NationStates Jolt Archive

please do not buy into the global warming hype. It is nothing more the cycles that have happend over the years before. I have attached a 1975 article that is from newsweek about global cooling. The wanted to go to drastic measures and release CO2 into the atmosphere to warm it. Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare. He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear. Read the article in the link i have attached.

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

please do not buy into the global warming hype.

Oh, I was going to! But now I'm not. Thanks for commanding me appropriately.

It is nothing more the cycles that have happend over the years before.

Ah, of course.

I have attached a 1975 article that is from newsweek about global cooling. The wanted to go to drastic measures and release CO2 into the atmosphere to warm it.

Yes, because 32 year old Newsweek article > International Panel on Climate Change (http://www.ipcc.ch/)

Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare. He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear.

It may be hard for you to understand, since I'm getting the impression that you're about 12 years old, but I knew about climate change long before I'd heard of Al Gore. So have most people. Y2K bug scare has nothing to do with this subject; neither does Al Gore.

Read the article in the link i have attached.

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

How about I instead just laugh at you?

Greater Trostia, your disembowelment of the OP made me wince inside.

Let me assure you that not all sceptics are like this specimen and that a little debate and controversy over the issue has yet to hurt anyone...

Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare. He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear. Read the article in the link i have attached.

I don't think global climate change is happening becauase Al Gore says it is, I think global climate change is happening because the evidence says it is.

On top of that, Al Gore is largely meaningless to 6,700,000 people that aren't from the USA. What he says has no bearing upon anybody. I knew of the Y2K scare, and of global warming, long before I had any idea of who Al Gore was.

I still have no idea who Al Gore is.

Global Warming does exist! Its just that it is a polarized and politicized issue. We are screwing up the environment, just mostly in ways other than global warming (such as turning our oceans into a chemical cesspool). Global warming is an overall warming trend that is natural, but is augmented by the fact that we (humanity, that is) are making the effects manifest much more rapidly than normal.

Knotthole Glade;13035457']I still have no idea who Al Gore is.
He was in that movie about something..um...

Oh yeah. Scarface.

He was in that movie about something..um...

Oh yeah. Scarface.

Wasn't he Dr. Frankenstein's assistant?

Global Warming does exist! Its just that it is a polarized and politicized issue. We are screwing up the environment, just mostly in ways other than global warming (such as turning our oceans into a chemical cesspool). Global warming is an overall warming trend that is natural, but is augmented by the fact that we (humanity, that is) are making the effects manifest much more rapidly than normal.

I am inclined to agree with you on that matter.

Knotthole Glade;13035457']I still have no idea who Al Gore is.

He got more votes than Bush, and yet was not elected. Ah, the great American democracy in action.

Knotthole Glade;13035457']I still have no idea who Al Gore is.

The guy who invented the internet

The guy who invented the internet

Oh, like that's impressive.

Anyone can make a series of tubes.

The guy who invented the internet

Oh that wasn't God?

Knotthole Glade;13035520']Oh that wasn't God?

Aren't they the same?

Wasn't he Dr. Frankenstein's assistant?
Nah, that's Cheney.

please do not buy into the global warming hype. It is nothing more the cycles that have happend over the years before. I have attached a 1975 article that is from newsweek about global cooling. The wanted to go to drastic measures and release CO2 into the atmosphere to warm it. Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare. He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear. Read the article in the link i have attached.

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

lol, what a tool.

Not this tired bullshit again.

Try doing some actual research: there were no scientific organisations saying that Global Cooling was definitely happening, only that more study was needed; there were no peer reviewed papers establishing that global cooling was happening, only alarmist articles in popular magazines; there was no over-whelming consensus among scientists.

Now look at Global Warming:
-Just about scientific organisation in the world has clearly stated that Global Warming is happening, that it is being driven by human activity and that urgent action must be taken. The few that aren't like the American Association of Petrol Geologists are invariably linked to the oil and fossil fuels industry.
-There are no end of peer-reviewed papers showing the reality of Global Warming.
-There is an over-whelming consensus among scientists.

I tried reading this article, but it's hard when your monitor is melting...

OP is made of phail...and Global warming existed before Al gore became a movie star...

Hmmmmmmm.


I like how people can believe in a god, but they can't believe in Global Warming.


Especially when the polar ice caps are melting right before our very eyes, right about the same time that carbon emissions have reached an all time high. But hey, that's just a coincidence, because this is a normal, naturally occuring climate pattern.


But of course.

I like how people can believe in a god, but they can't believe in Global Warming.It's very simple, really.

Warming.

Warm.

Warm Brother.

Global Warming is part of the worldwide homosexual conspiracy planning to make all the good, god-fearing kids gay!

Of course they wont believe in something that turns their kids gay ;_;


Especially when the polar ice caps are melting right before our very eyes, right about the same time that carbon emissions have reached an all time high.Complete coincidence. Human CO2 emissions being about about times greater than anything else, CO2 absorbing assorted spectra of infrared light, and high CO2 concentration in the atmosphere and temperature increases showing remarkably proportional developments for about as far as our data goes back (A few million years, minimum*) prove nothing.

I'm terribly reminded of conservapedia's articles on such things. And Relativity. That was awesome.

I love involuntary satire.

