|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Jun 8th, 2007 08:52 PM | ||
| kahljorn |
I didn't really mean it as far as it contributes to global warming. I just mean does it exist and is it negative. That's why I brought it up in the same sentence as water pollution ;o because lots of people like to act like cutting down on pollution would be a waste of money... Another thing is air pollution. The place where i live almost always has an, "Unhealthy" air quality. |
|
| Jun 8th, 2007 06:06 PM | ||
| Sethomas | From what I've read, the ozone hole actually isn't considered a major factor in global warming by serious environmentalists. It just still sees a lot of attention because it's easily quantified, which makes it scary, and conservatives can use the fact that it is arguably innocuous to create a strawman argument. | |
| Jun 8th, 2007 01:35 PM | ||
| Esuohlim |
I like the "the ozone hole over the south pole acts as an iris that dilates and contracts in order for the environment to fix its own problem" theory because, once again, it cuts me out of the equation and I don't have to worry about anything 
|
|
| Jun 8th, 2007 08:22 AM | ||
| Perndog |
Sorry, I know it didn't need to be just a link exchange and I wanted to give you the gist of the argument from that source, but I had to leave home and didn't have enough time to write more. I'm not sure about ozone depletion, but I already try not to get too much direct sunlight since my dad got cancer on his face twice. Maybe I'll look into the science on that one later. I've heard things like "the carbon dioxide accumulation makes up for the thinning ozone," "the fact that an ozone hole opened over the South Pole, where there are no people, suggests that human activity isn't the cause," and "oh shit we're all going to die." I don't know which is accurate. |
|
| Jun 8th, 2007 12:38 AM | ||
| kahljorn |
Well, that was an interesting read, and it actually answered my question, by providing an alternative, which was, I thought, very productive. I thought that they reamed people for thinking, "VENUS AND THE EARTH ARE NOT TWINS" for so long to be extremely annoying, though. i never thought that personally and I can't see how anybody could take it literally. That website did seem to concede that c02 can have an effect on the environment, they said it would be minor though. Maybe they just said that as a uh... rhetorical statement, though. My next questions would be: Preechr already brought up water pollution. What about ozone depletion? IS THERE SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY OR INVALIDITY? |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 11:12 PM | ||
| kahljorn |
*sigh* You're so stupid it's depressing, perndog. I wasn't trying to have some link war. You asked for an "ANGLE." I didn't give a damn about the angle. You did. I didn't want to have to post 30 million links. I just wanted to post an idea and get a response to it, that's all. OK? OK? IS THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND OR IS IT NOT GETTING INTO YOUR RETARDED FACE? IF YOU ACT LIKE THIS IN THE FUTURE ILL JUST IGNORE YOU BECAUSE I HOLD YOU TO HIGHER STANDARDS THAN RANDOM MORONS AND I EXPECT YOU TO FULFILL MY FUCKING STANDARDS MOTHERFUCKER. I'll read your links, though. "Holoscience" sounds like a science skepticism website, though. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 09:45 PM | ||
| Perndog |
Alright. I just realized that this is just going to turn into a dick-waving link exchange because this is all science and no philosophy and we're not actually scientists. But I'll play one round at least. Here are the people I agree with on this issue: http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=3jewx05w http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=8gfbewe7 |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 09:16 PM | ||
| kahljorn |
like i said, the point was that venus has a c02 rich atmosphere and it's also the hottest planet in the solar system. Try responding to that instead of responding with douchebaggery and picking on irrelevant topics. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 08:52 PM | ||
| kahljorn |
Uhh, I put it in parenthesis. Usually when people do that it means it's an ASIDE or just extra information. I already posted the "Science." http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/...m?Object=Venus http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/l...reenhouse.html http://www.ucar.edu/learn/1_3_1.htm http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Venus/greenhouse.html http://ircamera.as.arizona.edu/NatSc...ures/venus.htm |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 07:58 PM | ||
| Perndog |
The point is that I think these things are incorrect, but the only justifications given for them in this thread are "everyone says it's true", and like you just said, Quote:
|
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 07:34 PM | ||
| kahljorn |
it's not like i mentioned that you learned it in elementary school as the FACT OF THE MATTER the "fact of the matter" was already stated. It doesn't need an "ANGLE." How the hell would angles make something more valid? IF I SAY THIS FACT IN THIS WAY SOMEONE WILL THINK ITS BULLSHIT BUT IF I ANGLE THIS FALSITY IN A GOOD WAY THEN IT WILL BE TRUE ANGLES MAKE THIngS TRUE OR FALSE you act like an annoying mystical magic moon fairy. "SCIENCE? SCIENCE HAS BEEN PROVEN WRONG BEFORE. YOUR IDEAS ARE SHIT." "ELEMENTARY SCHOOL? ELEMENTARY SCHOOL HAS BEEN PROVEN WROng befoRE. YOUR IDEA IS SHIT." irrelevant. I know all I have to do is say that it is OFFICIALLY ENDORSED BY THE CHURCH OF SATAN AND EGOS EVERYWHERE! and the vampire bible approves of it 100%!!! If you read and accept this theory, you will have eternal life. Fact. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 07:13 PM | ||
| Perndog |
I'm glad we cleared that up. The Internet is the best place to act ridiculous, you know. In real life, of course, I'm too busy being dark and scary to do things like this. Want me to start a new thread about how AIDS isn't caused by a virus and doctors are killing people by giving them drugs for HIV? I'm sure you'd love that. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 06:26 PM | ||
