Cactus Game Design Message Boards
Open Forum => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Ironica on January 07, 2010, 06:31:11 PM
-
Haven't seen anyone posts things about the debate of global warming and I also wated to keep it out of the snowy tread. Hopefully, it will remain civil and not need to be moved to OD. Also, please try to keep Climate-Gate out of it as much as possible. Try to stick with the science.
So...what say you?
-
Well its because of global warming that its so cold. Wait a sec isn't global warming supposed to make the temperature go up not down? :D :laugh: ;D ::)
-
global warming is a ruse by the goverment.IT AIN"T REAL!!!!
-
how can you keep "climate-gate" out of it? thatz like voting for a baseball player and saying dont think about his 500 home runs and his 3000 hits. Climate-gate proves that there is no "global warming" imo. ps. just ask those in Buffalo, Chicago, alaska, lol
-
Does it matter? God is in control
-
I am a simple man and don't know a lot bout Global Warming. I think that apparently there is holes in the Ozone that let harmful rays in from the sun that could melt the polar ice caps thus eventually causeing them to turn to water and flood part of the earth. Maybe most of the earth by some peoples thinking. But I know Gods promise via the rainbow to Noah that He won't flood the earth again...Reckon, I'll stick with what I know for now.
-
short answer check your sources
as a person studying for engineering these are my thoughts
1) Co2 composes .03 percent of our atmosphe
2) media needs to increase sales
3) Al Gore still wants to be president
4) Big buisness profits from "global warming"
-Ie selling hybrids and other novely items that can't compete with standard tech
5) Bias? definaitely
-were are the measurements being taken?
- who is paying them for the study
- how they manipulate their graphs
6) the sun dosen't provide consitant energy it changes
- could this be a factor that is causing the "global warming"
7) percent error below 10% accepted
-we can't forcast weather 4 weeks ahead of our current date how can they do 10+ years
Book to read State of Fear by Micheal Chriton sp (the guy who wrote jurrasic park)
about me
am i biased defainetly.
could i be wrong
-yes
do i have adegree in this subject
- no closest thing i have is bio 1 in college
I am the worst speller there is
Later
Dave
-
how can you keep "climate-gate" out of it? thatz like voting for a baseball player and saying dont think about his 500 home runs and his 3000 hits. Climate-gate proves that there is no "global warming" imo. ps. just ask those in Buffalo, Chicago, alaska, lol
The reason I said that is because I wanted people to focus more on the science of the whole thing instead of what certain people hid (though I didn't say not to mention it at all because some people might bring up the facts that they supposedly hid).
Also...meet Frozen Gore (http://www.compeaus.com/)
-
The hole in the ozone layer is a natural phenomenon. Every year it opens up over Antarctica, and then closes up again. Sounds more like something God put into play to let stuff out rather than something we should worry about letting stuff in.
-
Breaking News: There's a Global Warming protest in Florida... Link (http://twitgoo.com/bbqt1)
-
I think it's nothing to worry about and actually doesn't exist it all. There was someone on Fox News about 2 months ago who did this whole special on how global warming, on a scientific level, doesn't make sense. It was really good.
Glenn Beck-Lord Monckton Debate Global Warming (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7tMY3ou0Yo#)
Here it is. Watch 1:30-whenever he's done with the chalkboard. ;D
-
Glenn Beck is a cracker. He's as bias as they come.
-
Glenn Beck should stop bringing reasonable and educated sources onto his show... somehow, he makes them look less reasonable and educated.
-
Global warming is the cake and the cake is a lie and the lie is the cake is one
-
Global warming isn't a bad thing. It'll increase food supply. :)
-
Glenn Beck is a cracker. He's as bias as they come.
What's wrong with that? He doesn't pretend to be a newscaster. He states his opinion. But the person he had on his show has done a lot of things against global warming.
-
Glenn Beck is a cracker. He's as bias as they come.
What's wrong with that? He doesn't pretend to be a newscaster. He states his opinion. But the person he had on his show has done a lot of things against global warming.
I'll second that
-
When you are bias, you tend to only represent your viewpoint. And in his case, he also presents the opposition's viewpoint as ridiculous, false, bull, etc.
-
When you are bias, you tend to only represent your viewpoint. And in his case, he also presents the opposition's viewpoint as ridiculous, false, bull, etc.
So then how do you get information? A different news station?
-
First, one can have a bias or be biased. One cannot be bias.
Second, Beck is a pundit, not a reporter. Why should it be his job to try to convince people that the side he disagrees with is valid?
Third, Beck uses sources to back up his claims. You can debate the validity of his sources, but he's not just running his mouth.
Fourth, Beck is hilarious.
-
I'm Brandon West, and I endorse the above message. ;D
-
Also, if you're watching TV for unbiased news, I feel sorry for you.
-
While I agree with your poitns Pol, I am merely pointing out that using him as a source that "Global warming is bad" would be akin to using Hitler as a source that Jews are bad. While one of those is true and one of them is not, that doesn't negate the fact that the sources you cited were not very reliable and not very openminded.
I don't watch TV for unbiased news, but I also don't watch it to have my viewpoint reinforced.
-
You do have to divine whether he was citing Beck or the scientist who was on his show.
-
You do have to divine whether he was citing Beck or the scientist one of the two politicians who was on his show.
I fixed it for you, Pol. There wasn't a scientist on the show. There was Glenn Beck and two conservative politicians.
-
^Which is the point. Beck hasn't provided any useful information from his show. All his show has done is reinforce the views of a vocal minority who think that every mainstream idea is wrong, whether it is or not.