* Oh, I forgot. Earth is only a few thousand years old. Geological data and evidence from drilling into the ice are therefore not eligible.

please do not buy into the global warming hype. It is nothing more the cycles that have happend over the years before. I have attached a 1975 article that is from newsweek about global cooling. The wanted to go to drastic measures and release CO2 into the atmosphere to warm it. Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare. He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear. Read the article in the link i have attached.

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf
Awesome.

From a similar point of time - damn doesn't it suck that the Reds just totally took over Saigon, eh?

please do not buy into the global warming hype. It is nothing more the cycles that have happend over the years before. I have attached a 1975 article that is from newsweek about global cooling. The wanted to go to drastic measures and release CO2 into the atmosphere to warm it. Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare. He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear. Read the article in the link i have attached.

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdfEr...if the article acknowledges that releasing CO2 into the atmosphere warms the globe, then isn't the article saying that the release of CO2 into the atmosphere causes global warming?

Knotthole Glade;13035457']I still have no idea who Al Gore is.You're silly.
She sang "It's My Party".

This thread sucks, not just the OP.

Greater Trostia, your post inspires me.

please do not buy into the global warming hype.

CROW: Why not?
TOM SERVO: Listen to the man, it'll make him feel better.

It is nothing more the cycles that have happend over the years before.

CROW/TOM: It is?
JOEL: It is not.

I have attached a 1975 article that is from newsweek about global cooling.

JOEL: 1975? Not even the parts I used for Crow and Servo are that old!
(Crow and Tom Servo look at Joel meaningfully)
JOEL: Sorry, guys.

The wanted to go to drastic measures and release CO2 into the atmosphere to warm it.

TOM SERVO: They did?
JOEL [stoner voice]: Oh, yeah, my best friend Tommy, he loved to sniff CO2.
CROW: Weirdo.

Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare.
TOM SERVO: Who's AL Gore?
CROW: The guy who invented the Internet.
TOM SERVO: Oh. Wait, isn't that God?

He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear.

JOEL [Al Gore]: I'm making money off your fear.
CROW: You've already got enough, you stupid...
JOEL/TOM SERVO: CROW!
Crow [sheepishly]: Sorry, Joel.

Read the article in the link i have attached.

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

CROW: No! Anything that old smells!
TOM: Like your first unpublished screenplay?
JOEL: Come on, guys, relax.
Anyway, we're getting out of here, show's over. (Walks out of theater)

Pretty crappy, right?

Awesome.

From a similar point of time - damn doesn't it suck that the Reds just totally took over Saigon, eh?
Two days after that Newsweek was published, no less.

*snip*
The only difference is the OP is referring to 1975, while all this take place "In the not too distant future/Down in deep 13" where "Dr. Forrester and TV's Frank were hatching an evil scheme."

The only difference is the OP is referring to 1975, while all this take place "In the not too distant future/Down in deep 13" where "Dr. Forrester and TV's Frank were hatching an evil scheme."

Eh?

I'd like to point out that a warmer moister globe sounds delightful to me. :)

Eh?

You were referring to Mystery Science Theater 3000, correct? That is the theme song (the second, I believe).

I'd like to point out that a warmer moister globe sounds delightful to me. :)Remember - a warmer, moister globe also facilitates infectious diseases.

You were referring to Mystery Science Theater 3000, correct? That is the theme song (the second, I believe).

Yeah, I was. But the not too distant future is next Sunday, A.D. [/nitpick] You want me to post the theme song, or something, because what the hell does that have to do with 1975?

Remember - a warmer, moister globe also facilitates infectious diseases.
You're thinking too small, man. Imagine, if you will, a world covered in mud!

Hang on, this sounds like the end-product of an evil plot by LG. Dude, are you behind global warming?

Yeah, I was. But the not too distant future is next Sunday, A.D. [/nitpick] You want me to post the theme song, or something, because what the hell does that have to do with 1975?

Ah, we have seen different episodes. The "next Sunday, A.D." is when Joel was the host, the one I posted was when Mike was the host.

It doesn't have anything to do with 1975; that's the point. The scenario of the OP is in 1975, while yours is in "the not too distant future". It was a joke, and not a very good one at that. If there was more of a banter going on this thread I would feel guilty.

Ah, we have seen different episodes. The "next Sunday, A.D." is when Joel was the host, the one I posted was when Mike was the host.

It doesn't have anything to do with 1975; that's the point. The scenario of the OP is in 1975, while yours is in "the not too distant future". It was a joke, and not a very good one at that. If there was more of a banter going on this thread I would feel guilty.

I have a lot of trouble getting jokes sometimes, so it's partly my fault. And I have seen both Joel and Mike episodes, and they're both great. I've also seen every version of the intro, so I know what you're talking about.

Especially when the polar ice caps are melting right before our very eyes, right about the same time that carbon emissions have reached an all time high. But hey, that's just a coincidence, because this is a normal, naturally occuring climate pattern.
On one hand, people though El Nino was something special, when infact it was a yearly occurence.

also, 'right before our very eyes' is a hard thing to say. were there studies measuring the rate of polar ice cap melting? and does this study go back decades to accurately show the increase?

me, I believe the climate is changing. and while I really don't care about the cause, I do know that more Greenhouse gasses means more pollution. Less trees means more pollution. Less dependancy on Gas (as an individual) means more money saved. More excercise means a healthier life.

The concept of Carbon Credits seem more like buying absolution. You're tossing money to companies, but are they following through?

So to all those people screaming "Global Warming" I ask, what are you doing to cut back on the damage you're doing to the environment?

The concept of Carbon Credits seem more like buying absolution. You're tossing money to companies, but are they following through?

Right. I recently read an article in The Washington Post about carbon offset companies, and there's not much to stop them from wasting your money.

In a similar vein, the Church will revive its practice of selling indulgences.

Greater Trostia, your disembowelment of the OP made me wince inside.

Let me assure you that not all sceptics are like this specimen and that a little debate and controversy over the issue has yet to hurt anyone...

Uh, no. That's not true at all. People are being hurt daily because the idiots in power capable of taking control of global warming and slowing it down are too busy fighting to keep doing what they're doing so they can keep making money.

Take a look at the recent huge storms like Katrina. Take a look at Pacific island chains that are being swallowed up by the ocean day by day due to rising sea levels from melting polar ice. Take a look at the loss of glaciers in Greenland, or the serious decline in habitat for many polar animals up in Canada, Russia, and the like.

Animals, be they human or otherwise, are facing the fury of what we've done with global warming each and every day, and the debate and controversy IS hurting them because while we're still debating like the fucktards we are rather than listening to climatologists who know what they're talking about, we're not doing anything to help change things.

Wow!!!

40 years ago some people thought things were different!


And then... maybe .... they did some more research.

For a followup thread, how about posting a link to an "authoritative" 1901 article espousing the impossibility of heavier-than-air flight? See, if only people would have listened then 9/11 would never have happened!

Disasters, after all, are best averted by maintaining ignorance.

Wow!!!

40 years ago some people thought things were different!


And then... maybe .... they did some more research.

For a followup thread, how about posting a link to an "authoritative" 1901 article espousing the impossibility of heavier-than-air flight? See, if only people would have listened then 9/11 would never have happened!

Disasters, after all, are best averted by maintaining ignorance.
Thank you, good sir. You have not only made me laugh, you've said something people truly need to understand.

lol, what a tool.


How about a current newsweek article to refute the OP's obviously poorly argued first one? The problem is that the seeds of doubt have been placed in people's minds by well funded groups who stand to gain off the continual pollution of our air. It's the tobacco companies strategy from the 70's and 80's they are using and the same assholes that bought that are buying this.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20122975/site/newsweek/

The article actually quotes people who worked for these industry backed organizations saying that they were full of shit and doing it for the fat paychecks they were getting. The only thing stronger than human stupidity is human greed.

The only difference is the OP is referring to 1975, while all this take place "In the not too distant future/Down in deep 13" where "Dr. Forrester and TV's Frank were hatching an evil scheme."

How dare you profane the memory of the original MST3K with the latter-day lyric!

"In the not too distant future
Next Sunday, A.D.
There was a guy named Joel
Not too different from you or me

He worked at Gizmonic Institute
Just another face in a red jumpsuit
He did a good job cleaning up the place
But his bosses didn't like him, so they shot him into spa-yace"

Ah, memories.

JOEL: And what do you want for Christmas, Crow?
CROW: I wanna decide who lives and who dies.

I miss Mr. B Natural.

Happy 5000th post to me!

Hear's a little food for though; not on topic really, and somewhat out of date, but nonetheless I think everyone should read it.

The latest twist in the global warming saga is the revision in data at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, indicating that the warmest year on record for the U.S. was not 1998, but rather1934 (BY 0.02 Of a degree Celsius).

Canadian and amateur climate researcher Stephen McIntyre discovered that NASA made a technical error in standardizing the weather air temperature data post-2000. These temperature mistakes were only for the U.S.; their net effect was to lower the average temperature reading from 2000-20006 by 0.15C.

The new data undermine another frightful talking point from environmentalists, which is that six of the 10 hottest years on record have occurred since 1990. Wrong. NASA now says six of the 10 warmest years were in the 1930s and 1940s, and that was before the bulk of industrial CO2 emissions were released into the atmosphere.

Those are the new facts. What's hard to know is how much, if any, significance to read into them. NASA officials say the revisions are insignificant and should not be "used by [global warming] critics to muddy the debate." NASA scientist Gavin Schmidt notes that, despite the revisions, the period 2002-2006 is still warmer for the U.S. than 1930-1934 and both periods are slightly cooler than 1998-2002.

Still, environmentalists have been making great hay by claiming that recent years, such as 1998, then 2006, were the "warmest" on record. It's also not clear that the 0.15-degree temperature revision is as trivial as NASA insists. Total U.S warming since 1920 has been about .21 degrees Celsius. This means that a .15 error for recent years is more then two-thirds the observed temperature increase for the period of warming. NASA counters that most of the measure planetary warming in recent decade has occurred outside the U.S and that the agency's recent error would have a tiny impact (1/1000th of a degree) on global warming.

If nothing else, the snafu calls into question how much faith to put in climate change models. In the 1990s, virtually all climate models predicted warming from 2000-2010, but the new data confirm that so far there has been no warming trend in this decade for the U.S. Whoops. These simulation models are the basis for many of the forecasts of catastrophic warming by the end of the century that Al Gore and the media repeat time and again. We may soon be basing multi-trillion dollar policy decisions on computer models who accuracy we already know to be less than stellar.

What's more disturbing is what this incident tells us about the scientific double standard in the global warming debate. If this kind of error were made by climatologists who dare to challenge climate-change orthodoxy, the media and environmentalists would accuse them of manipulating data to distort scientific truth. NASA's blunder only became a news story after internet bloggers plated whistleblower by circulating the new data across the web.

So far this year NASA has issued at least five press releases that could be described as alarming on the pace of climate change. But the correction of its overestimate of global warming was merely posted on the agency's Web site. James Hansen, NASA's ubiquitous climate scientist and man who has charged that the Bush Administration is censoring him on global warming, has been unapologetic about NASA's screw up. He claims that global warming skeptics- "court jesters," he calls them- are exploiting this incident to "confuse the public about the status of knowledge of global climate change, thus delaying effective action to mitigate climate change."

So let’s get this straight: Mr. Hansen's agency makes a mistake in way that exaggerate the extent of warming, and this all of a conspiracy by "skeptics"? It's a wonder there aren't more of them.

Content Provided by The Wall Street Journal-
Wednesday, August 29th, 2007 – Vol. CCL No. 50
Transition to the digital age provided by Maxen von Bismarck.

You're thinking too small, man. Imagine, if you will, a world covered in mud!

Hang on, this sounds like the end-product of an evil plot by LG. Dude, are you behind global warming?

It might be, but if so, LG forgets that only what, 30-40% of the planetary surface is land. Diluting that amount in water won't make any mud. Just some slightly silty water.

I don't think global climate change is happening becauase Al Gore says it is, I think global climate change is happening because the evidence says it is.

On top of that, Al Gore is largely meaningless to 6,700,000 people that aren't from the USA. What he says has no bearing upon anybody. I knew of the Y2K scare, and of global warming, long before I had any idea of who Al Gore was.
Al Gore was into environmentalism well before you were around. He first brought the issue up as a sitting senator way back in the early 80's and was on the committee for environmental issues back then as well.

Also, his 'inventing the internet' quote was actually 'took the initiative in creating the internet'.
By this he was referring to the High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991, commonly known as the Gore Bill (as he was the one who wrote and introduced it) which led to the development of the National Research and Education Network. It also led to the development of the National Information Infrastructure, the High-Performance Computing and Communications Initiative, the web browser Mosaic, and the creation of a high-speed fiber optic network.

Regardless to what Al Gore did, or didn't say, the internet is not the product of some rather pointless piece of legislature which would, without the ceaseless efforts of people like me and you, be nothing more than a footnote.

Al Gore, and the government, couldn't and just about cannot make anything, much less something as dynamic as the internet, without people ready to actually make something out of it.

Everyone knows the only way we can combat climate change is for us all to become gay, stop procreating, become vegans, have no showers and ban Christianity.

Regardless to what Al Gore did, or didn't say, the internet is not the product of some rather pointless piece of legislature which would, without the ceaseless efforts of people like me and you, be nothing more than a footnote.

Al Gore, and the government, couldn't and just about cannot make anything, much less something as dynamic as the internet, without people ready to actually make something out of it.

Sure, but the simple fact is that government research into whether the military's Arpanet could be expanded into non-military applications directly led to the creation of what we know today as the internet, and that Al Gore sponsored the legislation that funded said research. It's really quite sad that he's been pilloried for years for ever-so-ridiculously daring to take some credit for what he, y'know, actually did.

(Oh, and to the OP of this thread - didja know that scientists once believed the sun revolved around the Earth? Clearly, this totally invalidates modern scientists' assertions that the Earth revolves around the sun! Also, heavy things fall faster than light things in a vacuum, organisms are made up of "animalcules," and elements like plutonium and curium are entirely mythological. *nodnod*)

Regardless to what Al Gore did, or didn't say, the internet is not the product of some rather pointless piece of legislature which would, without the ceaseless efforts of people like me and you, be nothing more than a footnote.

Al Gore, and the government, couldn't and just about cannot make anything, much less something as dynamic as the internet, without people ready to actually make something out of it.
That 'pointless piece of legislature' led to the formation and funding of National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois where Mosiac, the first web browser which pretty much started the whole internet boom.

What did Marc Andreessen, the founder of Netscape and one of the ppl who wrote Mosiac, have to say about Al Gore and his Bill?
"If it had been left to private industry, it wouldn't have happened - at least, not until years later."

Or indeed what Internet pioneers Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn have to say about Gore's contributions to the Internet since the 1970s, including his work on the Gore Bill:
“As the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore's contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time."

Everyone knows the only way we can combat climate change is for us all to become gay, stop procreating, become vegans, have no showers and ban Christianity.

.. now why Christianity? I mean look at all the Incense all the monks burn. add to that all the smoke from all those car bombs those radical Islamists set off.

at least in Christianity, one can argue that dependance on automobiles can contribute to a major sin (slothfulness). :p

Everyone knows the only way we can combat climate change is for us all to become gay, stop procreating, become vegans, have no showers and ban Christianity.
Ok, I think I'll just die then.

That 'pointless piece of legislature' led to the formation and funding of National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois where Mosiac, the first web browser which pretty much started the whole internet boom.

What did Marc Andreessen, the founder of Netscape and one of the ppl who wrote Mosiac, have to say about Al Gore and his Bill?
"If it had been left to private industry, it wouldn't have happened - at least, not until years later."

Or indeed what Internet pioneers Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn have to say about Gore's contributions to the Internet since the 1970s, including his work on the Gore Bill:
“As the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore's contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time."

Good for those guys, obviously, they think that the internet is nothing more then a series of protocols, literally, all they see is 001100111001, thankfully, only a few do. The large part of everybody else, sees what is actually there, ideas, infomation, and capitalism at work. A instant market/dictionary/everything; did Al Gore do any of that? Did he help make the internet be The Internet, no. Did he create Ebay, Google, MySpace? No. Did he, at least, provide the foundations to the internet? Yes, he gave the taxpayers (scientists) back their money, plus some from other citizens so they could make his 6 hours of work typing some piece of paper up, worthwhile. So thanks Al, that was kind of you.

I already know about the Global Cooling scare and I actually read that article a long time ago.

The reason why the Climate Scientists shifted from Global Cooling mode to Global Warming mode about 20-25 years ago (and that was how it happened, they just abruptly changed) was because Margaret Thatcher, the Corporatist Prime Minister of the UK at the time (she was a Tory Party politician by the way) was feuding with coal miners over a strike. Obviously, a "coming catastrophe" that was a result of CO2, which coal emits when burned, is a perfect bargain chip in a strike.

Al Gore had long been a Global Warming believer (one of his professors in college was one of the first climate scientists to create this theory) and he went along with Thatcher, but only in the US (which is why the British left rejects man-made global warming, just as the American right does).

Of course, the Global Warmites have a perfect backup plan (which they'll need now that Wrong Way Fleming got stuck in the ice that is supposedly melted and is being chased by the supposedly "endangered" polar bear). They've been saying for a few years (do you remember the movie "The Day After Tomorrow?") that Global Warming could cause Global Cooling. They're about to shift to Global Cooling mode, as the claims of ice melting have now been thoroughly debunked.

Wasn't he Dr. Frankenstein's assistant?

Dr. Frankenfurter's assistant, wasn't he?
...good for relieving his ... tension.

On one hand, people though El Nino was something special, when infact it was a yearly occurence.No it wasn't/isn't.

Uh, no. That's not true at all. People are being hurt daily because the idiots in power capable of taking control of global warming and slowing it down are too busy fighting to keep doing what they're doing so they can keep making money.

Take a look at the recent huge storms like Katrina. Take a look at Pacific island chains that are being swallowed up by the ocean day by day due to rising sea levels from melting polar ice. Take a look at the loss of glaciers in Greenland, or the serious decline in habitat for many polar animals up in Canada, Russia, and the like.

Animals, be they human or otherwise, are facing the fury of what we've done with global warming each and every day, and the debate and controversy IS hurting them because while we're still debating like the fucktards we are rather than listening to climatologists who know what they're talking about, we're not doing anything to help change things.

I see your ante, Kyronea, and raise you this:

http://www.adn.com/front/story/9286059p-9200531c.html

:(

Greater Trostia, your post inspires me.



CROW: Why not?
TOM SERVO: Listen to the man, it'll make him feel better.



CROW/TOM: It is?
JOEL: It is not.



JOEL: 1975? Not even the parts I used for Crow and Servo are that old!
(Crow and Tom Servo look at Joel meaningfully)
JOEL: Sorry, guys.



TOM SERVO: They did?
JOEL [stoner voice]: Oh, yeah, my best friend Tommy, he loved to sniff CO2.
CROW: Weirdo.


TOM SERVO: Who's AL Gore?
CROW: The guy who invented the Internet.
TOM SERVO: Oh. Wait, isn't that God?



JOEL [Al Gore]: I'm making money off your fear.
CROW: You've already got enough, you stupid...
JOEL/TOM SERVO: CROW!
Crow [sheepishly]: Sorry, Joel.



CROW: No! Anything that old smells!
TOM: Like your first unpublished screenplay?
JOEL: Come on, guys, relax.
Anyway, we're getting out of here, show's over. (Walks out of theater)

Pretty crappy, right?
Winner of thread?

You're thinking too small, man. Imagine, if you will, a world covered in mud!

Hang on, this sounds like the end-product of an evil plot by LG. Dude, are you behind global warming?

Ye...uh....

The evidence of global warming's existence is circumstantial and ... *mumbles unintelligibly*

Everyone knows the only way we can combat climate change is for us all to become gay, stop procreating, become vegans, have no showers and ban Christianity.

Bullshit! I'm not giving up meat! :p

Greater Trostia, your disembowelment of the OP made me wince inside.

Let me assure you that not all sceptics are like this specimen and that a little debate and controversy over the issue has yet to hurt anyone...

Beauty is, it's more like the OP'r already straddled the tanto. Greater Trostia basically patted the OP'r softly on the forehead, in an appreciative manner. The rest really was already in play.

And perhaps you're not up to speed on the "debate and controversy" not hurting anyone.

