Page 3 of 22 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 212
  1. #21
    Senior Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,255
    Quote Originally Posted by sirthought View Post
    Snipe, this is too ridiculous. There is nothing in any of this that shows global warming is a hoax or scam. Seriously dude, you need to take a break from the glue and focus your energy on things other than conspiracy theories.
    Wow, the rediculous warmers are still clinging to the nonsense. I agree that we should try to keep the air, land and sea clean but this CO2 BS is well.........just that.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  2. #22
    Junior sirthought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NKY
    Posts
    2,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
    Wow, the rediculous warmers are still clinging to the nonsense. I agree that we should try to keep the air, land and sea clean but this CO2 BS is well.........just that.
    I'm not going to waste my time defending one side or the other of a climate debate on a basketball message board. But there is nothing in any of these e-mails that shows it's a scam. All that bolded content (and I've read more than I care to admit online after doing a google search) doesn't say anything that appears damning to me or others. And the legitimacy of it all, whether these documents have been manufactured or doctored, is thin at best.

    I think this is a smoke screen to try to effect legislation, and a pretty dirty one at that. If the doubters want to effect how science is funded and how legislation proceeds then you need to prove your point without stooping to hacking and using disreputable Russian servers. Do your own damn science and convince people the right way.

    Scientist aren't known to be bred with the thought that they have to establish their career by following a company line and forcing lies.

    And for those questioning if mainstream media will look at this seriously, they have. I found articles in all the major newspapers and wire services. We'll see where it leads.
    Last edited by sirthought; 11-22-2009 at 12:36 AM. Reason: spelling

  3. #23
    Senior Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,255
    Quote Originally Posted by sirthought View Post
    I'm not going to waste my time defending one side or the other of a climate debate on a basketball message board. But there is nothing in any of these e-mails that shows it's a scam. All that bolded content (and I've read more than I care to admit online after doing a google search) doesn't say anything that appears damning to me or others. And the legitimacy of it all, whether these documents have been manufactured or doctored, is thin at best.

    I think this is a smoke screen to try to effect legislation, and a pretty dirty one at that. If the doubters want to effect how science is funded and how legislation proceeds then you need to prove your point without stooping to hacking and using disreputable Russian servers. Do your own damn science and convince people the right way.

    Scientist aren't known to be bread with the thought that they have to establish their career by following a company line and forcing lies.

    And for those questioning if mainstream media will look at this seriously, they have. I found articles in all the major newspapers and wire services. We'll see where it leads.
    What's your point. CO2 is not dangerous.....period. The trends show that. You'd have a better arguement with CFC's. Oh wait, they tried that and then the Ozone layer "unexpectedley" 'healed". This is junk science.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  4. #24
    Junior sirthought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NKY
    Posts
    2,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
    What's your point. CO2 is not dangerous.....period. The trends show that. You'd have a better arguement with CFC's. Oh wait, they tried that and then the Ozone layer "unexpectedley" 'healed". This is junk science.
    You're the one bringing up C02 and arguing science, not me.

    My point is that nothing in the hacked package appears to overturn the general idea — arrived at via many lines of evidence — that the CO2 humans have been pumping into the atmosphere is warming the planet, nor does anything bolster the notion some put forward of a hoax on the part of climate scientists.

    It could turn out to be a tempest in a teapot or a PR gotcha for US climate scientists. I say they are allowed to have their private discussions of how to present their findings, so big deal. Either way, our behavior regarding how we treat the planet needs to change. No one needs to read a report to see what negative effects man has had on the Earth.

  5. #25
    Senior Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,255
    Quote Originally Posted by sirthought View Post
    You're the one bringing up C02 and arguing science, not me.

    My point is that nothing in the hacked package appears to overturn the general idea — arrived at via many lines of evidence — that the CO2 humans have been pumping into the atmosphere is warming the planet, nor does anything bolster the notion some put forward of a hoax on the part of climate scientists.

    It could turn out to be a tempest in a teapot or a PR gotcha for US climate scientists. I say they are allowed to have their private discussions of how to present their findings, so big deal. Either way, our behavior regarding how we treat the planet needs to change. No one needs to read a report to see what negative effects man has had on the Earth.
    I agree, keep things clean and recycle. This CO2 nonsense is rediculous. If you are a true believer than stop breathing. Like I said, CFC's which are a generally man made had me believing as a J-high kid but CO2 as a problem is simply stupid. I don't need a PHDope in "Climate Science" see through this junk science. CO2 is plant food, the more we have the better the crop yield. I'm sure you read the German study that proved this. But you would probably argue that "they are funded by the oil compainies" or some other asinine argument that allows you to disregard common sense.
    Last edited by Strange Brew; 11-21-2009 at 11:10 PM.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  6. #26
    Junior sirthought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NKY
    Posts
    2,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
    CO2 is plant food, the more we have the better the crop yield.
    I guess you must believe plants only came along after humans learned how to start burning fossil fuels? After the industrial revolution?

    We would need to actually have evidence of MORE plants growing for that "CO2 as plant food" argument to hold water. Forests are being decimated worldwide for development and ranching for the meat industry. And while that doesn't help, it isn't directly related to global warming but rather contributes to it more so. But what is related is the emergence of insects and disease that forests are dying from only after global temperatures have risen. Drought and natural disasters are on the rise. Crops are under attack by insects that can't be stopped by anything (except cooler temperatures). Forrest fires are already way out of control to the point where states don't know what to do.