-
You do have to divine whether he was citing Beck or the scientist one of the two politicians who was on his show.
I fixed it for you, Pol. There wasn't a scientist on the show. There was Glenn Beck and two conservative politicians.
Scientists. Politicians.
You say to-ma-to, I say to-mah-to. ;)
-
^Which is the point. Beck hasn't provided any useful information from his show. All his show has done is reinforce the views of a vocal minority who think that every mainstream idea is wrong, whether it is or not.
I can't tell are you for or against Glen Beck? ???
-
I think Glen Beck is a prime example of everything that is wrong with the right wing politicians in America.
-
You mean trying to expose the truth? You may disagree with some of his things but not everything he says is bias. He states his opinion, I believe it is right you may not, so what? And go on youtube. That guest of his doesn't only speak on glen beck. What does it matter whether his guest speaker was a scientist or politician? He stated scientific facts. Whether he's a budhist, a Christian, a liberal, a conservative, he states FACTS.
-
There probably were facts in his source material, and may have even supported his position, but he just doesn't understand what he is talking about. (To be fair, though, that is common among TV personalities and those that write opinion pieces.)
Example: Apparently his first experience with the internet. (Jump 30 seconds in.)
Glenn Beck: Cash For Clunkers is a government scam to gain access to your computer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqfuZ7hiap0#)
(Warning, rude comments if you continue to Youtube.)
-
Scientists. Politicians.
You say to-ma-to, I say to-mah-to. ;)
I was going to take offense. But then again, I did run for public office once, so I suppose there may be truth to this :)
-
What does it matter whether his guest speaker was a scientist or politician?
It matters as Pol's entire response to Alex_Olijar was predicated on Monckton being a scientist. To respond to Alex_Olijar's claim that Beck was biased by pointing out that the two guests on his show were right-wing political figures would have made no sense whatsoever. So, it matters for the same reason Pol's initial claim matters.
It also matters because Pol claimed the man was a scientist. This claim is false. As there is no actual mention of Lord Monckton's background on the video, any person unfamiliar with the topic may have been misled by Pol's false claim. While the internet makes spreading falsehood easier than ever we should still hold truth in some regard.
He stated scientific facts. Whether he's a budhist, a Christian, a liberal, a conservative, he states FACTS.
Whether Lord Monckton states FACTS is open to considerable dispute. You can read Monckton's deliberate manipulation (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/05/moncktons-deliberate-manipulation/) for an example in this arena where he has acted less than honestly. Given a track record of prevarication in the field, please provide evidence that what was said in the Glenn Beck snippet was both truthful and relevant.
-
Someone before me said there was a scientist on the show. I never view video clips people post, so I had no reason to say "politician" instead of "scientist." My point remains the same.
As to "vocal minority," that's just silly at best and arrogant at worst.
-
Global warming is a cross between conspiracy and a scientific theory
-
Pardon my ignorance, but is it a Christian thing or a Republican thing to deny global warming? There's enough overlap that I haven't figured it out yet, nor can I think of a simple reason why Christians/Republicans would deny it and not non-Christians/Democrats.
-
There's nothing to deny. "Global warming" is (and has been since the 20's) the pet mantra of the left. The left is anti-Capitalist, and if they can get enough people to believe any sort of global climate change is caused by man (completely ridiculous to any student of history), they can hurt businesses and make themselves richer at the same time via bogus environmentalist taxes/fines.
It's the nature of Conservatism to deny everything unless proven. Global warming as a man-caused phenomenon has been nowhere near adequately proved even for normal common sense, let alone to overcome the conservative inertia. It is also part of the nature of Conservatism to be suspicious of the Government. So far, every practical measure that is proposed to "fight Global warming" has the net effect of making the Government bigger and more powerful. Therefore, we are naturally suspicious of the premise.
-
Okay, Republican then. Thanks.
-
Pardon my ignorance, but is it a Christian thing or a Republican thing to deny global warming? There's enough overlap that I haven't figured it out yet, nor can I think of a simple reason why Christians/Republicans would deny it and not non-Christians/Democrats.
Unfortunately, something that should be decided by science has turned into something political.
To answer your question, though, it's not anyone's "thing" to deny something that science has shown to be false. However, some top people have convinced people who don't do the research themselves that there is global warming and have said it so much that people believed them. Same can be said with the separation of church and state. It’s been said so many times that most people believe that it is law (and some believe it’s actually in the constitution). Those of us who see the evidence contrary to popular believe are trying to let people know not to listen to the polar bear ads about how awful they are for killing them and to look at the facts. The people who believe in global warming also believe that we need to stop our “contribution” to it (which, in all honesty, could you blame them (if you believe that disposable diapers were going to one day destroy the earth and harm future generations, wouldn’t you want to figure out how to stop the use of disposable diapers (somewhat ridicules example but for some reason, that’s what pop into my head :P))). Unfortunately, the side who believe in it and try their best to stop it are either ignoring or just ignorant of the facts to the contrary.
Hope that makes sense.
-
Conservative. Huge difference.
It should also be a Christian thing. We know that the seasons will continue until the Day of the Lord, so why should we be worried about it? Christians should also employ common sense, but that's lacking from just about everyone these days. If there are records of the Isle of the Mighty (England today) being the worlds best wine producer, then hurp durp! the world's been hotter before than it is now, and there we no Hummers around back then.
-
Unfortunately, something that should be decided by science has turned into something political.
I don't even think it should be decided by science. It should just be recorded in Farmer's Almanac and then we all move on with our lives.