Bullshit! I'm not giving up meat! :p

You don't have to give it up, you just have to take it a different way, slightly.
:p

The reason why the Climate Scientists shifted from Global Cooling mode to Global Warming mode about 20-25 years ago (and that was how it happened, they just abruptly changed) was because Margaret Thatcher, the Corporatist Prime Minister of the UK at the time (she was a Tory Party politician by the way) was feuding with coal miners over a strike. Obviously, a "coming catastrophe" that was a result of CO2, which coal emits when burned, is a perfect bargain chip in a strike.So... You're saying that the physics behind CO2 absorbing certain spectra of infrared radiation (Thus reducing the amount of energy - heat - Earth radiates) are all wrong, and we've been mislead by a secret cabal of lying physicists?

They're about to shift to Global Cooling mode, as the claims of ice melting have now been thoroughly debunked.So, I take it that the companies* - shipping, oil, fishermen - presently gleefully rubbing their hands and plotting the expansion of their businesses into the arctic - shipping is happy, insofar as doing Rotterdam-Shanghai via skipping along the Russian polar coast is much faster than trying to go around Africa or through the Pacific, arctic oil supplies are already gunned for by several countries who no longer have to deal with the ice, and the fishes are self-explanatory - are all acting on false data provided to them by the global conspiracy, despite simply driving up there and looking for themselves - hell, actually, you can use google earth - proving that this developing 'Open Polar Seas' are nothing but a myth?

* On occasion the same companies claiming that the warming is totally not happening, I believe. Teehee.

*mumbles unintelligibly*

... blub?

You don't have to give it up, you just have to take it a different way, slightly.
:p

It's just not the same. :p

... blub?

I have to start preparing for another day of playing in the mud. :)

It's just not the same. :p

True.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=South+Park+Martha+Stewart&hl=en

I have to start preparing for another day of playing in the mud. :)

It's always win/win with you, isn't it? :p

I see your ante, Kyronea, and raise you this:

http://www.adn.com/front/story/9286059p-9200531c.html

:(
I was about to panic about the complete extinction of the species before I read the article more carefully and noted they simply meant they would not longer have a habitat in Alaska.

Which is still horribly, horribly bad.
Winner of thread?
No. Needs more host segment(s) before it can be declared a winner. And a bit more humor, though at least Johnny B. Goode has a decent sense of it, so he'll probably turn out to be a good MSTer once he gets some practice in.

I have to start preparing for another day of playing in the mud. :)

Nope. The planetary is mostly 70% water. Making it 100% water means no more mud. Imagine. Having to bath everyday, every second....for the rest of your life.

Nope. The planetary is mostly 70% water. Making it 100% water means no more mud. Imagine. Having to bath everyday, every second....for the rest of your life.

... WOOHOO!!! FAT FLOATS!!! I'm safe. :p

Winner of thread?

Thanks.

No. Needs more host segment(s) before it can be declared a winner. And a bit more humor, though at least Johnny B. Goode has a decent sense of it, so he'll probably turn out to be a good MSTer once he gets some practice in.

Wasn't long enough for host segments.

Two days after that Newsweek was published, no less.
Heh!

I was about to panic about the complete extinction of the species before I read the article more carefully and noted they simply meant they would not longer have a habitat in Alaska.

Which is still horribly, horribly bad.Yup.


No. Needs more host segment(s) before it can be declared a winner. And a bit more humor, though at least Johnny B. Goode has a decent sense of it, so he'll probably turn out to be a good MSTer once he gets some practice in.
Admittedly, it's pretty f*'n hard to try and keep up with a standard like "Water Buffalo". :D
...but that's what the "?" was for ... it meant a contender.

... WOOHOO!!! FAT FLOATS!!! I'm safe. :p

Dammit, i'll be like a jellyfish ... again.

"Head zeppelin!"

Global Warming does exist! Its just that it is a polarized and politicized issue. We are screwing up the environment, just mostly in ways other than global warming (such as turning our oceans into a chemical cesspool). Global warming is an overall warming trend that is natural, but is augmented by the fact that we (humanity, that is) are making the effects manifest much more rapidly than normal.

I applaud your concise description of a global mismanagement. we should all learn from the North American First Nations people, "The creator has given them the responsibility as keepers of the earth, nobody can own it"

please do not buy into the global warming hype. It is nothing more the cycles that have happend over the years before. I have attached a 1975 article that is from newsweek about global cooling. The wanted to go to drastic measures and release CO2 into the atmosphere to warm it. Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare. He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear. Read the article in the link i have attached.

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

Global warming is indeed happening but we do not have that big an impact on it. Global Cooling will come as it is a known fact that there is a warming and cooling trend on this planet.

Global warming is indeed happening but we do not have that big an impact on it. Global Cooling will come as it is a known fact that there is a warming and cooling trend on this planet.

I'm sure all those well trained and educated experts who think otherwise are just having an off day.

I'm sure all those well trained and educated experts who think otherwise are just having an off day.

You mean the same educated experts that have predicted a rise in hurricane activity? This year we had what? Seven named storms to date?

You mean the same educated experts that have predicted a rise in hurricane activity? This year we had what? Seven named storms to date?

A weatherman was wrong? Perish the thought.

He was in that movie about something..um...

Oh yeah. Scarface.

Let me intruduce you to my leetle friend?