    CO2 is plant food. But like all other foods, too much can be a bad thing. It seems a lot of people have fallen to become fat and stupid. Any concern of The Greening Theory getting short shrift only works if you are increasing the growth of plants that use it as food. We aren't. We're seeing the opposite happen. If CO2 is so great for food production why is famine such an issue and concern for the world's future? Any worries that you are taking away the plant's food can be put to rest. There is plenty of CO2 to go around even if you tried to stop all man-made CO2 creation.

    Research has been done showing that more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will mean less food value (i.e. decreased nitrogen and protein) in our fruits and vegetables. Think you'll get around that by boosting your meat diet? Once more, think again. Lower food value in plants, means less protein for grazing cows and pigs and therefore less meat produced by each animal. Add to this the exploding demand for meat from developing countries like China and you will need to tell me where we're meant to get all of these food calories from.

  7. #27
    Senior Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,255
    Quote Originally Posted by sirthought View Post
    I guess you must believe plants only came along after humans learned how to start burning fossil fuels? After the industrial revolution?

    We would need to actually have evidence of MORE plants growing for that "CO2 as plant food" argument to hold water. Forests are being decimated worldwide for development and ranching for the meat industry. And while that doesn't help, it isn't directly related to global warming but rather contributes to it more so. But what is related is the emergence of insects and disease that forests are dying from only after global temperatures have risen. Drought and natural disasters are on the rise. Crops are under attack by insects that can't be stopped by anything (except cooler temperatures). Forrest fires are already way out of control to the point where states don't know what to do.

    CO2 is plant food. But like all other foods, too much can be a bad thing. It seems a lot of people have fallen to become fat and stupid. Any concern of The Greening Theory getting short shrift only works if you are increasing the growth of plants that use it as food. We aren't. We're seeing the opposite happen. If CO2 is so great for food production why is famine such an issue and concern for the world's future? Any worries that you are taking away the plant's food can be put to rest. There is plenty of CO2 to go around even if you tried to stop all man-made CO2 creation.

    Research has been done showing that more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will mean less food value (i.e. decreased nitrogen and protein) in our fruits and vegetables. Think you'll get around that by boosting your meat diet? Once more, think again. Lower food value in plants, means less protein for grazing cows and pigs and therefore less meat produced by each animal. Add to this the exploding demand for meat from developing countries like China and you will need to tell me where we're meant to get all of these food calories from.
    Dumb, I'll make this simple. Famine is an issue do to a lack of water as the climate naturally shifts. XU was under water millions of years ago. You seem to be an Idealogue. Thus, would explain why reason is not apart of your thought process. Step back from the "research" and think about it rationally. If you are willing to do so, you will see that it doesn't make sense.

    By the way the street car would work if it ran up Gilbert/Montgomery, to Kenwood and then onto Mason. Think about that reasonably as well without the political infulence.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  8. #28
    Junior sirthought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NKY
    Posts
    2,774
    Dumb, huh? Well I probably am. I'm obviously not the "free thinker" you are. I guess you'll need to rely on your trusty reason to help planet turn itself around.

  9. #29
    Senior Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,255
    Quote Originally Posted by sirthought View Post
    Dumb, huh? Well I probably am. I'm obviously not the "free thinker" you are. I guess you'll need to rely on your trusty reason to help planet turn itself around.
    Well, at least we agree that I'm a free thinker. :D Also, I know that I, me, personally cannot change the climate. THERE IS ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING THAT WE CAN DO TO EFFECT IT. We can all drive Prius' and, oh wait, poof a volcano explodes and all our do goodiness is gone. Think about it.

    That said, we can effect our local environment by not dumping chemicals, trash, etc into our streets, rivers, etc. So we should be aware and act accoringly. This "climate change" nonsense is well....nonsense.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  10. #30
    All-Conference Snipe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Hell's Kitchen
    Posts
    9,736
    As we all know, this isn't about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.

    And you are still looking for a "smoking gun".

    What does that mean? We all know this isn't about the truth at all! What does your smoking gun mean? It is all about plausibilty deniable accusations.


    Please think about that. You have the nevre to say there is no smoking gun. How retarded are you.


    As we all know, this isn't about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.

    Hey!

    Look Over Here!

    yeah, Right Fucking Here at this quote:


    As we all know, this isn't about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.

    Hey! That is the smoking gun! Look right at it! It is smoking! it is a gun!


    As we all know, this isn't about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.

    It doesn't have to be an actual gun, and it doesn't have to be smoking.


    As we all know, this isn't about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.

    "This isn't about the truth" is striking. I like the lead in. "its about plausibly deniable accusations" is the kicker, I love the end game.

    What I admire the most is that someone can actually say this:

    As we all know, this isn't about truth at all, its about plausibly deniable accusations.

    and you would claim that there is actually no "smoking gun". Talk about plausibly deniable accusations. You are beyone the pale.
    Last edited by Snipe; 11-22-2009 at 03:31 AM.
    RIP Brian Dargin McCormick

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •