02-17-2006, 05:42 PM
02-17-2006, 05:52 PM
the highest temperatures occurred in about 1940. during the past 20 years, atmospheric temperatures have actually tended to go down
the global-warming hypothesis predicts that global temperatures will rise significantly, indeed catastrophically, if atmospheric carbon dioxide rises.
most of the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide has occurred during the past 50 years, and the increase has continued during the past 20 years. yet there has been no significant increase in atmospheric temperature during those 50 years, and during the 20 years with the highest carbon dioxide levels, temperatures have decreased.
the global-warming hypothesis predicts that global temperatures will rise significantly, indeed catastrophically, if atmospheric carbon dioxide rises.
most of the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide has occurred during the past 50 years, and the increase has continued during the past 20 years. yet there has been no significant increase in atmospheric temperature during those 50 years, and during the 20 years with the highest carbon dioxide levels, temperatures have decreased.
02-17-2006, 05:54 PM
now..... although I chastised you for requesting sources for what I thought was common knowledge elsewhere, can you give me your source?
02-17-2006, 05:55 PM
I ask only because there has been a lot of Rightwing financed junk science that has been discredited.
02-17-2006, 05:59 PM
only if you name your source for how bush is commiting treason with his port deals.
02-17-2006, 06:01 PM
Keyser Soze Wrote:only if you name your source for how bush is commiting treason with his port deals.
Keyser,
that is a MAJOR twist of what I said....
especially considering I was asking a question, and not making a statement....
the word treason was not even hinted at.
02-17-2006, 06:07 PM
were you insinuating that he has some secret deal with UAE?
02-17-2006, 06:10 PM
not at all.
02-17-2006, 06:10 PM
Science financed by republicans = junk science.
Everyone else is reputable
Media owned by a republican = junk media
Everyone else is reputable.
Huzzah for being objective!
Everyone else is reputable
Media owned by a republican = junk media
Everyone else is reputable.
Huzzah for being objective!
02-17-2006, 06:15 PM
Galt,
do you follow the news?
or just ignore that which doesn't agree to your world view?
do you follow the news?
or just ignore that which doesn't agree to your world view?
02-17-2006, 06:26 PM
You are clinically insane.
02-17-2006, 06:26 PM
I think it's pretty obvious humans are fucking things up, ecosystems are constantly being destroyed or altered and the weather is far from immune to all of these changes. Additionally, increasing mortality rates arent helping things (despite all of these new diseases that seem to come springing up - flu variants, cancers, etc) so all in all I think were a doomed race.
We wont kill the planet, as far as history goes we are a speck of dust on the timeline - we'll just end up killing ourselves.
We wont kill the planet, as far as history goes we are a speck of dust on the timeline - we'll just end up killing ourselves.
02-17-2006, 06:29 PM
Quote:We wont kill the planet, as far as history goes we are a speck of dust on the timeline - we'll just end up killing ourselves.
couldn't have said it any better.
02-17-2006, 06:31 PM
Updated: 8:10 a.m. ET Oct. 27, 2004
IOWA CITY, Iowa - The Bush administration is trying to stifle scientific evidence of the dangers of global warming in an effort to keep the public uninformed, a NASA scientist said Tuesday night.
“In my more than three decades in government, I have never seen anything approaching the degree to which information flow from scientists to the public has been screened and controlled as it is now,” James Hansen told a University of Iowa audience.
Hansen is director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and has twice briefed a task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney on global warming. He was also one of the first government scientists tasked with briefing congressional committees on the dangers of global warming, testifying as far back as the 1980s.
just a snippet of the latest flap,
reguarding the political flunky who's job was to edit the reports coming out of NASA....
do a little research though,
and you will find that most of the numbers Rush cites are all manufactured by hack Scientists to justify the Republican position.
IOWA CITY, Iowa - The Bush administration is trying to stifle scientific evidence of the dangers of global warming in an effort to keep the public uninformed, a NASA scientist said Tuesday night.
“In my more than three decades in government, I have never seen anything approaching the degree to which information flow from scientists to the public has been screened and controlled as it is now,” James Hansen told a University of Iowa audience.
Hansen is director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and has twice briefed a task force headed by Vice President Dick Cheney on global warming. He was also one of the first government scientists tasked with briefing congressional committees on the dangers of global warming, testifying as far back as the 1980s.
just a snippet of the latest flap,
reguarding the political flunky who's job was to edit the reports coming out of NASA....
do a little research though,
and you will find that most of the numbers Rush cites are all manufactured by hack Scientists to justify the Republican position.
02-17-2006, 06:32 PM
And where to "hack" scientists work?
02-17-2006, 06:36 PM
Galt Wrote:And where to "hack" scientists work?local comedy clubs?
02-17-2006, 06:42 PM
george bush went back in time and had thermometers rigged to give incorrect readings so it would seem like tempetures have not increased over time.
02-17-2006, 06:42 PM
And who funds the studies that you agree with?
Are we to assume that anyone who publishes a study that you disagree with is funded from a source that has ulterior motives, but the ones you agree with are funded from "objective sources"?
Are we to assume that anyone who publishes a study that you disagree with is funded from a source that has ulterior motives, but the ones you agree with are funded from "objective sources"?
02-17-2006, 06:46 PM
Galt is a shrill little bitch......
I guess the more wrong you are,
the louder you squeal.
I guess the more wrong you are,
the louder you squeal.
02-17-2006, 06:49 PM
theres that comfortable ken crutch