| kahljorn |
Well, it's the i-mockery philosophy forums. Making fun of stupidity and showing why it's stupid is kind of what we do here. i dont have a grudge or anything dude i just disagree with you/think you're acting ridiculous. Preechr won't respond to any of these threads, he gets too frustrated when he gets in arguments ;o [/taunt] |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 06:25 PM | ||
| Perndog | Oh, and I learned a lot of things in elementary school that turned out not to be true. Try another angle. | |
| Jun 7th, 2007 06:23 PM | ||
| Perndog |
These are the I-Mockery Forums. Random jabbering is what people do here. If I feel like saying something, I will. Chris, do you have some sort of lingering grudge against me, or are you on my case because you just don't have anything better to do? |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 06:04 PM | ||
| kahljorn |
They don't know if Venus was an Earth-like planet, for sure. That's not even the point, you jackass. The point is that venus is the hottest planet in the solar system because heat can't escape it (you might've learned that in elementary school, I know I did) and that the reason heat can't escape it is because it has a c02 rich environment. "I'm really not concerned, and I don't care to argue about it." Then maybe you should, uh i dont know, shut the fuck up? why do people like you even talk? Satanists are so retarded. IM GOING TO INSERT my oPINION BUT DONT gET CONFUSED. IM TOO SMUG TOO CARE. AND I SMOKE EXPENSIVE CIGARS OUT OF A PIPE. CAUSE THAT S SAUVE. I"M SOPHISTAFUNK. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 05:59 PM | ||
| kahljorn |
They don't know if Venus was an Earth-like planet, for sure. That's not even the point, you jackass. The point is that venus is the hottest planet in the solar system because heat can't escape it (you might've learned that in elementary school, I know I did) and that the reason heat can't escape it is because it has a c02 rich environment. "I'm really not concerned, and I don't care to argue about it." Then maybe you should, uh i dont know, shut the fuck up? why do people like you even talk? Satanists are so retarded. IM GOING TO INSERT my oPINION BUT DONT gET CONFUSED. IM TOO SMUG TOO CARE. AND I SMOKE EXPENSIVE CIGARS OUT OF A PIPE. CAUSE THAT S SAUVE. I"M SOPHISTAFUNK. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 05:47 PM | ||
| Fathom Zero |
That's not really what I was trying to convey. What I was saying was that all politicians are using politics to affect the scientific community. What they're trying to push for in the issue of global warming is irrelevant because all it's going to amount to is a lot of hot air and wasted money. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 05:05 PM | ||
| Sethomas | So, Democrats pushing Green solutions is political, but Republicans kicking and screaming against it isn't? Nice. | |
| Jun 7th, 2007 01:47 PM | ||
| Fathom Zero |
Science is being molested by politics and it's been brought upon the scientific community that you're either for the Earth or you're not so they've gotta pick sides before they release journals and studies and all objectivity is lost in the process. It's a damn shame that loaded questions like that go unchecked, but no one is against the destruction of Earth. Nobody with a public face, at any rate. So they let it go. All of this doesn't even take into account that "green" products are bringing in billions of dollars a year from low emissions vehicles and recycled toilet paper. I don't particularly see recycling as unuseful, but it probably serves little purpose aside from saving a seagull or two from choking to death on a plastic bag or Coke rings. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 12:24 PM | ||
| Perndog |
I think more than a little money is being wasted, and to be clear, I don't think human activity is an important factor in climate change, nor do I think that Venus used to be an Earthlike planet that became extremely hot due to the greenhouse effect, and I think that politics within science are pushing people very forcefully to whatever will pull in more money, effective results be damned, especially in this case because it's so well publicized. Mr. Milhouse's point that people used to be worried about global cooling is overlooked way too frequently. But Preechr has quite a bit more vitriol than I do on this topic, and it sounds like he's got mostly the same opinion. I'm really not concerned, and I don't care to argue about it. |
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 07:43 AM | ||
| RaNkeri | I remember reading an article which stated that if the amount of CO2 keeps increasing at the same level it has increased so far, life on earth will be quite hellish(if not impossible) somewhere around year 2200. | |
| Jun 7th, 2007 01:54 AM | ||
| kahljorn |
lol 
|
|
| Jun 7th, 2007 01:06 AM | ||
| Sethomas | While I do agree that presentism is an anthropological constant in the history of humanity, Perny doggy, one differing factor between science being wrong about geocentrism, aether, flight, spontaneous generation, whatever else you want to throw out, is that we didn't really have vested interest in any of them in the same sense that global warming has a high likelihood of causing economic and humanitarian devastation. We'll only know if we're right in hindsight, but increased CO2 emissions are directly associated with climate change and we are experiencing both. If we're wrong, we waste a little money. If we're right, then we're fucked. So this "science has been wrong and will probably be wrong again" thing is retarded. | |
| Jun 7th, 2007 12:36 AM | ||
| kahljorn |
Cows also cosume more food than they produce when we eat them :O but as a counter-point to that SOME cows eat foods that humans can't eat. also, meat tastes really good ;O |
|
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | ||
