NationStates Jolt Archive

Yes I am a creationist and believe that God created the world however, that does not mean jack shit in this debate.

In this debate, one has to look at all the evidence, going as far back as we can (and that includes midevil times), and weigh the evidence with a clear mind. To me, Global Warming is occuring. I am not going to deny that it is for it is an historical fact that it has and will continue to occur. It is also an historical fact that Global Cooling has occured and will occur again. This can not be refuted.

I've noticed a trend(very unscientific survey,my own) that creationists or extremely religious types are usually very anti science.....science seems to be their enemy because it challenges their beliefs....

I've noticed a trend(very unscientific survey,my own) that creationists or extremely religious types are usually very anti science.....science seems to be their enemy because it challenges their beliefs....

To some of the most extreme, you are indeed correct. I am a christian and proud of it, but I also believe in science as well.

Maybe because I had more than just a basic science course perhaps? Perhaps I have studied cycles of global proportion?

i've studied lots as well, it doesn't mean shit.....if the overwhelming majority of scientists say humans are responsible for this latest cycle of global warming who the fuck am I to say they are full of shit?.....and you're not even finished school and you're saying they're wrong...Global warming isn't an ethical debate about democracy or religion in which you're opinion is as good as anyone else's, it's about scientific facts and theory which you are not qualified to doubt.....

OK Chicken Little I assure you, the sky isn't falling just because we're having a mild winter.

The entire idea of Global Warming is that the average planetary temperature is climbing incrementally each year, (by a fraction of a degree) such that over the course of several decades the climate would be significantly warmer causing all sorts of changes like melting polar ice caps and so on.

One mild windter has *no* bearing on Global Warming. If you think it's 20 degrees warmer this year than average because of it, then we have about 5 years to live at best so grab your ankles and pucker up.

Or better yet, educate yourself.


i think you are my new favorite poster. all hail Neo Bretonnia

Oh brother. Because I'm a creationist, you automatically believe that I do not believe in science?

it is a requirement for the belief, yes. if you are not ignorant and not stupid and not insane, then you cannot believe both science and creationism

We all have been brainwashed by liberal teachers. NOT HAPPENING! RED HERRING!

it is a requirement for the belief, yes. if you are not ignorant and not stupid and not insane, then you cannot believe both science and creationism

Only those ignorant of math and science believe in luck.

i've studied lots as well, it doesn't mean shit.....if the overwhelming majority of scientists say humans are responsible for this latest cycle of global warming who the fuck am I to say they are full of shit?.....and you're not even finished school and you're saying they're wrong...Global warming isn't an ethical debate about democracy or religion in which you're opinion is as good as anyone else's, it's about scientific facts and theory which you are not qualified to doubt.....

I'm not qualified to doubt? Since when does one have to be qualified to doubt something? There is no qualification for one to doubt something, one can doubt all that they please.

Also, an overwhelming majority means that not all scientists agree on it. That means those whom you deemed qualified to doubt do, means it requires more study which I am in agreement with. It does need more study before we can undeniably show that we are indeed responsible for everything. There will always be doubt in whatever we do. I will not disagree that the majority of scientists believe this however, there are many who don't and when they present evidence to the contrary, they are immediately denounced without ever having their work looked at. That is the problem with everything going on in regards to Global Warming. No one wants to hear what the other side is saying. That is not how science is conducted.

it is a requirement for the belief, yes.

I'm calling bullshit on that.

if you are not ignorant and not stupid and not insane, then you cannot believe both science and creationism

Again, more pure bullshit.

I live in Minnesota(ya know the place that is famous for frigid winters and losing football teams) and normally we get several feet of snow by Christmas, with 8 days left, we haven't even had a quarter inch. today it was 50 degrees(F) outside. Care to refute this doubters?


I live in Wisconsin, we had about two weeks that were pretty cold, now the snow is melted and it feels like late fall or something. I guess it's pretty gross, I hate when people say is sooo nice, uh no...its not. If you don't want seasons go down south. I miss the Wisconsin winters I grew up in :(

I'm not qualified to doubt? Since when does one have to be qualified to doubt something? There is no qualification for one to doubt something, one can doubt all that they please.

