Jump to content

Remember this one ?


Guest 2smart4u

Recommended Posts

Guest 2smart4u

Yes it's true. 2005 was the hottest on record at that time. However as I've said before, this is a normal part of the naturally occuring cycle of global warming and cooling. Even though the socialist fool pretending to be president would like us to think this is a man-made process and can be altered, like almost everything else, he's sadly misinformed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

Yes it's true. 2005 was the hottest on record at that time. However as I've said before, this is a normal part of the naturally occuring cycle of global warming and cooling. Even though the socialist fool pretending to be president would like us to think this is a man-made process and can be altered, like almost everything else, he's sadly misinformed.

That's completely inconsistent with what you said before. A few days ago, you were claiming that 2005 wasn't the hottest, year, and NASA was just saying that because the agency is Obama's stooge.

But then, for the first time in history, you acknowledged that your previous claim wasn't true. You didn't say it that way but you're no longer claiming that NASA was cooking the books. Now your claim is, OK, they got the facts right but are drawing the wrong conclusion from them.

Problem is, the facts do not support your claim. Naturally occurring temperature changes do not happen as rapidly as we are seeing now. You're talking about millions of years, while climate change is happening a couple of centuries. You're taking a general point about natural fluctuations completely out of its context, and divorcing it from the applicable science. Your argument is like saying "who cares if you have the lungs and arteries of an eighty year old at the age of twenty, smoke all the cigarettes you want because you're going to die anyway."

The only exception to the rule that climate change is far more gradual than we are seeing now is when a cataclysmic event occurs, such as massive volcanic activity causing a rapid shift in the Earth's climate. That is natural too, but if that's your comparison, then you're admitting that fossil fuel burning is a massive environmentally cataclysmic event. (As usual, you don't understand your own argument.) So yes, there's no guarantee that nature won't wipe us out eventually. The point responsible people are making about human-caused climate change today is that we're doing it to ourselves. Snotty remarks about people who care about our natural environment are no substitute for an in-depth knowledge of the science, which you plainly do not have. They are also no substitute for honesty; you don't have that either. The science of climate change is not coming from loonies with a political agenda; it's coming from scientists all over the world whose profession is to study these things. when an overwhelming consensus of the world's scientists say one thing and you say another, that's not an argument you win. And if you're going to accuse other people of having an unthinking political agenda, then you shouldn't be so transparent about your own reasons for saying things. You're just making stuff up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

Dudette,

Global warming and cooling has been a naturally occuring process for millions of years, no matter what zerO and the loony tree huggers say.

As usual, you're ignoring most of the facts. Naturally occurring climate change happens over a much shorter time than the climate change we are experiencing now. In addition, in the natural cycle, the fluctuation in atmospheric carbon dioxide comes after the period of climate change. That is the opposite of what is happening now: a major change in atmospheric CO2 is leading the change in climate. Read the facts at this link. Human activity is causing a deviation from the natural cycle. So the mere fact that climate change occurs naturally does not alter the facts that (1) this period of climate change is unprecedented in its pattern, (2) is happening more quickly than it does during natural cycles, and therefore (3) must be added onto whatever nature is going to do on its own, not merely written off as the equivalent of nature, which it is not. You can get away with apologetics in religion but not when you're messing with nature, which has its own way of talking back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

Yes it's true. 2005 was the hottest on record at that time. However as I've said before, this is a normal part of the naturally occuring cycle of global warming and cooling.

No, it's not part of the natural cycle. You're dead wrong. The record-high temperatures in 2005 resulted from excess carbon in the Earth's atmosphere. This would not have occurred if humans hadn't been burning fossil fuels for the previous two centuries. So while there are natural cycles, the climate change we are seeing in the past few decades is separate from those cycles.

How do we know? We know because we can measure the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, and compare it with previous geological eras. What is happening now does not fit the long-term cyclical pattern. It is a human-caused natural phenomenon. If you're going to comment on this subject, educate yourself. You're writing from ignorance.