You mean the same educated experts that have predicted a rise in hurricane activity? This year we had what? Seven named storms to date?

Well then I guess they must be wrong about everything else too.

please do not buy into the global warming hype.

The term for a theory agreed upon by the vast majority of the scientific community is not "hype".

You mean the same educated experts that have predicted a rise in hurricane activity? This year we had what? Seven named storms to date?

Predicting climate is very different from predicting weather.

Predicting climate is very different from predicting weather.

Is it? Seems to me no one can predict climate change anymore than they can predict the weather. Climate changes over centuries whereas weather changes from day to day. I will say that weather is somewhat predictable in today's time than it was say 50 years ago, but it is still volitale to predict.

With climate change, we know climate changes over centuries. Are we in the midst of climate change now? My gut tells me yes but there is nothing we can do to stop it.

We need to bring back pirates, its been shown that pirates prevented global warming until the British killed them all!
BRING BACK THE PIRATES!

My gut tells me...

phail

phail
Seconded.

why didnt the thread end after greater trostia's post?

Here I'll do it for him:

/thread

why didnt the thread end after greater trostia's post?

Here I'll do it for him:

/thread
Because spam rocks. Also, this place is dead. Finally, as it's better to refute falsehoods with current theory and accepted scientific thought and allow some debate on a subject. :)

My gut tells me yes but there is nothing we can do to stop it.
So your gut tells you that it's not worth even trying, in opposition to scientific evidence. Hm. You need breakfast.
Also, this place is dead.
Yeah, what's up with that? :confused:

We could use some global cooling right now. Also some serious rain fall in the South and in the Midwest of the USA.

Yeah, what's up with that? :confused:
I blame creationists - they just aren't trying hard enough these days.

I blame creationists - they just aren't trying hard enough these days.

And the xenophobes seem to have gone somewhat more quiet.

I may blame huge msn convos too, though >.<

And the xenophobes seem to have gone somewhat more quiet.

I may blame huge msn convos too, though >.<
Yeah, it's all these generalites forming external cliques and spin-off forums. I dunno though, the amount of really polarised debate seems lessened.

So your gut tells you that it's not worth even trying, in opposition to scientific evidence. Hm. You need breakfast.

Speaking of which, there's probably dozens of posters here willing offer a breakfast to Corny of some sort ... perhaps a sandwich, perhaps a protein shake! :p

A weatherman was wrong? Perish the thought.


http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleID=000D4589-7E45-1F29-8D4A80A84189EEDF

please do not buy into the global warming hype. It is nothing more the cycles that have happend over the years before. I have attached a 1975 article that is from newsweek about global cooling. The wanted to go to drastic measures and release CO2 into the atmosphere to warm it. Remember Al Gore also brought us the Y2K bug scare. He creates a big uproar and profits from your fear. Read the article in the link i have attached.

http://denisdutton.com/newsweek_coolingworld.pdf

Well, let's see, one article vs. several thousand scientific papers. Hmmm.....Which should I believe?

Well, let's see, I remember when it was common to have snow drifts 6 feet+ deep in western Nebraska. A kids sled has been a waste of money for 30 years. I remember having a city ice skating pond most of the winter. I think they quit that about 1968 since it didn't stay frozen in the winter.

I guess I'll go with the obvious.

I'm sure all those well trained and educated experts who think otherwise are just having an off day.

An expert is someone that is more knowledgeable in a certain topic than most, not infallible.
They are paid to express their expert opinion, so why kill the golden goose by expressing that unpopular opinion that nobody wants to hear : the earth is in it's warming cycle and there is fuck-all we can do about it, because you see if we react, according to Bush (his paid economic experts), we will have a great loss of employment due to the high cost of adapting the industry to save emission norms, which may or may not (according to Bush and his paid environment experts) have a notable influence on th reversal of the warming trend.
If the earth wants to get rid of us like a pack of annoying fleas then we can't do bugger all about it. Eventually we will be joining the dinosaurs; our fossils will be the treasures that will be excavated by the experts of the next calamity survivors and future rulers of the earth (they think).

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa003&articleID=000D4589-7E45-1F29-8D4A80A84189EEDF

So that's how they do it! I've been wondering about that...while I hardly ever listened to those who blabbed about weather predictions--especially since we all know the weather is truly chaotic and that makes it nigh impossible for us to predict specific weather more than a week in advance, at least with current computer technology--I was wondering how weather patterns and climate were predicted, and now I know. Thank you.

Yup.


Admittedly, it's pretty f*'n hard to try and keep up with a standard like "Water Buffalo". :D
...but that's what the "?" was for ... it meant a contender.

"Water Buffalo"?

An expert is someone that is more knowledgeable in a certain topic than most, not infallible.
They are paid to express their expert opinion, so why kill the golden goose by expressing that unpopular opinion that nobody wants to hear : the earth is in it's warming cycle and there is fuck-all we can do about it, because you see if we react, according to Bush (his paid economic experts), we will have a great loss of employment due to the high cost of adapting the industry to save emission norms, which may or may not (according to Bush and his paid environment experts) have a notable influence on th reversal of the warming trend.

If you are referring to Kyoto, everyone knew it would do nothing and on top of that, Kyoto predated Bush as it was signed by Clinton and he never sent it to the floor for ratification because he knew that it would meet a very grusom death in the US Senate. I mean, the Senate did vote 95-0 against in a resolution about treaties and economic harm.

