shows a fundimental lack of understanding of even some of the most basic physical principles. Also, yet again, USA != globe.
We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses This is incorrect. CO2 is actually pretty poor when it comes to retaining heat, it simply happens to have peaks at particular temperatures where the other gases have relatively low performance.
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2014-11-20 00:39:31
Not by anyone who's opinion you should care about, but... Global climate is something that affects just about everything. Climate changes on any scale can upset entire ecosystems and disrupt industry. It's not hard for semi-educated people to make causal connections between anything and climate change even if it is at best a corollary or coincidental connection.
This constant emphasis on everything different being the polar opposite and must be wrong drives me nuts. People who question conclusions aren't the same as radical deniers any more than people who accept scientific consensus are tree-huggers.
I agree with the second paragraph, but the bolded part is what drives me nuts. Educated people and proper scientists should make it a point to not declare causality when there is at best a corollary or coincidental connection. Since you're someone who claims to always state opinions as opinions and facts as facts, I'd assume that you'd recognize that causality shouldn't be something that's declared all willy nilly just because it fits a narrative.
I agree, but I also am acutely aware of how much I don't know about many things, and I defer to experts. I wouldn't state their findings as fact, but things like oceanic temperature readings are easy for a layman to understand if they cared to.
Yeah, but making the leap from "ocean temperatures are rising" to "it's all our fault" and actually being able to declare causality with the backing of advanced statistics is a lot more involved than most people (even scientists) are willing to admit. Then again, I'm a tad jaded due to my line of work.
Well, here's my shorthand version. Temperatures are rising more quickly than at any time we know about that didn't correspond with some kind of major geologic event. We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses and we know that we're pumping a lot of it out. I'm not saying that it's the base cause, but it is definitely contributory and anything we can do to lessen our impact on our surroundings should at least be explored.
The problem is that deniers are claiming the same certainty as tree-huggers with even less evidence and that debate keeps us from having the debate we should be having; how do we deal with climate change and our finite energy sources.
Wanna back that statement up a bit?
Pipe down, kiddo, the adults are talking.
More like tossing poo.
Since the USA is one of the main CO2 producers, why are the temps not rising here? "You're not saying its the base cause but definitely contributing." Contributing to what? The extremely mild temperatures the USA has had and is continuing to have for the past 2 years. You cannot have it both ways. Uh, because a gas is not a solid? Localized production doesn't necessarily mean anything other than temporarily greater local concentrations? I'm sure this felt like a legitimate question, but it shows a fundimental lack of understanding of even some of the most basic physical principles. Also, yet again, USA != globe.
We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses This is incorrect. CO2 is actually pretty poor when it comes to retaining heat, it simply happens to have peaks at particular temperatures where the other gases have relatively low performance.
It's my understanding that it's considered a more powerful gas because of it's relative volume and how much longer it stays in the atmosphere than other gasses (~100 years vs methane's ~10 years). But, I am no expert on chemistry, that's just what I've read.
Bahamut.Milamber
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2014-11-20 00:44:06
If a group of pilots were discussing the best way to land a broken plane, do you know what I'd do? I sit down and shut up and let the people that know what they're doing actually fix the problem.
1970s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1980s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1990s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2000s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2010s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
Looks like they're doing a great job of fixing the problem.
Sadly, scientists aren't able to make the changes that would need to be made and research is expensive. Are you saying that green technologies have not made any significant progress in the last 50 years?
Relative to the money that's been shoveled towards them? No. Then again, I think the money has gone to the wrong places. Instead of giving it to a bunch of researchers who study it but can't do anything about it, it should've gone to engineers and inventors who might have been able to.
Attempting to develop a solution without thouroughly understanding the base problem and parameters affecting it is a great way to end up in trouble quickly. A lot of the direct engineering methods discussed for controlling atmospheric CO2 are short term, and borderline insane.
Now, if you want to tackle the problem indirectly, by funding innovative products which reduce the use of fossil fuels, we are talking about a different story. But that route is frequently contested polirically and is a minefield of conflicting interests.
[+]
Cerberus.Pleebo
Server: Cerberus
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9720
By Cerberus.Pleebo 2014-11-20 00:45:32
Water vapor is actually the greatest contributor to the greenhouse effect under those criteria. =~=~=☆
[+]
By Altimaomega 2014-11-20 00:46:34
Like I said: if you understood science, you wouldn't say what you say.
There's only one idiot here tonight, and well let's just say his intellect rather resembles his avatar.
Whats with your obsession with my avatar? Its like the 3rd time you've made fun of it and I really don't understand why...
Also, If you understood life you'd know that
How's business lately, AO?
Not to bad considering the Historic low temperatures and early snow.
has absolutely nothing to do with scientific literacy. Since you obviously have the aptitude of a stone I will spell it out for you.
It's kinda hard to chisel plow when the ground is frozen and covered in snow. Considering that I am ALWAYS chisel plowing this time of year I could really use some global warming about now.
It does since snow at this time of the year isn't "early" and these aren't even record low temps...
How many times do you need to be proven wrong before you shut up?
http://www.wnem.com/story/27410176/trust-steve-how-abnormal-are-these-temperatures
Quote: I am predicting a low of 9° tonight and a high of 23° for tomorrow. The coldest low ever recorded on Nov. 18 for Cincinnati is 12° way
back in 1880. The coldest the high temperature for the date is 26° set back in 1951 and that's before I was born so I guess it qualifies as a
long time ago too.
But wait there's more!!!
If we dip into the single digits tomorrow morning it will be the earliest it has ever been that cold in ALL CINCINNATI WEATHER HISTORY.
In addition if the high stays colder than 25° it will be the earliest in the season that we have gotten that cold.