OK, you say, but a cycle is a cycle. No, that's not true either. Cancer occurs naturally too. That doesn't mean you should smoke ten packs a day and not worry about the fact that you're probably killing yourself. Human activity is causing climate change. The overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree, and the consensus keeps solidifying as the data continue to accumulate. We don't know what we are doing to the Earth's climate long term. Ignoring this issue is like driving up to a railroad crossing, not being able to see, and going onto the tracks anyway. You might get lucky but then again, you might not. We are already seeing rises in water levels. If those persist, we are going to lose large areas of land all over the world. Weather patterns are changing, too, in many locations all over the earth. Who knows, maybe the Nevada desert will become a lush forest. On the other hand, maybe our rainforests and arable land will be cut in half. We have no right playing with nature like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

Yes it's true. 2005 was the hottest on record at that time. However as I've said before, this is a normal part of the naturally occuring cycle of global warming and cooling. Even though the socialist fool pretending to be president would like us to think this is a man-made process and can be altered, like almost everything else, he's sadly misinformed.

What you say means nothing unless you can support it with facts and sound analysis. Except for right wing blowhards on Fox Noise and right wing talk radio, who supports your view - not just that climate cycles occur naturally (no one disputes that) but that what we are seeing now is merely part of a natural cycle? All the reputable scientific studies I've read say that what we are seeing now is not part of the normal cycle. It is an aberration, where CO2 is preceding the climate change instead of coming after it. In other words, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is altering the natural cycle. Where are the data and analysis to dispute that? You won't answer because there aren't any. And that's because what the climate scientists - including those at NASA - say is happening is, in fact, what is happening.

In other words, they are right and you, in your ignorance, are wrong yet again. And the reason you are wrong - yet again - is that you are basing your "opinion" on what you would like to be true, not on what is true. As a result, it's not really an opinion, it's only an expression of your biases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

So, 2dim,

Now that you've had your head handed to you yet again, are you going to walk away from yet another discussion you started once you got your ass kicked? And your head handed to you?

Or will you be man enough for once to admit that you were just making stuff up, and that the scientists are right and you're wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

So, 2dim,

Now that you've had your head handed to you yet again, are you going to walk away from yet another discussion you started once you got your ass kicked? And your head handed to you?

Or will you be man enough for once to admit that you were just making stuff up, and that the scientists are right and you're wrong?

Nope, the coward cuts and runs when the facts come in.

Then he'll open another topic and say equally idiotic things and get blown out of the water again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u

So, 2dim,

Now that you've had your head handed to you yet again, are you going to walk away from yet another discussion you started once you got your ass kicked? And your head handed to you?

Or will you be man enough for once to admit that you were just making stuff up, and that the scientists are right and you're wrong?

So, 2dim,

Now that you've had your head handed to you yet again, are you going to walk away from yet another discussion you started once you got your ass kicked? And your head handed to you?

Or will you be man enough for once to admit that you were just making stuff up, and that the scientists are right and you're wrong?

"Scientists" ? So zerO and Al Gore are now scientists ? LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

"Scientists" ? So zerO and Al Gore are now scientists ? LOL

No, you were the one who brought up President Obama and former Vice President Gore. I've been talking about the scientists from NOAA, GISS, IPCC and other organizations and agencies that study, document and report on climate change. As usual. you make it personal so you don't have to discuss the issues. You were challenged to respond but you would have been better off not posting at all if you were just going to make it obvious yet again that you have nothing to say.

You started the topic by making an argument about summer ice in the Arctic. You had your ass kicked and your head handed to you.

Then you made an argument about natural warming and cooling cycles. You had your ass kicked and your head handed to you on that one, too. The climate change that is happening now does not fit the natural pattern: CO2 is leading the warming period, not following after it. And the change is occurring much more quickly than it does in the natural cycle - unless you want to include cataclysmic events, in which case you would be admitting that the current climate change is a disaster of epic proportions.

Then you made an argument about a NASA report about 2005. At best it was a trivial point and you still had your ass kicked and your head handed to you.