Also, an overwhelming majority means that not all scientists agree on it. That means those whom you deemed qualified to doubt do, means it requires more study which I am in agreement with. It does need more study before we can undeniably show that we are indeed responsible for everything. There will always be doubt in whatever we do. I will not disagree that the majority of scientists believe this however, there are many who don't and when they present evidence to the contrary, they are immediately denounced without ever having their work looked at. That is the problem with everything going on in regards to Global Warming. No one wants to hear what the other side is saying. That is not how science is conducted.

there will always be doubters! always!...until the man landed on the moon there were still a few who doubted the earth was round.....

so if listen to a few "doubters" and do nothing about global warming, what is the risk to humanity if they are wrong?........the risk is to high to take that chance, we risk nothing by doing something......

there will always be doubters! always!...until the man landed on the moon there were still a few who doubted the earth was round.....

so if listen to a few "doubters" and do nothing about global warming, what is the risk to humanity if they are wrong?........the risk is to high to take that chance, we risk nothing by doing something......

And if those who doubt global warming are indeed correct and that we are not the chief cause of it? Why put people needlessly out of work for doing something that we have no control over?

there will always be doubters! always!...until the man landed on the moon there were still a few who doubted the earth was round.....

so if listen to a few "doubters" and do nothing about global warming, what is the risk to humanity if they are wrong?........the risk is to high to take that chance, we risk nothing by doing something......

We have thousands of thermonuclear weapons sitting on fancy delivery systems.

Places like Iran are trying to build them. Pakistan and India are building more.

Other places, like the Gulf States, want them, too.

Gee, that's great - all these hotbeds of raging conflict getting thermonuclear weapons.

And you think global warming is a greater risk?

I think it's extremely possible in the next ten years that there will be a massive thermonuclear exchange in the Middle East. Nice and dirty.

After that, you won't have to worry about global warming.

After that, you won't have to worry about global warming.

Nuclear Winter will be here :D

cooling and warming have fucking causes. either you can name the ones that are responsible for this one and better fit the evidence than the scientifically accepted theory does, or you are a creationist. so make with the testable predictions of causes already.

well?

We have thousands of thermonuclear weapons sitting on fancy delivery systems.

Places like Iran are trying to build them. Pakistan and India are building more.

Other places, like the Gulf States, want them, too.

Gee, that's great - all these hotbeds of raging conflict getting thermonuclear weapons.

And you think global warming is a greater risk?

I think it's extremely possible in the next ten years that there will be a massive thermonuclear exchange in the Middle East. Nice and dirty.

After that, you won't have to worry about global warming.

other than the USA has ever used nukes, I have never heard anyone from another country besides americans even discussing the usability of nukes on a tactical scale.....so as far as I can tell the only danger of nuke usage comes from the USA, everyone else is to rational to consider them other than as a self defense weapon(mostly from the USA).....

...you yourself have advocated the use of nukes and firebombing civilians as acceptable and questioned the US military's resolve for not being willing to use them......so what do I fear more???? as long as your not elected to the whitehouse nuclear war is unlikely so I'll stick with Global warming as a bigger threat...

well?

Well what? I'm not worried, because stupidity is a constant, and humanity will not be around long enough to be a persistent problem.

other than the USA has ever used nukes, I have never heard anyone from another country besides americans even discussing the usability of nukes on a tactical scale.....so as far as I can tell the only danger of nuke usage comes from the USA, everyone else is to rational to consider them other than as a self defense weapon(mostly from the USA).....


So Pakistan and Iran are rational. Ummm....


...you yourself have advocated the use of nukes and firebombing civilians as acceptable and questioned the US military's resolve for not being willing to use them......so what do I fear more???? as long as your not elected to the whitehouse nuclear war is unlikely so I'll stick with Global warming as a bigger threat...

I never advocated their use. I said that in the past that sort of thing was acceptable, and is not acceptable today.

Please pull your head out of your ass.

other than the USA has ever used nukes, I have never heard anyone from another country besides americans even discussing the usability of nukes on a tactical scale.....so as far as I can tell the only danger of nuke usage comes from the USA, everyone else is to rational to consider them other than as a self defense weapon(mostly from the USA).....