As it now stands the earliest Cincinnati has dropped to single digits is Nov. 19. That was in 1880. The earliest the high temperature
did not make it to 25° was November 20 in 1937.
I'm in lower Michigan and it got down to 3*f and had a windchill of -15*f
Bahamut.Milamber
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2014-11-20 00:52:47
And for those interested in a visual representation of how CO2 is dispersed atmospherically, head here.
Bismarck.Ihina
Server: Bismarck
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3187
By Bismarck.Ihina 2014-11-20 00:53:31
AO, what would you say if I were to tell you that there's a difference between weather and climate?
[+]
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13643
By Bahamut.Ravael 2014-11-20 00:53:37
If a group of pilots were discussing the best way to land a broken plane, do you know what I'd do? I sit down and shut up and let the people that know what they're doing actually fix the problem.
1970s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1980s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
1990s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2000s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
2010s scientists: Hey guys, there's this thing called global warming. We should deal with it.
Looks like they're doing a great job of fixing the problem.
Sadly, scientists aren't able to make the changes that would need to be made and research is expensive. Are you saying that green technologies have not made any significant progress in the last 50 years?
Relative to the money that's been shoveled towards them? No. Then again, I think the money has gone to the wrong places. Instead of giving it to a bunch of researchers who study it but can't do anything about it, it should've gone to engineers and inventors who might have been able to.
Attempting to develop a solution without thouroughly understanding the base problem and parameters affecting it is a great way to end up in trouble quickly. A lot of the direct engineering methods discussed for controlling atmospheric CO2 are short term, and borderline insane.
Now, if you want to tackle the problem indirectly, by funding innovative products which reduce the use of fossil fuels, we are talking about a different story. But that route is frequently contested polirically and is a minefield of conflicting interests.
The bolded part is mostly what I'm referring to. Everything before that is, in my opinion, a money hole at this point.
Bahamut.Ravael
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 13643
By Bahamut.Ravael 2014-11-20 00:56:13
AO, what would you say if I were to tell you that there's a difference between weather and climate?
Do you actually ever contribute anything to these arguments, or do you just get a kick out of making passive-aggressive comments that often get ignored?
[+]
By Altimaomega 2014-11-20 00:58:51
Not by anyone who's opinion you should care about, but... Global climate is something that affects just about everything. Climate changes on any scale can upset entire ecosystems and disrupt industry. It's not hard for semi-educated people to make causal connections between anything and climate change even if it is at best a corollary or coincidental connection.
This constant emphasis on everything different being the polar opposite and must be wrong drives me nuts. People who question conclusions aren't the same as radical deniers any more than people who accept scientific consensus are tree-huggers.
I agree with the second paragraph, but the bolded part is what drives me nuts. Educated people and proper scientists should make it a point to not declare causality when there is at best a corollary or coincidental connection. Since you're someone who claims to always state opinions as opinions and facts as facts, I'd assume that you'd recognize that causality shouldn't be something that's declared all willy nilly just because it fits a narrative.
I agree, but I also am acutely aware of how much I don't know about many things, and I defer to experts. I wouldn't state their findings as fact, but things like oceanic temperature readings are easy for a layman to understand if they cared to.
Yeah, but making the leap from "ocean temperatures are rising" to "it's all our fault" and actually being able to declare causality with the backing of advanced statistics is a lot more involved than most people (even scientists) are willing to admit. Then again, I'm a tad jaded due to my line of work.
Well, here's my shorthand version. Temperatures are rising more quickly than at any time we know about that didn't correspond with some kind of major geologic event. We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses and we know that we're pumping a lot of it out. I'm not saying that it's the base cause, but it is definitely contributory and anything we can do to lessen our impact on our surroundings should at least be explored.
The problem is that deniers are claiming the same certainty as tree-huggers with even less evidence and that debate keeps us from having the debate we should be having; how do we deal with climate change and our finite energy sources.
Wanna back that statement up a bit?
Pipe down, kiddo, the adults are talking.
More like tossing poo.
Since the USA is one of the main CO2 producers, why are the temps not rising here? "You're not saying its the base cause but definitely contributing." Contributing to what? The extremely mild temperatures the USA has had and is continuing to have for the past 2 years. You cannot have it both ways. Uh, because a gas is not a solid? Localized production doesn't necessarily mean anything other than temporarily greater local concentrations? I'm sure this felt like a legitimate question, but it shows a fundimental lack of understanding of even some of the most basic physical principles. Also, yet again, USA != globe.
We know that CO2 traps more heat than other atmospheric gasses This is incorrect. CO2 is actually pretty poor when it comes to retaining heat, it simply happens to have peaks at particular temperatures where the other gases have relatively low performance.
Please enlighten my fundamental lack of understanding and describe temporarily to me. Is it 1yr? 2-3yrs?
Random Politics & Religion is for topics that aren't thread worthy on their own and do not have their own existing thread.
Rules and Guidelines
Forum Rules and P&R Section Guidelines still apply.
Satire is tolerated.
If your topic covers a story over 6 months old (Watergate, Benghazi, 2012 Election, etc.) post it here.
Discussions on racism, homophobia, transphobia, and the like are allowed, targeted insults based on these will not be tolerated.
Political debates get heated and are meant to be intense, if you take offense to being called or proven wrong, you don't belong here.
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen; if you prove you can't handle the criticism you bring upon yourself in this thread, you may be removed from it. You are responsible for what you post.
Along those lines, heat is fine, but sustained, clearly personal hostility is not okay. The personal attack rules still apply. Attack positions, not posters. Failure to adhere to this will result in your removal from the thread.
This thread is NOT the Flame Core.
These rules are subject to change and modification where and when needed.
Random Politics & Religion may be mained or demained depending on the activity within at a Moderator's discretion.
With that out of the way, let the debates begin!
/bow
|
|