Yeah, it's all these generalites forming external cliques and spin-off forums. I dunno though, the amount of really polarised debate seems lessened.
Why I say, that's completely unheard of! :eek:

Last part is true though...
Speaking of which, there's probably dozens of posters here willing offer a breakfast to Corny of some sort ... perhaps a sandwich, perhaps a protein shake! :p
Is that as kinky as I think it is? :p
Well, let's see, one article vs. several thousand scientific papers. Hmmm.....Which should I believe?

...

I guess I'll go with the obvious.
You should go with the Brevious. *Nods*

Not this tired bullshit again.

Try doing some actual research: there were no scientific organisations saying that Global Cooling was definitely happening, only that more study was needed; there were no peer reviewed papers establishing that global cooling was happening, only alarmist articles in popular magazines; there was no over-whelming consensus among scientists.

Now look at Global Warming:
-Just about scientific organisation in the world has clearly stated that Global Warming is happening, that it is being driven by human activity and that urgent action must be taken. The few that aren't like the American Association of Petrol Geologists are invariably linked to the oil and fossil fuels industry.
-There are no end of peer-reviewed papers showing the reality of Global Warming.
-There is an over-whelming consensus among scientists.
They were all paid by Al Gore. Duh!:p

My gut tells me yes but there is nothing we can do to stop it.
Well who can argue with that rock solid logic?

Well who can argue with that rock solid logic?Do not underestimate Corny's guts! Enough posters have ripped them all over the floor by now. Accurate predictions can be made from the patterns they fall in.

Do not underestimate Corny's guts! Enough posters have ripped them all over the floor by now. Accurate predictions can be made from the patterns they fall in.

In which case, when this warming trend stops (warming trend after an ice age? Who'd have thunk it :eek:), the opposite will take place. Just like it did when the mini-ice age occured. Of course, this is barring any unexpected cold snaps which have transpired throughout time along with higher than normal heating.

"Water Buffalo"?

Yeah, you know .... hamsters in a big donut box. Shake (agitate) the box a bit to get the trampling sound.
And if they're water buffalo, simple adjustment of pouring some milk into the box with them.

http://images.ibsys.com/2005/0515/4490722_200X150.jpg

Do not underestimate Corny's guts! Enough posters have ripped them all over the floor by now. Accurate predictions can be made from the patterns they fall in.

I like yer moxy. *bows*

Also ... if it's "solid" and in his/her "gut" ... how did it get there?
http://www.jcnot4me.com/images/Bush-BJ.jpg

Of course, this is barring any unexpected cold snaps which have transpired throughout time along with higher than normal heating.
http://www.zone-sf.com/images/datomorrow3.jpg
?

So that's how they do it! I've been wondering about that...while I hardly ever listened to those who blabbed about weather predictions--especially since we all know the weather is truly chaotic and that makes it nigh impossible for us to predict specific weather more than a week in advance, at least with current computer technology--I was wondering how weather patterns and climate were predicted, and now I know. Thank you.

No problem. :)
This time i'm actually here to help ... somewhat. :p

Is that as kinky as I think it is? :p
If it's Corny, it's gotta have some kinda kink.
*nods emphatically*


You should go with the Brevious. *Nods*
Steady?
http://www.websmileys.com/sm/love/1468.gif

Yeah, you know .... hamsters in a big donut box. Shake (agitate) the box a bit to get the trampling sound.
And if they're water buffalo, simple adjustment of pouring some milk into the box with them.

http://images.ibsys.com/2005/0515/4490722_200X150.jpg

I understand very little of this.

http://www.zone-sf.com/images/datomorrow3.jpg
?

So what are you saying? That such extreme heating events and extreme cooling events have not happened during a massive cooling or heating cycle?

So what are you saying? That such extreme heating events and extreme cooling events have not happened during a massive cooling or heating cycle?

A picture's worth a thousand words.

I understand very little of this.

If the 'net were more forthcoming, i'd illustrate.
Alas, no such luck.

Rest assured, one of MST3K's funniest, funniest moments.

Global Cooling? I throught the World was Warming up?

Global Cooling? I throught the World was Warming up?

And here it comes .............


......

...wait for it...


....

...


....it's cuz it's bipolar.

If the 'net were more forthcoming, i'd illustrate.
Alas, no such luck.

Rest assured, one of MST3K's funniest, funniest moments.

Tell me which episode.

.. now why Christianity? I mean look at all the Incense all the monks burn. add to that all the smoke from all those car bombs those radical Islamists set off.

I think that the aforesaid group would be largely in favour of… 'incense'. :D

My gut tells me…
phail

Not necessarily complete phail:

Remember - a warmer, moister globe also facilitates infectious diseases.

Intestinal disease: new evidence for climate change!

This thread aches to die in peace. Please, let it...

This thread aches to die in peace. Please, let it...

Sorry, what? I was thinking about the polar bears again and how my boss has a bunch of pictures of them in his office.

We need to bring back pirates, its been shown that pirates prevented global warming until the British killed them all!
BRING BACK THE PIRATES!

http://www.venganza.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/hq-graphcopy2_800.jpg