Then maybe you should read up on the US nuclear policy about not using them unless someone else launches first! And to say that you fear us using them more over other nations who probably would show no hesitation in using them, goes to show that you do not know much about our nuclear policy or how the real world is really shaping up!

...you yourself have advocated the use of nukes and firebombing civilians as acceptable and questioned the US military's resolve for not being willing to use them......so what do I fear more???? as long as your not elected to the whitehouse nuclear war is unlikely so I'll stick with Global warming as a bigger threat...

:rolleyes:

I have recently read an article that highlights some of the effects of global warming on parts of the world and a few have stuck out at me,

1. "Winter air temperature over Antarctica has risen by more than 2 degrees Celsius since the 1970's

2. "20 Billion tons of water flows into oceans every year because of runoff from ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. Greenlands ice is now melting three times faster than it was 5 years ago"

3. " In Europe spring has been ariving an average of 6 to 8 days earlier than in the 1970's. Seventy-eight percent of 542 plant species studied flowered and fruited eirlier in the year. Migratory birds were flying home to northern Europe earlier in time for the biginning of spring."

4. "Average sea surface temperatures in the tropical Atlantic and Pacific oceans have risen by 1.2 and 0.58 degrees fahrenheit in the 20th century; the number of category 4 and 5 hurricanes worldwide has nearly doubled over the past 35 years."

These are just some that I found somewhat relevant to this forum. I got my information from the "Discover" science magazine. I hope some of it will help

Then maybe you should read up on the US nuclear policy about not using them unless someone else launches first! And to say that you fear us using them more over other nations who probably would show no hesitation in using them, goes to show that you do not know much about our nuclear policy or how the real world is really shaping up!

:rolleyes:

I've read up lots thanks......USA considered a first strike against soviets, use of nuclear bunker busters have been recently discussed as acceptable......US nuclear policy is worthless as the USA has shown the world it is quiet willing to disobey international law when it wants....has a President that is willing to ignore human rights when he pleases.....so any official "nuclear policy" is worthless as the USA has shown precedent for ignoring laws when it is convenient

I've read up lots thanks......USA considered a first strike against soviets, use of nuclear bunker busters have been recently discussed as acceptable......US nuclear policy is worthless as the USA has shown the world it is quiet willing to disobey international law when it wants....has a President that is willing to ignore human rights when he pleases.....so any official "nuclear policy" is worthless as the USA has shown precedent for ignoring laws when it is convenient

And you have a lot of faith in the President of Iran when he says he'll wipe Israel off the map, right?

I've read up lots thanks......USA considered a first strike against soviets, use of nuclear bunker busters have been recently discussed as acceptable......US nuclear policy is worthless as the USA has shown the world it is quiet willing to disobey international law when it wants....has a President that is willing to ignore human rights when he pleases.....so any official "nuclear policy" is worthless as the USA has shown precedent for ignoring laws when it is convenient

I see you only read whats in the headlines and not the underlying causes of why we contemplated such things. Reading does not give one full understanding but detail indepth study can give one a sense of why we were thinking that. Why did we consider a first strike against the USSR? Why were we looking at nuclear bunkerbusters? And under International Law, we are not allowed to export tech that would be used to create nuclear bombs so what law are you precisely referring too?

Welcome to my lovely world of Political Science.

So Pakistan and Iran are rational. Ummm....


I never advocated their use. I said that in the past that sort of thing was acceptable, and is not acceptable today.

Please pull your head out of your ass.

Pakistan other than with India has been in how many wars since it's creation? 1?
Iran has attacked how many countries in the last hundred years? 0?
USA has attacked how many countries world wide in the last 100yrs? (I've lost count)
so how rational is the USA in comparison when it comes to war?

You absolutely questioned the resolve of the US military for not being willing to use nukes or firebombing methods to end conflicts, and you did so in the past week.....continue to lie if you want but I recall what you posted quiet well.......

Iran has attacked how many countries in the last hundred years? 0?

Even though it was in self-defense, they did attack Iraq. Oh and back up your Iran and Pakistan claims please.

so how rational is the USA in comparison when it comes to war?

More rational than North Korea and Iran.

Pakistan other than with India has been in how many wars since it's creation? 1?
Iran has attacked how many countries in the last hundred years? 0?
USA has attacked how many countries world wide in the last 100yrs? (I've lost count)
so how rational is the USA in comparison when it comes to war?

You absolutely questioned the resolve of the US military for not being willing to use nukes or firebombing methods to end conflicts, and you did so in the past week.....continue to lie if you want but I recall what you posted quiet well.......

Questioning resolve does not mean advocating old methods.

Your head is still stuck.

Pakistan has been at war with India over Kashmir for how long now?

Iran attacked Iraq.

[QUOTE=Socialist Pyrates;12108687]Pakistan other than with India has been in how many wars since it's creation? 1?
Iran has attacked how many countries in the last hundred years? 0?
USA has attacked how many countries world wide in the last 100yrs? (I've lost count)
so how rational is the USA in comparison when it comes to war?
[QUOTE]

Stopping in-education in its tracks! It is Moorington to the rescue!

Pakistan and India have long had a poor relation, involving suicide bombers, and raids across each other's borders at civilian targets. 1 war, 1000 raids! They are having their own 100 year war, with China as a dark horse, that is much more deadly then any of America's in terms of civilian casualties!

Sorry chum, but you get a stupid moron button for the day!

Iran hasn't existed until the the later half of this century, much less one full one! Another stupid moron button, to top it all fo it was used to be called Persia, who often got in fights with everybody!

USA has attacked a multitude of countries, but one thing for certain, where we have won we havn't forced any ideals upoun them except democracy. Something everybody likes! So I have to say, we are pretty rationale, and you are acting like you are a un-educated loser!

Cheers! Will continue to watch the conversation for more history goofs!

And you have a lot of faith in the President of Iran when he says he'll wipe Israel off the map, right?Not really. If he actually had power, that might be different.

Look on the brightside gents, global warming means more attractive women in bikinis!

Not really. If he actually had power, that might be different.

Agree, whats-his-face is under the complete control of a council of bishops, or something akin to that but Muslim style. Yet, they also know that Iran is controlled by the masses, revolution is not a un-used concept, so their usual conservative and quiet outlooks may bow down to the more radical Prime Minister's at one point in the future.

You get a smarter-than-thou button for the day!

I live in Minnesota(ya know the place that is famous for frigid winters and losing football teams) and normally we get several feet of snow by Christmas, with 8 days left, we haven't even had a quarter inch. today it was 50 degrees(F) outside. Care to refute this doubters?
That's not proof. That's anecodtal evidence.

We all have been brainwashed by liberal teachers. NOT HAPPENING! RED HERRING!

I see what you're saying - climate change is just a myth put about by a bunch of unwashed hippies. Because they run the world, right? They dictate everything that happens in the media and the international community, everyone knows that.
And, of course, there's no-one with a vested interest in keeping us burning fossil fuels. No massive corporation would ever put money before ethics by making any profit from something harmful. And those OPEC countries - they'd immediately stop supplying crude oil if there was any evidence of a threat to the environment. Of course they would.

For sale: One fiddle. Would be ideal for playing while Rome burns.

http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/prrl/prrl0226a.html

Amazing! More than one place mentioned that the report existed! It has to be true!

It's been in the upper 70s to low 80s here now (Florida, of course). I would usually expect it to be in the low 70s or possibly even in the 60s around this time of year. It doesn't feel like December at all.

It's been in the upper 70s to low 80s here now (Florida, of course). I would usually expect it to be in the low 70s or possibly even in the 60s around this time of year. It doesn't feel like December at all.
Whereas, in Vancouver, BC, November featured the most snow ever and the lowest teperatures ever.

Again, anecdotal evidence.

Folks, the Romans grew grapes in the south of England when they were there. Global climate shifts on its own all the time.

While it is conceivable that human activity has indeed altered this process and caused some warming, the planet will see to the balance. Some people see it as a crisis because all of the infrastructure humanity has built seems "permanent" to us. Seeing it flooded by rising sea levels due to melting sea ice is disturbing, thus, the panic.