The responsible and honest thing to do would be to admit that you parrot whatever right wing media figures tell you to think; that you were wrong on these issues, and that you'll study climate change more carefully, including reading the latest IPCC report, so you don't continue to make a fool of yourself. But since you are neither responsible nor honest, you're not going to do that.

Now, if you would like to post an intelligent response, please proceed. Take your time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

"Scientists" ? So zerO and Al Gore are now scientists ? LOL

That's your idea of a response? Lying about what the other person said, then making fun of your own idiotic remark because it isn't true. LOLOYSA. (Laugh out loud on your stupid ass.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

"Scientists" ? So zerO and Al Gore are now scientists ? LOL

Just because you're an idiot doesn't mean that everyone else is. The idea of treating Obama and Gore as though they were scientists came from your widdle pea brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, you were the one who brought up President Obama and former Vice President Gore. I've been talking about the scientists from NOAA, GISS, IPCC and other organizations and agencies that study, document and report on climate change. As usual. you make it personal so you don't have to discuss the issues. You were challenged to respond but you would have been better off not posting at all if you were just going to make it obvious yet again that you have nothing to say.

You started the topic by making an argument about summer ice in the Arctic. You had your ass kicked and your head handed to you.

Then you made an argument about natural warming and cooling cycles. You had your ass kicked and your head handed to you on that one, too. The climate change that is happening now does not fit the natural pattern: CO2 is leading the warming period, not following after it. And the change is occurring much more quickly than it does in the natural cycle - unless you want to include cataclysmic events, in which case you would be admitting that the current climate change is a disaster of epic proportions.

Then you made an argument about a NASA report about 2005. At best it was a trivial point and you still had your ass kicked and your head handed to you.

The responsible and honest thing to do would be to admit that you parrot whatever right wing media figures tell you to think; that you were wrong on these issues, and that you'll study climate change more carefully, including reading the latest IPCC report, so you don't continue to make a fool of yourself. But since you are neither responsible nor honest, you're not going to do that.

Now, if you would like to post an intelligent response, please proceed. Take your time.

That would take a very, very long time.

More likely, the idiot is waiting for Bill O'Reilly to tell him what to think next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As predicted, 2dim cuts and runs. He can't stay in a conversation because he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. The best he could muster was an idiotic remark about Obama and Gore that even a third-grader would know wasn't true.

Admit that you were wrong, dimwit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u

No, you were the one who brought up President Obama and former Vice President Gore. I've been talking about the scientists from NOAA, GISS, IPCC and other organizations and agencies that study, document and report on climate change. As usual. you make it personal so you don't have to discuss the issues. You were challenged to respond but you would have been better off not posting at all if you were just going to make it obvious yet again that you have nothing to say.

You started the topic by making an argument about summer ice in the Arctic. You had your ass kicked and your head handed to you.

Then you made an argument about natural warming and cooling cycles. You had your ass kicked and your head handed to you on that one, too. The climate change that is happening now does not fit the natural pattern: CO2 is leading the warming period, not following after it. And the change is occurring much more quickly than it does in the natural cycle - unless you want to include cataclysmic events, in which case you would be admitting that the current climate change is a disaster of epic proportions.

Then you made an argument about a NASA report about 2005. At best it was a trivial point and you still had your ass kicked and your head handed to you.

The responsible and honest thing to do would be to admit that you parrot whatever right wing media figures tell you to think; that you were wrong on these issues, and that you'll study climate change more carefully, including reading the latest IPCC report, so you don't continue to make a fool of yourself. But since you are neither responsible nor honest, you're not going to do that.

Now, if you would like to post an intelligent response, please proceed. Take your time.

I'll get back to you as soon as I check with O'Reilly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As predicted, 2Stupid4Words cuts and runs.

2dim, next time you have nothing to say, don't say it.

I'm glad the idiot says the stupid stuff he does. It makes me, or someone, do a little digging to come up with the facts. For example, I didn't know that CO2 in the atmosphere is leading climate change instead of coming after it. That's important to know when some knucklehead says "so much for global warming" whenever we get a little cool weather. 2dim tells us what the right wing propaganda masters are telling their sheep. It's important for reasonable people to know how to respond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...