Do I think something needs to be done? Yes. Deforestation removes carbon scrubbers from the equation, and burning fossil fuels is also a problem (for those of you who don't think so, travel to any remotely industrial part of China and let me know how well you can see or breathe). But the solution, as it always is in human affairs, is a moderated response. Weaning ourselves off of oil and coal and off the consumption and horsepower teats are good ideas -- but until those ideas also become good for corporations and industries, well folks, they're simply not going to happen. Money trumps the environment and always will until it either can't anymore or until science finds a way to make ecological concerns both practical and profitable.

That might suck to some people, but that's the way it is. And if it causes the extinction of humanity, the planet will do what it's always done after any calamity. Clean up and move on. The planet is fine. WE'RE potentially fucked.

Whereas, in Vancouver, BC, November featured the most snow ever and the lowest teperatures ever.

Again, anecdotal evidence.

Exactly. As a Seattleite (albeit a transplanted one for the time being), I expect a nice thank-you card from Florida and the Gulf Coast for diverting the 2006 hurricane season to the Northwest. What doesn't happen where it usually does, usually happens somewhere else.

You're welcome.

Look on the brightside gents, global warming means more attractive women in bikinis!

Only attractive women wear bikinis? Do you know what you're saying? It means more corpulent, hairy assholes in speedos, too! AND THAT'S JUST THE WOMEN!

AAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGH!

Seeing it flooded by rising sea levels due to melting sea ice is disturbing, thus, the panic.Melting sea ice has no influence on sea level, it's the melting Antarctic and Greenland glaciers that raise sea level.

Exactly. As a Seattleite (albeit a transplanted one for the time being), I expect a nice thank-you card from Florida and the Gulf Coast for diverting the 2006 hurricane season to the Northwest. What doesn't happen where it usually does, usually happens somewhere else.

You're welcome.

You must admit, it made for some entertaining football highlights.

you're missing the point. The chart is using data collected from the time periods it is marking. A tree ring from 1422 or an ice layer from 1422 will say what the weather was like, especially temperature. Ergo they are accurate.
Although tree rings are an inference, they are quite accurate usually. And the ice caps don't lie. At all. THey can generally tell you month by month what the average temoerature was for thousands of years back. MIllions if I am not mistaken. THey also collect other information from them like volcanic activity, meteor activity, comet falls, wood fire, human activities and suchlike. Amazing things, tree rings.

When you say accurate, what level of accuracy do you expect?
Have you seen what these proxies predict in models when compared to known measured data?

Any process occurring in the universe is, by definition, natural. And humanity has proven in the last hundred years that not only can they stop a natural process, but they can even reverse it. The world should be cooling now. It's warming. Is it really that difficult to see what's wrong with that?

Humans are a process occuring in the universe, how is it not natural?

Why "should" the world be cooling now? Whether or not there is an anthropogenic effect or not, that's a rather bold and unsupported claim as to what the current direction "should" be.

Does it really matter if humans are the major contributor or not?

I think that we can apply a modified Pascal's wager to this issue:

--------------GW exists----------GW does not exist/not caused mainly by man
help------------good----------------------negligible/waste money

don't help-------bad------------------------------negligible

In other words, to help is better than not to help.

And, unlike in Pascal's wager, I don't think there is any alternatives to global warming. Perhaps some other global disaster, but still...

as this archaeological excavation demonstrates, the ancient peoples that inhabited this forum in the distant past took part in a religion based around nature worship which included rituals aimed at controlling the weather. we suspect that the priesthood of this ancient religion divided into two ritual groups to take part in some sort of sacred ritualized battle for the favor of the gods...

8 months gravedig. not as bad as that gay marrige thread, but close.

This may have already come up ... Im just too lazy to read over a years worth of posts... but WHY is everyone so hung up on Global Warming? Do they not see that the Earth has been getting warmer for CENTURYS!? That the last Ice Age is just finally ending and that our lifestyle doenst impact it? Are humans THAT geocentric that they feel everyone on the planet is their cause? GIve it up.

This is as lame as Al Gore inventing the internet...